The Noose Around Privacy is Tightening... - Comments Page 1

Apple asked for this. The two people involved were dead. Apple should have worked with the FBI to provide them with the information that was on the cell phone. Note that Apple should not have been forced to divulge how they accessed the info...just the info relevant to the case in question. They in fact left the FBI no choice.

This is very scary and sad that we have an out of control corrupt government. Sure they are just after the bad guys and you have nothing to fear unless you just happen to vote for the other party ... think IRS targeting conservatives ... oh yeah, it happens. Pay attention and vote accordingly and then hold them accountable to the constitution.

I have no problem with the government reading my email and online chst, I donX't put anything that private on the net or in my emails.

Whatever happened to the "sneakernet" idea?
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneakernet)

You can use a memory card or a USB stick to be the go-between between a secure computer "off the grid", to a computer connected to the net. And you alone control what is transfered in or out of the computer with net connectivity.

The author of the "eternal vigilance" quotation is John Philpot Curran (1750-1831). Irish author, politician and wit. I won't give you all details but it's from a speech he gave in 1790. You can find further info in Familiar Quotations by John Bartlett.

Most privacy issues would be dealt with by the Libertarian Party. I know this site is for computer news but the subject matter of this article says read the Constitution. The LIbertarian Party is a strong supporter of the Constitution.

There is a good article, published on the internet by This Day In Quotes, that gives a lot of background and research regarding the quote, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." There have been many variations of this quote, attributed to various people throughout U.S history. If interested, read:

http://www.thisdayinquotes.com/2011/01/eternal-vigilance-is-price-of-liberty.html

There is a good article, published on the internet by This Day In Quotes, that gives a lot of background and research regarding the quote, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." There have been many variations of this quote, attributed to various people throughout U.S history. If interested, read:

http://www.thisdayinquotes.com/2011/01/eternal-vigilance-is-price-of-liberty.html

As parents we tell our kids: "Don't put anything in writing that you do not want your parents, your teacher, your Minister seeing" I think this blabber about privacy is nuts. Sure blow up the world but "please" don't read my email.

I began using the Internet over 20 years ago. At the time it consisted of mainly text-based chat rooms. Programs and files could be downloaded through universities. At the time I had what was rated as one of the best free e-mail accounts. Everything was fine for the first year or so. Then I began getting SPAM. That's when I realized that as soon as I connected to the Internet, I had no privacy. Just like people who talk loudly on their cell phones in public.
I agree with the Federal Court's June 2016 statement, but not the IPA's extension of it. Just because something CAN be done doesn't mean it's OK for any one to actually do it. When I lock my house I know there's a strong possibility that someone will break in. That doesn't mean anyone - even law enforcement or other governmental organization - can enter my house without my consent. Yet, that's what the IPA contends.
Those items I want to keep private (such as financial records) are kept on a hard drive that is never accessible from the Internet. The only way to have some semblance of privacy is to stay off the Internet (even that is not complete privacy).
People get all upset if the government tries to "invade our privacy", yet don't care about spammers, ad agencies, companies from whom they never bought anything, and even foreign governments getting the same information. Somehow that just doesn't make sense to me. If people are really concerned about privacy, they would press to keep anyone - not just the government - from tracking their online behavior.
I live by the philosophy that the best way to go unnoticed is not to draw attention to yourself. I am quite happy to be part of society's white noise. I come, go, do/say what I want, and just fade into the background.
I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn this post is being read someplace other than askbobrankin.com. But then, what have I said in it that would make anyone want to check up on me?

"No expectation of privacy": as they state it, is a two-way street; that is, since THEIR (the government's) computers and/or networks are ALSO connected to the internet, THEY can ALSO "assume that it can and will be hacked". It would also *imply* that such activity would/should no longer be illegal (if they can do so with impunity, so can anyone else), and anyone previously punished for such should be forgiven. I don't think that will fly, in any direction.
I'm saying that if the gov't thinks it's okay for THEM to do XYZ unto it's citizens, then IT IS OKAY for it's citizens to do XYZ unto said gov't. I don't think that's what they want. It's both a can of worms, and Pandora's Box.

Imagine this. The city, in which you have been a long-time resident, is suddenly surreptitiously, meaning without your knowledge, invaded by secret government agents who go undercover to all public places, schools, churches, bars, sporting events, even fishing holes. These agents also place themselves clandestinely outside private homes, close enough to hear even casual conversation. Then, without your knowledge of what is considered by the agents to be subversive language, these agents arrest you for just such an egregious behavior and whisk you away as a traitor, without your friends or family knowing what happened to you.

In case you're wondering, this was just one of the many grievances used by England's King George III against what he supposed were his "subjects" in the Colonial city of Boston and elsewhere in America during the late 1700s, before and during her Revolutionary War.

Do you think this is not occurring again in America during 2016 and beyond. I have already been labeled a "terrorist" by virtue of openly supporting the Constitution, the Bible, and by advocating individuals be armed for protection. There's probably quite a file of my digital words against the intruding nature of my own government. Granted, there are differences between 1776 and now; however, there are so many resemblances that I can't help but wonder just where our current government has crossed the same lines of personal Freedom and Liberty. Who knows, maybe the fight has already started, and We the People are just waiting to realize it. Just some thoughts. Oh, and thank you, Bob, for fomenting them.

I don't like what's happening any more that anyone else. The truth is that legislation, bureaucratic decree, and moronic judicial decisions have been chipping away at what most people would consider personal privacy issues. All done in order to "protect" us. The truth is also that this trend will continue slowly and surely.

you need a way to share this on facebook & others

Road to tyranny: Decriminalize soft drugs like m*riju*na. Stratify the population into "us" vs "them" economically and financially. Employ Orwellian tactics (like 2 way tvs!) to spy into every nook and cranny of people's lives. Keep the masses impoverished, malnourished, and on the public dole. Repeat 3x a day: "we love Big Brother"!
By the way, Steppenwolf was one of my favorite groups when I was a teen. I knew that I was born to be wild and I took a few magic carpet rides, but I always feared Big Brother (Amerika) was watching!

We already have 2-way computers - built in microphones and cameras. I cover up the camera.

Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.
Would Abraham Lincoln see a description of the current state of the nation in these words?

With people carrying around tiny full-blown computers, many of them having their whole lives on their phone and completely bypassing a desktop or laptop computer and some people being vicious animals, I say the hell with privacy. I don't care! I care about tracking down people who want to kill. GOOD FOR THE FBI FOR NOT SPILLING THE BEANS TO APPLE!!! Why the hell should they??!!

I hope the FBI NEVER EVER gives in & Apple & any others can swing in the wind like a bunch of whirling dervishes!! I have nothing to hide, they can track me anytime but it's a waste of their time to do it!I love my country,swore to defend it in my early years & will do it again if I still am able,physically that is. So there!!

If home computer users have no expectation of privacy as soon as they connect to the internet, then logically the government would not either, so hacking government computers should no longer be a crime. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.