3 ms·

I may be cynical, but I see the opposite. I really want to believe Snowden is right about this, but what I see is governments passing more obscure laws to creat

by swombat 11y ago

I may be cynical, but I see the opposite. I really want to believe Snowden is right about this, but what I see is governments passing more obscure laws to create more legal loopholes, and in fact doubling down on the investment in "security" infrastructure. I don't see a trend of governments demanding accountability from their spies. Quite the opposite. The conservative government is about to try to pass yet another version of the Snooper's Charter, and you know what, I think this time they may well succeed, since the tories have the majority and have only just won their seats. Even if they vote to betray the human race by passing the Snooper's Charter, it will be forgotten by the time the next election comes round. Looking around Europe, I don't see a lot of visible concern about this. Occasional articles, etc, but most people don't get why this is important. The only positive trend at all is the increase in use of encryption that he notes. And to balance out that positive trend, what do we have? Governments of the world starting to make noises that "encryption should be illegal". Will Apple, Google, Facebook, etc, keep fighting for encryption if it's made illegal? Dubious. We're losing this battle at the moment.

jokoon 11y ago
Another cost is the trust people put in technology. This could really result in ugly situations. What I'm scared of is that it could turn into a situations where people believe they have privacy, and it would be impossible to prove otherwise. You'll either end up paranoiac or it would effectively result in a society of political control. I wonder if it's possible for an investigator or a hacker to use suspicious behavior to lure the NSA and prove that they were being under surveillance while they are effectively innocent. It would be difficult to present it, since it would require legal and technological explanations.
- swombat 11y ago
  Basically, we are in some kind of technological singularity, at least for most people. Humans on average are no longer smart enough to understand and cope with the technological developments around them. Even if you knew everything that was going on (as Snowden largely did), and you could prove that it's evil, most humans don't have the intellectual skills required to understand it, no matter how calmly and clearly you try to explain it. It's beyond their ability to understand.

by swombat 11y ago

jokoon 11y ago

Another cost is the trust people put in technology. This could really result in ugly situations. What I'm scared of is that it could turn into a situations where people believe they have privacy, and it would be impossible to prove otherwise. You'll either end up paranoiac or it would effectively result in a society of political control. I wonder if it's possible for an investigator or a hacker to use suspicious behavior to lure the NSA and prove that they were being under surveillance while they are effectively innocent. It would be difficult to present it, since it would require legal and technological explanations.

swombat 11y ago
Basically, we are in some kind of technological singularity, at least for most people. Humans on average are no longer smart enough to understand and cope with the technological developments around them. Even if you knew everything that was going on (as Snowden largely did), and you could prove that it's evil, most humans don't have the intellectual skills required to understand it, no matter how calmly and clearly you try to explain it. It's beyond their ability to understand.