Are you comfortable with 24/7 Government Surveillance? (1 Viewer)

[seventhroot]

Say in an ideal world were the government wouldn't sell your data to the highest bidder, would you let the government spy on you every day, every minute, literally every second (irrespective of what the constitution and any laws say) to 'keep you safe'?

Kind of like the one in Person of Interest where mass surveillance is conducted and it compiles data on to stop national security threats. This include things like (but not limited to) obtaining your phone calls, messages, emails, boredofstudies posts, monitoring conversations and allowing you to surrender your complete privacy in the name of said safety? They can do this using the data on your phone; satellites; the computers you log on; drones and whatever other super secret technology they have.

IMO; I think it would be alright.

for whatever reason it says I can't post polls so just comment your answers

inb4AFP,NSA,CIAlocateMe

 

[wannaspoon]

nao, it won't be alright...

 

[astroman]

nope

 

[seventhroot]

nao, it won't be alright...

ohh shit it is catching on


why won't it be alright? they're not selling your data and only a super computer is watching you in the shower. No other humans have access to this data.

 

[enigma_1]

no way. Stupid NSA. If they did, I would be arrested already

 

[wannaspoon]

ohh shit it is catching on


why won't it be alright? they're not selling your data and only a super computer is watching you in the shower. No other humans have access to this data.

so you would be fine with another human being that you don't know (who may or may not be morally bankrupt), knowing every intricate detail of your life (without knowing any of there's)...

 

[seventhroot]

no way. Stupid NSA. If they did, I would be arrested already

I am not talking about "little crimes" like theft or fare evasion but things like terrorist attacks, international scale drug traffacking, sex trafficking, murders, etc. think about all the lives it could be saved if you just let the government read a "few of your messages"

I know this comes under the premise of "if you've got nothing to hide; then you've got nothing to worry about" and assumes you're guilty

How do we know such a system isn't already in place?

so you would be fine with another human being that you don't know (who may or may not be morally bankrupt), knowing every intricate detail of your life (without knowing any of there's)...

but no other human has access to this data. It cannot be breached and operates autonomously.

 

[wannaspoon]

but no other human has access to this data. It cannot be breached and operates autonomously.

there is actually no point of collecting that data if that was the case... it would just sit idle in some hard drive of some server room and not be used... no point of having it, if that was the case...

 

[enigma_1]

I am not talking about "little crimes" like theft or fare evasion but things like terrorist attacks, international scale drug traffacking, sex trafficking, murders, etc. think about all the lives it could be saved if you just let the government read a "few of your messages"

How do we know such a system isn't already in place?



but no other human has access to this data. It cannot be breached and operates autonomously.

It could very well be existent. In fact it is very likely. Not everything is as it seems.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bryan-schonfeld/hero-traitor-selfsaboteur_b_3604832.html

It's happened in the USA, therefore it can be inferred that other countries may also be taking part. Sure, there's privacy issues, but the government doesn't really care about that. It could be used for the purpose of NWO.

 

[seventhroot]

there is actually no point of collecting that data if that was the case... it would just sit idle in some hard drive of some server room and not be used... no point of having it, if that was the case...

but what if it need to recall something from the past to establish a connection to an imminent crime. Such as tracing where millions of dollars went to buy weapons etc?

 

[seventhroot]

It could very well be existent. In fact it is very likely. Not everything is as it seems.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bryan-schonfeld/hero-traitor-selfsaboteur_b_3604832.html

It's happened in the USA, therefore it can be inferred that other countries may also be taking part. Sure, there's privacy issues, but the government doesn't really care about that. It could be used for the purpose of NWO.

but I am not talking about spying on some chinese people for commercial benefit; but rather spying on everyone to keep everyone safe

 

[wannaspoon]

but what if it need to recall something from the past to establish a connection to an imminent crime. Such as tracing where millions of dollars went to buy weapons etc?

what do you class as a crime... resistance to a corrupt establishment can also be considered as a crime of treason...

 

[enigma_1]

but I am not talking about spying on some chinese people for commercial benefit; but rather spying on everyone to keep everyone safe

The only reason they wouldn't do it is because it's too expensive. Also due to the fact that the terrorists and stuff are not stupid. They'd be deleting the traces by hiring computer people (or whatever you call it) so the government wont be able to track those specific people. This wouldn't necessarily be effective.

 

[Queenroot]

No, now I can't send nudes.

but no other human has access to this data. It cannot be breached and operates autonomously.

Inb4 JulianAssange

 

[seventhroot]

what do you class as a crime... resistance to a corrupt establishment can also be considered as a crime of treason...

what I class as 'crime' (only) is a combination of definitions under the crimes act, criminal code act, UN treaties, etc.

but I am talking about some top level tier stuff. something like treason yes because it could severely hurt the economy, and cause civil unrest, etc but fare evading not so much. It will "see" it but then it will ignore it

 

[seventhroot]

The only reason they wouldn't do it is because it's too expensive. Also due to the fact that the terrorists and stuff are not stupid. They'd be deleting the traces by hiring computer people (or whatever you call it) so the government wont be able to track those specific people. This wouldn't necessarily be effective.

okay; lets say we have unlimited money and square was leading the project after he graduates with his compSci degree.

if these terrorist start getting their own computer people and deleting evidence, etc (if for whatever reason they found out about it), it would not matter. This "system" can detect things like cleaning up evidence and still being able to trace such persons of interest

 

[seventhroot]

No, now I can't send nudes.

Inb4 JulianAssange

you can still send nudes and ONLY the computer program will look at them, no other person on earth (except who you're sending them to) will see it

 

[Queenroot]

you can still send nudes and ONLY the computer program will look at them, no other person on earth (except who you're sending them to) will see it

Well I really do have nothing to hide, so idc. But I guess it's harder for dealers now.

 

[enigma_1]

okay; lets say we have unlimited money and square was leading the project after he graduates with his compSci degree.

if these terrorist start getting their own computer people and deleting evidence, etc (if for whatever reason they found out about it), it would not matter. This "system" can detect things like cleaning up evidence and still being able to trace such persons of interest

haha well in that hypothetical scenario, it would be effective.
But then again, I don't get why governments try to do retarded things like this when they could be helping the developing/poor nations or something.

 

[seventhroot]

haha well in that hypothetical scenario, it would be effective.
But then again, I don't get why governments try to do retarded things like this when they could be helping the developing/poor nations or something.

the argument could be made that rich people (mining magnates, net worth >$10 Billion, large companies like apple or Samsung, etc) do the same thing? the argument could also be that they have no responsibility to do so but should we let this greed stop a safer society?