3 ms·

This talking point needs to be squashed immediately: I think that you have right to privacy but that doesn't mean that you have the right to anonymity It almo

by valar_m 12y ago

This talking point needs to be squashed immediately: I think that you have right to privacy but that doesn't mean that you have the right to anonymity It almost sounds reasonable, like a compromise of sorts. And that is deeply troubling.

Seshat 12y ago
It is indeed terrifying....and the worst part is they are being sincere. Anonymity is a right we are going to have to fight for in the coming decades. These people live in a world where they are the good guys fighting the evil guys. The good guys need to have special powers...but don't worry, they aren't going to abuse them..oh and don't worry about how they defined bad guys either. "Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the trunk of a car if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this." Policing should be difficult, if policing is not difficult you live in a police state.
nitrogen 12y ago
Quoting a dead sibling comment from a brand new user (I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing the fresh account, or maybe Tor usage(?) caused the comment to be killed): Seshat 1 hour ago | link | parent | flag [dead] It is indeed terrifying....and the worst part is they are being sincere. Anonymity is a right we are going to have to fight for in the coming decades. These people live in a world where they are the good guys fighting the evil guys. The good guys need to have special powers...but don't worry, they aren't going to abuse them..oh and don't worry about how they defined bad guys either. "Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the trunk of a car if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this." Policing should be difficult, if policing is not difficult you live in a police state.
- geon 12y ago
  "Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the locked door of a home if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this." Slippery, slippery slope.
  - vegedor 12y ago
    It's a compelling argument. Imminent danger allows cops to search and seize without a warrant and every cop can find a reason and won't be prosecuted for basically doing his job, right now. That's the status quo but nobody argues privacy in these case. And it would be grotesk, if cops only patrolled the streets while most crime happens insides without voluntary inclusion of law enforcement. Now they could come to your home instead at least to follow protocol and let you witness the search. On the other hand, data is much more like information than property, so it should be protected by the right to remain silent? Edit: And I say should without any moral connotation.

by valar_m 12y ago

Seshat 12y ago

It is indeed terrifying....and the worst part is they are being sincere. Anonymity is a right we are going to have to fight for in the coming decades. These people live in a world where they are the good guys fighting the evil guys. The good guys need to have special powers...but don't worry, they aren't going to abuse them..oh and don't worry about how they defined bad guys either. "Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the trunk of a car if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this." Policing should be difficult, if policing is not difficult you live in a police state.

nitrogen 12y ago

Quoting a dead sibling comment from a brand new user (I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing the fresh account, or maybe Tor usage(?) caused the comment to be killed): Seshat 1 hour ago | link | parent | flag [dead] It is indeed terrifying....and the worst part is they are being sincere. Anonymity is a right we are going to have to fight for in the coming decades. These people live in a world where they are the good guys fighting the evil guys. The good guys need to have special powers...but don't worry, they aren't going to abuse them..oh and don't worry about how they defined bad guys either. "Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the trunk of a car if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this." Policing should be difficult, if policing is not difficult you live in a police state.

geon 12y ago
"Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the locked door of a home if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this." Slippery, slippery slope.
- vegedor 12y ago
  It's a compelling argument. Imminent danger allows cops to search and seize without a warrant and every cop can find a reason and won't be prosecuted for basically doing his job, right now. That's the status quo but nobody argues privacy in these case. And it would be grotesk, if cops only patrolled the streets while most crime happens insides without voluntary inclusion of law enforcement. Now they could come to your home instead at least to follow protocol and let you witness the search. On the other hand, data is much more like information than property, so it should be protected by the right to remain silent? Edit: And I say should without any moral connotation.