[ExI] Privacy is dead

[The Avantguardian]

--- BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:47 AM, The Avantguardian wrote:
> >
> > What country do you live in Bill? Are you American?
> >
> 
> 
> In the UK, though I have traveled around quite a lot.
> Why is it relevant to this question?

I thought as much. It is relevant because the U.S. federal government defines
encryption software as a "munition" which places it in the same category as
bullets and bombs. It is illegal for someone to send encryption software of
over 64 bit strength out of the country and one technically needs to apply for
a permit before one can even do that. If the U.S. government gets it panties in
a bind over 64 bit encryption, I am not quite certain how it would view
exporting of infinite bit encryption. That may be Guantanamo worthy.
 
> The UK has the most cameras of any country in the world, though there
> is now the beginnings of a reaction against them. i.e millions spent
> for very, very few crimes solved. People are starting to realize that
> it is mostly security theatre and the money could be better spent
> elsewhere..

I have felt sorry for the English people for some time now. Now I see the U.S.
headed down that route and I am worried. Washington DC now possibly has as many
cameras as London.
 
> Like the millions spent on the TSA. Did you know that there are now
> about half a million people on the terrorist watch database in the US?
> So many terrorists, so little time to watch them all.
> And all the people so unfortunate as to have the same name as a
> 'terrorist' are subjected to continual hassles whenever they fly.

Even travellers not on the list are hassled by the TSA. Taking off my shoes and
being herded through security check points every time I fly is a hassle IMO.
Having my luggage rifled through intermittently is a hassle. Living with
perpetual threat level orange is a hassle. The paranoia exhibited by the
government in this regard is staggering and stinks of fear. If the government
is afraid of something that I am not, how can I can I possibly respect it
enough to let it govern me? If the government is breaking the highest law of
the land and then hastily writing new lesser laws that "legalize" their crimes,
how can I possibly trust it enough to govern me? If the government starts
justifying any action, no matter how contemptible, out of irrational fear then
it is a rogue elephant in our midst that threatens to trample our children and
must be dealt with accordingly.  

Governments rule by the consent of the governed and are legitimatized by a
social contract between the government and the people. If the government
defaults on its contractual obligations, why would any rational citizen uphold
his or her end of the bargain? My loyalty is to the Constitution not a bunch of
stuffed shirts that have the temerity to extort money from me to protect me
from dragons, vampires, and bogeymen.


Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"In ancient times they had no statistics so that they had to fall back on lies."- Stephen Leacock