"And you never know what data you may need in the future..."
THIS. THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH COLLECTING EVERYTHING.
Sure, there are "checks" to make sure data isn't retained longer than the laws, secret or otherwise, allow. Just like here, the Warrant limited the length of how long it would be held.
But that didn't stop them from holding on to it longer, BECAUSE YOU JUST NEVER KNOW.
People who say "I don't have a problem with it because I don't have anything to hide." YET. You do not have anything to hide, YET. And they'll hold on to it, just in case...
"from the hey-the-4th-amendment-still-exists dept"
Sometimes, after reading these articles and cases involving the 4th Amendment, it makes me worry that someone is actually going to notice the 4th Amendment still applies and try to do something about it.
Certain appellate judges and certain REDACTED courts now see a law enforcement/surveillance "loophole" that needs to be closed. Over / Under on when a ruling comes out directly disclaiming this one? I say 8 months.
The government hires USIS to perform background checks on its employees. The USIS sends emails about not doing it's job, and it's only AFTER the Snowden leaks that the NSA finds out.
now the DOJ miraculously has emails incriminating the USIS. Interesting.
It's not that they didn't have enough information, it's that they didn't connect the dots. Again. (the NSA presumably had all of USIS's emails the whole time!)
Dang, Snowden is helping more people than he could have ever realized, INCLUDING the NSA!
What if Google charged an extremely steep price (like, say, $200,000) per request?
They can argue that the cost includes loss of investor opportunities and trust, and loss of potential contracts because their reputation took the hit (Much like Boeing losing out on a 7 Billion dollar contract...), and the price would be hard to justify asking for hundreds of thousands of records?
Also, Google (being not evil and all) could give that money to charity, or the ACLU, or the EFF and make a big deal about it in the press, so the government backs off.
Or would that reveal the number of requests they got if they revealed how much they charged/received?
I can see his "Fuck the Constitution!" Platform Mission statement now...
1st Amendment - HIPPIES NEED TO SHUT IT AND STOP HATING AMERICA
2nd Amendment - Assign everyone a gun (And subsidies the manufacturing costs with tax breaks for S&M, and require all 'Muricans to pay full price)
3rd Amendment - IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, IT AIN'T NO PROBLEM (Also, The NSA is already in your family room, bedroom, bathroom, and every other room you use electronics SO THIS IS MOOT)
4th Amendment - IF YOU HAVE NOTING TO HIDE, DON'T WORRY 'BOUT IT...AND ONLY GUILTY PEOPLE RESIST!
5th Amendment - IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? (Unless you are an executive or elected official, in that case this is still fine)
6th Amendment - TRIALS GO MUCH FASTER IF THEY ARE PRIVATE (secret) AND ONLY ONE SIDE GETS TO TALK. YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO! also, Lawyers are dumb (Unless they grow up to become elected or appointed officials, so they can stick to defending DUIs and stuff)
7th Amendment - There's a 7th Amendment? SINCE WHEN? THANKS ALOT OBAMACARE. $20 adjusted for inflation from 1776 to today is like $50948873 dollars. YOU ONLY GET A JURY IF YOU ARE WORTH $50948873 DOLLARS. Plus, Terrorists don't get juries!
8th Amendment - EXCESSIVE BAIL IS BAD. THEREFORE, NO MORE BAIL FOR THOSE WHO ARE "TERRORISTS" ("Terrorist" hereinafter refers to someone arrested for "terrorist activities" as defined by ME BITHCES)
9th Amendment - WHY DO MANY AMENDMENTS? JUST STOP AFTER #2! THESE ARE YOUR ONLY RIGHTS. That way, they can't conflict with others you think you have. YAY SIMPLICITY.
10th Amendment - STATES RULEZ, CONSTITUTION DRUELZ. (Also, My state > your state, SO LISTEN UP.
They have to figure out what they meant by "it" and "the" and "a" and every other word in the letter. BECAUSE CONTEXT PEOPLE.
Also, from what we know about the NSA's capabilities, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a copy of the letter before it was even sent across the hall to the office printer...
The NSA admitted that it treats elected officials the same as everyone else. The NSA also claimed that it gives everyone in the US high privacy protections subject to oversight.
A while ago, this came out: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-personal-data-israel-documents
It was discovered that the NSA gave raw data (unfiltered nor censored) to Israel. This data included information on US Citizens.
Therefore, the NSA gave private information of elected officials to Israel. and SNOWDEN is the one guilty of treason? ;)
I have a feeling Mr. Sanders KNOWS the answer to that question, and that it's "Yes."
What he's doing is seeing if the NSA will deny it or do a "Not under this section" response.
Prepare for a new Snowden document next week detailing the NSA program GUBMINT tasked with collecting the metadata of all US elected officials because terrorism.
What if the NSA, in installing it's own back door in Huawei's software, it discovered ANOTHER back door already installed (presumably by Huawei for the government, for the same purpose as the NSA) and called them out to cover up their own wrongdoing?
This would show that 1) DUH, the Chinese government spies; 2)They weren't as discrete about their backdoors (hehehe) as the NSA; and 3) the NSA practiced in economic espionage to discredit a Chinese competitor.
The article said he discovered the letters while in London. He was representing the American Colonies after the fallout of the French-Indian war. It does not seem like he came into possession of those letters due to his Job duties as Deputy Postmaster General directly.
I actually like the story so far (it's two issues in). Basically the President got together with his Cabinet and they decided the world needed people with experience in combat just in case, so they finagled a reason to start a 13 year long war in the middle east, to give people that experience.
Wouldn't it be better to ban data retention completely, and make the NSA obtain a warrant, and then have to monitor it in real time? (Or only retain data if there is a specific warrant).
Seeing how the users are the PRODUCT and the consumers are the Advertisers, this is another example of Facebook trying to increase volume to its consumers. In Facebook's business, it's quantity over quality.
*P.S. I was about to write something else, but thought better of it and decided to erase what I wrote. It gave me an idea: if everyone types obscene messages to Facebook and then erases them, will they get the message?
Also...
"And you never know what data you may need in the future..."
THIS. THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH COLLECTING EVERYTHING.
Sure, there are "checks" to make sure data isn't retained longer than the laws, secret or otherwise, allow. Just like here, the Warrant limited the length of how long it would be held.
But that didn't stop them from holding on to it longer, BECAUSE YOU JUST NEVER KNOW.
People who say "I don't have a problem with it because I don't have anything to hide." YET. You do not have anything to hide, YET. And they'll hold on to it, just in case...
Eep
"from the hey-the-4th-amendment-still-exists dept"
Sometimes, after reading these articles and cases involving the 4th Amendment, it makes me worry that someone is actually going to notice the 4th Amendment still applies and try to do something about it.
Certain appellate judges and certain REDACTED courts now see a law enforcement/surveillance "loophole" that needs to be closed. Over / Under on when a ruling comes out directly disclaiming this one? I say 8 months.
Hehe
Does anyone else see the irony here?
The government hires USIS to perform background checks on its employees. The USIS sends emails about not doing it's job, and it's only AFTER the Snowden leaks that the NSA finds out.
now the DOJ miraculously has emails incriminating the USIS. Interesting.
It's not that they didn't have enough information, it's that they didn't connect the dots. Again. (the NSA presumably had all of USIS's emails the whole time!)
Dang, Snowden is helping more people than he could have ever realized, INCLUDING the NSA!
NSA
A scary though, which I felt is relevant:
The NSA constantly indicates that it does not abuse the systems it has in place to monitor everyone.
What happens if a President like, say, Chris Christie, with a staff like, say, Chris Christie's staff, is in charge of an agency, like, say, the NSA?
I see no way how this could possibly go wrong.
Just thought it was relevant; don't want to take away from Aaron Swartz.
Re: Then there is that little thing
I see no conflict here.
Protect the Constitution.
Have secret interpretations that drastically alter the way the Constitution is applied.
CONSTITUTION IS FINE, BUT IT DOES NOT MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS.
Also, It's in a nice sealed box/frame thingy to protect it from the elements / terrorists / Nicholas Cage, so his job is basically done, right?
What if...
What if Google charged an extremely steep price (like, say, $200,000) per request?
They can argue that the cost includes loss of investor opportunities and trust, and loss of potential contracts because their reputation took the hit (Much like Boeing losing out on a 7 Billion dollar contract...), and the price would be hard to justify asking for hundreds of thousands of records?
Also, Google (being not evil and all) could give that money to charity, or the ACLU, or the EFF and make a big deal about it in the press, so the government backs off.
Or would that reveal the number of requests they got if they revealed how much they charged/received?
Constitution
I can see his "Fuck the Constitution!" Platform Mission statement now...
1st Amendment - HIPPIES NEED TO SHUT IT AND STOP HATING AMERICA
2nd Amendment - Assign everyone a gun (And subsidies the manufacturing costs with tax breaks for S&M, and require all 'Muricans to pay full price)
3rd Amendment - IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, IT AIN'T NO PROBLEM (Also, The NSA is already in your family room, bedroom, bathroom, and every other room you use electronics SO THIS IS MOOT)
4th Amendment - IF YOU HAVE NOTING TO HIDE, DON'T WORRY 'BOUT IT...AND ONLY GUILTY PEOPLE RESIST!
5th Amendment - IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? (Unless you are an executive or elected official, in that case this is still fine)
6th Amendment - TRIALS GO MUCH FASTER IF THEY ARE PRIVATE (secret) AND ONLY ONE SIDE GETS TO TALK. YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO! also, Lawyers are dumb (Unless they grow up to become elected or appointed officials, so they can stick to defending DUIs and stuff)
7th Amendment - There's a 7th Amendment? SINCE WHEN? THANKS ALOT OBAMACARE. $20 adjusted for inflation from 1776 to today is like $50948873 dollars. YOU ONLY GET A JURY IF YOU ARE WORTH $50948873 DOLLARS. Plus, Terrorists don't get juries!
8th Amendment - EXCESSIVE BAIL IS BAD. THEREFORE, NO MORE BAIL FOR THOSE WHO ARE "TERRORISTS" ("Terrorist" hereinafter refers to someone arrested for "terrorist activities" as defined by ME BITHCES)
9th Amendment - WHY DO MANY AMENDMENTS? JUST STOP AFTER #2! THESE ARE YOUR ONLY RIGHTS. That way, they can't conflict with others you think you have. YAY SIMPLICITY.
10th Amendment - STATES RULEZ, CONSTITUTION DRUELZ. (Also, My state > your state, SO LISTEN UP.
Re: How long does that take?
They have to figure out what they meant by "it" and "the" and "a" and every other word in the letter. BECAUSE CONTEXT PEOPLE.
Also, from what we know about the NSA's capabilities, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a copy of the letter before it was even sent across the hall to the office printer...
Oops
The NSA admitted that it treats elected officials the same as everyone else. The NSA also claimed that it gives everyone in the US high privacy protections subject to oversight.
A while ago, this came out:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-personal-data-israel-documents
It was discovered that the NSA gave raw data (unfiltered nor censored) to Israel. This data included information on US Citizens.
Therefore, the NSA gave private information of elected officials to Israel. and SNOWDEN is the one guilty of treason? ;)
/rant
I have a feeling
I have a feeling Mr. Sanders KNOWS the answer to that question, and that it's "Yes."
What he's doing is seeing if the NSA will deny it or do a "Not under this section" response.
Prepare for a new Snowden document next week detailing the NSA program GUBMINT tasked with collecting the metadata of all US elected officials because terrorism.
What if...
What if the NSA, in installing it's own back door in Huawei's software, it discovered ANOTHER back door already installed (presumably by Huawei for the government, for the same purpose as the NSA) and called them out to cover up their own wrongdoing?
This would show that 1) DUH, the Chinese government spies; 2)They weren't as discrete about their backdoors (hehehe) as the NSA; and 3) the NSA practiced in economic espionage to discredit a Chinese competitor.
Interesting...
Re: Near-sighted overweight nerd!
Captain Cannabis??
Re: Wait a minute
The article said he discovered the letters while in London. He was representing the American Colonies after the fallout of the French-Indian war. It does not seem like he came into possession of those letters due to his Job duties as Deputy Postmaster General directly.
Well
Thanks to the CIA and NSA, a tongue-lashing today has a completely different meaning than it did back then.
Also, John Yoo think's it's an entirely appropriate way to get information from potential tearror partyists...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What if...
Thanks for the clarification.
Re: Re: What if...
We know they have a knack for piling on charges, so this fits the bill of what the FBI would try to do.
Also, the Government can't get copyrights on its works, but it can have copyright rights transferred to it.
Re: Re: Letter 44
I actually like the story so far (it's two issues in). Basically the President got together with his Cabinet and they decided the world needed people with experience in combat just in case, so they finagled a reason to start a 13 year long war in the middle east, to give people that experience.
Question
Wouldn't it be better to ban data retention completely, and make the NSA obtain a warrant, and then have to monitor it in real time? (Or only retain data if there is a specific warrant).
Or is that just wishful thinking?
Doge the NSA dog
such WHAT
much HUH
very confuse
Well Duh
Seeing how the users are the PRODUCT and the consumers are the Advertisers, this is another example of Facebook trying to increase volume to its consumers. In Facebook's business, it's quantity over quality.
*P.S. I was about to write something else, but thought better of it and decided to erase what I wrote. It gave me an idea: if everyone types obscene messages to Facebook and then erases them, will they get the message?