It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
U.S. President Barack Obama on Friday made a passionate case for mobile devices to be built in such a way as to allow government to gain access to personal data if needed to prevent a terrorist attack or enforce tax laws.
Speaking at the South by Southwest festival in Texas, Obama said he could not comment on the legal case in which the FBI is trying to force Apple Inc. to allow access to an iPhone linked to San Bernardino, California, shooter Rizwan Farook.
But he made clear that, despite his commitment to Americans' privacy and civil liberties, a balance was needed to allow some intrusion when needed.
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Barzad
Part of the problem is that our laws on electronic communication are in DIRE need of updating to be current with the times...
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Barzad
Pretty much, we're not at the point where we have predictive algorithms to discover terrorism before it happens. They can scoop up all the info on the world (literally) but it doesn't help them until an attack happens.
All that data DOES help in the subsequent prosecution if the individuals are caught alive. Before then? It's just a vast beach full of sand grains and no idea which of the trillions of grains is important...
Paralyzed by data overload...
In a way, I see moves like this as some kind of social/cultural conditioning. Get us used to not having any expectation of privacy in our electronic devices at all by hammering us down and chipping away at us for decades upon decades.
Someone needs to just put it in black and white, literal stone needs to be carved with a line that simply cannot be crossed.
Part of the problem is that our laws on electronic communication are in DIRE need of updating to be current with the times...
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Barzad
Pretty much, we're not at the point where we have predictive algorithms to discover terrorism before it happens. They can scoop up all the info on the world (literally) but it doesn't help them until an attack happens.
All that data DOES help in the subsequent prosecution if the individuals are caught alive. Before then? It's just a vast beach full of sand grains and no idea which of the trillions of grains is important...
Paralyzed by data overload...
Here is an application to terrorism:
Terrorists are really rare. In a city of twenty million like New York, there might be one or two terrorists, maybe up to ten. 10/20,000,000 = 0.00005 percent, one twenty-thousandth of a percent.
That's pretty rare. Now, say you have software that can sift through all the bank-records, or toll-pass records, or public transit records, or phone-call records in the city and catch terrorists 99 percent of the time.
In a pool of twenty million people, a 99 percent accurate test will identify two hundred thousand people as being terrorists. But only ten of them are terrorists. To catch ten bad guys, you have to investigate two hundred thousand innocent people.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
"Enforce tax laws"....so they mean using cell phone data to go after organized crime via the old Capone method? Or is this about harrassing small time drug dealers?
None of that matters, i guess. What I want to know is, why do I have to give up my freedom and privacy because of someone else?
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Bedlam
The problem is the false positive paradox:
originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Bedlam
I figured L3 would have had something to do with all of this as well ... Don't they have a fun little project?
originally posted by: Aazadan
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
"Enforce tax laws"....so they mean using cell phone data to go after organized crime via the old Capone method? Or is this about harrassing small time drug dealers?
None of that matters, i guess. What I want to know is, why do I have to give up my freedom and privacy because of someone else?
It's an interesting question really. How far should the government be allowed to go in order to enforce tax laws? If they don't go far enough, no one pays their taxes but if they go too far it opens up all kinds of civil liberties violations.