"Here's my problem with that little scenario. If you're going to blackmail someone (which is a crime) then committing a crime in order to get the dirt on them in the first place isn't going to slow you down much."
True, but only when "getting the dirt" is something that can be done solo or just by a few conspirators. That's not the case with the potential misuse of government wiretapping under any reasonable system of safeguards. When the crime requires the knowing cooperation of a whole network of GS employees, you can be damn sure some of them won't risk their pensions in an illegal scheme. When it requires the phone company to turn over databases and that is clearly criminal, even if a company executive joins the conspiracy, the geeks he orders to actually perform the data transfer will blow the whistle, and be glad to see the last of the stupid SOB...
Thank you so much! I really liked reading your viewpoint! I'm still not sure what I think--so far I tend to agree with markm, above, who put it far better than I would--but I'm happy to get an intelligent opinion from a different viewpoint than the ones I usually read. This is why I read you. :)
Any chance to limit the power/authority of government is a "Good Thing", imo. Sure, this bill won't make much difference one way or another, but it's all about degrees.
And those degrees are leveraged; every concession to big government makes it grow larger by multiples.
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2008/07/sometimes-you-cant-be-paranoid-enough.html (4 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
"Here's my problem with that little scenario. If you're going to blackmail someone (which is a crime) then committing a crime in order to get the dirt on them in the first place isn't going to slow you down much."
True, but only when "getting the dirt" is something that can be done solo or just by a few conspirators. That's not the case with the potential misuse of government wiretapping under any reasonable system of safeguards. When the crime requires the knowing cooperation of a whole network of GS employees, you can be damn sure some of them won't risk their pensions in an illegal scheme. When it requires the phone company to turn over databases and that is clearly criminal, even if a company executive joins the conspiracy, the geeks he orders to actually perform the data transfer will blow the whistle, and be glad to see the last of the stupid SOB...
Thank you so much! I really liked reading your viewpoint! I'm still not sure what I think--so far I tend to agree with markm, above, who put it far better than I would--but I'm happy to get an intelligent opinion from a different viewpoint than the ones I usually read. This is why I read you. :)
Ellsburg is a twit living off past "glories" - having Noam Chomsky on his side is no benefit where his reality-tether is concerned.
Any chance to limit the power/authority of government is a "Good Thing", imo. Sure, this bill won't make much difference one way or another, but it's all about degrees.
And those degrees are leveraged; every concession to big government makes it grow larger by multiples.
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>