Computer System That Would Peek At Personal Data

[wig]

This is the type of ends justify the means menailty that is a big risk to all Americans.

Here's an excerpt...

"As the director of the effort, Vice Adm. John M. Poindexter, has described the system in Pentagon documents and in speeches, it will provide intelligence analysts and law enforcement officials with instant access to information from Internet mail and calling records to credit card and banking transactions and travel documents, without a search warrant."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/09/politics...&partner=GOOGLE

[sextoyking]

Wig,

Big brother is alive and well in this country, or it seems it will be soon enough if this republican admin. get's it's way.

this is bad news for all.

I thought carnivore was bad new, but this...

[T-Rav]

scary...very scary...

Does this not make anyone nervous? If something like this is not stopped immediately we will be forced to live with this mistake indefinitely. This administration may or may not abuse this information, but some future administration will abuse it.

[Edd]

If you guys like that, you'll LOVE this....

Heard about Palladium yet?

[wig]

Like all Gov't programs... it will be abused.

[EricP]

I agree it's fucked and can be abused, but...

What would they really want with me? I mean, what are they going to find if my internet connection were tapped?

I work on, and look at porn sites? I do research, I send email to people etc.

So What.

The way I look at it is, if you don't want someone else to know about it, don't do it over the internet.

I find it very hard to believe that the government is not already using a Super Packet Sniffer, or worse.

[Mike AI]

Wig, I totally understand. However if the gov;t would put controls on it - which would be easy. Say only thigns admissible in court from those taps woudl be for issues of national defense and terrorism. So anythign else gotten would be inadmissible in court....

[wig]

For me it falls under the category of unlawful search and seizure. Personally, I would be very skeptical of any controls. Once they skirt the constitution, there will be abuses no matter how they "control" it.

It has nothing to do with being right or wrong or doing something right or wrong.

To me, it is simply the principle of it.

[Dianna Vesta]

You're right, it will be abused and all proceedures get caught in red tape. Every month it seems like another police officer is caught abusing the system and those are only the ones that got caught. My son is sitting in prison, a bright, intelligent man all because of his word against an asshole and the goverment trying to make a point.

I've been over this system since I was a teenager and didn't know any better. Now that I know better it's worse. What's the solution? There really isn't any unless I leave and that has so much red tape.

Someone once told me to avoid the system is to not do anything to get caught up in it but everytime you turn around it's something else.

I'm building a commune. Doesn't mean I can escape the goverment tho.

[T-Rav]

Originally posted by EricP@Nov 11 2002, 10:47 PM
I agree it's fucked and can be abused, but...

What would they really want with me? I mean, what are they going to find if my internet connection were tapped?

I work on, and look at porn sites? I do research, I send email to people etc.

So What.

The way I look at it is, if you don't want someone else to know about it, don't do it over the internet.

I find it very hard to believe that the government is not already using a Super Packet Sniffer, or worse.

EricP, along that line of reasoning, I guess you would be fine if they set up cameras in our houses just "to make sure" we weren't doing anything wrong. And as long as you aren't breaking any laws...what's the harm?

Also, Eric let's say you are innocently surfing porn as you say, then you accidentally click on a kiddie porn link. It is documented, saved, and recorded. Then everyone you business with is a suspect, your property is seized during the investigation, etc, etc. Do you not think the likes of Ashcroft and his cronies would love the opportunity to prosecute legitimate porn business people with this type of technology?

MikeAI, the "controls" you speak of could easily be overturned at any time to suit whatever purposes they had in mind. Like I said before...it may or may not be abused by this administration, but it will be abused.

What do they really have to gain besides spying on citizens? Do you think if this technology was in place 2 years ago it would have prevented the 9-11 tragedy? I seriously doubt it. If I remember correctly there were FBI reports requesting certain people and scenarios be investigated prior to 9-11, and that wasn't even enough to prevent it. So, how could a huge database of Internet traffic protect us in any way shape or form?

This outrages me, and what scares me even more is when people defend this type of thing.

[EricP]

I guess you would be fine if they set up cameras in our houses just "to make sure" we weren't doing anything wrong. And as long as you aren't breaking any laws...what's the harm?

T-Rav -- Do you also hear voices? This is taking it a little extreme.
The internet is just like a phone, and they are tapped every day.
I have nothing to hide.

Also, Eric let's say you are innocently surfing porn as you say, then you accidentally click on a kiddie porn link. It is documented, saved, and recorded. Then everyone you business with is a suspect, your property is seized during the investigation, etc, etc. Do you not think the likes of Ashcroft and his cronies would love the opportunity to prosecute legitimate porn business people with this type of technology?

T-Rav -- Think -- if my connection were tapped -- they would know I only saw the front page and them immediately reported the site. I do not sit and browse KP.

You are taking my words and turning them in to extreme examples.

Lets get back to reality.

[Ironhorse]

Unfortunately this has been prophecized too many times and we are most likely walking right along the Neuromancer scenario by Willliam Gibson one of many books on the subject. Intrusion, counter-intrusion, this is the stuff technology and progress is made of.

I'm not worried about FBI special agent Jerkoff though. The truly scary part is when they develop some AI system capable of processing all this data at light speed, Terminator style. Then we are truly fucked..or could this be the new Messiah? Time will tell.

What's kind of messy too is the paragraph below:


"Before taking the position at the Pentagon, Admiral Poindexter, who was convicted in 1990 for his role in the Iran-contra affair, had worked as a contractor on one of the projects he now controls. Admiral Poindexter's conviction was reversed in 1991 by a federal appeals court because he had been granted immunity for his testimony before Congress about the case."


I seem to recall that Pointdexter actually got off by presidential pardon, namely Bush Sr. #41..hmm..



Last edited by Ironhorse at Dec 16 2002, 02:44 AM

[Torone]

Hell, ECHELON has been around for something like 4-5 years...and it monitors ALL Electronic Communications.

[Ironhorse]

My guess is anything we have now is like copper tools compared to iron. What's scary is this new technology is obviously being researched but it's the military that has all the financing to plow ahead.

Anyone see how the Navy's been using dolphins for different missions? Their use is bound to increase in the Gulf, keep the Suicidos at bay

i hate to be the one to point out the obvious, but how will government locate, surveil, pursue, arrest and/or detain bad guys before they do bad things in a world where the bad guys are increasingly getting the upper hand? technology evolves exponentially as compared to legislation. The bad guys ability to do bad things will always grow exponentially compared to law enforcements ability to arrest and convict them.

the "Big Brother" scenario is old news. So is the New World Order, One World Government, one world currency, cashless society and every thing else. However, information at the speed of light, unbreakable encryption, disposable and untraceable mobile phones and so on is not. This is new and its all right now.

everyone is against Homeland Security
against anything that may considered to possibly infringe on personal freedoms, rights or privacy.... but what are the solutions?

who here is qualified to comment on behalf of INTERPOL, FBI, CIA, Domestic Law Enforcement, Congress about all the obstacles they face in preventing 9/11 scenarios?

9/11 was nothing compared to what the next real attack will be. 3000 dead was simply a logistical, tactical and technological limitation.

the intent is "everyone dead".

remember that when you look at your family tonight. when you kiss your wife and hold your child. thousands of people are trying to kill them right now... and thats a fact no one can dispute.

i for one am not ready to watch millions die in a small pox out break because i was worried that "maybe... possibly... conceptually... someone could listen to my phone call"

why live in the US if you are afraid of your own government?



Last edited by -= JR =- at Dec 16 2002, 09:04 AM

[Winetalk.com]

why live in the US if you are afraid of your own government?
*************************************************

yeah, I wonder what Todd has to say about that
;-)))

let me also spare everyone the need to mangle Ben Franklins quote:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

i dont feel that i am giving up any "essential liberties". just as i dont feel like a jay walking law is infringing on my right to walk across the street... or feel threatened by the fact that a cop has the right to stand on the street and watch me cross it to see if i break that law.

we live in a civil society that depends on laws to maintain that order, security and safety for all. when the laws become innefective as the world around them evolves, they need to be changed, amended or new laws need to be created to adapt to the reality of that time.

people express concern that is born out of fear. i think that to some extent that is reasonable, but those fears unfortuneately do not address the real problems that the laws are created to deal with.



Last edited by -= JR =- at Dec 16 2002, 09:03 AM

[Ironhorse]

All good points JR, these are tough times and it's hard to see who's who, what's what, but as a historian I have to tell you that EVERYTHING is under dispute. As it should be.

I always thought this country was founded on principles of people controlling the government not the other way around. By its very nature, power corrupts and there is no way to change this. It's only human nature.



Last edited by Ironhorse at Dec 16 2002, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by Ironhorse@Dec 16 2002, 09:23 AM
All good points JR, these are tough times and it's hard to see who's who, what's what, but as a historian I have to tell you that EVERYTHING is under dispute. As it should be.

I always thought this country was founded on principles of people controlling the government not the other way around. By its very nature, power corrupts and there is no way to change this. It's only human nature.

i agree that everything should be disputed. thats democracy.

but how are the powers of government unchecked?

as a historian... when was the last time that the powers of the government of the United States was unchecked?

how is the government today, "controlling the people" in a way that it did not 10 years ago, or 20 years ago or 50? (in general, i am not talking about specific technology)

there is an election every 4 years.

how are the people not "controlling the government"?

[Ironhorse]

Originally posted by -= JR =-+Dec 16 2002, 08:29 AM-->