News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Priv... by PopsiclePete on Thursday January 11, 2018 @12:14PM (#16125598)
You can't. Most people will choose safety over freedom every single time.
Re:House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Priv... by dgllghr on Thursday January 11, 2018 @12:39PM (#16125836)
I completely understand where you're coming from, and I share some of that cynicism. But there are many contrary examples. Abolitionists fought in the US Civil War to end slavery. Russian journalists and politicians are killed left and right but continue to challenge Putin's dictatorship. The Kurds, though they have never had their own state, continue to resist both Turkey and ISIS. Protesters were attacked and killed for protesting the neo-nazi rally in Charlottesville, VA just last year.

I think it's as Thomas Jefferson said: "...all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Perhaps in this case, the suffering is not great and the vision of privacy is not strongly supported. But I disagree that people will choose safety over freedom every time.

Re:House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Priv... by javajosh on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:02PM (#16126062)
American slaves weren't safe, so there wasn't a trade-off there.
Re:House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Priv... by Panino on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:22PM (#16126294)
This is a common fallacy, that freedom and safety are in opposition, that increasing one decreases the other, that freedom puts you in danger and a lack of freedom saves you. In this debate people often say there is perfect safety in prison, but if I imagine myself a prisoner, versus my daily life right now, I'd feel a lot less safe in prison. I've read that some prisoners go to the bathroom with one pant-leg undone, just so their legs won't be tangled at the ankles if they get violently attacked. I can't imagine my daily life being this dangerous.

Freedom leads to the most security. If you scatter plot graph "free countries" and "safe countries" you'll find an unmistakable positive correlation. Whether the dangers are religious police kidnapping people for "virginity tests," people being disappeared for criticizing the government, or routine industrial accidents in places where expendable people aren't free to demand workers rights, a lack of freedom increases danger.

You're pretty safe in Switzerland, not so much in Iraq.

Re:House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Priv... by Animats on Thursday January 11, 2018 @03:57PM (#16127777)
The ads for China's "big brother" systems, some of which are corporate/government partnerships, are way ahead of the US.[1] These are from QQ.

In one public demo, jaywalkers in a city intersection had their personal details appear on a giant screen.[2]

[1] https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/947649480123285505 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShXKvo6xl6U

Re:House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Priv... by StanislavPetrov on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:16PM (#16126221)
Which is why you have to help explain to her that the police state has absolutely nothing to do with keeping you safe.
Re:House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Priv... by willstrafach on Friday January 12, 2018 @02:37AM (#16131132)
In the case of 702, as it is for foreign surveillance, it is not even any freedom/security tradeoff because it is not them being surveiled.