6 ms·

We don’t want the state-run telcos in Saudi, Iran, Bahrain, Belarus, China, Egypt, Cuba, USA, etc… to have direct access to the metadata of TextSecure users

by junto 12y ago

We don’t want the state-run telcos in Saudi, Iran, Bahrain, Belarus, China, Egypt, Cuba, USA, etc… to have direct access to the metadata of TextSecure users in those countries or anywhere else. Sad to see that the 'land of the free' has become bundled (in a relatively short period of time) into a category of oppressive states that have little or no respect for the privacy of its citizens.

colechristensen 12y ago
It seems pretty clear that more or less every advanced country should be included on that list. America needs a new constitutional amendment to address what the 4th Amendment means in the 21st century.
- dhimes 12y ago
  I think you are seeing what it means to those in power- and those are the folks who would draw it up. It would be quite a remarkable revolution to put normal citizens in the legislature to rewrite the laws. I'm not sure my country can handle that. Too much funny laugh-track stuff on TV.
blfr 12y ago
Do people really think that having your texts read is comparably oppressive to living in Belarus?
- alsdifu3 12y ago
  No one said that except you. Nice rhetorical strategy. Moxie said 'state-run telcos'. Which is accurate.
  - blfr 12y ago
    Moxie didn't say it but the comment seems to imply that they are in fact comparable.
    - alsdifu3 12y ago
      OP lamented that the US uses the same tactics as those places. Data sent to/from your device will be captured in all of the places mentioned. Where is the comparison?
proveanegative 12y ago
I read this bundling as a deliberate rhetorical/political move. You could have bundled the US with other surveillance-happy Western nations such as Australia or the UK, which as far as I understand do not behave in a qualitatively different manner.
- dredmorbius 12y ago
  Not only do the UK, Australia, or Canada and New Zealand for that matter, not behave qualitatively differently, but as the "Five Eyes" surveillance states, they'll spy on one another's citizens (and occasionally their own) for one another, effectively gutting any legislative prohibitions on domestic surveillance. https://plus.google.com/u/0/104092656004159577193/posts/2ncBEdPVrHX https://plus.google.com/u/0/104092656004159577193/posts/2ncB... Tipped off to me by SoftwareMaven here at HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9077061 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9077061 (Links are described in more detail in my G+ post above) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/20/us-uk-secret-deal-surveillance-personal-data http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/20/us-uk-secret-de... http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/02/revealed-australian-spy-agency-offered-to-share-data-about-ordinary-citizens http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/02/revealed-austra... http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/10/nsa-offers-intelligence-british-counterparts-blunkett http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/10/nsa-offers-i... http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/06/21/uk-usa-security-britain-idUKBRE95K10620130621 http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/06/21/uk-usa-security-bri...
  - pyre 12y ago
    Said information shared was found illegal in the UK recently.
    - dredmorbius 12y ago
      Source?
      - pyre 12y ago
        Looks like it wasn't an actual court. I was recalling incorrectly: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/06/gchq-mass-internet-surveillance-unlawful-court-nsa http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/06/gchq-mass-int...

by junto 12y ago

colechristensen 12y ago

It seems pretty clear that more or less every advanced country should be included on that list. America needs a new constitutional amendment to address what the 4th Amendment means in the 21st century.

dhimes 12y ago
I think you are seeing what it means to those in power- and those are the folks who would draw it up. It would be quite a remarkable revolution to put normal citizens in the legislature to rewrite the laws. I'm not sure my country can handle that. Too much funny laugh-track stuff on TV.

blfr 12y ago

Do people really think that having your texts read is comparably oppressive to living in Belarus?

alsdifu3 12y ago
No one said that except you. Nice rhetorical strategy. Moxie said 'state-run telcos'. Which is accurate.
- blfr 12y ago
  Moxie didn't say it but the comment seems to imply that they are in fact comparable.
  - alsdifu3 12y ago
    OP lamented that the US uses the same tactics as those places. Data sent to/from your device will be captured in all of the places mentioned. Where is the comparison?

proveanegative 12y ago

I read this bundling as a deliberate rhetorical/political move. You could have bundled the US with other surveillance-happy Western nations such as Australia or the UK, which as far as I understand do not behave in a qualitatively different manner.

dredmorbius 12y ago
Not only do the UK, Australia, or Canada and New Zealand for that matter, not behave qualitatively differently, but as the "Five Eyes" surveillance states, they'll spy on one another's citizens (and occasionally their own) for one another, effectively gutting any legislative prohibitions on domestic surveillance. https://plus.google.com/u/0/104092656004159577193/posts/2ncBEdPVrHX https://plus.google.com/u/0/104092656004159577193/posts/2ncB... Tipped off to me by SoftwareMaven here at HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9077061 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9077061 (Links are described in more detail in my G+ post above) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/20/us-uk-secret-deal-surveillance-personal-data http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/20/us-uk-secret-de... http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/02/revealed-australian-spy-agency-offered-to-share-data-about-ordinary-citizens http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/02/revealed-austra... http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/10/nsa-offers-intelligence-british-counterparts-blunkett http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/10/nsa-offers-i... http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/06/21/uk-usa-security-britain-idUKBRE95K10620130621 http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/06/21/uk-usa-security-bri...
- pyre 12y ago
  Said information shared was found illegal in the UK recently.
  - dredmorbius 12y ago
    Source?
    - pyre 12y ago
      Looks like it wasn't an actual court. I was recalling incorrectly: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/06/gchq-mass-internet-surveillance-unlawful-court-nsa http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/06/gchq-mass-int...