SOPA - Internet as we know it about to be gone?

[nodunit 397]

They waste far more then that funding an unwinnable drug war that mirrors prohibition and countless military projects that never see the light of day despite even being better than what they were put up against. One billion dollars is not even pocket change for US government spending, and I'm not about to be guilted when they carelessly throw far more money around.

You also asked me if these freedoms and rights are worth 1000's of lives per year, to me yes they are.

For one, people die in greater numbers from far more things not even intended for "terror purposes", and secondly far more people lay down their lives in the revolution and predating it, even when they didn't fully have a country to call their own.

Edited July 4, 2013 by NodUnit

[krycek 349]

@ Krycek, I am particularly interested in your views on the above. It's rather easy to criticise something, lets see if you have the brains to suggest a viable alternative? If you don't respond, I will take it as an admission that you don't. I will laugh at that :)

Simple methods proved and proved again for finding terrorists and they already doing it.For internal security use personnel from security agencies to infiltrate crime rings or places with suspicious activity.Of course they won't wear "I'm a terrorist/criminal" t-shirts but for the specific methods or how to locate those places ask the law forces.They do it for decades without listening half the globe.Surveillance of those groups it's actually something that I encourage and I can't argue with it.

For external security you have so many security agencies that I lost count,most of them probably deploy spies regularly in hot spots.Also everything is connected these days,these agencies usually cooperate with many other secret services/security agencies from around the world.

So basically if Ahmed plans something he has a past,if he has a past then it's obviously on a database somewhere because he did stupid shit in that past of his.How do they find these groups?

I have a hunch they didn't need to listen the whole Middle East and most probably they have people with brains otherwise in the past when it the tech wasn't so advanced we should have had terrorist attack bonanza on every weekend and maybe 2-3 in the work days.

I'm not telling you something new,these are pretty basic measures and I'm sure they've used many more that didn't include "hey let's listen everyone,maybe one of them is a terrorist".Surveillance should be targeted on groups with risks,not on a whole country's people.

I didn't included in those categories nutters that watch 2 extremists videos and they decide it's their life calling to bomb people.True I have no solution for this,but if you think about it your whole safety feeling is based on something that is not real.Why?Because you could be stabbed,shot and so on in a min on a street,in literally seconds your life could be over because some drunk bastard hit you with his car,you could die in so many ways that basically when you say "I want to be safe" you're lying yourself.Could government protect you from this with their uber Prism?Mostly not.

Unless we go Minority Report in the future the basic fact is this,there is no sense of real safety.You can accept it and live your life or you can live in terror of angry terrorists blowing you up while you might get killed by a junkie to get his next fix.That's why their arguments of why such a program needs to exist is pure cheap propaganda.

[Tonci87 163]

Well lets turn it on it's head and start from the beginning, lets start from the point of view that privacy is more important than an individual right to life and every safeguard that might impinge privacy is removed, no databases, no records, no CCTV, nothing:

Scenario 1:

Someone posts a letter contaminated with anthrax and 3 people working in a post room die.

Now protecting everyone's right to privacy how do you:

A. Find out who did it?

B. Stop it happening again in the future?

Scenario 2:

A bomb explodes in a shopping mall killing 50 people. It was placed in a maintenance cart, no one knows who put the bomb there or when. They use a common explosive and generic toy parts for the construction and it is triggered by mobile phone. There is no link to anyone apart from the person that made the call.

Now protecting everyone's right to privacy how do you:

A. Find out who made the call or where from?

B. Stop it happening again in the future?

3. Associated issues:

C. Do we just let it go as everyone's right to privacy is more important than a few 1000 dead people each year + $billions in disruption, decontamination etc?

D. Without a deterrent the problem is likely to increase, so at what point do you say enough is enough?

@ Krycek, I am particularly interested in your views on the above. It's rather easy to criticise something, lets see if you have the brains to suggest a viable alternative? If you don't respond, I will take it as an admission that you don't. I will laugh at that :)

Right you don't do maths/math either? That $1Billion dollars is gone, spent on decontamination. It leaves a deficit in the government finances, so how do you replace it? It means paying more tax. Understand? A few letters cost $1Billion, what if it happened every week (if they couldn't find who did it, it might)? How would you afford to pay for it?

1. a) Let the police do it and give them the needed funds, usually they are pretty good at this.

b) The postal service should be obliged to check all mail for traces of dangerous chemicals, wich is easily doable but comes at a cost

2. a) Same as above

b)Shit happens, that is life. You still have a higher chance to die while driving to the supermarket.

3. a) Yes. It is completely blown out of proportion. Google how many people die in traffic accidents each year in your country. You should be more concerned about that. Yet people are more afraid of terror attacks (Only to get killed while driving to work).....

The "safety" meassures against terror attacks are completely out of proportion. Just look at how much money is spend on surveillance and secret intelligence. Reduce that and transfer it to the police, they are pretty good at solving murder cases if they have the funds to do so.

Ultimately the right to privacy should always be more important than everything else (as long as you don´t commit a crime).

The deadliest terror attacks are usually committed by lone lunatics, or very small groups. Secret intelligence and surveilance can´t stop such people.

[mrcash2009 0]

Mattar, seems like the sky is falling in for you and no one else around here, your latest post should be something you need to read everytime you call someone a cliche' name its quite remarkable.

The last 2 posts above made more sense so far.

Scenario 1:

Someone posts a letter contaminated with anthrax and 3 people working in a post room die.

Now protecting everyone's right to privacy how do you:

A. Find out who did it?

B. Stop it happening again in the future?

Likelyhood of this happening (seeing as the case you use was lab level and targeted locations not anyone to anywhere) based on every other possible scenario, I think the staff probably have more chance getting killed on the way to work, eating something dodgy, work related accident, fire in the workplace, or the best threat ... sacking. If anything they should check the obvious and thats government building post and so on, which will get that treatment and did anyway, not the entire US mail permanently.

Scenario 2:

Your pretty much asking for pre crime technology to handle this, careful what you wish for.

C. Do we just let it go as everyone's right to privacy is more important than a few 1000 dead people each year + $billions in disruption, decontamination etc?

Swathing statement without details and using an example you can pick apart in moments and I already did that you ignore all the time, again, it was targeted locations, lab based .. narrows the field of potential and what to check. You use the dead figures and cost figures and yet you dont use the alive figures (those effected by the legislation brought in as a result) & other cost examples due to a myriad of things that can be a threat to humans daily & have caused loss of life plus cost tax payers.

D. Without a deterrent the problem is likely to increase, so at what point do you say enough is enough?

The sky is falling in. What point do you say we need more and more given the bloated justifications and blanket solutions for everyone?

You have the gaul to call people paranoid in this thread, its amazing :) Your argument is we need it, and if you have issues you think its not needed, the point is, how far its gone and going based on the justification of its instalment IE isolated incidence with a potential risks to them (compared with other risks) which has had fix for it that includes every human.

Edited July 5, 2013 by mrcash2009

[Amra 10]

I wonder why despite all these reconnaissance measures two guys were able to blow a bomb on Boston marathon. It seems to be an inefficient spending of money and resources. Especially when Russian special services informed their US colleges about those guys. Bloody Russian special services from totalitarian Russia, where they can spy after you only by the decision of the court.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

That's it, is it? That is your carefully considered response? The big answer is:

-Continue spying on known terrorists, let the others slip though?

-Let the police deal with it, let people die/get injured 1st, allow the crime to happen, fingers crossed there is enough evidence left over for some chance of a prosecution?

-Continue spying on the mail with more invasive checks like x-ray scanning and opening suspicious packages. Slow the whole mail system down so that it takes weeks/months for items to arrive? Even if you discover something you will not know where it was posted from (unless you still spy/look at adjacent packages)? Criminal still goes free to do something else?

-The cost in lives / injuries / $Billions in economic disruption doesn't matter because more people die in other circumstances, it's only a few extra lives and money is of no consequence because you can always collect more tax?

-Forget about any preventative measures? It's easy if you ignore the large number of attacks that didn't happen, lives and cost don't factor into it, see above.

-If you make it easy to commit a crime, people are more likely to do it if they know they will not get caught. But an increase in attacks / crime doesn't matter, see above.

Well that's just awesome, truly awesome!

(@Amra - same in USA that's why they couldn't do anything, no evidence of any wrong doing, despite an investigation and interviews. That is yet more evidence that mass surveillance doesn't occur, they don't have the resources to do it. The data is stored, no one has the time to look at it all.)

On the other issue. Does anyone have any evidence that Russia and China will stop industrial espionage for profit at some stage or is that likely to continue as it has done for the last 80 years? As it's illegal in the USA and the USA don't do it, do you think it's possible that Russia and China will introduce similar laws?

Edited July 5, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[Amra 10]

If you ask me, yes. Industrial espionage will go on since our foreign partners smile into the face, call for disarmament and peace, "for everything good against everything bad" but at the same moment continue their cold war politics by spying (http://rt.com/news/nsa-spied-medvedev-g20-789/), trying to influence our internal politics via so-called "non-profit organizations" and so on. We're not living in a dream world, aren't we?

[Tonci87 163]

That's it, is it? That is your carefully considered response? The big answer is:

-Continue spying on known terrorists, let the others slip though?

-Let the police deal with it, let people die/get injured 1st, allow the crime to happen, fingers crossed there is enough evidence left over for some chance of a prosecution?

-Continue spying on the mail with more invasive checks like x-ray scanning and opening suspicious packages. Slow the whole mail system down so that it takes weeks/months for items to arrive? Even if you discover something you will not know where it was posted from (unless you still spy/look at adjacent packages)? Criminal still goes free to do something else?

-The cost in lives / injuries / $Billions in economic disruption doesn't matter because more people die in other circumstances, it's only a few extra lives and money is of no consequence because you can always collect more tax?

-Forget about any preventative measures? It's easy if you ignore the large number of attacks that didn't happen, lives and cost don't factor into it, see above.

-If you make it easy to commit a crime, people are more likely to do it if they know they will not get caught. But an increase in attacks / crime doesn't matter, see above.

Well that's just awesome, truly awesome!

(@Amra - same in USA that's why they couldn't do anything, no evidence of any wrong doing, despite an investigation and interviews. That is yet more evidence that mass surveillance doesn't occur, they don't have the resources to do it. The data is stored, no one has the time to look at it all.)

On the other issue. Does anyone have any evidence that Russia and China will stop industrial espionage for profit at some stage or is that likely to continue as it has done for the last 80 years? As it's illegal in the USA and the USA don't do it, do you think it's possible that Russia and China will introduce similar laws?

Good job simply ignoring all arguments, or interpreting them the wrong way.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Did terrorist win in making average Joe & Jill in US a bit more paranoid? Is it possible to use this kind of fear to establish some more intrusive "safeguards" and "safety" programs/tools/backdoors even as legal options for an "War against terror", "War against drugs", "War against the axis of evil" etc? Again - who controls those who are using these security measures or is it just better to have somekind of blind obedience and trust in everything + anything they say and do? Mattar_Tharkari - FYI : US isn't even officially a country where happy unicorns and fluffy bunnies live: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scandals_in_the_United_States and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_and_local_political_scandals_in_the_United_States ;)

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

My advice to you guys is not to waste your talents. Perhaps you should set up a think tank for the benefit of mankind? It will need a catchy name....something that advertises the purpose but is short and to the point...how about VRANYO!???

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_e-eHEVlBJEC&pg=PA128&lpg=PA128&dq=russia+today+vranyo&source=bl&ots=v74BchB6s_&sig=gBy66baATZY1V-p4g12fLZR0rxU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=--bWUZ_KDMrK0QWNtoDQAw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=russia%20today%20vranyo&f=false

[nodunit 397]

There is a beautiful irony in the idea that for all of the amero-centric casting post 9/11, about terrorists wanting to take our freedoms and rights, that to make ourselves safe we must take our own freedoms as time goes on, so effectively, you let the terrorists win under the umbrella of fear and protection.

Secondly power left unchecked, no matter the government involved, is still power left unchecked and will slowly grow over time, it's simply fact from the history books. Who is to say that martial law, seen as "It works" may not become the standard for other incidents?

I realize I bang on about freedom quite a lot, but to me the United States is nothing without it's founding principals, just a broken shadow of its former self, and freedom is far easier to lose than it is to gain.

Edited July 5, 2013 by NodUnit

[Amra 10]

My advice to you guys is not to waste your talents. Perhaps you should set up a think tank for the benefit of mankind? It will need a catchy name....something that advertises the purpose but is short and to the point...how about VRANYO!???

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_e-eHEVlBJEC&pg=PA128&lpg=PA128&dq=russia+today+vranyo&source=bl&ots=v74BchB6s_&sig=gBy66baATZY1V-p4g12fLZR0rxU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=--bWUZ_KDMrK0QWNtoDQAw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=russia%20today%20vranyo&f=false

LOL. When you'll stick your head out of the sand let us know.

[Tonci87 163]

There is a beautiful irony in the idea that for all of the amero-centric casting post 9/11, about terrorists wanting to take our freedoms and rights, that to make ourselves safe we must take our own freedoms as time goes on, so effectively, you let the terrorists win under the umbrella of fear and protection.

Secondly power left unchecked, no matter the government involved, is still power left unchecked and will slowly grow over time, it's simply fact from the history books. Who is to say that martial law, seen as "It works" may not become the standard for other incidents?

I realize I bang on about freedom quite a lot, but to me the United States is nothing without it's founding principals, just a broken shadow of its former self, and freedom is far easier to lose than it is to gain.

Did you ever play GTA4?

One of the internet news reports in this game had a nice morale to it.

At the start of the game the bridges in Liberty city are closed due to a terror alert. The News report said that someone got a vague hint that someone wants to blow up the bridges to take away the freedom of the people of liberty city. So instead they closed down the bridges themselves. Not an exact Quote: No Terrorist will take away our freedom, rather we will take it away from ourselves.

[krycek 349]

Don't worry guys Mattar won't get upset if the government treats him like a criminal.Because mass surveillance means your own authorities brand you and your whole family like possible suspects.Not guilty until proven so doesn't seem to matter these days.

[mrcash2009 0]

Good job simply ignoring all arguments, or interpreting them the wrong way.

Yes, pretty much the end results every time, or it ends in sarcasm or name calling, no need to reply to that last list of drivel its all posted in response already.

My advice to you guys is not to waste your talents.

You are pretty much the last person I would take advice from all things considered, you can always jog on to another thread if you like, this is the subject matter and has multiple points of view.

Perhaps you should set up a think tank for the benefit of mankind?

Dont worry there are plenty working through the legislation this thread is about to satisfy your need to be safe.

(@Amra - same in USA that's why they couldn't do anything, no evidence of any wrong doing, despite an investigation and interviews. That is yet more evidence that mass surveillance doesn't occur, they don't have the resources to do it. The data is stored, no one has the time to look at it all.)

The most prefect doublethink statement thus far. No one has time to look at the data that is stored from the process that does not happen as there is no evidence, there is no resource to store the data thats stored, but its stored anyway, somehow, but not to worry ... no one has time to look at it all anyway .... :confused: And yet PRISM has come to light as well.

Simplifying the process of data mining using algorithm technology and making it sound like a man in a shed having to scan lots of paper. Also sticking to the argument that single persons data wont get looked at, when the point always has been the fact that it can (whether or not) is the issue and the process is not slowing down, not getting less interconnected and well, everything else you like to ignore including legislation like this thread started about just as a small example.

Edited July 5, 2013 by mrcash2009

[mrcash2009 0]

Staff from the National Security Agency got more than they bargained for when they attempted to recruit students to their organisation earlier this week …

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/shortcuts/2013/jul/05/national-security-agency-recruitment-drive

Attending the session was Madiha R Tahir, a journalist studying a language course at the university. She asked the squirming recruiters a few uncomfortable questions about the activities of NSA: which countries the agency considers to be "adversaries", and if being a good liar is a qualification for getting a job at the NSA.

It has a soundcloud stream of the recording to this here (or in the article itself):

https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F99464422&show_artwork=true

No matter what your take on this is, its an interesting "chat" none the less.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Don't worry guys Mattar won't get upset if the government treats him like a criminal.Because mass surveillance means your own authorities brand you and your whole family like possible suspects.Not guilty until proven so doesn't seem to matter these days.

And how likely is that? Care to provide some statistics, where, when, how often this actually happens? It doesn't happen where I live.

@Cash - interesting article indeed. Can I ask why there appear to be gaps in the recording Madiha R Tahir made? She asks a question, then the tape cuts out several times? Is it edited in any way? Looks like a bit of a stunt which didn't really uncover anything? Just a barrage of questions and accusations, the two recruiters were not really given time to respond? Poor journalism. Another thought - where did Madiha R Tahir get her warrant to secretly record conversations? Isn't that a form of spying, lol? Regarding journalists spying on people, is that ok because they think they are in the right? Or is it just spying for profit like the Russians and chinese do?

Regarding your comments previous page, I have known for some time that you are immune to logic and factual evidence, no sense of humour either? I simply asked for alternatives to the current system, and all I got was an epic fail. e.g. Tonci's "The postal service should be obliged to check all mail for traces of dangerous chemicals". How does that work in practice? The only way is to x-ray and open which is worse than what occurs now as someone would actually be inspecting every parcel and letter. It would also paralyse the postal system. To catch the offender you would still need to examine all post in the same batch so what does it change?

So it is, in fact, easy to criticise but hard to provide alternatives? Please have another attempt - I'm still interested in possible alternatives.

Edited July 6, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[mrcash2009 0]

And how likely is that? Care to provide some statistics, where, when, how often this actually happens? It doesn't happen where I live.

= in my world everything is ok, how very "Mattar Centric". You ask this question when you never answered the ones prior yourself.

Move along nothing to see here, yours sincerely, Pelham. Sorry, Mattar.

Another thought - where did Madiha R Tahir get her warrant to secretly record conversations? Isn't that a form of spying, lol? Regarding journalists spying on people, is that ok because they think they are in the right? Or is it just spying for profit like the Russians and chinese do?

Guess what I posted: "No matter what your take on this is, its an interesting "chat" none the less." its hardly high level investigative journalism, but then I never said it was.

Still love how you swing that back to the cold war east/west tripe yet again, so now this student is a potential spy and aligned to eastern countries practices, my my, how the boxes in your mind work overtime.

I have known for some time that you are immune to logic and factual evidence, no sense of humour either?

I laugh every time I read your everso logical strawman-argumentative-official-source-only-doublethink-deflecting-last-resort-sniping-name-calling posts mate, every day, it brings me a certain kind of joy :) And changes nothing to boot, that in itself has its own flavour of comedy.

I simply asked for alternatives to the current system, and all I got was an epic fail.

Heres a jar of cookies for you, I hope your proud .. good work! You are my personal hero, you have put the world to rights, bravo sir.

Strawman arguments is all you ever post, evading the real focus of what is now (deliberating on what could be is a deflection to win an "argument") and in place and being expanded on, meanwhile life roles on and this and its still valid, why worry mate, your safe. You still ignore what I said about process vs threat and assessing it then blanket inclusion numerous times, no point or need to go in a loop over it, its all posted to read .. or be ignored.

Edited July 6, 2013 by mrcash2009

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Don't worry guys Mattar won't get upset if the government treats him like a criminal.Because mass surveillance means your own authorities brand you and your whole family like possible suspects.Not guilty until proven so doesn't seem to matter these days.

Just wondered where this happens, to whom and how often? If someone has this kind of anxiety it must be based on some sort of experience or evidence?

so now this student is a potential spy and aligned to eastern countries practices,

Well I was interested in her personal ethics, she seems to be against spying, yet is secretly recording someone? There are also gaps in the recording which aren't explained? I link it with the practices of Russia and China (ethically) because newspapers make a profit often on stories where they spy on and investigate people secretly. That is what Russia and China do, espionage for profit. So what about the ethics of this, seems a bit mixed up to me? How can you have a problem with spying when you do it yourself?

[mrcash2009 0]

Just wondered where this happens, to whom and how often? If someone has this kind of anxiety it must be based on some sort of experience or evidence?

Trolling the point of less resistance as usual.

That is what Russia and China do, espionage for profit. So what about the ethics of this, seems a bit mixed up to me? How can you have a problem with spying when you do it yourself?

Here the blog from the article:

http://mobandmultitude.com/

Someone else happened to record it on an iPhone, hence the audio quality. It’s been edited mainly to cut garbled audio or audio that wouldn’t have made sense and edit out questions and comments from people who didn’t explicitly say it was ok to post their audio. You’ll hear the sound drop out for a second to mark the cuts.

Your comparisons are a joke, its an open room with questions being asked in an open environment, if they had so much an issue of spying (they are the bloody NSA) they wouldn't allow mobile phones into the room as a policy, and if they didn't have that policy then maybe they should bring a law in to stop all mobile phones anywhere in case of spying.

They didn't ask that process becuase they are not revealing sensitive information, its a recruitment process like any job on a campus as well, im fairly sure if it is and was an issue that clip will be taken down and the article never reach any source, sound-cloud admin's are pretty hot on that process, the campus wouldn't take long to react in light of it & the media would certainly have to check it legally post all the recent media debacle. All smart phones have the features to record, effectively they are just that, a recording device .. dont want anything recorded, you ban them from the room & check on entry.

But im sure you will find something to deflect upon it somehow.

Edited July 6, 2013 by mrcash2009

[Tonci87 163]

And how likely is that? Care to provide some statistics, where, when, how often this actually happens? It doesn't happen where I live.

@Cash - interesting article indeed. Can I ask why there appear to be gaps in the recording Madiha R Tahir made? She asks a question, then the tape cuts out several times? Is it edited in any way? Looks like a bit of a stunt which didn't really uncover anything? Just a barrage of questions and accusations, the two recruiters were not really given time to respond? Poor journalism. Another thought - where did Madiha R Tahir get her warrant to secretly record conversations? Isn't that a form of spying, lol? Regarding journalists spying on people, is that ok because they think they are in the right? Or is it just spying for profit like the Russians and chinese do?

Regarding your comments previous page, I have known for some time that you are immune to logic and factual evidence, no sense of humour either? I simply asked for alternatives to the current system, and all I got was an epic fail. e.g.

Tonci's "The postal service should be obliged to check all mail for traces of dangerous chemicals". How does that work in practice?

The only way is to x-ray and open which is worse than what occurs now as someone would actually be inspecting every parcel and letter. It would also paralyse the postal system. To catch the offender you would still need to examine all post in the same batch so what does it change?

So it is, in fact, easy to criticise but hard to provide alternatives? Please have another attempt - I'm still interested in possible alternatives.

If the envelope contains dangerous material theh it is extremely likely that traces of said material can be found on the outside of the envelope as well. An even better and more cost efficient way of dealing with such stuff would be to equip endangered organisations/persons with the equipment to open mail without risk. Gloves + (I don´t know how it´s called in english) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Atemluftfilter_Einwegmaske.jpg are already enough to protect you from most of the dangerous stuff that can be send per mail.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

@Cash - It's still secretly recording people without their knowledge isn't it? Doesn't matter if she did it or a friend. That's spying. Bad ethics and poor journalism. You can't criticise spying and then engage in secret recordings yourself, it's unethical.

@Tonci - It's not practical and unworkable, it also entails more handling and each item of mail would have to be photographed or labeled in some way to track it in storage while you wait for the results of chemical analysis so what's the difference? Some of the compounds can't be identified instantly and any test would record thousands of false positives, entailing more handling and opening. You are replacing what is anonymous recording and data storage with a small army of people opening and looking at thousands of pieces of mail. You need an alternative that isn't worse than what you already have and allows the postal service to function. If you implemented that it would go out of business.

[mrcash2009 0]

@Cash - It's still secretly recording people without their knowledge isn't it? Doesn't matter if she did it or a friend. That's spying. Bad ethics and poor journalism. You can't criticise spying and then engage in secret recordings yourself, it's unethical.

Let me pretend to be you .... "Where is the proof that this was 'secretly' recorded?". Again you steam-roll past my point once again even if they did pull a cheap trick ref mobile phones in sensitive meetings (this wasn't) they would ban phones prior & check on entry, and all deflection from the subject that always stands. Everything leads to a recording of a Q&A session on campus in a group session. Recording an open Q&A employment campus session on a mobile phone to log the Q&A with multiple people isnt "spying" .. it would only be that if it was set to sting someone or get incriminating details from them or sensitive information on a known session where such devices have been openly prohibited.

Going by your logic journalists in a room talking to an official of day to day business in a Q&A session is spying.

Edited July 6, 2013 by mrcash2009

[Tonci87 163]

@Cash - It's still secretly recording people without their knowledge isn't it? Doesn't matter if she did it or a friend. That's spying. Bad ethics and poor journalism. You can't criticise spying and then engage in secret recordings yourself, it's unethical.

@Tonci - It's not practical and unworkable, it also entails more handling and each item of mail would have to be photographed or labeled in some way to track it in storage while you wait for the results of chemical analysis so what's the difference? Some of the compounds can't be identified instantly and any test would record thousands of false positives, entailing more handling and opening. You are replacing what is anonymous recording and data storage with a small army of people opening and looking at thousands of pieces of mail. You need an alternative that isn't worse than what you already have and allows the postal service to function. If you implemented that it would go out of business.

Good job on ignoring this bit

An even better and more cost efficient way of dealing with such stuff would be to equip endangered organisations/persons with the equipment to open mail without risk. Gloves + (I don´t know how it´s called in english) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:A...inwegmaske.jpg are already enough to protect you from most of the dangerous stuff that can be send per mail.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Good job on ignoring this bit

Ahh I see, you would like every postal and government worker who handles, reads or opens mail to work in full protective clothing every day? Gloves and a mask isn't enough, you need a sealed suit to prevent skin contamination. Contamination from previous attacks began at the mail box where the item was posted so you would need to start protection there. What about others? In the 2001 anthrax attack, 2 members of the public died who were not connected to the letters or contaminated buildings.

And you think this is practical? Have you ever worn this type of equipment? Do you realise how uncomfortable it is? Doesn't protect anyone from letter bombs? You would need to quadruple the number of employees and have them working in shifts as it's impossible to wear this for an entire working day. Yet another bizarre and expensive idea. (you would still have to deal with $Billions in decontamination which you haven't covered, does money still not matter?). There are other numerous problems, and there is still no way of tracking the parcel and aprehending whoever posted it. I often make the comment that you and others here don't think things through, do you see why? Are you going to take some time and have a 3rd attempt at this? It's still not an alternative for the present system of scanning the outside of mail.

@Cash the proof is given in the reason for editing - the journalist/assistant (iPhone sounds like it's right under her nose doesn't it?) didn't ask consent of all those present and if it was given it could be declared or would be present on the tape. If 1 person declined to be recorded there would be no tape. It's spying on people and an invasion of privacy. It is described in journalism ethics as a "fishing expedition" and is considered highly unethical, more so if certain procedures are not followed as in this case. The editing could also be classed as misleading as it's unclear if the tape is a true and accurate account of what took place. It's a blog, you only have her word for this, there is no independent editorial oversight. In short - it stinks and isn't ethical.

What I find strange is people like the journalist and yourself who are concerned about privacy rights and are against spying using methods like these to justify your argument - touch hypocritical? Can you invade privacy and spy on people as long as you think you have the moral right lol?

Edited July 7, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari