4 ms·

But by your own words, access to private info was granted back then only because of where we had to store it while traveling. We now store our information on en

But by your own words, access to private info was granted back then only because of where we had to store it while traveling. We now store our information on encrypted supercomputers that fit in our pockets instead of in our luggage, open for all to see. If you truly feel we don't deserve and shouldn't expect privacy, I hereby demand that you immediately post your entire medical history, SSN, full contact list, passwords for all of your social media accounts, full text of every email and sms conversation you've ever had, your full browser history (porn and all), and links to every file in your cloud storage services, all to this public thread for everyone to see. Go ahead, I'm waiting. You have nothing to hide, right? You see, it's not about expecting more privacy, it's about expecting them to fully respect the privacy we already enjoy when sitting at home.

leereeves 10y ago
> it's about expecting them to fully respect the privacy we already enjoy when sitting at home. That's the point. We don't, and that's not new. The courts decided long ago that we don't enjoy the same privacy when crossing borders that we enjoy when sitting at home. Whether the information is written on paper or stored on encrypted supercomputers is, legally, irrelevant.
- morganvachon 10y ago
  So you're saying the law should never, ever change despite that technology changes and improves? That what was good enough for the 1970s is good enough for today? Because that's a pound of bullshit that I find hard to swallow. I still can't understand why you desire zero privacy at the border. Why would any citizen applaud the government for invading their privacy just to entertain security theater? The contents of my phone have zero bearing on whether I'm bringing a gun on a plane. You don't foil a terror plot at the TSA checkpoint by browsing someone's phone contents.
  - leereeves 10y ago
    No, I'm not saying the law shouldn't change. Advocate changing the law if you want but acknowledge that you're asking for a change in the law. Then consider the reasons the law exists in the first place and why they're no longer applicable, if you think that's the case. And please don't misstate my position. I don't desire having zero privacy. I just recognize why searches are necessary.

leereeves 10y ago

> it's about expecting them to fully respect the privacy we already enjoy when sitting at home. That's the point. We don't, and that's not new. The courts decided long ago that we don't enjoy the same privacy when crossing borders that we enjoy when sitting at home. Whether the information is written on paper or stored on encrypted supercomputers is, legally, irrelevant.

morganvachon 10y ago
So you're saying the law should never, ever change despite that technology changes and improves? That what was good enough for the 1970s is good enough for today? Because that's a pound of bullshit that I find hard to swallow. I still can't understand why you desire zero privacy at the border. Why would any citizen applaud the government for invading their privacy just to entertain security theater? The contents of my phone have zero bearing on whether I'm bringing a gun on a plane. You don't foil a terror plot at the TSA checkpoint by browsing someone's phone contents.
- leereeves 10y ago
  No, I'm not saying the law shouldn't change. Advocate changing the law if you want but acknowledge that you're asking for a change in the law. Then consider the reasons the law exists in the first place and why they're no longer applicable, if you think that's the case. And please don't misstate my position. I don't desire having zero privacy. I just recognize why searches are necessary.