Citizenfour : I'm not worried about my privacy at all because I've done nothing wrong.

That seems like a fair argument, but let's put it to the test.

For everyone that puts forward this argument then please send me a private message with your email login details and password.

For all of the email accounts that you have.

And then also set up a Gmail account and back up all your text messages to that and give me the password so I can access it.

How does that sound?

Probably won't happen, but if you're doing nothing wrong then what's the harm?

What could possibly go wrong?

If the opposite of Love is indifference, what's the opposite of Hate?

So what you're saying is, I should give you all my secrets because I hypothetically believe there's no danger in that?

Do you realize what you just said condemns Mr. Snowden? If you were the US, he just stole your login & password and sold it to Russia.

Yes, I realise that, but you're avoiding the question that I asked.

So send me a PM with your email login details and we'll see what happens, yes?

Unless you find that might result in something bad happening then what do you have to hide?

If the opposite of Love is indifference, what's the opposite of Hate?

I'd rather not if it's all the same to you. But if I did just don't sell it to the country known for the most authoritarian secret police in history. They're probably not benevolent custodians.

---

They're probably not benevolent custodians.

---

Ay, and there's the rub.
After watching this documentary and probably reading the news reports about the police arresting/beating up innocent civilians based upon the information they received from the "Intelligence" services, then do you think that the US government is a benevolent custodian of all your private information?

If the opposite of Love is indifference, what's the opposite of Hate?

It's my government, I helped elect them. Within their scope of duties is to protect us from enemies foreign and domestic. If they never looked inside the borders for trouble they'll never find it when it exists.

You're proposing something that would make men like Timothy McVeigh limitless in their ability to carry out terrible acts. Considering they have their hands full of potential threats, I'm not in the least worried they'll be tapping my phone out of the 500 million cellphones in the country. Not enough manpower to even monitor the actual threats.

Taking that ability from their hands and giving it to Russia, who has its own interests that are hostile towards OUR elected government and nation, is presenting your throat.

If Snowden was a 'hero' he would have given the information to CNN and kept the debate in-house. He lost all claim to that when he took it upon himself to ally with a foreign power.

If anything positive did occur, it's that China didn't want him around as political baggage, which at least gives a semblance of trying to maintain a positive working relationship with the US. Russia, on the other hand, LOVES their new stooge and doesn't hesitate to poke the Eagle at every opportunity they are afforded.

This is exactly why Bradley Manning is in prison as we speak. No one private citizen can take it upon themselves to decide for everyone what the government can and cannot do. That is taking ALL of our ballots cast and ripping them to shreds. As someone who has served in the military, he was completely free to take his problems up with his chain of command. Julian Assange is not a rung on that ladder.

Also, cite where people are being 'beat up and detained' by government thugs using illegally obtained information. Infowars is not a valid source. As far as whoever's in Gitmo? There lies the possibility that although you don't know why they are there, someone who should know does know why they are there. I imagine it's quite a task to end up in a military prison for being Arabic on a Friday night.

I realise that you're smart and I quite like you, but let's stick to the question in point.

Do you think that the US government is a benevolent custodian of all your private information?

That's requires a binary answer.

Yes or no?

If the opposite of Love is indifference, what's the opposite of Hate?

Not really binary. There can be rogue elements within our government who don't uphold their integrity when handling other people's information. Actually, I consider Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning PRIME cases of that trust being violated. But I also don't assume that every time I order a cheeseburger there's something foul happening in the kitchen.

I would say yes, I do believe that my own government is benevolent towards its people and can be trusted to monitor our society. They've already been tracking you for decades with your social security number, driver's license, taxes, municipal and state police, FBI, etc. But truth be told, the vast, vast majority of that is simply a file so that if you ever do become a problem they can access it. Not so that they can thumb through them on their down time like a voyeur.

I actually DO take some issue with the information being gathered by the NSA specifically, in the sense that their jurisdiction is outwards while the FBI's jurisdiction is domestic. But this appears to be little more than departmental cooperation than an upheaval of individual liberty.

Consider also the amount of staffing required to moniter ALL of EVERYONE's information. It's nonsensical to think that could ever be done. If you think every text you've ever sent and every email you've sent has been monitored or even archived you'd be dead wrong. At the peak of East Germany's power, upwards of 20% of their entire population was tasked to internal monitoring and they still couldn't quell dissent or watch literally everyone. The sheer bureaucracy of it has massive diminishing returns at that level.

So, if it must be a yes or a no answer, I will say yes.

As an addendum, I will add that the strongest counter you have to government malfeasance is your ballot. If elections aren't engaging the populace, it is giving its power away. There are indeed countless bad eggs (by my approximation) littering congress and the senate who could have all been remedied by a people who take part in the democratic process. Keep that in mind and spread that idea if you want to maintain the social contract. I, for one, consent to being governed, but I would very much like it if we could spend more time rotating out the old guard and less time acting like babies every time political discourse occurs between your peers. There are a lot of politicians that get a wrinkle on their dick every time someone says "CAN WE NOT TALK ABOUT POLITICS PLEASE!"

---

It's my government, I helped elect them.

---

Are you responsible for them?


Can "we" blame you for our privacy being tainted/attacked?

You can blame whoever you want. This isn't Russia or China, we don't throw you in jail or seize your media outlet for saying it. Yes, this is the same guy you quoted, new account.

> It's my government, I helped elect them.

The donations given for campaigning - the big ones - elected your government, not you.

"It's my government, I helped elect them."

To whoever writes something as naive as that, everything that comes after that sentence is not worth reading.

Sounds like the typical citizen of the US who believes everything he is told on the news blindly. I know it's tough to think for oneself, but these are dire times and we must LEARN how to think beyond the mediocre level that public education provided us with.




.;*We Live Inside A Dream*;.

I have my money and identity to hide from youI don't think the NSA is gonna open up lines of credit in my name

Boy, are you confused. You already pay to have someone in the US access all of your private info, and then share it with his corporate buddies.

"I'm not in the least worried they'll be tapping my phone out of the 500 million cellphones in the country."

But they are, regardless of whatever your opinion is about it.

"Not enough manpower to even monitor the actual threats."

True, that's why they are housing all of it in that huge repository where they are setting up more and more of the "machines" that will be capable of analyzing or mining the data. Machines will create profiles for them, and hencethe Red Flags, calling attention to whomever, to be watched. And if no citizen today being spied and mined generates a red flag, that of you or me, or your friends and family (and you know kids, they do the darnedest things), perhaps tomorrow or in ten years the political power in charge with different whims and fancies will formulate other various data-sets to create different profile criteria to generate their red flags.

It's all there, in place to use, abuse, and act upon, since there is no judicial oversight. It's happening.right now and will be there for future use, according to the whims of whoever is in charge.

Pandora's box.

---

"Not enough manpower to even monitor the actual threats."

---

Computers have a lot of manpower that doubles yearly.


Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

Seems to me like the corporate buddies have first dibs.

People who use that argument should be sent to North Korea

Great posts above by ixusillwrath. The OP sounds seriously paranoid and should get a better grip on reality.

As a great article in the Daily Beast explained Snowden etc can not point to a single person who was actually harmed by the US collecting metadata.

Meanwhile the US and its corporations are seeing wave after wave of cyber attacks and thefts from China, North Korea, and so on. With the US largely hamstrung to stop them.

---

With the US largely hamstrung to stop them.

---

That statement is nonsense. The barriers to stopping "cyber attacks" are more technical than political.

jj

I didnt say whether it was political or technical.

I see you posting all over this area of IMDB seemingly desperate to blunt US capacity either way.

I guess you dont post in your own name because of that big check from North Korea

How 'bout this true story:

In Canada, where they do the same thing as here, RCMP got a jingle that in one telephone conversation a woman was heard using words: "Terrorists", "Bomb" and "Blast". They promptly figured out who she was and paid her a visit.
Luckily, this was in Canada where things are a bit more civilized and after following her and finally approaching her, they learned that she was talking about her kids birthday party where kids had a "blast" and where the cake was the "bomb" and that kids were "terrorizing" her

But, when IQ of investigators is not high enough to connect these dots, no one knows what is possible; actually all those innocents who were water boarded know.

That sounds like the 'true' story about the US Naval vessel and the Canadian lighthouse which is, actually, complete BS.

that did not happen unless you provide a link preferably not from conspiracydudes.com

The argement is fair, but what this really is is the infancy of a police state. Thats where the real fear should be.
Do I have to give it to you?

---

but what this really is is the infancy of a police state

---

I would say that is an understatement.

The United States and the UK are at least at a preteen police state level, with puberty approaching very fast. If the governments have their way and force installation of NSA and GCHQ backdoors in encryption protocols (just like the NSA already did with a feature of RSA, who they actually paid millions to install their backdoor in) the puberty stage -and wet dream of all the NSAs, Mossads, GCHQs etc of the world- will be reached. The next stage after that can only be full-blown big brothery orwellianism, aka police state adulthood and maturity.

People like ixusillwrath most likely would have no problem with a world like 1984, as long as they are safe and they are naive enough to think that the sole purpose of the security agencies of their government is to protect them; because, you know, why would these "patriots" ever do things like industrial espionage to allow the american companies to have a competitive advantage, right? Why would they do that? (supreme naivete..)

---

Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

---

I thought it was hilarious one of the msgs exchanged between Snowden and Laura was about a program the NSA loves because the UK allows them to run it all day vs. in the US where it's not allowed.

Do I have to give it to you?

Yes, the Tempora project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempora).
A variation of it was explored in the TV mini series The Honourable Woman (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3021686), with Maggie Gyllenhaal. A very well written and produced TV show.

---

Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

---

Nice slippery slope argument there. Surveillance =/= oppression. If you think dash cams on police cars or wire tapping constitutes an Orwellian dystopia you're a goddamn idiot.

I love dash cams on police cars; they help us catch crooked cops or officers in the act of violating civilians.





I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way

I have found two interesting passages in Aristotle's Politics, Book V:

---

In all well-attempered governments there is nothing which should be more jealously maintained than the spirit of obedience to law, more especially in small matters; for transgression creeps in unperceived and at last ruins the state, just as the constant recurrence of small expenses in time eats up a fortune. The change does not take place all at once, and therefore is not observed; the mind is deceived, as in the fallacy which says that "if each part is little, then the whole is little." And this is true in one way, but not in another, for the whole and the all are not little, although they are made up of littles.

---

---

A tyrant should also endeavour to know what each of his subjects says or does, and should employ spies, like the "female detectives" at Syracuse, and the eavesdroppers whom Hiero was in the habit of sending to any place of resort or meeting; for the fear of informers prevents people from speaking their minds, and if they do, they are more easily found out.

---

Please don't tell me that Aristotle was also a goddamn idiot.

I don't have to, Bertrand Russell will here https://tigerpapers.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/bertrand-russell-on-plato-and-aristotle/

I'll take my philosophy from someone with a little more foundation to build on, thanks.

Yep. Point well made!

What's interesting is that loss of privacy isn't the argument here. It is about the abuse of power.

In theory, if this power is handled responsibly, then if you are innocent, then you should have nothing to worry about. Government's should represent their people and as such should be accountable and responsible for their actions, by the people.

Do we believe that this power has been and will be yielded responsibly? I'd wager not. (And there goes a little alarm bell against my name)

I'll send you copies of all my e-mails, but ain't giving a private citizen my logins and passwords some of which I use for my bank accounts and credit card accountsI'm not worried about the government stealing my meager savings but someone like you I definitely am

I'll send you my texts too

difference is I'm more comfortable with my info being in a massive file dump in some random facility in Utah than being in the hands of a random individualthe stuff in there I have no fear of the government doing anything withbut you? Yeah you're more dangerous to me

---

I'm more comfortable with my info being in a massive file dump in some random facility in Utah than being in the hands of a random individual

---

Understandable.
So if you gave that access to your best friend, then would that be OK with you?
That wouldn't be a random individual, so yes or no?

If the opposite of Love is indifference, what's the opposite of Hate?

Something you and many others don't understand is that your data is not only in a "massive file dump" but also in the hands of a random individual. You do know that it is people working in those facilities, and not robots, right?

Give you my login information to my banking information, which can contain my SSN? No thanks.

Please provide evidence of a single person harmed and having their identity stolen due to NSA surveillance, and then maybe we'll consider handing over what you're asking for in this post.

Would a writer for show Dexter count? He was almost killed when FBI raided his aparment based on his google searches which he used for research to write his scripts for the show.


Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

---

Please provide evidence of a single person harmed and having their identity stolen due to NSA surveillance, and then maybe we'll consider handing over what you're asking for in this post.

---

Here's one. Let me know if you need more.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10263880/NSA-employees-spied-on-their-lovers-using-eavesdropping-programme.html

Tomato, tomato.

Well, you aren't offering anything in return.

Gmail sees your emails in return for giving you free (in the financial sense) email.

What are you offering?

Some of comments suggest that a person would trust the government to take and use their personal information without their knowledge, but not an individual.

The exceptions being persons representing an agreed purpose for the information. An example is a loan officer at a bank. The difference between the bank and the government is that the bank would be charged with multiple felonies if they took your personal information without a valid reason or your knowledge. It may be news to some but the government has to follow the law as well as everyone else.

But ok lets go with trusting government to take and use any and all personal information without concern because it only affects criminals. In that case, should be no problem to have officials visiting our homes and rummaging around with no specific reason. Maybe instead of sending around census takers they could send officials to search your home, vehicles, and what the heck persons too. Or alternatively we could have "I have nothing to hide Days of the Week" where local, state and federal law enforcement is allowed to search anything and anyone they want on randomly selected days each week. That sounds like a party.


"I'm not worried about my privacy at all" is code for, "Tell me when and where to bend over and I'll be there, just let me keep my eyes closed."

I dont agree with that argument, but ill play the devils advocate because i used to agree in the past.

Sure, if you find a way for you to access my Gmail account, etc without ability for you to change the contents (note that in this case NSA is intercepting and reading, not creating), im sure many people wouldnt actually mind. Alas giving passwords gives you MORE access than NSA has, making your argument agaisnt it flawed.


Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

You'd probably send me an email telling me to get a life after going through my gmail accountlol. But I wouldn't want anyone reading the texts to my mother where I discuss the anal fissure I endured during my last pregnancy or how many Smurf figurines I have made a bid for on ebay.ooppss..dammit. No you cannot have my login info!!!! Seriously though, i think there is a huge difference between info being stored on some giant HDD somewhere and probably never being looked at unless flagged and one single individual having the access. While I feel like I have nothing to hideyes I really am that boringI still wouldn't want anyone to have access to my private data.

The OP makes a very good point. Myself, I don't really have anything to hide. Nothing shocking about me, and I am not involved in any kind of criminal activity I would need to cover up.just an average, middle-class working professional.

That said, although there is nothing all that much of interest there, I am also a man that has always enjoyed and valued his privacy. Why? Because my business is my business. I share what I like with those that I choose to share with (close friends and family.) Why would anyone else need to know anything at all about my personal life, who I call on the phone and when, my email traffic, what I look up on the Internet, what I write on the internet etc. etc. if I have not chosen to share that with them?

Answer.nobody has any right to know.

The bad news is you have houseguests. There is no good news.

It doesn't matter whether I have anything to hide or not, it matters that I have a right to privacy, a right to hide it as long as I'm not breaking the law. If I break the law, then they can find it out afterwards by gathering evidence after the fact, rather than gathering evidence against me before I did anything. Yes that will be less effective, but if the alternative is that I have no right to privacy then that's just how it'll have to be.

lol retard. I'm not ok with giving them to YOU (wtf?) but to the government, and only wiht the condition that I'm not the only one, and every single citizen does the same.