Skype Makes Chats and User Data More Available to Police: Good or Bad?
Heisenberg
2012/07/26 20:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
101 votes
|
|
32% | |||
|
210 votes
|
|
68% | |||
WASHINGTONPOST.COM reports:
The changes have drawn quiet applause in law enforcement circles but hostility from many activists and analysts.
Read More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/sky...
Top Opinion
-
Kevin1111 2012/07/26 19:33:15Bad
+11The police do not care about justice or about right and wrong, they don't care about what kind of damage they do to you and your family. They only care if they can gather enough evidence to make it look like you've committed a crime. They think this is what they are supposed to do, so they use any means they are allowed to use, then they twist what they find around to make you look as guilty as possible.
"The State must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." — Adolf Hitler, “Mein Kampf”
There is no expectation of privacy on the internet, so go for it.
But - - effects me not, since I don't use Skype.
Most bad guys are in jail for being stupid! And the smart ones are not in jail!
Everyone knows the smart guys stay off the grid.
No biggie.
But on the other hand, I must admit that police and authorities need to fight against crime organisations and terrorism, and that they must be enabled to make controls. Sadly enough, the private sphere of many innocent people is being troubled, but on the other hand, planned attacks could be prevented by means of intrusive controls on calls and mails.
I don't know what kind of information I could possibly offer the police but I don't like that my privacy could potentially be invaded.
If I find out anything I will turn them in myself, and have, and had people busted for fraud. We have to stand up to these scumbags that want to use the internet to steal peoples money.
Perhaps we could station police outside every home to ensure the safety of the public before we exit our homes into public spaces each day. It might cost a lot but if you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to hide, right?
From whence comes your faith in such a benevolent government?
and i don't even know why you're on about police outside homes? you're just taking ridiculous to a new level. they said that records will become MORE available to police, not that they're gonna walk up and just hand everything over. there will still be channels to follow, procedures to go through. it's not like they're gonna rock up and go 'oh hey, i heard there's this guy down the street and i don't like the sound of him. give me his skype logs now and i'll find something to arrest him on'.
from where comes all your cynicism? not everyone is out to get you, you know. the availability of information is as much about your (people as a whole) protection as it is about 'persecuting' you (using the words of others here, i don't see it as persecution).
However, warrantless wiretaps and searches without cause or reasonable suspicion are increasing, not decreasing. Though the police agencies used to have to hide such practices as they were criminal acts, they now have the legal authority to do them. What was was an "inviolable" right protected by the fourth amendment is constantly being more eroded by the day. So, no I don't believe in the protection of the courts and certainly don't believe that politicians would protect their own constituents (unless those are the private prison owners, prison guard unions, police unions, and other publicly subsidized groups). Even if the courts really worked to protect the people from such practices, it would be ex post facto with the bottomless well of government funding available to persecute whomever they wished.
My cynicism is with regard to knowing that governments always grow to abuse their powers and that they and those who put them in office (I don't mean the voters) stand to benefit greatly. As it stands, there are so many laws no on...
However, warrantless wiretaps and searches without cause or reasonable suspicion are increasing, not decreasing. Though the police agencies used to have to hide such practices as they were criminal acts, they now have the legal authority to do them. What was was an "inviolable" right protected by the fourth amendment is constantly being more eroded by the day. So, no I don't believe in the protection of the courts and certainly don't believe that politicians would protect their own constituents (unless those are the private prison owners, prison guard unions, police unions, and other publicly subsidized groups). Even if the courts really worked to protect the people from such practices, it would be ex post facto with the bottomless well of government funding available to persecute whomever they wished.
My cynicism is with regard to knowing that governments always grow to abuse their powers and that they and those who put them in office (I don't mean the voters) stand to benefit greatly. As it stands, there are so many laws no one can know all those that even apply just to him, yet ignorance of the law is not a viable defense. Moreover, the government continues to make new laws that prohibit action and speech regularly. These are not all laws like shouting fire in a crowded theater. The wrong word, taken out of context can have someone arrested. The wrong word in the wrong place can do the same. Considering that the government continues to grant itself more powers on a daily basis to invade the private lives of the individual and to declare what was once legal to be criminal, that "crimes" without a complainant continue to be declared means that no one can be sure when "he has nothing to hide".