We have a PIRACY problem, not a PRIVACY problem online.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

Last edited Thu Aug 8, 2013, 09:38 PM - Edit history (1)

And for anyone who doubts that, what is my cell phone number?

My Birthday?

My Social Security Number?

That is called PRIVACY.

What we have is a PIRACY problem, and what's worse is that our own tax dollars are funding it.

How do we make the PIRATES stop?

ON EDIT: I am NOT speaking of copyright violations. I am referring to the US gov spying on everyone, essentially STEALING or PIRATING e.g. ILLEGAL COPYING of all our personal, PRIVATE information.

[Rex]

1. .

Kewl story bro!

[Cali_Democrat]

2. The NSA is on to you. Be careful

Echo echo tango alpha charlie kilo foxtrot delta

The beaver is in the basket. I repeat, the beaver is in the basket.

Over and out.

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. If you put any of those things on the Internet...

they are no longer private...LOL Better scrub your Facebook page!

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

5. I and many others put them out over the internet all the time, and you don't know them

case closed.

[VanillaRhapsody]

7. that proves it is?????

Wow you are seriously deluded...

Because everyone doesn't know your phone number....you think you have privacy?

Sorry....but you are wrong...
case closed.

[Rex]

8. I agree, it sounds like how a little child would argue their case.

nt.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

12. Yeah, same challenge goes to you, too.

What's my mother's maiden name?

Or if that's too tough, explain to me EXACTLY how the internet is inherently unsafe.

Take your time.

[Rex]

15. Why would I explain anything to the likes of you?

No thanks, I like watching you embarrass yourself on DU. Please keep it up, a child could make a better argument than you do.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

16. cop-out

and personal insults... what were you saying about a child again?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

35. personal insults are not tolerated here

please do NOT even try to disrupt this thread, or you will be asked politely to leave.

Thank you

Not lets discuss!

[Bobbie Jo]

117. Oh FFS

Did Admin take the day off and leave you the keys?

Pffffffffft.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

118. ah, more content free nonsense

Thanks for helping illustrate my point.

[Bobbie Jo]

121. You have no point.

Understand?

Thank you for continuing to illustrate your full range of batshit.

[VanillaRhapsody]

22. It is inherently unsafe because for example someone could get those

if they wanted to target you and you put them on the Internet.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

29. They are already online

But they remain private.

That doesn't sound "ihherently" unsafe to me... Im not sure that word you keep using "ihherently" means what you think it means.

[VanillaRhapsody]

31. the fact that you keep saying that they are safe publically on the internet

proves you don't know the Internet like you think you do...good luck with that. Me....I keep what I want private...NOT on the Internet.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

43. OK. SO you never purchase anything online?

Work from home?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

70. Bueller

[VanillaRhapsody]

89. Never said that....I just am not under the illusion that it is safe!

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

93. ipso facto, you must certainly NOT consider it INHERENTLY unsafe then.

Thank you for illustrating my point.

[Downwinder]

40. Probable available here:

http://www.ancestry.com/

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

45. So, you can't answer the question, either.

Understandable, as the internet is not inherently insecure.

Which is the point of the OP, however we do have a PIRACY problem, and the question is how to address it.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

11. Yep.

Otherwise no one in their right mind would do ANY business online.

And only a FOOL would not recognize all the business that is conducted online.

If they thought that the internet was INHERENTLY insecure do you seriously think they, and government, would be online?

Think about it...

[VanillaRhapsody]

10. Grok this "Internet Expert"

Internet users obtain Internet access through an Internet service provider (ISP). All data transmitted to and from users must pass through the ISP. Thus, an ISP has the potential to observe users' activities on the Internet.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

14. That's why we encrypt private information.

next

[VanillaRhapsody]

23. Who do you think wns the strongest encryption?

and you somehow think "encryption" is the answer....encryption CAN and IS broken all the time...The Internet is NOT private

[darkangel218]

4. Pirates dont hurt you.

Someone else, with 3 letters can though.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

6. Yes they do, but they can be prosecuted for their crimes

What do we do about the other PIRATES with the 3 letters though?

[darkangel218]

9. sue their asses!!

They're not immune to the laws of the land!!!

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

13. Agreed, and exactly what the ACLU has been trying to do for years now

Hopefully it is true that Snowden has names of folks who were spied on so they can finally get standing in court.

[PowerToThePeople]

18. No one here is with the NSA (that we know of)

Seeryusly stoopid post

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

21. This is too funny! pointing out some basic internet FACTS and you are reduced to insults?

:shakes-head:

[PowerToThePeople]

24. have you missed the last week or two of conversation?

I do not believe a single person ever claimed that "random internet person can get all of your infoz."

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

37. Have you missed the point of the OP?

No one is talking about "random internet person"

[VanillaRhapsody]

32. You would NEED to have some basic Internet FACTS before you tried to point some out!

[Agschmid]

25. You caught me... shit.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

20. More personal insults?

What, did this op strike some sort of nerve?

[Agschmid]

27. You both should chill out.

No personal insults from me.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

39. Excuse me?

I am the one being insulted on this thread from the very beginning and I need to "chill out"?

I think those who have come here to disrupt and insult need to leave.

Thank you.

[Agschmid]

48. When you post flamebait...

you will get flamed. And some of the insults have been hidden... all on the same team here so no need to go all out.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

49. Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Last edited Thu Aug 8, 2013, 09:17 PM - Edit history (1)

And I am glad the disrupters with nothing whatsoever to contribute are being asked to leave, as I do not want this thread to be disrupted.

Thank you.

[LanternWaste]

123. Given that that so many reject the premise, you then have two options

Given that that so many reject the premise, you seem to have two options... one: everyone is correct, you have egg on your fence, yet may still bow out with dignity; or two: double-down, deny that other valid possibilities exist other than yours, contend that all disagreement with your contention are merely insults, and pretend the disagreements "prove" your point in a fit of petulant self-validation.



However, as so many people simply rationalize an untenable premise rather than accepting fault, I have a gut feeling it will not end well at all...

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

124. I see a third option

Continue to challenge those who make false charges eg internet is inherently not private and ignore those with content free post, and ignore the others who only have childish insults (which are the bulk)

[VanillaRhapsody]

26. Not just groups with 3 letters...

Following a decision by the European Union’s council of ministers in Brussels, in January, 2009, the UK's Home Office adopted a plan to allow police to access the contents of individuals' computers without a warrant. The process, called "remote searching", allows one party, at a remote location, to examine another's hard drive and Internet traffic, including email, browsing history and websites visited. Police across the EU are now permitted to request that the British police conduct a remote search on their behalf. The search can be granted, and the material gleaned turned over and used as evidence, on the basis of a senior officer believing it necessary to prevent a serious crime. Opposition MPs and civil liberties advocates are concerned about this move toward widening surveillance and its possible impact on personal privacy. Says Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights group Liberty, “The public will want this to be controlled by new legislation and judicial authorisation. Without those safeguards it’s a devastating blow to any notion of personal privacy.”[81]

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

33. Like i said PIRACY. Good thing us Americans have the 4th Amendment

Reminds me of that quote though... "locks are made for honest people"

But with that kind of argument, ANYTHING is inherently insecure/not private.

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. Here's some history for ya...

since you think "encryption" makes you all warm and fuzzy and safe:

The FBI's Magic Lantern software program was the topic of much debate when it was publicized in November, 2001. Magic Lantern is a Trojan Horse program that logs users' keystrokes, rendering encryption useless to those infected.


THAT was then....guess what....the technology is even better

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

34. You are speaking of PIRACY, not PRIVACY

There is a HUGE difference.

[PowerToThePeople]

41. Ok, hold on. I May actually be getting your point with this post...

Are you eluding that our keystrokes or telephone conversations have intrinsic copyright protection when the words are said or the symbols typed? And with that, if someone intercepts and stores that data, they they are infringing our copyrights to that data?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

54. Close, and there is a sub-thread going on, too

1. PRIVACY - is well established online, and if anyone doubts that, they can visit almost any web site online and find a link to their privacy policy. And if anyone violates your privacy (online or off) e.g. criminals/crackers/PIRATES whatever bad actor name you are comfortable with, can and are PROSECUTED when they VIOLATE a person's right to privacy.

2. PIRACY - is the act of STEALING ones private personal information and sharing it with others. Which is how the current illegal, unprecedented SPYING activities by our own gov can be characterized.

3. INTERNET - the internet is in no way inherently insecure/not-private. That is simply untrue. And people throw that around to try and argue that there is nothing that can be done against the gov stealing our private personal information, since we, according to that false theory, have forfeited our RIGHT to privacy simply by posting our data online, or according to some (one even in this thread) even having it on our computers.

Hopefully that clears things up.

[PowerToThePeople]

56. I understand what you are trying to get at.

I hope this thread is still going later when I get back. Maybe someone else will explain while I am gone. While your statements may appear true to you, they are in fact ALL FALSE STATEMENTS.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

61. I think I made my points pretty clear.

And this thread will be in your personal posts record so please feel free to qualify your, until then, mysterious argument.

[PowerToThePeople]

71. Reply

1. PRIVACY - is well established online, and if anyone doubts that, they can visit almost any web site online and find a link to their privacy policy. And if anyone violates your privacy (online or off) e.g. criminals/crackers/PIRATES whatever bad actor name you are comfortable with, can and are PROSECUTED when they VIOLATE a person's right to privacy.

2. PIRACY - is the act of STEALING ones private personal information and sharing it with others. Which is how the current illegal, unprecedented SPYING activities by our own gov can be characterized.

3. INTERNET - the internet is in no way inherently insecure/not-private. That is simply untrue. And people throw that around to try and argue that there is nothing that can be done against the gov stealing our private personal information, since we, according to that false theory, have forfeited our RIGHT to privacy simply by posting our data online, or according to some (one even in this thread) even having it on our computers.

1.Privacy policies of websites do not have ANY legal weight. No one is going to get prosecuted for violating your privacy. They will get prosecuted for illegally accessing a computer system.

2. Piracy is (as I understand it) is just another term for copyright infringer. It has nothing to do with your personal info.

3. The internet is 100% insecure unless you are encrypting your data. ANY machine in the path of your data can capture and read EVERYTHING you do.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

73. Wrong on all 3

1. If you STEAL my personal private information, you will be prosecuted. And no you don't have to break into a computer to do it. Phishing, man in the middle, etc. But of course if you do, that will be ANOTHER charge against you.

2. Piracy is also known as STEALING, and illegal copying (but why are we splitting hairs?)

3. You just contradicted yourself. Ask yourself, how is Personal, private information usually transmitted online? That's right, it's encrypted. The internet is NOT inherently insecure/not private, cause IF it was NO ONE, thats right NO ONE would do ANY business on it.

Now, can we get to the real question of the OP?

What are we going to do about it?

Thank you.

[PowerToThePeople]

81. end-to-end encryption.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

82. oh, well, wait... WOW, now that explains EVERYTHING

nevermind

[VanillaRhapsody]

90. If you put that information on the Internet...it is not private anymore..

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

94. then what's my credit card number?

[Agschmid]

98. That's not how this works...

And I'd your point is that the NSA or "other" knows he information than it makes perfect sense that a DUer would not know your credit card information.

Your post is flame bait, it makes no sense, it is NOT logical. You in fact have now become a disruptor for the rest of us... It's does get old quickly.

And to the jury who will most likely jury this post. There are no personal attacks included here, I have no malice directed towards this poster, just frustration due to their clear flame baiting. It is not fair, it makes my DU experience... well disrupted.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

103. you don't say

[Agschmid]

105. FLAME BAIT CRAP OP. n/t

And if this is juried...

Read the whole thread and you will agree... This poster is out of control.

[Bobbie Jo]

119. But....

He's a flippin' PATRIOT, doncha know?

I concur with your assessment.

[PowerToThePeople]

30. Here is a link

www.google.com/search?&q=most+popular+torrents

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

36. Sorry, but blind links are not welcome.

[PowerToThePeople]

38. you have a tough time with terminology, huh?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

42. why not say what you are thinking in plain english?

Last edited Thu Aug 8, 2013, 07:32 PM - Edit history (1)

I already told you I don't click on blind links ever, and I often don't click on links even after I know what they are linking to, but I'll be the judge of that.

so, please explain.

[PowerToThePeople]

44. it was not a blind link

The link text is exactly the same as the link location. There is no "blind link" there.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

47. sure it was

there was no description whats so ever.

And I even asked for one, but you still don't want to provide one, not that I would click on it anyway, but it does reveal a lack of common curtesy.

So, unless you want to say what's actually on your mind I will not be replying to any more of your content free posts.

Thank you

[lumberjack_jeff]

60. I, being a guy who calls himself "lumberjack" was able to cleverly infer a number of useful bits.

The link was to "google.com" which as I understand it, a searchy-thing.
The text next to that are what they call "search terms".
Unless I miss my guess, those search terms "most" and "popular" and "torrents" will direct the user to web pages associated with "most popular torrents".

Edgar Rice Burroughs should have written about me, since I can detect the nefarious intent of even blind hyperlinks.

Of all the problems in this world, piracy is not on my radar, and efforts to mitigate it cause much more harm than good.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

63. You guys are confusing my use of the term "PIRACY" with copyright infringement

I will update my post to me more clear, thank you.

[msanthrope]

116. Good job, Kreskin! nt

[hobbit709]

46. If you can't tell where a posted link goes, how do you ever find out anything?

I guess you want a 3 paragraph detailed description for any link before you click on it.

So you're saying "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with any facts" with your attitude about links.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

50. Sorry, it is just common internet courtesy

Can we stay on topic, please.

[hobbit709]

51. Which topic?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

55. Nevermind

please do not disrupt here, you are doing it poorly.

Thank you.

[hobbit709]

72. Me disrupt. Better take a good look in the mirror

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

74. Do you have anything to contribute to this thread?

Otherwise, thank you for illustrating my point.

[hobbit709]

75. Do you besides posting alert bait.

[Agschmid]

76. +1.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

78. I'll take that as a no

cya

[hobbit709]

79. So do I

[Koios]

52. Send me ...

... an email from your personal account and in little time and for about $15 I could have all that information and more.

So indeed, privacy rights are going down the drain, IMO, and in fact.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

57. Giving away your personal data is not the same thing.

With the government PIRATING your personal private information, yes your rights are going down the drain.

So, what can we do about it?

[Koios]

64. Be stentorian ...

... in our demand for it to stop, especially from the Left, since Obama a) promised us (supporters) he'd end the practice; and b) Obama seems to be only scaling it up.

And now's the time, since the Bush-apologists who defended it when W was doing it, are obviously now opposed to it since Obama is president. So the only thing getting in the way of huge and united voter backlash is our side: liberals, who are Obama-apologists.

The Pols run for cover in a heartbeat when we're united and outraged. Consider how long moneyed interests on Wall Street have had woodies for getting their hands on the SS cash flow, and pouring big bux into lobbying for it. But when any in DC suggest SS-privatization, the backlash is immediate and overwhelming. Also the Internet Privacy thing, that big money tried to push through. But the voter backlash sent them running for cover at light speed.

Same on this. If we care about our rights, we have to get pissed off, royally, when they're taken away, regardless of who is in the White House.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

69. Agreed 100%

I strongly believe that education is critical in this struggle, especially dispelling the myths and propaganda.

[VanillaRhapsody]

95. Apparently you don't know that you can pay people to do background checks online...

and find out all sorts of stuff about you....Have you ever googled yourself dude?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

100. zzzZZZzzz

[Agschmid]

101. That was productive huh?

[lumberjack_jeff]

53. Did you know that anyone who sings "Happy Birthday to You" in a restaurant is a pirate?

I don't think we have a piracy problem, and in fact our tax dollars are spent finding new and clever ways for corporations to exploit us with patent, trademark and copyright law.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

58. That has nothing to do with your personal private data

I am not talking about copyrights here.

Just to be clear.

[lumberjack_jeff]

62. What you are calling "piracy" is better understood as malicious hacking or identity theft. nt

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

68. Yep, and that's exactly how I would charecterize the illegal spying

[Koios]

66. Not true ...

... sing any song you wish. But do not sell recordings of it without a royalty agreement allowing you to distribute recorded copies.

Also, do not play it on a radio or a record player, in a restaurant or similar business without paying ASCAP fees.

[lumberjack_jeff]

67. Singing in a restaurant is "a public performance"

http://www.restaurants.com/blog/can-restaurants-sing-the-happy-birthday-song/#.UgQvtI3VC9E

[HiPointDem]

59. kr

[wandy]

65. Na, no worry at all we'll just say we don't know you.............

Ha ha..

[limpyhobbler]

77. The current controversies are mostly that the service providers are _giving_ the info to the gov't.

The government comes knocking with a warrant, or a subpoena, or a national security letters. The the service provider gives the info. Just like a bank or a bookstore or library would give the info.

I can't call it stealing exactly but it's a corruption of the legal process or something. They might also be stealing some.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

80. I'd argue that the bigger one is them stealing/pirating/illegal copying of our data

but i do agree that it is also a serious issue that the companies are not telling them to fuck off.

[limpyhobbler]

84. How are they stealing/pirating/copying?

What are you referring to?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

87. illegal copying

Have you not heard about the NSA whistleblowers, yet?

Then you are in luck, here is an excellent resource that links to all the most recent revelations...
http://www.theguardian.com/world/the-nsa-files

But be sure to google "nsa whistleblowers" to learn about the many other patriots who spoke up.

make sure you are sitting down when reading ALL of them.

You're welcome

[limpyhobbler]

92. Oh ok. So we're both talking about the same thing, just calling it by different names.

You're calling it stealing or illegal.

I was calling it "legal" but actually I agree it is illegal, but that's a matter of controversy as well.


I thought you meant the government was breaking into service provider machines without permission, or breaking into home computers without a warrant, or something like that.

They might be.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

97. So, now that you're on the same page...

maybe... you can address the question in the OP?

Thanks

[limpyhobbler]

102. well

I pretty much agree mass surveillance is bad.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

104. so

no idea how to stop it?

[Agschmid]

106. What's your idea...

Please share.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

110. Sorry, you are just a disrupter

who has disrupter poorly, and I don't appreciate all the personal attacks even after i have tried to be reasonable and fair with you.

[Agschmid]

111. There have been no personal attacks from me.

[limpyhobbler]

109. Not really

Call Congress, protest, vote, donate money groups like EFF, ACLU or candidates like Rush Holt.

Those are kind of the ways to try to change it.

[Agschmid]

112. They are looking for something else...

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

113. I agree 100%

I also feel that word of mouth education of the issues is critically important, too.

Thanks for sharing

[arely staircase]

83. keep ringing those bells!11

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

85. oh, look another disrupter... disrupting poorly

Edward Snowden is a modern day Paul Revere with a thumb drive full of news that Tyranny is coming!

Edward Snowden's Dad Calls Him 'Modern Day Paul Revere'
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/edward-snowdens-dad-calls-modern-day-paul-revere/story?id=19554337

Hmmm... who knew how influential a DU meme could be

[Agschmid]

86. Just because people disagree...

Does not make them a disruptor.

Just FYI.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

88. when they post content free posts... ah, yes it does.

just like you have been, so this will be the LAST content free post of your I reply to.

Otherwise, how do think we should go about stopping the totalitarian PIRATES?

[Agschmid]

91. I don't feel they need to be stopped.

In fact I don't think they give a rats ass about what I do on the Internet... It's pretty boring.

Also my information is out there and mostly because I put it there. I'm a millennial we don't really fret about this stuff.

I know it's mind blowing to some.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

96. finally

thank you for your honesty.

too bad you just couldn't come out and say that from the beginning.

but just because you apparently don't give a flying fuck about YOUR privacy, don't expect others to AGREE with your opinion.

fair enough?

[Agschmid]

99. Fair enough.

But then it is fair enough to expect pushback in your thread...

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

107. well

i wouldn't call content free posts, or personal attacks, any kind of legitimate 'push back' or argument, cept maybe on a playground.

and those with the personal attacks, no the rules, they are politely escorted from the thread, the way it not only should be, but must be, if we are to have actual discussion.

now, you have made your case on the op, we agree to disagree, time to MOVE ON.

cya

[Agschmid]

108. No I will be here for a while.

The way it should be is that people can't post threads which lack substance and only cause derision.

Otherwise it seems you are doing this maliciously... And that is not ok.

The only way you get rid of me is by self deleting the post, which is how it should be. I will not personally attack... And I will not insult but I will make it clear I feel you have some odd intentions on his thread.

[arely staircase]

114. then alert on it nt

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

115. Noting their disruption is enough

[Agschmid]

120. You are disrupting GD.