Which is exactly what they have been doing. Storing the information so that you can search it later if you need to (because you can’t store the data after it’s already gone) is not the same thing as searching it after receiving a warrant.
The technical developments you mentioned are serving to enable far greater crimes than any imagined threat to your privacy posed by the fact that there is a list of phone calls you have made that nobody is allowed to look at.
[QUOTE=Lewis Carroll]
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – that’s all.”
[/QUOTE]
Well, then, snap to and get to work replacing all those opaque walls!
Who needs to peek through windows when metadata tracking is so much more efficient, cost-effective, and less harmful and intimidating?
We’re discussing mass surveillance of message content, not just metadata. Please try to keep up with the class.
(Er, never mind struggling to keep up with the class. As you have repeatedly said, plebes like you should just shut up, quit worrying about the complicated stuff, let the tech experts do their thing, and enjoy the resulting privacy-protected end-to-end-encrypted communications network.)
I thought we were discussing an evidence-free claim made by a paranoid ideologue who quit because he couldn’t handle the responsibilities of his job and has a bone to pick with his former employer.
Er, are we back to the whole “organlegger” thing?
There is more evidence that organ donation is a corrupt profit-based industry that lets people die for their organs than there is that anyone at the NSA cares to listen in on you wishing a happy Father’s Day to your old man.
Cite?
Whatever. I’d prefer that they didn’t, and with technology available to enforce that preference I see no reason not to avail myself of it as the learning-curve speed bumps are ironed out of it.
See the previous thread in which the matter was discussed.
I prefer not to be attacked by vampires, but that doesn’t mean I spend all my money on garlic and holy water.
Everyone who has done so continues to wait breathlessly for the tiniest modicum of evidence to back up your position.
To say nothing of the fact that if his claim (that giving consent to organ donation puts one at risk of being allowed to die) was actually true, it would be a textbook example of the sort of thing that, according to his own stated political philosophy, should be concealed from the public for its own good (in order to prevent a shortage of donors).
It’s like stupidity and hypocrisy intertwined into a fractal pattern.
You know, I get some weird looks when I claim that “Brave New World” is a utopia. But claiming that 1984 is utopic? Damn. That takes some cojones.
No, but see, when people like him talk about what The People should do or not do, know or not know, be allowed to do or not, they always mentally exclude themselves. After all, he’s just told us : the People are boorish, fickle, uneducated idiots who don’t know what’s good for 'em. But *he *knows, goes without saying, common sense, stands to reason ekcetera.
You can meet a million **Smaptis **every afternoon, down at the corner pub.
Yes, that’s why he knows about the Evil Organlegger Conspriacy… and why, by virtue of his own superior wisdom, he had a responsibility to avoid mentioning a word of it to the sheeple who wouldn’t be able to rationally deal with the Awful Truth.
No, the rational response would be to nationalize the medical industry and take it out of the hands of profit-seekers to stop this kind of abuse.
As I recall, it had a happy ending.
nm
Wrong.
No need to hurry. He’s already living in a glass house:
Why?