5 ms·

Living in Brussels with soldiers in the streets now, I wonder - would I mind free govt access to my phone and email if it would have prevented all the crap that

by stef25 12y ago

Living in Brussels with soldiers in the streets now, I wonder - would I mind free govt access to my phone and email if it would have prevented all the crap that happened in Paris?

oleganza 12y ago
Even if you wouldn't mind, there is your neighbor who would've. Should someone then put him in prison for having another opinion?
- stef25 12y ago
  Sorry I don't follow, why would that happen?
dmix 12y ago
The attackers in Paris were under surveillance until 6 months before the attack but they were ruled out by French authorities as not a threat. In addition, the brothers shaved their beards, stopped all unusual activities in public, and purposefully acted like regular Parisians for months before the attack. So passive surveillance wouldn't have made a difference.
rhino369 12y ago
I think there is an interesting question about whether privacy is necessary for freedom.
- flycaliguy 12y ago
  Depends on who wants the privacy though. The US government has become increasingly secretive for example. It seems nobody even really knows how much money this surveillance effort is even costing us... I'm glad I found this post because I enjoyed our dialog and was looking for the fundamental difference between our perspectives. People change how they act when they are being watched. Is a life lived while watched as free as one in private? Are you willing to argue that a man influenced by the panopticon is just as free under that influence? A life spent avoiding shame, embarrassment and condemnation is an oppressed life if you ask me. It is also a society which will subdue creative and divergent thinking, in turn slowing scientific and cultural progress. Compare Chinese schooling grades in maths and science with their performance on the nobel prize stage. An educational system which enforces strong conformity and strict rules performs well on paper but fails to produce as much innovative thinking. Just one novel example I came up with while examining PISA scores recently. The negative effects of the panopticon are well documented. Such thinking, that there is "bad people" and "good people" is a very scary path for a government to walk. "Pose no threat and you have nothing to worry about" is not freedom. Ultimately I believe a nation's amount of freedom should be determined by how it treats its dissidents and marginalized people, not by how it treats the loyalists. In a free nation I shouldn't have to be loyal to conventional behaviour to feel free. The two do not go hand in hand.

by stef25 12y ago

Living in Brussels with soldiers in the streets now, I wonder - would I mind free govt access to my phone and email if it would have prevented all the crap that happened in Paris?

oleganza 12y ago

Even if you wouldn't mind, there is your neighbor who would've. Should someone then put him in prison for having another opinion?

stef25 12y ago
Sorry I don't follow, why would that happen?

dmix 12y ago

The attackers in Paris were under surveillance until 6 months before the attack but they were ruled out by French authorities as not a threat. In addition, the brothers shaved their beards, stopped all unusual activities in public, and purposefully acted like regular Parisians for months before the attack. So passive surveillance wouldn't have made a difference.

rhino369 12y ago

I think there is an interesting question about whether privacy is necessary for freedom.

flycaliguy 12y ago
Depends on who wants the privacy though. The US government has become increasingly secretive for example. It seems nobody even really knows how much money this surveillance effort is even costing us... I'm glad I found this post because I enjoyed our dialog and was looking for the fundamental difference between our perspectives. People change how they act when they are being watched. Is a life lived while watched as free as one in private? Are you willing to argue that a man influenced by the panopticon is just as free under that influence? A life spent avoiding shame, embarrassment and condemnation is an oppressed life if you ask me. It is also a society which will subdue creative and divergent thinking, in turn slowing scientific and cultural progress. Compare Chinese schooling grades in maths and science with their performance on the nobel prize stage. An educational system which enforces strong conformity and strict rules performs well on paper but fails to produce as much innovative thinking. Just one novel example I came up with while examining PISA scores recently. The negative effects of the panopticon are well documented. Such thinking, that there is "bad people" and "good people" is a very scary path for a government to walk. "Pose no threat and you have nothing to worry about" is not freedom. Ultimately I believe a nation's amount of freedom should be determined by how it treats its dissidents and marginalized people, not by how it treats the loyalists. In a free nation I shouldn't have to be loyal to conventional behaviour to feel free. The two do not go hand in hand.