Reply to: Privacy vs Paranoia

[doodab]

yes sorry probably a bad example, but the message I was hoping to convey is the expectation of privacy is gone and people you don't sanction will use your data as they see fit.

agree we need to teach our kids to respect their disclosures. That doesn't mean they can't do naughty things, just make sure they don't let someone record it.

There is no room for them to make mistakes any more. That's very sad.

It upsets me that we've allowed childhood from this point on to be irrecoverably corrupted so that someone can get rich from trying to sell us tulip we don't need. That's as bad as any environmental or financial catastrophe we might inflict upon future generations, and the fact is we're all complicit in it because we did nothing to stop it.

[vetran]

ftfy

Are you sure you're cut out to be a contractor?

good point, luckily I have never had to sell my body (well nobody would pay for it anyway) so I didn't consider that.

[Mich the Tester]

That doesn't mean they can't do naughty things, just make sure they get paid a tulipload of money if someone records it.

ftfy

Are you sure you're cut out to be a contractor?

[vetran]

Which is why we need to be sure our kids aren't stupid enough to do daft things like that. We need to educate them to have respect for themselves. I bet she and her family are thoroughly mortified.

yes sorry probably a bad example, but the message I was hoping to convey is the expectation of privacy is gone and people you don't sanction will use your data as they see fit.

agree we need to teach our kids to respect their disclosures. That doesn't mean they can't do naughty things, just make sure they don't let someone record it.

[Mich the Tester]

That dopey bint at Slane (that stinking cess pool of teenage over excitment) will never live this down.

OTOH, she might have started a fashion.

[cailin maith]

like we are going to listen to someone on the Blonde pile ? :


Seriously after you have dealt with a few of our nations 'finest' you realise you wouldn't want most of them anywhere near your personal data.
The prosecutions for illegal access to Tax records are laughably low.
Police have been known to run vendetta's against individuals.
Councils and political figures use statistical data (both public and I imagine private) for political ends daily.
They can't even manage NI numbers properly.

Like the lass on her knees at the festival, once its out (or in) on camera you can't take it back.

I want the people monitoring communications and using the information watched like a hawk at all times and laws surrounding it to be rigid and fair so that politicians can't change them at will. That is the price of my data.

You are probably right I guess I just think there is tulipty stuff that needs doing that involves an invasion of privacy but if it keeps me safe and my son safe from some nutter terrorist then so be it.

We have to be able to trust those entrusted with look at and keeping hold of that stuff and I acknowledge it's next to impossible to do that but what is the alternative?

That dopey bint at Slane (that stinking cess pool of teenage over excitment) will never live this down. Which is why we need to be sure our kids aren't stupid enough to do daft things like that. We need to educate them to have respect for themselves. I bet she and her family are thoroughly mortified.

[vetran]

Click on the "here" underlined in Chefs post and read about it.

sheeesh.... you lot are meant to be the geeks and here is me doing the explaining!!

like we are going to listen to someone on the Blonde pile ? :


Seriously after you have dealt with a few of our nations 'finest' you realise you wouldn't want most of them anywhere near your personal data.
The prosecutions for illegal access to Tax records are laughably low.
Police have been known to run vendetta's against individuals.
Councils and political figures use statistical data (both public and I imagine private) for political ends daily.
They can't even manage NI numbers properly.

Like the lass on her knees at the festival, once its out (or in) on camera you can't take it back.

I want the people monitoring communications and using the information watched like a hawk at all times and laws surrounding it to be rigid and fair so that politicians can't change them at will. That is the price of my data.

[bless 'em all]

Yep. The official secrets act exists to protect officials, not secrets.

Having been asked to sign the OSA dozens of times, to admit to having signed it is a breach of the OSA, I concur.

[jmo21]

ok, given this thread is actually about privacy and my preference for keeping it, I will briefly answer your question seeings as you are so curious.

No she didnt actually open the box herself, but yes she did use it, the box was damaged before she could see the end result but she does/did know what should have happened as I explained it to her post proposal, yes we were engaged for quite a while, no the box had nothing to do with the reason why we are no longer together. Yes Mitch would, no I dont believe there is anyone else in her life as far as I know but then I could easily be wrong, no I wont provide any pics, Cologne-Germany is the closest location I will give to her location. HTH.

lol, sorry!

[chef]

That was the first thing I did, and the link didn't say what happened other than they split up. I wanted to know if opening the box was the reason so I asked some more questions.

Sheesh!

so you were engaged for a while then?

What's for you will not go by you as my old gran used to say, it worked out for the best in the end.

ok, given this thread is actually about privacy and my preference for keeping it, I will briefly answer your question seeings as you are so curious.

No she didnt actually open the box herself, but yes she did use it, the box was damaged before she could see the end result but she does/did know what should have happened as I explained it to her post proposal, yes we were engaged for quite a while, no the box had nothing to do with the reason why we are no longer together. Yes Mitch would, no I dont believe there is anyone else in her life as far as I know but then I could easily be wrong, no I wont provide any pics, Cologne-Germany is the closest location I will give to her location. HTH.

[jmo21]

she used the box, then accidentally cracked the screen, it was broken beyond a complete rebuild and so I opened the box and proposed the traditional way.

explained here

description of the box and how it works given here and a complete detailed thread given to it here

so you were engaged for a while then?

What's for you will not go by you as my old gran used to say, it worked out for the best in the end.

[jmo21]

Click on the "here" underlined in Chefs post and read about it.

sheeesh.... you lot are meant to be the geeks and here is me doing the explaining!!

That was the first thing I did, and the link didn't say what happened other than they split up. I wanted to know if opening the box was the reason so I asked some more questions.

Sheesh!

[Ticktock]

That stance is naive. If mass surveillance was for that purpose, there would be no Boston bombing. The Mafia would be out of business, there would be no banking fraud.

Not fully true. You are assuming that just because these things aren't true, then the motive given is not true. You are ignoring the possibility that they just aren't very effective in using their powers.

I'm not saying I agree with one side or the other, just pointing out the massive logical fault in your assumption.

[NotAllThere]

... The reason for mass surveillance is that governments don’t want information to be freely available about their incompetence, corruption and how much they are in bed with the banks and large corporate. ...

Yep. The official secrets act exists to protect officials, not secrets.

[Paddy]

Her point of view being:

I know I have zero to hide and so if governments say they will check all emails, texts and phone calls to prevent terror and that saves 1 life then surely that's better than not being able to do so if they didnt check on people

That stance is naive. If mass surveillance was for that purpose, there would be no Boston bombing. The Mafia would be out of business, there would be no banking fraud. The reason for mass surveillance is that governments don’t want information to be freely available about their incompetence, corruption and how much they are in bed with the banks and large corporate. Furthermore, information gathered is often commercial secrets from foreign companies that get handed to US companies. Moreover, real terrorists would not be talking about panning over unencrypted systems.