Comment by mass_and_energy 10 months ago
The implication of the right to privacy being unnecessary because you have nothing to hide is akin to declaring the right to free speech unnecessary because you have nothing to say.
The ability to maintain privacy and anonymity is not for today, it's for tomorrow.
I don't think many people seriously think that terrorists planning attacks to maim and kill people, and pedophiles sharing child sexual abuse imagery with each other, have an absolute right to privacy in such communications, nor that doing so is an example of free speech.
Really it's a good thing that the "global adversary" is - almost certainly - keeping tabs on Tor traffic and tracking down who is responsible for the worst abuses within this network.
Not sure what you mean. Gathering evidence is a vital part of investigating criminal activity. In the age of the internet, this includes evidence generated on computer networks, such as connection metadata from distributed systems like Tor.
Why, in your view, is this akin to Stalinism? It's just standard police work adapted for modern technologies, not an indication of totalitarian governance.
Because it exceeds the ruleset mutually agreed upon when it comes to the methods.
There was a gentleman named Edward Snowden who worked at a law enforcement agency called the National Security Agency, or the NSA for short. They operate in the United States of America.
The United States of America is a democracy, and has an agreed upon system in which the populace has a say about the rules their society must follow. These are called laws. American people and institutions are expected to follow these laws.
Pc is referencing the leader of a regime called the USSR. The USSR did not practice democracy, and it's agencies did not have to abide by the laws of the USSR.
The reason American law enforcement agencies are being compared to Stalinist (USSR) ones is because the aforementioned gentlemen Edward Snowden proved that, not unlike the USSR, American LEAs do not follow their countries laws either.
Does that make sense? I'm happy to clarify further, knowledge is power and I seek to empower those around me (y)
Edward Snowden is a Russian agent who sought to damage USA intelligence agencies as much as he possibly could, disingenuously framing it as whistleblowing.
It's unfortunate that many people, such as yourself, have been taken in by his story and don't see the bigger picture.
Also, gathering metadata on Tor usage to break anonymity is not actually against any law. It'll be done within the legal framework that permits collection and analysis of intelligence data.
Where do I say it's unnecessary?