4 ms·

> No data should be collected without a warrant In your world, are police officers allowed to call in license plate numbers to see if the car of the person the

by mpyne 11y ago

> No data should be collected without a warrant In your world, are police officers allowed to call in license plate numbers to see if the car of the person they just pulled over is registered to an escaped armed criminal? May the government tune radios to public airwaves? Or is it just electronic communications which are special?

voxic11 11y ago
pretty sure he meant any data obtained via methods which would be illegal for a private citizen to utilize should require a warrant. So no national security letters or breaking into secure facilities to place taps ect.
- mpyne 11y ago
  > pretty sure he meant any data obtained via methods which would be illegal for a private citizen to utilize should require a warrant. Oh, so the solution is easy then; just make tapping phones legal for everybody again! It might also make those guys with their police scanners happy. While we're at it, they can bring back party lines for landline telephone use and save some money, or let weev out of prison, and in the meantime the NSA and FBI can gobble up all of our communications.
takeda 11y ago
Anything a normal person would assume is private should be treated that way. License plates? That's why they are for, you register your car with DMV or similar institution in your country for the sole purpose of matching you with the car. So keeping database of all license plates that match drivers, perfectly ok, but scanning automatically license plates and building map of your daily routes, that is going too far. Where I frequent is my private business. Public airwaves? Yes, the keyword is "public", assuming the communication is not encrypted. If it is encrypted then it means it should be private. Criminals can use encryption? Doesn't matter, it is still private. If we allow to go that route, next thing you know we will have implants in our heads transmitting what we are thinking. “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” -- Benjamin Franklin
- mpyne 11y ago
  > Anything a normal person would assume is private should be treated that way. Fine, just don't complain when it turns out that your expectation of what is normal doesn't match up with the population.

by mpyne 11y ago

voxic11 11y ago

pretty sure he meant any data obtained via methods which would be illegal for a private citizen to utilize should require a warrant. So no national security letters or breaking into secure facilities to place taps ect.

mpyne 11y ago
> pretty sure he meant any data obtained via methods which would be illegal for a private citizen to utilize should require a warrant. Oh, so the solution is easy then; just make tapping phones legal for everybody again! It might also make those guys with their police scanners happy. While we're at it, they can bring back party lines for landline telephone use and save some money, or let weev out of prison, and in the meantime the NSA and FBI can gobble up all of our communications.

takeda 11y ago

Anything a normal person would assume is private should be treated that way. License plates? That's why they are for, you register your car with DMV or similar institution in your country for the sole purpose of matching you with the car. So keeping database of all license plates that match drivers, perfectly ok, but scanning automatically license plates and building map of your daily routes, that is going too far. Where I frequent is my private business. Public airwaves? Yes, the keyword is "public", assuming the communication is not encrypted. If it is encrypted then it means it should be private. Criminals can use encryption? Doesn't matter, it is still private. If we allow to go that route, next thing you know we will have implants in our heads transmitting what we are thinking. “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” -- Benjamin Franklin

mpyne 11y ago
> Anything a normal person would assume is private should be treated that way. Fine, just don't complain when it turns out that your expectation of what is normal doesn't match up with the population.