Here is a case where having ALL records is claimed to have been relevant: pinning the 2005 assassination of Lebanon's PM to Hezbollah [1]. As we all start to i

Here is a case where having ALL records is claimed to have been relevant: pinning the 2005 assassination of Lebanon's PM to Hezbollah [1]. As we all start to internalize the value of metadata criminals will avoid using systems that expose it. This may reduce the value of this technique but I somehow suspect it will not remove it. So while arguing that the data isn't worth as much as claimed certainly sits well with me and other privacy advocates I wonder how long that argument will last. [2] The panel noted that the government never “attempted to identify to what particular ‘authorized investigation’ ” the data of all Americans’ phone calls would be relevant. I think this argument is also weak. That the act of collection has been limited to specific investigation has more to do with the physicality of historical communication mediums. At least I believe this has a greater influence over those limits than the idea of privacy. So I wonder how far this argument will hold. I will be happy if it holds in "public v. NSA" but suspect somewhere in the future, under some other constellation, it may not. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9498119 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9498119 2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/appeals-court-rules-nsa-record-collection-violates-patriot-act/2015/05/07/c4fabfb8-f4bf-11e4-bcc4-e8141e5eb0c9_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/appeal...