ANon PSP owner
@rr.com
| reply to ricep5
Re: already there
Wrong! The Patriot Act allows them to get whatever info or snoop (bypassing Constitutional Rights) by bypassing the middle man, the Judge without a warrant any time they wish. Because all of the sheep and sleepers in this country that think you will keep your hard earned freedoms by sitting on your asses, this has now ready to become a permanent thing. Now they are trying to make it permanent and make it stronger. Sheep and cattle to slaughter.
"Those who have long enjoyed such privileges as we enjoy, forget in time that men have died to win them."
-Franklin D. Roosevelt |
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO | reply to Unregisterd User
said by Unregisterd User:
This isn't the kind of country I want to live in. It reminds me too much of the old USSR. OMG, it's Dick Durbin! |
|
Unregisterd User
| reply to ricep5
No, I don't think anyone necessarily wants to know what I do online. I think IT'S NONE OF THEIR DAMN BUSINESS WHAT I DO ONLINE! The government has no business whatsoever even asking that this data be collected, period. They also have no business being able to secretly trawl through library book and Internet records, but they can. That's what the House is trying to overturn in the last few days. Well, the book part, at least. The Internet snooping is apparently OK, so that activity wasn't barred in the House bill. Of course, Bush has threatened to veto it. I guess he feels that what you read at the library is the Feds' business. I mean, we need to know when someone reads something controversial. And no, you don't have to be under a criminal investigation of having committed a crime, you just have to be a suspected terrorist.
This isn't the kind of country I want to live in. It reminds me too much of the old USSR. |
|
ricep5
Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL
 ·AT&T Southeast
 ·AT&T CallVantage
·VoicePulse
| reply to Unregistered User
You assume that there alot of people interested in what you do online. The Feds are only interested in illegal activities and they still have to get permission from a judge to get the info.
While you moan about the lack of finger lifting in the US, I also think you place too much self importance on your internet activities.
No one person, corporation or government has the resources to go out collect, analyze and report on individual internet behavior for a whole country. (Only China thinks they can)
They would find a wasteland of benign chat, emails full of personal drivel and site logs full of bid updates from eBay. Hardly profound stuff.
Paranoia can be healthy when kept in perspective. When you assume everyone wants to know everything about you personally, then it has begun to reach something less healthy. |
|
baj475
join:2004-11-02
Chico, CA
·Future Nine Corpor..
| reply to pnh102
said by footballdude  :There is no legal right to privacy when you are in a public place. Not entirely true. See Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) |
|
Unregistered User
| reply to pnh102
Um, no. This would be something the government could trawl through if they suspect that you did something suspicious. Remember, they want to be able to see library records without a warrant, so there's no reason to think this is any different. Do you really want them to know what Web sites you've been looking at, who you've been e-mailing, etc.? Suppose they wanted to know the names of every person who visited Indymedia during a period of time. Easy. First, get Indymedia's Web logs. That gives a list of times and IP addresses. Next, check the logs of those ISPs at those times, and you have a complete list of subscribers who visited that site and the pages they viewed. And this can all be done more or less automatically by using search tools.
If this doesn't scare you, it should. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to footballdude
said by footballdude :To me, no big deal. There is no privacy on the net. You're right. Doing illegal activity on the Internet and getting busted months after the fact due to log retention is no different than doing illegal activity in a public place and getting busted because a camera recorded the activity. There is no legal right to privacy when you are in a public place.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
Unregistered User
| reply to footballdude
No, they're not. They usually only keep enough records so they can do billing at the end of each month. I don't think you understand what this entails, so I'll tell you. Under this scheme, ISPs would be required to keep:
The URL of every Web page you visit
The address of every e-mail you send
Every other TCP/IP connection your computer makes
This is a _massive_ amount of data, and it'll take a massive amount of storage. It'll allow anyone with it to reconstruct almost every activity you conducted in a given period of time.
What gets me in all this is the defeatist attitude I see in response to all this. Go over and read Slashdot to see what I mean. There are people willing to stand up and die for what they believe in in countries far more repressive than ours, yet most people here won't even lift a finger to stop something they don't agree with. In just over a year, we've seen governments in Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrryzstan, and Bolivia toppled by people hitting the streets, yet all we do is sit and moan. What's wrong with us? |
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO | ISPs are already monitoring you and keeping a log of your activities, just in case they get sued. Sounds like all this proposed law is doing is asking them not to delete the stuff.
To me, no big deal. There is no privacy on the net. |
|
