Intel Official: Expect Less Privacy

From the O.P.:

// ... a top intelligence official says it is time
that people in the United States changed their
definition of privacy ... //

//Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, ... //

So what was this intelligence official saying?

What part of privacy do you need that doesn't
require anonymity?

(come on guys, lets have some answers to that, eh?)


I just taught a 15-year-old to drive.
He really never did figure out what it meant
when I said: "the driver's license is given
by the State of Oklahoma to only those whom
the State of Oklahoma wants to give
the driver's license."
Hopefully my 25-year-old driver has figured
that out by now. There is NO anonymity
allowed on the public roads (and other
public places). Every driver is responsible
for what they do while driving (and parking,
for that matter). I don't like tinted windows
where one cannot see who is driving &
cannot make eye contact with them
(sometimes the earliest warning they are about
to do something stupid is the eyes).

I fought AOL for 1984-2004 because they
thought that their service assured anonymity
on-line. Now they claim to be anti-anonymous
folks??? There should be no anonymity on
the internet - everybody has to be accountable
for everything they do. Now what does our
constitutional right to privacy mean?
'Privacy' does NOT mean 'anonymity' on-line
or on-road/in-public-place.

Privacy was always highly overrated anyway.
As a Baptist I recommend responsibility
instead of privacy.

 

you're wrong on this one, Ed.

The government can use your own personal information against you.

All you need is a dishonest gov't worker.

Or some incorrect information.

Or an idiot with an agenda.

Or a bad computer program.

Or someone who's stolen your SSN.

Or a host of other things.

If we are not vigilant in protecting our privacy, we will reap many severe consenquences. Healthcare, taxes, travel restrictions, even our criminal record.

Sorry...we don't disagree often...but I can't disagree with you more on this.

 

Depends on who's rating it I suppose. I'd give it 8/10. You?

Btw, there is no way of closely regulating the internet on a large scale. Or roads. Or anything else. Hence the age old "don't complain when you get a ticket for driving 5 mph over the limit b/c there's been dozens of times you drove 15 mph over the limit and weren't caught."

 

What do you have against Baptists?

Holding us to such a high standard.

 

Baptists have been held to high standards
since in the Bible:

James 3:1 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition):
My brethren, be not many masters,
knowing that we shall receiue
the greater condemnation.

Or in 21st Century (2001-2100) English:

James 3:1 (TNIV = Today's New International
Version)
Not many of you should presume to be teachers,
my brothers and sisters, because
you know that we who teach will
be judged more strictly.

 

It was a joke, ED. :BangHead:

 

http://www.legal-workforce.org/social-security-not-way-track-illegals

There are others as well.

I'm surprised you didn't know about this.