4 ms·

>But it's not meant to be a warning about [private communication], but about how anyone can something something that can be used against them, privately or not

>But it's not meant to be a warning about [private communication], but about how anyone can something something that can be used against them, privately or not Okay, the internet was created for military communications. So, with your logic, you should have a problem with it being used to power eCommerce, pornography, YouTube, Facebook and hacker news. This ain't literature class.

coldtea 7y ago
>Okay, the internet was created for military communications. So, with your logic, you should have a problem with it being used to power eCommerce, pornography, YouTube, Facebook and hacker news. Not with "my logic", but with the logic of some strawman, who claimed something really unrelated to my point. I didn't say that "nothing can't be used outside of its original stated purpose". I said that a specific quote about how anybody can find some damning thing in what others have wrote/said to attack them with, is not the same as a quote about privacy. That is, it's intented message not: "It's good to keep your writings/letters/etc private because else someone might find stuff in them to use against you" but: "I -as a skilled manipulator- can take any random stuff wrote/said by even the most innocent man and it against them to make them appear guilty".
- vezycash 7y ago
  >I said that a specific quote about how anybody can FIND some damning thing in what others have wrote/said to attack them with, is not the same as a quote about privacy The act of FINDING anything one has said/written is privacy related. >I -as a skilled manipulator- can take any random stuff wrote/said by even the most innocent man and it against them to make them appear guilty". Good point. Let's put the quote in context. Gestapo, Nazi Germany's secret police is where this quote supposedly originated. They had a country-wide spy network to monitor what people said. Data manipulation can't happen without data. Without the collection and storing of conversations, breaking into people's homes, intercepting mails/telephone/telegraph correspondence, no manipulation of the "words" could have happened. The point is - A skilled manipulator won't find anything to hang me unless he's invading my privacy in the first place. (Assuming I don't give public speeches or write publicly)
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >Gestapo, Nazi Germany's secret police is where this quote supposedly originated. They had a country-wide spy network to monitor what people said. The quote is attributed to cardinal Richelieu, and whether it's his or not, exists for at least 2 centuries, so before the Gestapo and modern surveillance. >Data manipulation can't happen without data. Which is neither here, nor there. I agree that privacy is important, and that surveillance offers all kinds of opportunities for that. My point is that the quote wasn't intended originally as a comment on that, and it is out of place related to that, because it intends to emphasize the inverse: you don't need "data", just any 6 lines will do. >The point is - A skilled manipulator won't find anything to hang me unless he's invading my privacy in the first place. That's a point one can make. It might even be a point I agree with. It's not however the point the quote was making. And it's only that which I'm pointing here, not the merits or not of privacy/surveillance. The quote was making the inverse point: "Who cares for data and deep secrets, and notebooks, and spying, and so on. I just need any old 6 lines from someone and can have them hanged". Might be too arrogant for Richelieu (or whoever said it) to think so. Might not even be realistic. But even metaphorically, it's purpose was to convey: "Anything someone says can be used and misconstrued against them".

coldtea 7y ago

>Okay, the internet was created for military communications. So, with your logic, you should have a problem with it being used to power eCommerce, pornography, YouTube, Facebook and hacker news. Not with "my logic", but with the logic of some strawman, who claimed something really unrelated to my point. I didn't say that "nothing can't be used outside of its original stated purpose". I said that a specific quote about how anybody can find some damning thing in what others have wrote/said to attack them with, is not the same as a quote about privacy. That is, it's intented message not: "It's good to keep your writings/letters/etc private because else someone might find stuff in them to use against you" but: "I -as a skilled manipulator- can take any random stuff wrote/said by even the most innocent man and it against them to make them appear guilty".

vezycash 7y ago
>I said that a specific quote about how anybody can FIND some damning thing in what others have wrote/said to attack them with, is not the same as a quote about privacy The act of FINDING anything one has said/written is privacy related. >I -as a skilled manipulator- can take any random stuff wrote/said by even the most innocent man and it against them to make them appear guilty". Good point. Let's put the quote in context. Gestapo, Nazi Germany's secret police is where this quote supposedly originated. They had a country-wide spy network to monitor what people said. Data manipulation can't happen without data. Without the collection and storing of conversations, breaking into people's homes, intercepting mails/telephone/telegraph correspondence, no manipulation of the "words" could have happened. The point is - A skilled manipulator won't find anything to hang me unless he's invading my privacy in the first place. (Assuming I don't give public speeches or write publicly)
- coldtea 7y ago
  >Gestapo, Nazi Germany's secret police is where this quote supposedly originated. They had a country-wide spy network to monitor what people said. The quote is attributed to cardinal Richelieu, and whether it's his or not, exists for at least 2 centuries, so before the Gestapo and modern surveillance. >Data manipulation can't happen without data. Which is neither here, nor there. I agree that privacy is important, and that surveillance offers all kinds of opportunities for that. My point is that the quote wasn't intended originally as a comment on that, and it is out of place related to that, because it intends to emphasize the inverse: you don't need "data", just any 6 lines will do. >The point is - A skilled manipulator won't find anything to hang me unless he's invading my privacy in the first place. That's a point one can make. It might even be a point I agree with. It's not however the point the quote was making. And it's only that which I'm pointing here, not the merits or not of privacy/surveillance. The quote was making the inverse point: "Who cares for data and deep secrets, and notebooks, and spying, and so on. I just need any old 6 lines from someone and can have them hanged". Might be too arrogant for Richelieu (or whoever said it) to think so. Might not even be realistic. But even metaphorically, it's purpose was to convey: "Anything someone says can be used and misconstrued against them".