Prism Program ( Big Brother gone too far?)

[Malcador]

Somehow I am skeptical of something the NSA claims with regards to this.

[Zoraptor]

 

"Using this Doll, can you show me where the bad NSA touched you?"

 

 

Even better if there is a spot on the doll marked 1.6%

 

1.6%? Pft. I'd need a 1.9% label, at the least.

 

This is a very good point. Data only becomes intelligence in a given context. The NSA isn't going to be just scooping every porn site you surf, because why would that be important? Right?

Why wouldn't they though? The amount of storage required to do that is truly trivial. "Walsingham visited Obsidian Forums on 12/08/13 1507 GMT" uses... about 40 bytes, without any compression or other tricks, and it's entirely plausible that it's actually easier to dragnet everything than administer some sort of always fluctuating 'undesirable' person/ site list where if you drop people/ places or miss them you may have to carry the can if something bad happens. Easier and safer to just target everyone, after all, nothing to hide == nothing to fear!

[Guard Dog]

To follow up on Hurlshot's comment (and others) about having nothing to hide, you are presuming to know what they are looking for. Right now the story is they are using this data to look for terrorist/criminal activity. Is it so inconceivable that this could be used to monitor speech, political leanings, searching out "enemies of the people"? Now that this thing exists and congress has reaffirmed it's future it can be used for whatever the whims of the regime of the day dictate. Don't forget the Obama administration once set up a website where you could report people who were speaking ill of Obamacare before it was passed. Tomorrows "terrorist" might be you if you have visited unauthorized sites or engaged in political postings or expressed opinions considered to be "contrary to the interests of the United States".

 

If you think this program is harmless or even a good thing for you then you placing a hell of a lot of faith in your future political leaders.

[Hurlshort]

I don't think it is harmless or good for me, I think it is a completely ineffective way of spying on people.  I simply don't think the NSA is efficient enough to sift through all these haystacks and find the proverbial needles.  And if they started to target a regular schmuck like me, they are just going to look ridiculous.  

 

We just aren't that close to a big brother scenario here.  That is clear by the lambasting the NSA is receiving in the media.  This is the worst thing possible for a supposed spy agency.  They don't want to be in the public eye.

 

This is drifting from the point a bit, but think about how easy it is to go public with stuff nowadays.  You can upload a cell phone video to youtube in seconds.  Government conspiracies and coverups are a nightmare to pull off today.  A Watergate scenario would end up pasted across every website in the world in a matter of minutes.     

 

I don't have faith in politicians.  As a whole they seem to be petty and power hungry.  But that's the beauty of the system.  If all the politicians started to agree on everything and act as a single entity, I'd be terrified.  

Edited August 13, 2013 by Hurlshot

[Raithe]

Well, wasn't the description basically that they pretty much record every email (or such) and save it away on big server farms? Then if your name crops up in relation to anything (or some bureaucrat is annoyed with you) they can pretty much run a search query on you, pull it from storage, then they can analyse it to look for whatever they want or if there's something interesting.

 

Of course, that might just have been the journalists getting it a wee bit wrong, which like, never ever happens.

[Hurlshort]

Well the report is saying they record 1.6% and file it away, then tag 0.025% of that for review.  I doubt they can actually store every email sent, that would be a massive amount of data just in one day.  

 

The annoyed bureaucrat would also be exposing themselves to some risk here, because in order to act on any information they are going to need to bring more people into the loop, and that means more complications to the witch hunt.  

[Guard Dog]

I don't know about that second part Hurlshot. The IRS has not only been caught trying to suppress political speech, they are still doing it brazenly. And the majority of the media coverage has been supportive of them. The Obama admin states it's within their power to use drones to kill Americans and not only was the press supportive for the most part they ridiculed people who opposed it. The majority of the media has become a willing accomplice in covering up malfeasance to help politicians they support. I wonder how much risk a petty and vindictive politician really takes when he decides to use his office or government power to "punish" an enemy.

[Zoraptor]

I'd be very surprised if they weren't storing pretty much everything text based- text is small, easy to search and easy to store; and easy to remove duplicates so no need to store the million Nigerian Money Scam and other spam that could gum the system up. It's a byte per letter, plus some for the headers without any compression at all. Images and audio, especially on the fly stuff, would be far more difficult as the sizes required are more massive and it's far more difficult to search effectively.

 

This is drifting from the point a bit, but think about how easy it is to go public with stuff nowadays.  You can upload a cell phone video to youtube in seconds.  Government conspiracies and coverups are a nightmare to pull off today.  A Watergate scenario would end up pasted across every website in the world in a matter of minutes.   

Would it? They've already shown that they are willing to monitor journalists in a way Woodward and Bernstein  never had to worry about, and the response to exposure has been, basically, to label those doing the exposing as criminals and traitors. Certainly, they can get a lot of useful information out of their monitoring system if they ever need leverage, because whatever anyone says people always have something to hide whether it be skiving off to go skiing, smoking a joint, having an affair or lying on the tax return about that hotel stay being business related rather than a holiday.

 

Mostly though, it will be used to enforce ideological purity and to make sure that employees can be relied on to toe the party line much- as attempts on such systems have always been used prior. It's Panopticon Theory, a person watched or who believes they are being watched polices/ censors themselves, most of the time.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

[Nepenthe]

*laughs hysterically*

[ShadySands]

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

 

What would you suggest instead?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Seeing as Alex Jones is still alive and doing his media stuff, I don't think we have to fear a massive government that can crush any and all opposition effortlessly yet.

 

*laughs hysterically*

*joins in*

 

 

 

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

 

What would you suggest instead?

Privatization. Edited August 13, 2013 by KaineParker

[Zoraptor]

Disestablish the military and reestablish states' militias; then people could properly bear arms as part of a well regulated militia and hono(u)r the constitution.

 

Might actually be an interesting (if unrealistic and almost certainly unworkable) idea.

 

The only realistic defence against the military has ever been having them well connected, grounded and integrated into civil society, so that if given an illegal order they'll disobey it. And that requires being under the control of the civilian government, anything else is a recipe for military dictatorship.

[Nepenthe]

 

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

 

What would you suggest instead?

 

 

TBH, I think he was thinking of a beacon of morality, like the administration before this one. It's just as funny, though.

[Gorth]

Somehow I am skeptical of something the NSA claims with regards to this.

Where is your trust in the system???

 

I find this one generally amusing (from www.cia.gov)

 

"The Central Intelligence Agency is committed to protecting your privacy and will collect no personal information about you unless you choose to provide that information to us."

 

So, we are all pretty safe from snooping

[Walsingham]

 

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

 

What would you suggest instead?

 

 

Give it to Prince Charles. The man may be mad for all practical purposes, but you can guarantee he isn't power-crazed.

[Gorth]

 

 

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

 

What would you suggest instead?

 

 

Give it to Prince Charles. The man may be mad for all practical purposes, but you can guarantee he isn't power-crazed.

 

His son(s) may have different ideas though about what an army can be used for...

 

*mumbles something about unfinished business at the Khyber Pass*

[Raithe]

 

 

*mumbles something about unfinished business at the Khyber Pass*

 

 

Let's just Carry On then shall we?

[Walsingham]

I think you're all quite right to be suspicious of the NSA. In so far as they are constantly trying to bulk their power. But I think you are mistaken to reject everything they do. They've saved a hell of a lot of lives since 9/11.

 

Just saying.

[Gfted1]

Don't forget the Obama administration once set up a website where you could report people who were speaking ill of Obamacare before it was passed.

So that explains why theres been a pizza truck parked in front of my house for the last year...

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

 

What would you suggest instead?

 

I suggest we elect a less corrupt and overreaching one.

[Hurlshort]

 

 

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

What would you suggest instead?

I suggest we elect a less corrupt and overreaching one.

We would probably need to write one in on the ballot to get that.

[Guard Dog]

I really can't think of a single politician I have a shred of respect for. Marco Rubio was one I had high hopes for but he got to Sodom-Om-The-Potomac he became another big government type. There is not a single one I'd want to have any power over me and mine but they seem to take more and more every day.

[Walsingham]

 

 

I think it's very dangerous to leave the military in the hands of this corrupt, overreaching government.

 

What would you suggest instead?

 

I suggest we elect a less corrupt and overreaching one.

 

 

I'm not saying it's a daft idea. But i don't think you're going to get that unless and until we stop people going into politics at a young age. Politicos are completely specialised, and entirely isolated in their little world. At least over here.

 

It's no wonder they think they have all the answers when they think that only they understand the question.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Walsingham

[BruceVC]

I really can't think of a single politician I have a shred of respect for. Marco Rubio was one I had high hopes for but he got to Sodom-Om-The-Potomac he became another big government type. There is not a single one I'd want to have any power over me and mine but they seem to take more and more every day.

 

What about your president GD? Surly you respect Obama even if you don't agree with all his policies