Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Spy scandal - anyone bothered by the US government sweeping through *everything* we do online..?

231 replies

edam · 10/06/2013 22:17

Seems Uncle Sam can just hoover up data from Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Apple, Youtube and the rest. US govt is busy reassuring Americans this 'only' applies to foreigners. Like us.

One boffin interviewed on Channel Four news said they may look for keywords like 'Iran' - so if you've ever commented on a thread about Iran, people working for that nice Mr Obama may have been watching...

OP posts:
SirChenjin · 11/06/2013 19:41

It means that I really couldn't care less if anyone wants to snoop as I have nothing to hide. Absolutely nothing. I would much rather that they snooped and found something that protected me and my family than they fannied about playing guessing games with very limited resources.

Ilikethebreeze · 11/06/2013 19:46

Cant decide whether to be bothered or not.
I think I am. Not because of what I do, but because of what others do.
If others, say in say x country are trying to do something to make the democracy better in that country, well they may well be bieing monitored, and ultimately end up in jail or worse?
I think I always thought that would happen with the internet.
I could see it remaining private for many decades.
Interent use may begin to wane from here on in.

Ilikethebreeze · 11/06/2013 19:48

Couldnt see, not could see.

Also, ever since the whole of Linked in was hacked, I realised passwords are a joke.

mathanxiety · 11/06/2013 19:58

Indeed. And I'd have been with the Civil Rights marchers, not the bombers. And would probably also have received security force attention for this. Which security force was directed from London, under a one-person-one-vote democracy in England.

Initially, back in 1968/69, the security forces that paid attention to the Civil Rights marchers were the NI security forces, which were the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the B Specials. Suspension of Stormont, folding-up of the Governor General's office, and direct rule from Westminster were accomplished in 1972, at which point troops were sent in to do policing, and William Whitelaw was appointed Secretary of State for NI, with sweeping powers. It was only at that juncture that the police forces in NI came under the control of the government at Westminster.

NI was quasi independent up to then.

Both Tory backbenchers and Irish political parties howled at this, but the decision had the broad support of the majority of the British electorate and NI was a part of the United Kingdom, however loosely.

The out of control behaviour of elements in the security forces in the 1970s is one of the reasons we now have parliamentary oversight and RIPA and all the rest of it. The regulatory process should to be supported and itself scrutinised, not waved away with a naive belief that a democratic state is reliably benign to all its citizens.

There were high-minded hopes that transferring control of policing to Westminster would result in policing being conducted on a fair and non-sectarian basis (the Heath government recognised that the RUC and B Specials were a massive problem), a plebiscite on the future of NI was promised, and internees were to be released as part of the imposition of direct rule. Unfortunately it was a signal for extremists on both sides to redouble their military efforts in support of their very different aims, and thwart the will of the majority. On the one hand Unionists were enraged by their loss of local power, and on the nationalist side the Provos were encouraged by what they saw as weakness along with failure to wrap up the state of NI and hand it over to the Republic.

The security forces responded as successive Secretaries of State saw fit. Momentum was never in the hands of the forces of law and order, nobody in Westminster paid sufficient attention to the nuts and bolts of affairs in NI, too many parties thought the morass was their golden opportunity to advance their aims, and the situation degenerated.

There is no such thing as reliable benignity on the part of any state but there sure as heck is no way anyone in any of NI's ghettos could rely on any modicum of justice when under the thumb of either loyalist or nationalist paramilitaries. The wheels of democracy sometimes grind very slowly but in the end they do grind.

mummytime · 11/06/2013 20:02

If you do anything on line it is a good idea to realise it isn't necessarily private, nor does it necessarily go away. (If I google myself I find a reference to a Poem I wrote 20 years ago, which I have lost, but the reference to it is out there.)

I think if the US government trawls through my messages they must be very bored.

Of course if I wanted to look for something dodgy then I would look for ways to do it covering my tracks. Just as when I worked in a school and wanted to know what the kids were really saying I would use Urban Dictionary rather than a search which would red flag the IT guys.

Branleuse · 11/06/2013 20:04

yes i am bloody bothered.

Ilikethebreeze · 11/06/2013 20:12

I think the first time the general public will start to wake up and take notice, is when it involves a celebrity in some way or other.

Morrigu · 11/06/2013 20:17

You see I am worried because I don't believe in the giving up of freedoms for a little security. I also don't agree with the whole rhetoric of 'if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to worry about'. Who decides between what's right and wrong? It all seems just one step closer to a police state.

Plus is what they have done is it not illegal (correct me if I'm wrong)?

edam · 11/06/2013 20:23

The people who say 'if you've got nothing to hide' - wonder whether they routinely get undressed with the curtains wide open? Would they mind a police officer standing in the garden watching them?

OP posts:
HabbaDabbaDoo · 11/06/2013 20:43

Are you seriously likening some peeping tom seeing you naked with a computer four thousand miles away scanning your emails of you bitching to your mate about your MIL for eg? Hmm

In anycase, it's much ado about nothing. World wide there are billions of emails, phone calls and text messages daily. Some super computer at some secret NSA data centre scans the stuff looking for key words. Only then do they get bought to the attention of an analyst. You probably stand a greater chance of winning the lottery.

After 9/11 sales of firearms shot up all over the USA. As if bin laden and friends were going to be visiting Hicksville USA . It's the same here. There are billions of emails etc being sent each day and you are worried about the NSA reading your emails?

Crowler · 11/06/2013 20:47

It's legal under the patriot act, I believe.

Seriously, what a load of bollocks - "I've got nothing to hide". Would it bother you if the government starts looking into your medical records, because you have nothing to hide? Maybe starts monitoring the computer system your car to ensure you're not breaking the speed limit? What if you have an email correspondent in let's say, Tunisia, and they think that you've been recruited to Al Qaeda and you wind up being waterboarded until you give up the goods?

What a complacent fool you are.

I'll just wait for you to tell me you'd never be so stupid as to have a friend in Tunisia.

mathanxiety · 11/06/2013 21:00

Morrigu you might see things differently if you were a woman married to an abusive man who happened to be the second in command in your local Provisional IRA, or a hairdresser trying to set up shop and finding the street tax due to the local kneecapping and arson brigade was making it impossible to make any money for your family. I think you would choose any amount of heavy handed tracking of the armed thugs in your neighbourhood over your personal privacy online. This isn't some academic question involving high falutin principles played out on a vast scale. This is about how life is when your neighbourhood is ruled by racketeers or fundamentalists (or anyone who has not bought into democracy at all) and how governments can stop that happening.

In NI a whole generation or two had their lives blighted by the circumstances that arose when armed thugs took over large swathes of cities. They were able to do this because government did not pay attention to the right details or focus on the right level of the conflict, or appeal to those in the middle who desperately wanted to just get on with their lives. When troops first arrived in NI they were greeted with cups of tea -- by women.

aftermay · 11/06/2013 21:00

I'm bothered. But they already know that.

On a serious note, I am bothered. I need to know the extent of the snooping and its purpose. Not long before we have to grass on each other for holding views different to the party line.

edam · 11/06/2013 21:05

Habba - both are an unwarranted and unjustified invasion of privacy. Unless you are happy with any random employee of the state watching you get undressed, you should be bothered by this. It's exactly the same principle.

Still, going by this thread, there are plenty of people who would have been happy in the old communist East Germany, with the Stasi snooping on everyone. Nice to know democracy matters so little to them.

OP posts:
Morrigu · 11/06/2013 21:14

Thanks Crowler I wasn't sure.

The thing is - where is the limit?? I'm actually glad to see there are a few MNers who are bothered by this as I'm really disappointed by most of the apathy shown.

stealthsquiggle · 11/06/2013 21:15

Habba - much ado about nothing? For real? Shock

As I said, I have long assumed that anything I do can be seen /heard, and think it exceedingly unlikely that anyone would find me interesting enough to watch /listen to, but that is not the same as being ok with the idea of random surveillance without due process.

'you have nothing to fear unless you are doing something wrong' is how Germany sleep-walked into Nazi control.

Ilikethebreeze · 11/06/2013 21:16

Habba, worryingly they will probably employ more and more people doing it.

mathanxiety · 11/06/2013 21:20

'They' can already see me virtually undressed if I go through an airport x ray machine. And 'they' are welcome. I don't want to sit beside someone with explosives in his unmentionables while flying over the Atlantic.

Ilikethebreeze · 11/06/2013 21:20

habba, How about if I now go and search your posts, and start amassing them all here.
Shall I start now.
Will that bother you at all?

Morrigu · 11/06/2013 21:26

Ermm mathanxiety don't tell me how I would feel living in NI during the troubles, because funny enough I actually did (and a lot closer than I would ever tell on an anonymous forum ta very much). What I've been through and experienced in my lifetime, I still have the views I do.

scaevola · 11/06/2013 21:28

Is it the same principle, though?

Why do you consider the Internet a private place? It's not your own four walls. It's a global network, with different bits owned by different entities in different jurisdictions.

It's less like being naked in your own house; more like being naked in your CCTV-covered town centre.

Ilikethebreeze · 11/06/2013 21:31

I have now done a quick skim of this months posts.
Do you feel slightly uncomfortable?

NicholasTeakozy · 11/06/2013 21:44

Since Blair got into power we have been slowly led towards total surveillance. This afternoon, for instance, police raided a squat in London to arrest protestors before they'd had a chance to protest. How is that democracy?

If you want to be almost undetectable on the net use an onion router like Tor or Freenet. These are what some security people use to ensure anonymity as you bounce through many 'nodes' before getting to your eventual connection.

Another good thing about Startpage is you have the option of connecting via their own secure proxy for added anonymity.

Morrigu · 11/06/2013 21:59

And the difference is in NI math (I'm assuming you're from NI too) is that we had a civil war basically. Yes there was security and spying but the difference is it was upfront. The IRA/Ulster whatever they decide to call themselves this week knew they were spied upon. Reason why so many people got killed for being 'informers'

But it was withdrew. Since the Good Friday Agreement the army was withdrew, barracks and police stations have closed etc. The difference that I see it is that if Snowden hadn't of come out and said about it would it withdraw? Would it hell? It would just get worse.

edam · 11/06/2013 22:08

scaevola, no, it's nothing like being naked in the town centre. That would be a deliberate choice. We don't have much choice about going online - increasingly people are being pushed into it whatever their personal preference because you are charged extra for paying by cheque, extra for buying something in person, it's made far more difficult to get hold of information from the government offline - this govt. is making benefits dependent on being online with universal credit.

When people signed up for Facebook, there was no disclaimer made clear to users that 'all your information will be handed over to American spies'.

Nicholas is right that the police are harassing people even before they protest - not only is our democratic right to protest being eroded, we aren't even allowed to think about protesting!

OP posts: