really?

You have an inflated sense of the worth of your communications.

People who don't understand how the data mining is actually being done can run around like dumbasses shouting about everybody being spied on.
But it's not true. 99.9% of the data is never even looked at.

Sorry, I don't want to live in a panopticon, regardless of whether the "authorities" pay close attention to the data they gather about us.

Do I think the government reads my email? Not likely. Do I think they copy and store it so they can read it later if they develop an interest in me? Damned straight. That data is one informant away from percolating to the forefront of the authorities' attention, one crime away, in a country that has become so law-bound that everyone of us commits crimes of some sort all the time, one election away, if the leadership swings authoritarian.

Spot on.

that act alone, is the problem, whether ot not the content is the conversation of a call, text, email, or chat or if it's only metadata.

It is unbelievable to me that the NSA would NOT be storing conversation content. All communications (other than letters, etc) are digital. Conversations are carried on the same type of lines as their metadata. It's would be easy for the NSA to just scoop all of it up and, if you're on their target list listen to it immediately, or store it for later perusing for whenever your activities start to catch their interest.

give away our information when we use social media, the internet etc..all without a warrant or court order

we should make sure the data is not collected by private companies in the first place

Looks at Porn - Y/N

Owns a Cat - Y/N

NOW, we find out that this info, regardless of our permissions, is being harvested. I don't know where you're coming from saying that we should make certain the data isn't collected in the first place by private companies. Have you ever done a Google search?

Please.

Private companies should not be forced to cough up the info we gave in confidence. imho

and if you think giving our consent is a good gating function, sorry that is not enough - they also track data without our consent and sell the info to other corporations

yeah i use the internet and yes i know i am being tracked - and since i accepted that risk, i can live with it -

1) permission to the private companies to hand it over to the gov't, nor
2) the data directly to the gov't. One had our permission, one did not.

Also:
The private companies aren't going to come after us as terrorists for
belonging to OWS, e.g., but the gov't might.

But that is what we are being asked to do in many cases in cases of applying for a job or applying to a school, when the interviewing company demands that we provide them our Facebook or other social media account passwords. That is being done now, and at least at the state level, many states are making this illegal (including recently Oregon thankfully). This is tacitly being allowed by the federal government to happen as they don't want any rationalization to keep them from playing the same games and violating people's privacy. The vacuum of laws our adequate court decisions to reinforce our rights given to us by the 4th amendment and more people just trying to work around it both in private industry and the government is where we are today.

Think about it. If you are being asked by one company to give your account and information stored by another company, you are:
1) violating the privacy of those friends, etc. that you share privacy covenants with when you place your trust in that company to keep others from getting access to emails, messages, and other data associated with you AND THEM! It might even violate other state or country's laws by doing so.
2) provide them information that in many states they would not legally be able to ask you about in an interview situation to stay within boundaries of anti-discrimination laws, etc. Companies open themselves up for lawsuits by doing this.
3) by allowing this sort of breach to happen, what's to stop companies like Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Amazon, Carbonite or other companies with your personal private data stored on their servers, from allowing a hiring manager to access that if you interview with them or one of their partners for a job? Where is the line drawn in that case. If they are allowed to demand Facebook passwords, they probably won't stop there either.

So, bottom line is that we need the 4th amendment updated to reinforce our rights to own private information in the virtual world and have some degree of control over how it's used. That is probably a very difficult question to answer in a simple fashion that can keep relevant over the years without frequent revision or without some disruption of the online world's business, etc., but a lot of that has to do with no one even attempting to do this now, as long as it is in the government and private industry's own selfish interests to do nothing about it to allow the powerful to stay more and more powerful over the few. We need to at least start this effort with a technical task force not beholden to the PTB as much as possible. The government is needing to provide the proper rules that we the citizenry want and agree to for both it AND private industry to follow. This needs to happen soon if we want to keep a democracy and not move towards a fascist police state.

doesn't happen quickly.

I know conversations cannot or atleast are not supposed to be recorded without either consent of the parties involved and or a warrant for a wiretap but what about email? Also who owns the emails on a businesses computers that you send? You or the company?

But it is looked at by computers and if you are in .1% which is spit out for human review as a result of complex and imperfect algorithms, your life could be a living hell, even if you are innocent. In this case once the inhuman finger pointed at Brandon Mayfield, human review determined he had (horrors) converted to Islam and married an Egyptian immigrant. Both perfectly innocent, but combined with the fact that the database spewed him out was enough to merit multiple home invasions and an arrest.

period

I do know that Palantir and other NSA private contractors were caught secretly negotiating with the Chamber of Commercs and Bank of America to use their expertise to attack Move-On and Glenn Greenwald in 2010.

Can I be a dumbass and run around objecting to that?

This is wrong on so many levels, including the squandering of this country's money and future.

The failure to stop 9/11 was excused by the Bush Administration, in part, on the grounds that you can't get a sip of water out of a fire hose.

If you can't get a sip of water out of a fire hose, it makes no sense to use governmental funds to finance a Niagara Falls electronic spy network.

Also, a super-let's-spy-on-everyone-and-what-they-say-program inhibits some from exercise their freedom of speech as guaranteed by the Constitution and ever public official who took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

As Krugman said, you can have an Authoritarian or Democratic approach to surveillance. And for 13 years we have gleefully opted for the former. Shame.

Erase the database!

this is standard right-wing smear/misdirection. Having the program extended by a nominal (D) president has brought many nominal Dems on board too. This is how countries slither into fascism.

...that the large majority here don't operate that way. They need to make this about Snowden so that they can proceed to tear him down. When people of principle stick to the story at hand and continue to focus on the abuses that are occurring instead of focusing on whether Snowden wrote his girlfriend a Dear Jane letter, they're not equipped to handle it.

about what a hero he was. Now it appears they can't stand the heat on behalf of their hero.

They'll skin you like a cat.

The Nadler stuff is old news. cantbeserious already posted the actual video.
Do you see how angry Rep. Nadler is about being lied to, and even calling Mueller a liar. That apparently is what the CNET reporter saw.
Why are you trying to make it about Ed Snowden? You brought it up.
But since you chose to discuss him. He has already been proven wrong in his interpretation of what he released.
He fled from a democracy to an authoritarian country and has released additional stolen information to them.

and what our government is doing to US.

When an OP makes a post complaining that some universal they have made this about Snowden. Why would that bother them and what does it have to do with the US.
The simple solution is, if you don't want anybody to talk about Snowden, don't.

willing to jump on board the character-assassination bandwagon - as if Edward Snowden WERE the point.

You said it best:

They want us to focus on anything else except what they're doing to us.

the extremely ominous and disturbing propaganda machine that the corporate plutocracy is crafting to replace the free press of a democratic society. From the purchased mainstream media to the incessant political astroturfing of the internet, the propaganda machine in this country has never been more manipulative, dishonest, non-transparent, relentless, and determinedly pervasive, systematically infiltrating even discussion boards like DU.

What is being done to this country is well beyond creepy and disturbing at this point. We have been overtaken by corporatists intent on corporate fascism, and we have *already* been stripped of major foundations of our free society, including our right to privacy, our right to free speech and free association, our right to protest, and, increasingly, the free press that was our most important alarm for and protection against government abuse and tyranny.

When their authoritarian fuckbuddies have been embarrased by their own bad behavior, try to ruin the life of the whistleblower with smears and innuendo.

and Snowden fled to Hong Kong.

In fact, it's illegal for the NSA to spy on us.

Another misleading media report implies that warrantless wiretapping is legal.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724

I think that Snowden releasing this information and the inaccuracies that were part of the initial reports, his bogus claims and his fleeing to Hong Kong makes him a Coward.

His actions in Hong Kong don't help his case.

Thanks for the thread, mike.

For the sudden defenders of all the Government did after 9-11, they were Neo-Cons. No abuse was too much, no protective scheme, no matter how expensive, and unworkable, was out of the question. So what do we call those people now that the Democrats are in charge? Are they Neo-Dems? They are the same authoritarian pricks that we objected to a few years ago, the system hasn't changed, because we haven't changed it.

...along with a thousand other epithets. I'll get very creative.

Great point, BTW!

they're just swooners

Your search for something to call them shows just how disgusting you are.

"A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people."

"toady" works, too.

Who knew the Anti-Christ would have such a messy garage?

I don't know how you can support that remark by referring to what is known about the story. Sad

If he is lying scumbag just going for glory and money, then that calls into question some of what he is claiming. However, regardless, the documents he acquired and released are no doubt legit.

on DU to say that breaking an oath and harming the country is bad, but at the same time spying on American citizens is bad too or is it just an either/or argument?

There's Congressional oversight on the intelligence agencies. Snowden could have gone there.

Intelligence agencies by their very nature tend to increase the scope of their activities. That's why oversight is needed.

to answer your question regarding " Snowden could have gone there."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023030479#post1

Snowden's options were limited.

attacking the messenger is rather lame,. just sad way to avoid the real issues.

than for them to destroy the privacy of citizens. That's the perverted sense of values lurking behind the misdirections.

that anyone could reach the middle class regardless of their parents' ability to send them to college. with Snowden we see how contemptuous people really are of people pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.

but that's beside the point.

the point here is that there's way too many dems who'd rather side with Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Ari Fleischer, than to have the courage to question Obama.

if you think very long on it, it's terrifying, actually.

Are you incapable of distinguishing the issues?

When President Obama became President. Some people prefer party over principle and will be happy to support the same things that they would have opposed under Bush. Even if it involves all sorts of twisted logic circles or lying to themselves about whether they would have supported it under a Republican president.

eom

It's that Ed Snowden fled to China so it's o.k. for PRESIDENT OBAMA to spy on us.

Once there's a Republican back in the White House and in charge of NSA, these same pathetic sycophants will need the fainting couch and hankies once again.

Edward Snowden is the story, not the spying. The spying has been going on for decades, this government and every government on this world spy's on each other and on itself. Democrats spy on Republicans and vice versa, but we as AMERICAN DO NOT TORTURE OR SELL OUT OUR OWN PEOPLE. I'm not saying the spying is correct, but it is tolerated, selling out our government should never be tolerated.....

So,

...supported by an A1 asshole Obama hater and has told us NOTHING NEW other than shit he has yet to prove

...and know one is advocating "spying" on people for no damn good reason.

Hyperbole (strawman) noted

and was likely motivated by little more than being passed over for promotion.

whatta sissy