It isn't even a matter of being guilty. You don't want ... ...your month's shopping receipts printed in the newspaper so everybody can see what you spent money on.
You don't want the NSA operatives' children seeing their exam papers ahead of time.
It may be common practice - but it has unfortunate psychological consequences - just like when police on a stakeout refer to the stakeoutees as "targets".
There are good reasons for the NSA to have this capability,
NO NO NO.
If the NSA has this capability then we have to assume that the bad guys have the capability too. The only safe option is for no-one to have this capability.
The alternative explanation is that the sites in question were not actually pornographic - but were missclassified by the system. Unfortunately for Cameron that theory blows an even bigger hole in his plan...
Firstly ownership, being the registered keeper and being the insured driver are three different things.
Secondly they still do have to establish who was driving. They can put on a lot of pressure BUT - if the registered keeper/ insured driver says X was driving and X says no I wasn't the keeper was" then they will have to try and prove who was lying.
Now Microsoft is not buying Nokia; they're buying a few pieces of Nokia that are still valuable, and leaving the rest of the company to rot.
Not quite right - they're buying the mobile phone business and a limited licence to use the Nokia name. Nokia is one of those companies that shifts its business interests around and has a history of selling off declining businesses for cash and then re-investing ion something new. This is actually a very smart move for Nokia (and a bad one for Microsoft). The "rump" of Nokia will not rot - it will re-invent itself with a new product - maybe in a different field.
The claims of the capability of the D-Wave 2 system are ridiculous
Quantum computing has been ridiculously overhyped. This is especially worrying for those of us who find it interesting because of the inevitable backlash that will follow.
One point of relevance here is that the D wave computer is NOT capable of running Shor's algorithm and hence is not capable of cracking RSA encryption.
But, most importantly, at no point would the fact that such information was used to lead to the stop be revealed, and that's unconstitutional. If you're accused, you're supposed to have access to all of the evidence being used against you.
Actually, since that evidence was not used in court, I don't see that as a problem.
The problem is that the information is gathered in the first place. One that has happened the remaining steps are very difficult to deny. Once the information has been gathered it is impossible not to slip down the slippery slope to using it for anything.
This is why "terrorism" is such an important and dangerous meme.
In the old days espionage was directed exclusively at foreign governments. It is very unlikely that an attempt to find out the details of the latest Soviet missile program would somehow segue into a drug bust.
Unfortunately terrorists are different because, lacking government finance they tend to turn to ordinary criminal activity to provide cash. (and drugs are SUCH an attractive criminal business opportunity - but that is another story).
The only solution is to delete the "terrorist" meme and treat these people as ordinary criminals with ordinary policing as the only weapon against them.
The fact is that terrorism (by definition) does very little real damage to the country (unlike, say, war).
By hyping it we are granting the terrorists their wish. They have made us all stand in interminable hot, security queues with nothing to drink. They have made us spend millions on "scanners" that might damage our health - and all without a single successfull aircraft attack in over 10 years.
If the FAA/CAA rules about aircraft accidents had been followed in respect of terrorism (the rules that say that you weigh the cost of safety measures against their benefits before inmplementing them) then we wouldn't have had any of this nonsense.
The tragedy here is that Theresa May was not even supposed to be home secretary - it should have been David Davis - who would have taken a very different line.
Unfortunately he was too principled to hang on to his job in the shadow cabinet until the election.
Almost no one is arguing that the government should never have secrets.
Generally there are only three reasons for having secrets.
1. To increase the effectiveness of military equipment and tactics by denying the opponent knowledge and hence forcing him to tie up more resources than he would otherwise need to.
2. Because your deeds are evil.
3. To lock in the loyalty of your operatives by including them in the inner ring of privilege.
Only the first is justifiable - and only a fool would rely on it since history teaches that keeping secrets effectively for a long time is not really possible.
So, no, in an ideal world the state would not rely on secrets and shoudl try to avoid the need whenever possible.
On the post: Wouldn't It Be Something If We Had A President Who Believed In Liberty?
Re:
You don't want the NSA operatives' children seeing their exam papers ahead of time.
On the post: Fire Sale: TSA Now Offering You Your Civil Liberties For A Fee!
Re:
On the post: Regulatory Agencies Sending Armed Squads To Check Water Quality, 'Rescue' Baby Deer
They should make a film
On the post: NSA, GCHQ Admit That The Public Is The Enemy
Re: "adversary"
On the post: The US Government Has Betrayed The Internet; It's Time To Fix That Now
Re:
Your idea is over a century old....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beale_ciphers
On the post: NSA & GCHQ Covertly Took Over Security Standards, Recruited Telco Employees To Insert Backdoors
Re: This may not be the popular opinion here...
NO NO NO.
If the NSA has this capability then we have to assume that the bad guys have the capability too. The only safe option is for no-one to have this capability.
On the post: UK's Government Computers Used To Access Porn More Than 300,000 Times In The Last 14 Months
Missclassified
On the post: Dumb Speeding Criminal Decides To Post Manhattan Speed Run Video Online
Re: Re:
Firstly ownership, being the registered keeper and being the insured driver are three different things.
Secondly they still do have to establish who was driving. They can put on a lot of pressure BUT - if the registered keeper/ insured driver says X was driving and X says no I wasn't the keeper was" then they will have to try and prove who was lying.
On the post: Dumb Speeding Criminal Decides To Post Manhattan Speed Run Video Online
Re:
on past evidence you're probably right and he'll probably get away with it!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/4559173.stm
On the post: MLK Jr.'s Sons Celebrate 50th Anniversary Of 'I Have A Dream' By Suing His Daughter
Re: Guess you saw the words "copyright" and "trademark"...
The King estate is a long-running saga of greed similar to many others. It's the norm.
FTFY
On the post: Microsoft Buying Nokia Reminds Us That Dominant Tech Companies Can Disappear Quickly
Re:
Not quite right - they're buying the mobile phone business and a limited licence to use the Nokia name. Nokia is one of those companies that shifts its business interests around and has a history of selling off declining businesses for cash and then re-investing ion something new. This is actually a very smart move for Nokia (and a bad one for Microsoft). The "rump" of Nokia will not rot - it will re-invent itself with a new product - maybe in a different field.
On the post: Intelligence Black Budget Reveals Major Focus By NSA On Cracking Encryption
Re: Re: Intel
They will use Quantum Cryptography. Quantum cryptography, done properly, is theoretically unbreakable.
On the post: Intelligence Black Budget Reveals Major Focus By NSA On Cracking Encryption
Re: Re: Intel
Quantum computing has been ridiculously overhyped. This is especially worrying for those of us who find it interesting because of the inevitable backlash that will follow.
One point of relevance here is that the D wave computer is NOT capable of running Shor's algorithm and hence is not capable of cracking RSA encryption.
On the post: Intelligence Black Budget Reveals Major Focus By NSA On Cracking Encryption
Re: Oh yes, please, tell me I'm wrong.
Probably not that significant - but you need to demonstrate some success in order to maintain funding.
On the post: Congress Asks Eric Holder To Explain Why NSA Supplies DEA Info Which It Then Launders To Go After Americans
What is the problem
Actually, since that evidence was not used in court, I don't see that as a problem.
The problem is that the information is gathered in the first place. One that has happened the remaining steps are very difficult to deny. Once the information has been gathered it is impossible not to slip down the slippery slope to using it for anything.
This is why "terrorism" is such an important and dangerous meme.
In the old days espionage was directed exclusively at foreign governments. It is very unlikely that an attempt to find out the details of the latest Soviet missile program would somehow segue into a drug bust.
Unfortunately terrorists are different because, lacking government finance they tend to turn to ordinary criminal activity to provide cash. (and drugs are SUCH an attractive criminal business opportunity - but that is another story).
The only solution is to delete the "terrorist" meme and treat these people as ordinary criminals with ordinary policing as the only weapon against them.
The fact is that terrorism (by definition) does very little real damage to the country (unlike, say, war).
By hyping it we are granting the terrorists their wish. They have made us all stand in interminable hot, security queues with nothing to drink. They have made us spend millions on "scanners" that might damage our health - and all without a single successfull aircraft attack in over 10 years.
If the FAA/CAA rules about aircraft accidents had been followed in respect of terrorism (the rules that say that you weigh the cost of safety measures against their benefits before inmplementing them) then we wouldn't have had any of this nonsense.
On the post: 50% Of 'Retiring' Senators Now Become Lobbyists, Up From 3% A Few Decades Ago
Re: 50% is probably true at all levels.
Intellectual property.
\sarc
On the post: 50% Of 'Retiring' Senators Now Become Lobbyists, Up From 3% A Few Decades Ago
Re:
On the post: Author Of UK's Terrorism Act Says It Was Never Meant For Situations Like David Miranda
Tragedy
Unfortunately he was too principled to hang on to his job in the shadow cabinet until the election.
On the post: NSA Tapping UN Isn't A Huge Surprise -- But Ability To Crack Video Conferencing Encryption Raises Questions
Re: Re: Re: I think we should start calling this a voyeurism fetish.
On the post: Former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Says Anti-Terror Laws Should Be Used To Stop Investigative Journalism
Generally there are only three reasons for having secrets.
1. To increase the effectiveness of military equipment and tactics by denying the opponent knowledge and hence forcing him to tie up more resources than he would otherwise need to.
2. Because your deeds are evil.
3. To lock in the loyalty of your operatives by including them in the inner ring of privilege.
Only the first is justifiable - and only a fool would rely on it since history teaches that keeping secrets effectively for a long time is not really possible.
So, no, in an ideal world the state would not rely on secrets and shoudl try to avoid the need whenever possible.
Next >>