19 ms·

I tend to agree. There are already well established methods to investigate individuals suspected of some crime without needing SigInt, but it's more expensive.

I tend to agree. There are already well established methods to investigate individuals suspected of some crime without needing SigInt, but it's more expensive. That's all this is about: cost. It's more expensive and the system would have to dedicate more resources to fewer targets, being forced to prioritize their efforts. Sure, that means that investigating truly bad people will be more difficult. But, that extra cost means that the average well-meaning person won't be nearly as vulnerable to bad actors who use Total Information Awareness for nefarious purposes. This shouldn't really be controversial now, in-fact it's a well established principle in criminal law called Blackstone's Ratio. "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_formulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_formulation

CryptoPunk 6y ago
One thing that is never factored into reports by security agencies is the threat posed by the state. So for instance, in the United States federal framework for criminal crypto enforcement report recently published by the US Department of Justice's Cyber Digital Task Force, it states: https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1326061/download https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1326061/download >>Because of the global and cross-border nature of transactions involving virtual assets, the lack of consistent AML/ CFT regulation and supervision over VASPs across jurisdictions—and the complete absence of such regulation and supervision in certain parts of the world—is detrimental to the safety and stability of the international financial system.161 This takes it as a priori that state institutions having Total Information Awareness with regard to private financial transactions DOESN'T pose a threat to the "safety and stability of the international financial system." This is an absurdly totalitarian political philosophy and the infrequency in which it's criticized is extremely dangerous.

CryptoPunk 6y ago

One thing that is never factored into reports by security agencies is the threat posed by the state. So for instance, in the United States federal framework for criminal crypto enforcement report recently published by the US Department of Justice's Cyber Digital Task Force, it states: https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1326061/download https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1326061/download >>Because of the global and cross-border nature of transactions involving virtual assets, the lack of consistent AML/ CFT regulation and supervision over VASPs across jurisdictions—and the complete absence of such regulation and supervision in certain parts of the world—is detrimental to the safety and stability of the international financial system.161 This takes it as a priori that state institutions having Total Information Awareness with regard to private financial transactions DOESN'T pose a threat to the "safety and stability of the international financial system." This is an absurdly totalitarian political philosophy and the infrequency in which it's criticized is extremely dangerous.