5 ms·

Well, not public, but eventually accessible by those holding the guns and running the prisons. Which is still not great.

by puzzle 9y ago

tluyben2 9y ago
I get into many discussions like this; not sure where you are from but educated Americans I talk to do not accept their data being read by anyone except the gov in cases of terrorism. That means, in practice, the gov can read your data. What is the difference in China? Do you want all data or no data or some data and how is some data defined exactly? If this is not black and white the definitions are going to be painful and biased and how to enforce proper use?
- mattnewton 9y ago
  Many Americans (but probably not the majority) don’t accept that their data is going to be read in cases of terrorism. It’s why Apple refused to backdoor their phone for the government in a case of terrorism. Narrow warrants granted by a seperate branch of government in broad daylight is very different from this. And it’s why we need to fight to restore that norm in America. I don’t buy that terrorism is such an exceptional case that we ought to bend due process out of shape.
  - Feniks 9y ago
    What little protection remains is a relic of the seventies. An interesting time in America. A time of strong resentment against the government after Vietnam and Nixon. There was a really powerful TRUE left wing in Washinton that had power. Ofcourse even back then they never extended FISA to non US citizens. Nobody legislates the CIA.
    - mc32 9y ago
      People rag on Nixon --he's not a likeable guy, deservedly, but he also passed title ix as well as the EPA. The true left were to some extent tools of the soviet information warfare effort, which has now transformed into a alt right effort. In both cases in an effort to destabilize (weaken) the US position --but people wanna believe.
      - mirimir 9y ago
        The true left in the US predated Lenin. And support for the final Russian Revolution among them was mixed. But yes, the Soviets did push their agendas via left wing and antiwar groups. However, some of those efforts, such as the Soviet-American Friendship Society, were in fact focused on peace.
      - alsetmusic 9y ago
        > People rag on Nixon --he's not a likeable guy, deservedly, but he also passed title ix as well as the EPA. It’s good to see this mentioned. I’m sometimes surprised by the good that Nixon did, despite my overall conclusion that he was unfit for office. > The true left were to some extent tools of the soviet information warfare effort… This deserves citation to back it up. Please provide links to credible sources.
        mc32 9y ago
        You can follow down the rabbit hole here[1]. There is an anecdote of a Soviet spy working in post-war London. He frequented high society and people sometimes wondered what he did. On one occasion, someone muttered to him, something to the effect "what do you do, you never seem to be doing anything, are you a Soviet spy or something [laughter]" and he responds, "yes, of course I'm a soviet spy" and people laughed it off [what a funny bloke]. Point is, this interaction shows a sort of acceptance that one in their own circles could be a spy, they could joke about it, not caring it it were really true. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_influence_on_the_peace_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_influence_on_the_peace_...
        grzm 9y ago
        Huh. My reading of the anecdote is they laugh it off because they consider it absurd (no real spy would tell us they were!), more than acceptance and uncaring. Could be your telling or my reading. Is there more to it, or perhaps how it was related, that leads you to your interpretation rather than mine? I'm not doubting it; it's just my read.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
ryanlol 9y ago
Or you know, to anyone willing to pay $20 to a corrupt cop/employee on wechat? Feels pretty public to me.

Well, not public, but eventually accessible by those holding the guns and running the prisons. Which is still not great.

by puzzle 9y ago

Well, not public, but eventually accessible by those holding the guns and running the prisons. Which is still not great.

tluyben2 9y ago

I get into many discussions like this; not sure where you are from but educated Americans I talk to do not accept their data being read by anyone except the gov in cases of terrorism. That means, in practice, the gov can read your data. What is the difference in China? Do you want all data or no data or some data and how is some data defined exactly? If this is not black and white the definitions are going to be painful and biased and how to enforce proper use?

mattnewton 9y ago
Many Americans (but probably not the majority) don’t accept that their data is going to be read in cases of terrorism. It’s why Apple refused to backdoor their phone for the government in a case of terrorism. Narrow warrants granted by a seperate branch of government in broad daylight is very different from this. And it’s why we need to fight to restore that norm in America. I don’t buy that terrorism is such an exceptional case that we ought to bend due process out of shape.
- Feniks 9y ago
  What little protection remains is a relic of the seventies. An interesting time in America. A time of strong resentment against the government after Vietnam and Nixon. There was a really powerful TRUE left wing in Washinton that had power. Ofcourse even back then they never extended FISA to non US citizens. Nobody legislates the CIA.
  - mc32 9y ago
    People rag on Nixon --he's not a likeable guy, deservedly, but he also passed title ix as well as the EPA. The true left were to some extent tools of the soviet information warfare effort, which has now transformed into a alt right effort. In both cases in an effort to destabilize (weaken) the US position --but people wanna believe.
    - mirimir 9y ago
      The true left in the US predated Lenin. And support for the final Russian Revolution among them was mixed. But yes, the Soviets did push their agendas via left wing and antiwar groups. However, some of those efforts, such as the Soviet-American Friendship Society, were in fact focused on peace.
    - alsetmusic 9y ago
      > People rag on Nixon --he's not a likeable guy, deservedly, but he also passed title ix as well as the EPA. It’s good to see this mentioned. I’m sometimes surprised by the good that Nixon did, despite my overall conclusion that he was unfit for office. > The true left were to some extent tools of the soviet information warfare effort… This deserves citation to back it up. Please provide links to credible sources.
      - mc32 9y ago
        You can follow down the rabbit hole here[1]. There is an anecdote of a Soviet spy working in post-war London. He frequented high society and people sometimes wondered what he did. On one occasion, someone muttered to him, something to the effect "what do you do, you never seem to be doing anything, are you a Soviet spy or something [laughter]" and he responds, "yes, of course I'm a soviet spy" and people laughed it off [what a funny bloke]. Point is, this interaction shows a sort of acceptance that one in their own circles could be a spy, they could joke about it, not caring it it were really true. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_influence_on_the_peace_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_influence_on_the_peace_...
        grzm 9y ago
        Huh. My reading of the anecdote is they laugh it off because they consider it absurd (no real spy would tell us they were!), more than acceptance and uncaring. Could be your telling or my reading. Is there more to it, or perhaps how it was related, that leads you to your interpretation rather than mine? I'm not doubting it; it's just my read.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago

ryanlol 9y ago

Or you know, to anyone willing to pay $20 to a corrupt cop/employee on wechat? Feels pretty public to me.