• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Spy Net on Israel Snares Congress

justabubba said:
your choice
convenience or privacy
Click to expand...

Actually, it's not just about convenience, and yeah, we could go pre 1900 and have even greater personal security and privacy. But it can be protected, and should be.
 
Thoreau72 said:
In the hypothetical that you do internet banking with your smart phone (I do not), do you consider your banking matters to be in the public domain?
Click to expand...

If you send a postcard to your bank? Yes. And that is what you are doing till encryption is sufficient.
 
Montecresto said:
I disagree that it's public just because somebody has figured out how to kick the invisible wall down. And will never EVER agree with your assertion that the government can data mine me when I'm under no suspicion of wrong doing. I'll fight you and any other SOB that thinks he can punk my fourth amendment right. I have pointed out for years now that technology will be our Frankenstein monster, and lack the confidence that the checks and balances to which you continually refer will ever come, will come with the proper safe guards, or will have the necessary enforcement to protect me and my fellow Americans which are concerned about it. For you, and any others that value a strong centralized government to civil liberty, too bad!
Click to expand...

The wall and home sanctuary seem important and in most situations decisive for the 4th. This does not mean that the protection should not be maintained. This is what we should be discussing and not a sweeping mix of varying measures. Because there can be no doubt, that the public will suffer, if we do not allow our government to use the technologies that are being used against us by a very mixed set of interests. The question is how to structure the use of the technology and who may use the data under which conditions and control mechanics. As far as I have seen, this seemed well enough structured for a start, but will require considerable restructuring as technology has moved quickly and the political urgency of 9/11 has subsided. But an intelligent use is not in forbidding the technology to be employed and arguing as though it were is counterproductive.
 
joG said:
The wall and home sanctuary seem important and in most situations decisive for the 4th. This does not mean that the protection should not be maintained. This is what we should be discussing and not a sweeping mix of varying measures. Because there can be no doubt, that the public will suffer, if we do not allow our government to use the technologies that are being used against us by a very mixed set of interests. The question is how to structure the use of the technology and who may use the data under which conditions and control mechanics. As far as I have seen, this seemed well enough structured for a start, but will require considerable restructuring as technology has moved quickly and the political urgency of 9/11 has subsided. But an intelligent use is not in forbidding the technology to be employed and arguing as though it were is counterproductive.
Click to expand...

I'm not nearly as trusting of government as you seem to be. Don't know what else to say to you. But senator Church who spent months in areas you'll never have access to was alarmed by what the NSA had developed in 1975, and made a dire warning of the potential for abuse of Americans civil liberties that Snowden disclosed the reality of. Furthermore, Americans are dying in vastly greater numbers in a host of problematic ways that the government doesn't care about. I'm not concerned about the one in 4 million chance of being a victim of terrorism and those odds aren't even remotely worth the compromise to my liberty and fourth amendment rights as a result of federal government collection and storage of my communications without due process. I've been clear with you that you and I will not see eye to eye on this as is the case in nearly every topic that is discussed here.
 
Montecresto said:
I'm not nearly as trusting of government as you seem to be. Don't know what else to say to you. But senator Church who spent months in areas you'll never have access to was alarmed by what the NSA had developed in 1975, and made a dire warning of the potential for abuse of Americans civil liberties that Snowden disclosed the reality of. Furthermore, Americans are dying in vastly greater numbers in a host of problematic ways that the government doesn't care about. I'm not concerned about the one in 4 million chance of being a victim of terrorism and those odds aren't even remotely worth the compromise to my liberty and fourth amendment rights as a result of federal government collection and storage of my communications without due process. I've been clear with you that you and I will not see eye to eye on this as is the case in nearly every topic that is discussed here.
Click to expand...

But there is no question of trusting government. That is about the only thing I fully go with Lenin on. Trust is bad and control is (only) better. But I do not trust the bad guys out there nor the good guys either. And I know that some of them are plotting and using the powerful technologies that have developed in the last few decades against us. I also know that powerful technology trumps the weaker one and that abstaining from the use will cost one the game. That is the theory, I have seen it in the history books over and over again and have watched it happen in my areas, in related areas and I have followed it in society as a whole. If you do not find a way to use the innovations that the other guy has at his disposal you go down.
That is why it is so important to discuss how to utilize these technologies and how society can employ them, while protecting the citizenry from their misuse. That is why it is absolutely counterproductive and dangerous for our society to want to prevent the uses. That is the prescription for serfdom and not the safeguarded use. IT is not an option to find a due process that prevents misuse. It is an obligation and anything else is pure negligence.
 
joG said:
But there is no question of trusting government. That is about the only thing I fully go with Lenin on. Trust is bad and control is (only) better. But I do not trust the bad guys out there nor the good guys either. And I know that some of them are plotting and using the powerful technologies that have developed in the last few decades against us. I also know that powerful technology trumps the weaker one and that abstaining from the use will cost one the game. That is the theory, I have seen it in the history books over and over again and have watched it happen in my areas, in related areas and I have followed it in society as a whole. If you do not find a way to use the innovations that the other guy has at his disposal you go down.
That is why it is so important to discuss how to utilize these technologies and how society can employ them, while protecting the citizenry from their misuse. That is why it is absolutely counterproductive and dangerous for our society to want to prevent the uses. That is the prescription for serfdom and not the safeguarded use.
Click to expand...

You cannot trade liberty for security, you'll end up with neither. I'm not afraid of the 1 in 4 million threat. :shrug:
 
joG said:
If you send a postcard to your bank? Yes. And that is what you are doing till encryption is sufficient.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that there is commercial encryption that cannot be defeated by the government?

I am studied enough to know that a smart phone, any cell phone, is a radio. Further, any radio can be listened to. So as far as I'm concerned when one puts one's private information on the airways, by voice or by data, it is VERY MUCH in the public domain. That's one of the many reasons I don't do even online banking.
 
Montecresto said:
You cannot trade liberty for security, you'll end up with neither. I'm not afraid of the 1 in 4 million threat. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Beaux mots are always nice and comfy, have that quaint feeling of tradition and endurance and the hope to kill an argument. Sadly, they are often not well placed, as it is in this case. There is no "trade liberty for security" involved here. The new technology is disruptive and if you do not adapt it to protect your liberty, if you instead proscribe its use for fear, the others will take both from you and you will be left with good intent but sitting in the ashes without liberty or security.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Are you suggesting that there is commercial encryption that cannot be defeated by the government?

I am studied enough to know that a smart phone, any cell phone, is a radio. Further, any radio can be listened to. So as far as I'm concerned when one puts one's private information on the airways, by voice or by data, it is VERY MUCH in the public domain. That's one of the many reasons I don't do even online banking.
Click to expand...

Okay. Then don't broadcast your bank data and business on the radio, if you like that parable better.
 
joG said:
Beaux mots are always nice and comfy, have that quaint feeling of tradition and endurance and the hope to kill an argument. Sadly, they are often not well placed, as it is in this case. There is no "trade liberty for security" involved here. The new technology is disruptive and if you do not adapt it to protect your liberty, if you instead proscribe its use for fear, the others will take both from you and you will be left with good intent but sitting in the ashes without liberty or security.
Click to expand...

It's not an intended argument killer, it's simply my views on my liberty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom