4 ms·
"If the director of the CIA can't maintain his privacy on the Internet, we've got no hope." I couldn't help but laugh when I read that.
by ftwinnovations 14y ago
"If the director of the CIA can't maintain his privacy on the Internet, we've got no hope."
I couldn't help but laugh when I read that.
- Dn_Ab 14y agoInterestingly, I consider that a fair equilibrium. Not something to despair over. I think it would be worse if the director of the CIA could keep privacy but not random individual. That power does not affect ability to avoid lack of privacy means things are becoming more balanced.
- lostnet 14y agoYes, I'd say privacy is actually much more of a problem for the elite. How many investigations dig up infidelity, etc, in the normal population and then carefully step around it instead of enlarging the investigation? But I do think the power elite are driven by excessive compulsions, and I worry if we eliminate the ones with relatively normal/outside compulsions we will be left with the Machiavellian freaks running everything.
- doctorstupid 14y agoFair equilibrium? Perhaps anyone can be incriminated, but access to the incriminating evidence is anything but balanced. Remember, he was tracked by the FBI, not some ordinary Joe.
- Torgo 14y agoEh, the director of the CIA has a different threat profile than a regular user. I don't have a security clearance (anymore) that I have to maintain that gives anybody direct reason to consider thwarting tracking to be dangerously suspicious.