4 ms·
Possibly so, though if you believe this, presumably the powers that be would not be above fabricating such evidence. Bear in mind that the data used in this ar
by rtl49 11y ago
Possibly so, though if you believe this, presumably the powers that be would not be above fabricating such evidence.
Bear in mind that the data used in this article are from arrest records. In fact, many of the arrests supposedly resulting from online activity could just as easily have occurred because of reports by concerned citizens. Would you put it past the authorities to seize a suspected terrorist identified through dragnet surveillance without creating a record of arrest? I think it is not inconceivable.
If you are opposed to mass surveillance, I think the best argument is that its social costs surpass the benefit of reducing terrorism. But perhaps this is not such a palatable argument after two well-publicized tragedies.
- brlewis 11y agoYou speak of "the benefit of reducing terrorism" as if it's a given rather than a hypothetical possibility.
- rtl49 11y agoNo I don't. There I grant the opposition their belief as a stipulation for the purpose of making a more salient point: terrorism is not so destructive as people tend to think, and regulating the flow of information is more destructive than people tend to think. Thus we avoid the challenge of quantifying mass surveillance's efficacy in reducing terrorism.