4 ms·

The NSA does not appear to have the capability of analyzing all the data it taps in a way that would actually be considered intrusive. Knowing the state of AI I

The NSA does not appear to have the capability of analyzing all the data it taps in a way that would actually be considered intrusive. Knowing the state of AI I just can't imagine this. It's not like in "Person of Interest" where the government has a machine to automatically sift out problems. Same with drones and law enforcement. I can see them using drones in a surveillance capacity, for traffic control, maybe even to track a fugitive. But large-scale drone surveillance? Peaking into people's homes? Tracking people the way they can't track them right now through CCTV footage? No way, no how. The biggest risk from drones is that they fall out of the sky all the time. This will partly resolved through break throughs in artificial intelligence, but for now birds, lines, insects, power failures, hackers or even projectiles can take down a drone, potentially hitting someone. That's why they are used sparingly. A crashing drone is even more obvious than one flying above you making tons of noise. Not very clandestine operations...

rl3 12y ago
> The NSA does not appear to have the capability of analyzing all the data it taps in a way that would actually be considered intrusive. The intrusive nature of this context is not so much the analysis of your personal data, but storage of it. When someone falls under the microscope, sensitive data collected in the past can be pulled from storage, effectively enabling retroactive surveillance. For example, the NSA essentially collects and stores everything they can on everyone, including American citizens. What makes American citizens unique is that they are afforded extra legal protections. However, these protections don't usually extend to the storage of data on US persons, but simply the "collection" and "interception" of said data, which, in NSA's odd legal nomenclature, can simply be translated to mean accessing data that is already stored. In my opinion, the best hope for real privacy is not storing data that enables retroactive surveillance in the first place.

rl3 12y ago

> The NSA does not appear to have the capability of analyzing all the data it taps in a way that would actually be considered intrusive. The intrusive nature of this context is not so much the analysis of your personal data, but storage of it. When someone falls under the microscope, sensitive data collected in the past can be pulled from storage, effectively enabling retroactive surveillance. For example, the NSA essentially collects and stores everything they can on everyone, including American citizens. What makes American citizens unique is that they are afforded extra legal protections. However, these protections don't usually extend to the storage of data on US persons, but simply the "collection" and "interception" of said data, which, in NSA's odd legal nomenclature, can simply be translated to mean accessing data that is already stored. In my opinion, the best hope for real privacy is not storing data that enables retroactive surveillance in the first place.