5 ms·

Why is it that politicians think that "not listening to your phone calls" is any different than tracking everything about your phone calls. It reminds me of li

Why is it that politicians think that "not listening to your phone calls" is any different than tracking everything about your phone calls. It reminds me of little kids fighting, getting in each others face and shouting "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you!"

MartinCron 13y ago
Why is it that politicians think that "not listening to your phone calls" is any different than tracking everything about your phone calls Because there's a huge material difference, maybe?
- esrauch 13y ago
  Who I am calling is the vast majority of what I want to be private, what I say to them is often obvious given who I am speaking to.
  - MartinCron 13y ago
    For a lot of calls, sure. You can guess that calls between me and my mechanic are probably about my car. Calls between me and my wife when I'm out of town? You could guess what we're talking about, but I don't want you to listen in.
    - nitrogen 13y ago
      Yet the fact that you do or do not call your wife when you're out of town speaks volumes about the strength and nature of your relationship, information which could be used against you if in the wrong hands.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  There is a "huge material difference" between touching your sibling and merely hovering your finger a millimeter over them.
- lukejduncan 13y ago
  If I stretch my imagination I can see the argument, but I don't buy it (IMHO). I think the spirit of why the privacy of the content of my conversation is important equally applies to any information about that conversation. If my conversation is privileged, why shouldn't my meta-data be? What's the difference? If AT&T provided a service that cataloged and tagged my conversation for retrieval based on analysis of the content (and I opted into this) would that meta-data also be available to the government?
  - MartinCron 13y ago
    If you're having trouble stretching your imagination, just go back to your teenage years. Mom: Who was that on the phone? You: My (girl|boy)friend. Mom: What exactly did you talk about?
    - harryh 13y ago
      Or even better: Mom: I see here from looking at the phone bill that you were talking for your (girl|boy)friend. You: ... Mom: What exactly did you talk about? You: I'm not telling! The metadata isn't your information, it's the phone company's. The conversation is yours.
      - unclebucknasty 13y ago
        But, why is the conversation technically yours? What is materially different about the metadata (originated by the callers) and the voice data from the point of view of the phone company? It is all data flowing over their network, which is created by the private parties who use their service. I honestly don't get this exception that's made for metadata where the phone company is concerned.
        dragonwriter 13y ago
        > But, why is the conversation technically yours? Because the metadata is information that the phone company has to know in order to provide you the service and to bill you for it, and therefore cannot be information in which the parties to the conversation have an expectation of privacy. The content of the conversation, OTOH, is not information that the company needs to have to provide and bill for the service, and therefore can still be information in which the participants have a legal expectation of privacy.
smackfu 13y ago
They are still in a dumb phone world, where people use their phones to call other people.
anigbrowl 13y ago
Because it is, in fact, significantly different; and the differences were articulated several decades ago by the Supreme Court. The two cases you should examine are Katz v. United States and Smith v. Maryland.
ivan_ah 13y ago
The modern version of that is "it's just the metadata." I don't think legislation is the solution to this though. The spying is done because it //can// be done. By using a web application administered by somebody else you have implicitly given them your access logs. The right solution is more along the lines of bringing the power home[1], or friendly neighborhood colocation locations. If the Internet has 1M servers, they can monitor transmission at the large ones. If the Internet had 1B servers on it, they wouldn't be able to handle. [1] Talk by Eben Moglen about the Feedombox: http://youtu.be/gORNmfpD0ak?t=1m23s http://youtu.be/gORNmfpD0ak?t=1m23s
rayiner 13y ago
Because the metadata about your phone calls is AT&T's information about you not your information?

MartinCron 13y ago

Why is it that politicians think that "not listening to your phone calls" is any different than tracking everything about your phone calls Because there's a huge material difference, maybe?

esrauch 13y ago
Who I am calling is the vast majority of what I want to be private, what I say to them is often obvious given who I am speaking to.
- MartinCron 13y ago
  For a lot of calls, sure. You can guess that calls between me and my mechanic are probably about my car. Calls between me and my wife when I'm out of town? You could guess what we're talking about, but I don't want you to listen in.
  - nitrogen 13y ago
    Yet the fact that you do or do not call your wife when you're out of town speaks volumes about the strength and nature of your relationship, information which could be used against you if in the wrong hands.
jlgreco 13y ago
There is a "huge material difference" between touching your sibling and merely hovering your finger a millimeter over them.
lukejduncan 13y ago
If I stretch my imagination I can see the argument, but I don't buy it (IMHO). I think the spirit of why the privacy of the content of my conversation is important equally applies to any information about that conversation. If my conversation is privileged, why shouldn't my meta-data be? What's the difference? If AT&T provided a service that cataloged and tagged my conversation for retrieval based on analysis of the content (and I opted into this) would that meta-data also be available to the government?
- MartinCron 13y ago
  If you're having trouble stretching your imagination, just go back to your teenage years. Mom: Who was that on the phone? You: My (girl|boy)friend. Mom: What exactly did you talk about?
  - harryh 13y ago
    Or even better: Mom: I see here from looking at the phone bill that you were talking for your (girl|boy)friend. You: ... Mom: What exactly did you talk about? You: I'm not telling! The metadata isn't your information, it's the phone company's. The conversation is yours.
    - unclebucknasty 13y ago
      But, why is the conversation technically yours? What is materially different about the metadata (originated by the callers) and the voice data from the point of view of the phone company? It is all data flowing over their network, which is created by the private parties who use their service. I honestly don't get this exception that's made for metadata where the phone company is concerned.
      - dragonwriter 13y ago
        > But, why is the conversation technically yours? Because the metadata is information that the phone company has to know in order to provide you the service and to bill you for it, and therefore cannot be information in which the parties to the conversation have an expectation of privacy. The content of the conversation, OTOH, is not information that the company needs to have to provide and bill for the service, and therefore can still be information in which the participants have a legal expectation of privacy.

smackfu 13y ago

They are still in a dumb phone world, where people use their phones to call other people.

anigbrowl 13y ago

Because it is, in fact, significantly different; and the differences were articulated several decades ago by the Supreme Court. The two cases you should examine are Katz v. United States and Smith v. Maryland.

ivan_ah 13y ago

The modern version of that is "it's just the metadata." I don't think legislation is the solution to this though. The spying is done because it //can// be done. By using a web application administered by somebody else you have implicitly given them your access logs. The right solution is more along the lines of bringing the power home[1], or friendly neighborhood colocation locations. If the Internet has 1M servers, they can monitor transmission at the large ones. If the Internet had 1B servers on it, they wouldn't be able to handle. [1] Talk by Eben Moglen about the Feedombox: http://youtu.be/gORNmfpD0ak?t=1m23s http://youtu.be/gORNmfpD0ak?t=1m23s

rayiner 13y ago

Because the metadata about your phone calls is AT&T's information about you not your information?