Our right to "Privacy". Where Is it guaranteed?

a reply to: thesmokingman

What about the cloud? If I write a document and store it in the cloud, do I have a reasonable expectation of privacy?

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: JHumm
Maybe the question should be why does the government feel the need to take privacy away everyone?
Just because you aren't hiding something are you OK with people watching every thing you do?

Well,it could save a lot of lives if they were to say, catch some people planning an attack or something.

So, they've been monitoring everything for a while now and they haven't caught anyone yet.

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: Bilk22
a reply to: thesmokingman

Article 4
Right of search and seizure regulated

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I am talking about being watched in public or on the internet.

I would guess that every time you connect to the internet you're using an ISP of some sort for which you've already agreed to abide by their terms.

Sending data through somebody else's routers and servers is not something where you would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

I wholeheartedly agree, 100% You cannot expect privacy using a public utility, In my opinion anyway.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: JHumm
Maybe the question should be why does the government feel the need to take privacy away everyone?
Just because you aren't hiding something are you OK with people watching every thing you do?

Well,it could save a lot of lives if they were to say, catch some people planning an attack or something.

So, they've been monitoring everything for a while now and they haven't caught anyone yet.

Sure they have! There have been plenty of thwarted terror attacks here and abroad. Absolutely have.
50 in fact since 9/11 www.heritage.org...

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: thesmokingman

What about the cloud? If I write a document and store it in the cloud, do I have a reasonable expectation of privacy?

One would not think so...

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: JHumm
Maybe the question should be why does the government feel the need to take privacy away everyone?
Just because you aren't hiding something are you OK with people watching every thing you do?

Well,it could save a lot of lives if they were to say, catch some people planning an attack or something.

So, they've been monitoring everything for a while now and they haven't caught anyone yet.

Sure they have! There have been plenty of thwarted terror attacks here and abroad. Absolutely have.
50 in fact since 9/11 www.heritage.org...

How many were plots that were thought up and facilitated by an alphabet agency and then stopped?

a reply to: thesmokingman

So then kiss intellectual property rights good-bye. If someone can break into your cloud storage and steal your unfinished manuscript, then they could conceivably publish it as their own work. After all, it's in the cloud and not yours ... right? Someone can also take those pictures you store and use them however they want. Just relabel cloud as public domain.

Then, I guess there is a reason why you have a desktop. Ever notice they are trying to phase those out?

But you say there is no need for privacy.

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: JHumm
Maybe the question should be why does the government feel the need to take privacy away everyone?
Just because you aren't hiding something are you OK with people watching every thing you do?

Well,it could save a lot of lives if they were to say, catch some people planning an attack or something.

You are joking right?

Like they were watching Michael Adebolajo, even offered him a job as an informant. Before he beheaded Lee Rigby.
Like everybody seems to have been watching the french brothers, only for them to do what they did.

Yeah, this surveillance of everybody seems like a really good idea.....NOT.

And to be honest, who payed you to even ask the question? Sounds like you really have a fascist agenda going on there.
Surveillance doesnt stop attacks, if someone is so damned desperate to blow themselves or others up, they will do it.
The place the cameras need to be is in the government offices, its them that need watching, not us.

I encountered the nothing-to-hide argument so frequently in news interviews, discussions, and the like that I decided to probe the issue. I asked the readers of my blog, Concurring Opinions, whether there are good responses to the nothing-to-hide argument. I received a torrent of comments:

My response is "So do you have curtains?" or "Can I see your credit-card bills for the last year?"

So my response to the "If you have nothing to hide ... " argument is simply, "I don't need to justify my position. You need to justify yours. Come back with a warrant."

I don't have anything to hide. But I don't have anything I feel like showing you, either.

If you have nothing to hide, then you don't have a life.

Show me yours and I'll show you mine.

It's not about having anything to hide, it's about things not being anyone else's business.

Bottom line, Joe Stalin would [have] loved it. Why should anyone have to say more?

chronicle.com...

a reply to: thesmokingman

Nowadays privacy becomes a luxury consumption goods and you have to BUY with plenty of resources. Sad but this is the reality.

a reply to: thesmokingman
"Inalienable rights"
(Unalienable rights)

originally posted by: thesmokingman

Sure, the Fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, but id does not say anything about being "spied" on by the government.

I thought your government was restricted to only those powers specifically set out for it in the Constitution? Isn't that the point of the 10th Amendment?

So should the question be "where is it prohibited?", or should the question be "where is it allowed?"

If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged.

Cardinal something. I can't remember. True. And the entire point.

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: Bilk22
a reply to: thesmokingman

Article 4
Right of search and seizure regulated

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I am talking about being watched in public or on the internet.

There's a difference between someone reading something you have posted on the internet and targeting you for surveillance. The latter should always require a warrant. There's a difference between someone seeing you walking down the street and targeting you for surveillance. The latter should always require a warrant.

originally posted by: JHumm
Maybe the question should be why does the government feel the need to take privacy away everyone?
Just because you aren't hiding something are you OK with people watching every thing you do?
And it is the government for the most part that is watching everyone, not just some cyber stalkers. Most people don't care what others are doing so they don't invade others privacy.

The motivation is likely to create fear. People who fear their governments are more easily controlled.

First of all, like most people I’d prefer that my communications, personal documents, places I travel to, consumer activity, blah, blah, blah not be monitored and stored in an increasingly detailed historical profile on some remote database server somewhere. But, what I prefer and reality are not the same thing. I learned long, long ago that my right to privacy is very strictly limited. I know, for instance, that it may be a bad idea to stand on a street corner with a large sign proclaiming, “Please donate to my cause or I will detonate the bomb you see strapped to my chest”. I can stand around at home in my living room with that sign all day long and get away with it, but as soon as I walk out the front door with it I’m f___ed. When I walk out the door I’m quite conscious of the fact that no matter where I go I’m most likely in the field of view of some surveillance camera, not to speak of the fact that my cell phone can be used to track me. And it’s not considered a violation of my Constitutional right to privacy.

So in a way, I think of getting on the Internet as analogous to walking out my front door. Whenever I connect to the internet, I broadcast to the world, “Hello world! Here I am, and here’s my address!” It’s just the nature of being a node on an IP network. Anyone with the proper skill-set can hack me and trace my activity. In my case, and most others, it would be a waste of time to monitor my activity in search of anything of value. So, it doesn’t bother me. For that matter, you might consider cookies an invasion of privacy since they do reveal info about you and your online activity. Most major companies plant these little spies on your system whenever you go online. Where are all the cries about the evil corporate cookie monster? I haven’t heard them. I read so many posts by outraged folks screaming about their Constitutional privacy rights being violated by the government, but not so much about all the countless companies/corporations who also collect their data and spy on them routinely.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that there’s no chance that all this data being collected on us can’t, or won’t, some day be used in some diabolical plot to enslave us and take over the world. I’m also not denying the claims being made that all this data is being collected to satisfy the demands of a rogue band of flesh-eating, Constitution-hating mutant commie aliens. All I’m saying is, it is what it is. We’ve entered the information age and the era of hi-tech explosion. The cat’s outta the bag and it ain’t goin’ back in. Personally, I tend to avoid Google products and the big social network sites (Facebook, Twitter, etc), and I have no interest in cloud apps to store my personal data. But, that doesn’t really mean much. I’m a member of this forum and a few others. So, I’m not hiding anything from anyone who really wants to know. I guess I’m jaded, but I figure the government and major corps, at the very least, have whatever online data about me that they care to gather. I’m quite aware of the Big Brother scenarios that come to mind, but I’m just not going to allow myself to become paranoid over it. The ONLY thing Ed Snowden ever said that I agreed with is that our privacy is a thing of the past. But then, I knew that already.

The government has been collecting data on us for many, many years. I don’t think they’re doing anything much different now; it’s just that the technology has gotten so much more sophisticated. Over time, as technology advances, the government will even further tresspass into our private lives and become more and more intrusive. On the corporate side Google, as well as many other major corps, are currently investing significantly in what’s called the “Internet of Everything”. Talk about an intrusive violation of privacy, this one takes the cake. More and more our household appliances will come equipped with a standard network interface to send data over the internet. They’ll also be able to talk to each other. Now, in this case I can see possible Constitutional issues! When my toaster and refrigerator start plotting against me, that’s the day paranoia sets in.

I wish I had the answers, but I don’t. As our technology continues to explode at lightning speed, I wonder if we humans can evolve fast enough to use it wisely. If not, then we have a problem...

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: JHumm
Maybe the question should be why does the government feel the need to take privacy away everyone?
Just because you aren't hiding something are you OK with people watching every thing you do?

Well,it could save a lot of lives if they were to say, catch some people planning an attack or something.

Lets say they do catch someone planning an attack, but hasn't yet broken any laws. Planning anything you want is perfectly legal provided you stay clear of conspiracy laws. Do you support the state taking actions against them for what they might do in the future even though they haven't yet done anything wrong? If you don't, then what's the point in violating peoples privacy in the first place? If you do, if the government says you have the capability to assassinate a world leader they're entitled by their own argument to convict you for something you haven't done.

originally posted by: Hefficide

Your right to privacy does not include statements made publicly - which internet posts would count as. Now if you keep a journal on your computer or are texting somebody in a private conversation and that gets used against you, without a warrant it would be a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Which, BTW, the NSA is actively violating every second of every day. But so is Bing, Google, Facebook, AIM, etc.

That's because the constitution doesn't apply to actions between people and corporations. Instead it is handled entirely by contract law which isn't equipped to handle that. It was a bit of an oversight on the founders part, but something that there's no political will to change.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Maybe the 5th applies more than the 4th.

There have been many cases over this with people accused of crimes they don't need to hand over a password because it would be a 5th amendment violation. There is no clear ruling on this established, it has been pretty much 50/50 in the courts.

Oddly enough the 3rd is starting to apply more and more as the government uses your devices to monitor you.

Here apparently...

Source

I will have to look into the original source of privacy laws, I suspect its the Magna Carta but may be mistaken.
A little reading is required.

I dont know how I forgot about it, but in the UK the data protection act is suppose to protect our privacy.
That has never prevented our information being sold on to private interests though. Traffic accident details being passed to insurance companies for instance. It doesnt seem to have prevented civil servants leaving huge databases of private personal information on public transport either.

If you just go to the wiki for privacy law, there is a lot of information. Also you need to see the information relevant to whichever country you are in.

en.wikipedia.org...