But we have also never had as powerful instruments as we do now. Photographic, videographic, audiographic and textual evidence all in one device. We need extraordinary privacy because we have extraordinary vunerability.
The FBI used to have to go in person to set wiretaps, to steal documents, to access a safe deposit box. Now they can do it from miles away, and despite what Comey implies, they can do it without a warrant.
I'd like to imagine a future where citizens would have enough privacy to stage a revolution, and enough freedom of speech to broadcast widely without the government's consent.
> We need extraordinary privacy because we have extraordinary vulnerability
I don't understand that statement. Do you mean we need a widely defined right to privacy, aggressively enforced, because observation is so easy?
I view it the other way. Observation by anyone/everyone is so easy and natural. We should not expect more privacy from law enforcement than we would from any other stranger.
More specific to the posted article, it makes sense that a corporation should be able to sell secure encryption and possibly win in the marketplace because users appreciate their privacy. If users turn out to appreciate convenience instead, then they should expect the FBI to have the same capability that the vendor has to look at users' data.
Well he's incorrect in that we always had absolute privacy of thought. Its true we're no different from our predecessors who used cyphers, satire and concealment to communicate. It is also depressingly true that we are approaching a turning point in technology where our thoughts - from a purely technical aspect, may not remain private or even be fully our own.
I would argue this is the reason a bias toward privacy must exist, modeled after the same international conventions that outlaw use of WMD and torture.
Agreed. There is often a lack of imagination on the part of folks as regards the potential future abuse of privacy invading tech. There will come a day when thoughts can be decoded with ease.
There is more evidence than ever before in human history. More and more human activity is mediated by and observed by network-connected digital recording equipment, providing what is essentially a distributed cornucopia of evidence - which is conveniently paid for by us! It's quite an exciting time to be in law-enforcement.
The FBI could do a better job of advocating for increasing it scope of powers: "Give us this little change in our access to information, and we will be able to go after Rachel in Card Services." If they went after spam, and fraud, like they do terrorism, people would roll over. :/
[+] [-] hexane360|9 years ago|reply
The FBI used to have to go in person to set wiretaps, to steal documents, to access a safe deposit box. Now they can do it from miles away, and despite what Comey implies, they can do it without a warrant.
I'd like to imagine a future where citizens would have enough privacy to stage a revolution, and enough freedom of speech to broadcast widely without the government's consent.
[+] [-] xapata|9 years ago|reply
I don't understand that statement. Do you mean we need a widely defined right to privacy, aggressively enforced, because observation is so easy?
I view it the other way. Observation by anyone/everyone is so easy and natural. We should not expect more privacy from law enforcement than we would from any other stranger.
More specific to the posted article, it makes sense that a corporation should be able to sell secure encryption and possibly win in the marketplace because users appreciate their privacy. If users turn out to appreciate convenience instead, then they should expect the FBI to have the same capability that the vendor has to look at users' data.
[+] [-] rrggrr|9 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_identification
http://www.nature.com/news/brain-decoding-reading-minds-1.13...
I would argue this is the reason a bias toward privacy must exist, modeled after the same international conventions that outlaw use of WMD and torture.
[+] [-] ickwabe|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] javajosh|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Esau|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cmdrfred|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tn13|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] John23832|9 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover
Was an upstanding american!!!!
[+] [-] guest2143|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wyager|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] teslaberry|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]