There's been a lot of noise in the media about how our civil liberties and privacy are being curtailed in the name of fighting terror. Well, honestly, what's the big deal all about? Or, am I missing the point?
Let's say that I'm moving to the USA.
As a brown-skinned person from India, security agencies may show some interest in me. I won't see a lot of it directly, such as background checks before my visa approval. I may experience an extra security check when I enter the USA (this did not happen the last time I entered the USA). All fine till here? Now, let's deal with the seemingly touchy topic of phone-tapping, and electronic surveillance.
Again, suppose the FBI or agents from Dept of Homeland Defence actually do tap my phone or intercept my emails. I don't think it's a big deal. Unless I'm missing something big here. Examine these.
1. Recording my phone conversations would require some manpower. Even if computers can transcribe the conversations and "red flag" certain phrases, someone will have to go through the transcript, right? Ditto for emails.
Unless the agencies have unlimited manpower, and some extremely bored agents, they would probably monitor me for a while, profile me appropriately, and move on to someone else.
2. Examining my Internet activity will incur some cost to these agencies. They may do it for a while, but soon get bored of checking out what I do on Orkut, Facebook, etc.
3. Ditto for any other form of surveillance.
My point to all you anti-surveillance activists is simple. Unless you're up to something, you have nothing to fear. Stop giving yourself so much credit!
No agency wants to know what you purchased online - unless it's something dangerous.
They don't want to know what sites you visited - unless it teaches you to build bombs, or sympathises with known terror groups.
They don't wanna know who you're trying to pick up online when your girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/husband/etc is not looking - unless you're plotting something.
They certainly don't want to know about how shitty your job is, how irritating that person you met was, how cool that other fellow was, or how amazingly your bike/car goes after the work you did on it.
Unless you're Paris Hilton or someone equally popular (or notorious), nobody wants to know about your life, unless some aspect of it potentially threatens others.
I would gladly sacrifice a little of my privacy, knowing that no agent could possibly be interested in my life once they've determined that I'm not a threat.
Again, I ask, what's the big deal about?!?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Back in the 70s there was a huge manhunt in the states against communists. If you spoke red then you were arrested.
Civil liberties and the right to privacy is essential. It moves to another point like censorship.
Fundamentally, how can someone else - especially - government, decide what is good and bad for society?
In some senses you are correct. however, the problem is that the potential for abuse is immense. Arun has already mentioned the red example as to why too much surveillance is a bad idea, so i shall not repeat it again. However, here is a perspective that i think needs more popularity, purely because it is more practical: your privacy is gone - get over it!
Now, I did not say this, Scott McNealy did. And so did Neal Stephenson. And these are people i respect.
Neal Stephenson had a simple point: your privacy has already been completely eroded - it is now only a sham. The real method of dealing with this, as a society, is a new social contract. His proposal: lets have cameras in each and every public place, everywhere, except the privacy of our homes. Especially important: lets have cameras in places of authority - like all parts of all police stations, jails, govt offices etc. And lets make all these camera recording live and visible to one and all. We thus do away with the privacy sham, but get some degree of privacy at home and a lot of safety and protection against abuse of authority.
the big deal is the fear of that invisible line being crossed.
That's the role of boundaries. To define the limit.
the big deal is : OK So we say yes to this today, so what next tomorrow.
It's the paranoia.
BTW, what's the deal with changing blog names. And how do we figure out where's the next stop? :)
Post a Comment