3 ms·

Not an american, but the EU/UK are following the same trend. What is the proposed alternative? As we can see there are bad actors in our society that pose a hi

Not an american, but the EU/UK are following the same trend. What is the proposed alternative? As we can see there are bad actors in our society that pose a higher risk than ever before, and their tools are ever more sophisticated.

kelnos 3y ago
Are these bad actors actually that big of a threat, though? And are they really that smart/sophisticated that they can elude more standard, "old school" investigative methods? The problem is that we just don't know, and law enforcement agencies aren't giving us a detailed breakdown of which plots were foiled (or at least successfully prosecuted after the fact) via privacy-invading means vs. old-fashioned police work. Of course they'll never give us this data; we probably don't even hear about most investigations, even after the fact. Just trust them? No thanks. They are very publicly incompetent in many ways (e.g. all airline "security" procedures developed post-9/11 -- except for locking and armoring cockpit doors -- seems pointless, and don't catch people during sanctioned penetration testing), and I don't see why they deserve any blind trust here. We don't know if this sort of dragnet genetic database trawling will broadly close cases. Sure, it worked with the Golden State Killer, when no other methods seem to have worked. But that's just a single data point. And I'd rather that the occasional -- very occasional, as it turns out -- serial killer goes free, rather than live in a police state with no privacy. This is a meandering way for me to say: we on the outside cannot propose alternatives, because we have scant data and little understanding of what works and what doesn't. And the people in power consider it a feature that we don't have access to this information.
- gumballindie 3y ago
  Oh believe me they are. Even back when the london olympics took place people were quietly muttering about the risk of terrorist attacks. To be fair the UK/MI6 are doing one hell of a job at keeping people safe, but the risk is massive. If the US wouldn't be as paranoid as it is believe me it would be worse. I am not justying the level of government oversight, I am genuinely curious what the alternatives are.
- WeylandYutani 3y ago
  "I would rather have one serial killer get away with it" would make for a hell of a sound-bite for your opponent in an election campaign. Honestly this issue was already decided. No new arguments have been presented. I'm old enough to remember it. One side talks about hypotheticals and constitutional principles. The other side holds up a photo of some poor murdered child. Can't win this one.
- Obscurity4340 3y ago
  That's the most annoying part. They have literally every other tool and technology and scientific equipment/personnel to find out (sometimes even parallel construct) whatever they need for a case, why do they need to have access to ALL your private data and thoughts? How did thry ever solve a crime before the mass proliferation of all the data-rich personal tech we have today?

kelnos 3y ago

Are these bad actors actually that big of a threat, though? And are they really that smart/sophisticated that they can elude more standard, "old school" investigative methods? The problem is that we just don't know, and law enforcement agencies aren't giving us a detailed breakdown of which plots were foiled (or at least successfully prosecuted after the fact) via privacy-invading means vs. old-fashioned police work. Of course they'll never give us this data; we probably don't even hear about most investigations, even after the fact. Just trust them? No thanks. They are very publicly incompetent in many ways (e.g. all airline "security" procedures developed post-9/11 -- except for locking and armoring cockpit doors -- seems pointless, and don't catch people during sanctioned penetration testing), and I don't see why they deserve any blind trust here. We don't know if this sort of dragnet genetic database trawling will broadly close cases. Sure, it worked with the Golden State Killer, when no other methods seem to have worked. But that's just a single data point. And I'd rather that the occasional -- very occasional, as it turns out -- serial killer goes free, rather than live in a police state with no privacy. This is a meandering way for me to say: we on the outside cannot propose alternatives, because we have scant data and little understanding of what works and what doesn't. And the people in power consider it a feature that we don't have access to this information.

gumballindie 3y ago
Oh believe me they are. Even back when the london olympics took place people were quietly muttering about the risk of terrorist attacks. To be fair the UK/MI6 are doing one hell of a job at keeping people safe, but the risk is massive. If the US wouldn't be as paranoid as it is believe me it would be worse. I am not justying the level of government oversight, I am genuinely curious what the alternatives are.
WeylandYutani 3y ago
"I would rather have one serial killer get away with it" would make for a hell of a sound-bite for your opponent in an election campaign. Honestly this issue was already decided. No new arguments have been presented. I'm old enough to remember it. One side talks about hypotheticals and constitutional principles. The other side holds up a photo of some poor murdered child. Can't win this one.
Obscurity4340 3y ago
That's the most annoying part. They have literally every other tool and technology and scientific equipment/personnel to find out (sometimes even parallel construct) whatever they need for a case, why do they need to have access to ALL your private data and thoughts? How did thry ever solve a crime before the mass proliferation of all the data-rich personal tech we have today?