Quantcast

Skype Makes Chats and User Data More Available to Police: Good or Bad?

Daryl 2012/07/26 20:00:00
You!
Add Photos & Videos

WASHINGTONPOST.COM reports:
The changes have drawn quiet applause in law enforcement circles but hostility from many activists and analysts.
exclusive drawn quiet applause law enforcement circles hostility activists analysts

Read More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/sky...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Kevin1111 2012/07/26 19:33:15
    Bad
    Kevin1111
    +11
    The 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.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • naarcissus 2012/07/27 20:53:31
    Bad
    naarcissus
    +2
    However, since I have already stopped using the Skype service for other reasons, it doesn't effect me much.
  • Mog of War 2012/07/27 20:42:34
    Bad
    Mog of War
    +5
    Since invading the privacy of law-abiding citizens seems to be more the police force's concern than pursuing justice, and Skype was already cooperative with law enforcement to said goal, I don't see any good that can come of this.
  • The Bantam Seditioner 2012/07/27 19:17:21
    Bad
    The Bantam Seditioner
    +6
    The Internet is the last frontier for free exchange of ideas and information, and that drives busybody politicians nuts. They're going to keep making ever more desperate attempts to get into our Internet, whether the pretext is "fighting child pornography" or "stopping online piracy", etc. I hope the people will be ready for this so they can resist it.
  • JonDeniro The Ban... 2012/07/27 22:46:44
    JonDeniro
    +3
    Exactly right.
  • Windy The Ban... 2012/07/30 05:45:09 (edited)
    Windy
    +1
    And this is where they got the idea to use "it's for the children", yes, think of the poor, precious "chilled wrens":
    "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”
  • Reikyrr 2012/07/27 18:21:47
    Good
    Reikyrr
    Only when the person in question is a suspect. And only from his computer or phone.
  • Mog of War Reikyrr 2012/07/27 20:38:54
    Mog of War
    +4
    The thing is, Skype already turns such things over concerning suspects. The new policies will allow for non-suspects to be monitored.
  • Reikyrr Mog of War 2012/07/28 19:52:46
  • Kigan 2012/07/27 16:06:59
    Bad
    Kigan
    +4
    Will put the honest people in a dangerous position. All it takes is one misquoted phrase to put you in jail.
  • Lanikai 2012/07/27 16:03:42
    Good
    Lanikai
    +1
    WHATEVER helps them get the bad people-USE IT.


    There is no expectation of privacy on the internet, so go for it.
  • Professor Wizard 2012/07/27 15:55:48
    Bad
    Professor Wizard
    +3
    Anything giving big brother more power is a bad thing.

    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.
  • davyd god loving patriot 2012/07/27 14:37:43
    Good
    davyd god loving patriot
    works for nobama
  • CAPISCE 2012/07/27 13:56:47
    Bad
    CAPISCE
    +4
    Seems like more and more freedoms are disappearing under Obama--
  • Marianne 2012/07/27 13:40:13
    Bad
    Marianne
    +1
    It is not good for the private sphere of all the honest people using such services.

    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.
  • The Impossible Girl ✿ 2012/07/27 13:25:30
    Bad
    The Impossible Girl ✿
    +4
    ..... I think I'm going to get rid of Skype now..
    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.
  • Kingarthurup 2012/07/27 12:43:17
    Bad
    Kingarthurup
    +3
    we have to maintain some semblence of privacy
  • Picasso's Cat 2012/07/27 12:25:53
    Good
    Picasso's Cat
    +1
    There are many scams and grifters on the internet, the more they bust, the better.
    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.
  • Janoy Davis 2012/07/27 09:16:07
    Good
    Janoy Davis
    +1
    The Internet is a free-for-all for governments and private industries. So if you have something to hide, I advice not using this site. Personally, I have not to hide besides "I miss you Mom, Yes, I love you too :P lolz" So move on with your life. Instead, you can use Chat routlette! :D
  • thefatguy 2012/07/27 07:13:13
    Bad
    thefatguy
    +1
    Just one more reason to hate Microshaft products. Where is a company with b@lls anymore?
  • bleep 2012/07/27 05:40:50
    Bad
    bleep
    +2
    i don't think so. whatever happened to privacy.
  • cmdrbnd007 2012/07/27 05:40:34
    Good
    cmdrbnd007
    +3
    If you are dumb enough to use it to plan a crime then I don't have a problem with that. Same goes for Twitter and FB.
  • Tom 2012/07/27 05:13:53
    Bad
    Tom
    +2
    Big Brother at it's Finest.
  • Elz 2012/07/27 03:34:02
    Bad
    Elz
    in some cases it is.
  • Chokmah 2012/07/27 03:25:42
    Bad
    Chokmah
    +3
    On 19 July 2010 the Washington Post reported that 854,000 people work for the National Security Agency in thirty-three building complexes amounting to 17 million square feet of space, in the DC Metro and suburban area. Every day, collection systems at the NSA intercept and store 1.7 billion emails and phone calls of American citizens, in what amounts to a vast domestic spy system. Writing in the New Yorker on 23 May 2011, Jane Mayer reported that the NSA has three times the budget of the CIA, and has the capacity to download, every six hours, electronic communications equivalent to the entire contents of the Library of Congress. They also developed a program called Thin Thread that enables computers to scan the material for key words, and they collect the billing records and the dialed phone numbers of everyone in the country. In violation of communications laws, ATT, Verizon, and BellSouth have opened their electronic records to the government. At the height of its insanity, the Stasi in East Germany was spying on 1 out of 7 citizens. The U.S. is now spying on 7 out of 7.
  • Fran-Halen 2012/07/27 02:29:30
    Bad
    Fran-Halen
    +1
    Eye spy....everywhere.
  • Pedalpusher 2012/07/27 01:11:49
  • ElynnKy 2012/07/27 01:06:08
    Bad
    ElynnKy
    +2
    Whether or not I think something is okay is irrelevant to cops. They do as they please and never have to worry about repercussions.
  • T A 2012/07/27 00:22:47
    Bad
    T A
    +3
    Hope Skype loses market share to an entrepreneur who understands individual privacy and the danger of the police state.
  • *~Amelie~* 2012/07/26 23:38:01
    Good
    *~Amelie~*
    +2
    I couldn't care less what they know about me - If you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to hide so why should it matter what the police know?
  • T A *~Amelie~* 2012/07/27 00:26:35
    T A
    +2
    Because it's no different than a peeping tom with the ability to ruin your life with even a well intentioned error in interpretation. Most people are opposed to eavesdropping and peeping. Just because an individual works for the government doesn't make it acceptable.
  • *~Amelie~* T A 2012/07/28 01:03:38
    *~Amelie~*
    it's not eavesdropping or peeping - the internet is a public place. what you put out there is your choice, just know that once you put it there, it's there for everyone to see.
  • T A *~Amelie~* 2012/07/28 01:16:40
    T A
    Like your phone calls. The phone lines aren't a private place. Or like your mail which passes through the hands of strangers. Or like your person passing through an airport. Got it.

    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?
  • *~Amelie~* T A 2012/07/28 01:31:26
    *~Amelie~*
    you're taking this a bit extreme are you not? but in a sense, yes you're right nothing is totally private. once you're out there, people can see you. they can talk to you. they can ask you questions. it's your choice to respond and give them information etc is it not?

    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).
  • T A *~Amelie~* 2012/07/28 02:37:11 (edited)
    T A
    Police searches outside every home is admittedly extreme and of course it wouldn't happen if for no other reason than those who work productively to provide all this 'protection" could not work enough to provide for such a large parasitic class.

    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...
    Police searches outside every home is admittedly extreme and of course it wouldn't happen if for no other reason than those who work productively to provide all this 'protection" could not work enough to provide for such a large parasitic class.

    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".
    (more)
  • Kingart... *~Amelie~* 2012/07/27 12:44:53
    Kingarthurup
    +1
    because we have a right to privacy in this country... it is called the 5th amendment. Odumba voter hey?.
  • *~Amelie~* Kingart... 2012/07/28 01:03:34 (edited)
    *~Amelie~*
    Not american, actually - why should this have to do with who people vote for? Not everything revolves around US politics you know. And yes, people have a right to privacy...but once you put stuff on the internet, it's out there for people to see. the internet isn't a private thing - it's public. It's your choice to put it there.
  • Marek *~Amelie~* 2012/08/15 19:54:12
    Marek
    +1
    Sad state of affairs in once great United Kingdom when people don't mind the police spying on them. Whatever happened to the motto, "my house, my castle."
  • *~Amelie~* Marek 2012/08/21 23:58:21
    *~Amelie~*
    The internet isn't classed as 'my house'. it's PUBLIC. Your employer, your mother, your supermarket checkout person, the police...they all have the same chance of seeing things once you put them on the internet. It just so happens that your checkout person isn't necessarily interested.
  • Marek *~Amelie~* 2012/08/22 04:10:23
    Marek
    The Skype advertises itself as a phone service so as such all communication should be considered private. The government needs the court approval to wiretap your phone communications and this is no different.
  • JonDeniro *~Amelie~* 2012/07/27 22:54:37
    JonDeniro
    +2
    Just because you have something to hide doesn't mean you have done anything wrong.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/10/30 15:52:08

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals