3 ms·
European Court ruling condemns mass surveillance
- thisiswrong 13y agoUnrelated to the article: I have taken a quick browse around this site. Their content and supposed mission is very appealing and something i have much respect for. However, as an organization that is fighting for digital rights i don't agree or understand why they use Google's surveillance code (analytics) on this site. A similar site comparison would be Bruce Scheier's blog [1], which uses no 3rd party tracking code whatsoever. Furthermore, they don't accept cryptocurrency donations and seem to push for PayPal. Disappointing. [1] https://www.schneier.com/ https://www.schneier.com/
- greenyoda 13y agoOf course, a similar state of surveillance exists in the U.S. Are there any groups in the U.S. that are advocating against the archiving of personal data (browsing histories, call histories, geo-location data, etc.) by phone companies, ISPs, etc.? Or is it taken for granted at this point that all peoples' histories must be recorded (whether they're currently suspected of a crime or not) to make it easy for the government to track down criminals?
- MattHeard 13y agoThese may not be exactly what you're looking for, but I think they are pretty close: 1. EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) (https://www.eff.org/issues/privacy https://www.eff.org/issues/privacy) 2. EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center) (https://epic.org/privacy/ https://epic.org/privacy/) 3. ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) (https://www.aclu.org/protecting-civil-liberties-digital-age https://www.aclu.org/protecting-civil-liberties-digital-age) All three organisations are actively involved in significant legal actions to challenge privacy violations.
- tptacek 13y agoIsn't that special. Maybe now they'll stop conducting so much of it.
- Tomte 13y agoNo, the court did not rule anything (although it probably will). The Advocate General at the court entered his plea, which the court usually follows.