dan_bk

> If the numbers are comparable, then we figure brown kids have less value than Wall Street bankers?

We all know we do exactly that, even if we don't like to admit it. Our inaction is the proof.

There are thousands of questions like this one that we should have been asking ourselves for a very long time, but never did, on a societal level.

I think you just won the challenge.

How can you trust a product promising privacy when it runs on a closed-source platform (that is further also known to collect data on the user and to be prone to government surveillance)?

Real privacy is only possible on platforms that are 100% open-source.

The best known example for this are bankers. As a rule of thumb, bankers don't go to jail.

John Oliver (Last Week Tonight) has a good round-up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y1ya-yF35g

With the Constitution becoming more and more of a joke recently, we should elect a constitutional scholar as the next President to fix this. /s

> encrypt your life

Absolutely. The problem is: communication is a "network good", you don't do it alone. How do you want the "Facebook people" to understand the gravity of the situation? We all do communicate with Facebook people.

How can a modern society still think it is ok to carry out the death penalty?

Stupidity like this belongs in the Middle Ages, not our times.

For added ROI, visit http://mansionmap.com/ before :-)

It's a cat-and-mouse game, for the time being. Until there's a real solution, use the available tech:

https://prism-break.org/en/

Article in German (original): http://www.nzz.ch/nzzas/nzz-am-sonntag/schweizer-anwalt-fuer...

I've been told it's so that Jack Bauer from CTU Los Angeles can protect us. But you'll have to routinely let him brake all protocols so he can do his job - it's all for own good.

But how are we going to fill the (corporate) prisons then? These wards have families to feed, too!

I was thinking more than 1 person must be thinking this sounds strangely like an invitation for a fat torrent.

...while the rest of society keeps making itself more transparent every day.

> Because MOST people don't mind. You are in the minority, complaining about this. It's quite hopeless, really.

I hope you realize how you sound like an automated GCHQ agent.

Also, it's interesting to see how these posts disappear quickly from the front page.

It reminds me of the "boiling frog" - if you turn the heat up slowly (i.e. climate change) the frog won't react.

And it's still bizarre the gov't put so much emphasis on that event, given the fact that they must have known that the destroyed data was never the only existing copy.

The only reasonable explanation for this seems to be a strategy of intimidation.

Giving a speech to the House of Commons today, the UK Home Secretary, Theresa May, made it clear that, in her view, the powers in the new legislation are still inadequate — saying they “will not tackle the wider problem of declining communications data capability” – bringing back the specter of a more wide-ranging ‘Snoopers’ Charter’ being introduced by a future Tory government.

In other words: They're just warming up.

Real solutions must be entirely de-centralized and open-source. Anything else is bandaid at best.

> but for rich entities with lobbyists it is much easier

I still don't understand why lobbying - a socially accepted form of corruption - still exists, without being questioned. Even more so as, today, everybody knows that 1% control most of the wealth == lobbying == legislation == our lives.

This may very well be the usual "we currently have no plans to enter the market of...", stated a few months or a year before some product/service is launched, in precisely that market.

If you depend on your anonymity, do not use Tor.

Or it's just another political statement to gain/retain voter support, while everything (US-german collaboration regarding mass surveillance) will go on as before.

Seriously, if Germany wants to make a statement, it can start by banning all NSA listening stations on German soil.

Like we shouldn't get our privacy.

Whereas he bought himself a specially isolated penthouse in order to live his open marriage in perfect privacy.

> or has made a huge misjudgement by signalling that they have something to hide

That is obviously a psychological effect that the NSA & Co. welcome very much, maybe even try to use against the rest of us. The question is: Do we want to let such a cheap trick get us?

Next, they'll just filter out those attempts to make noise.

It's a cat-and-mouse game and also needs a solid (i.e. political) solution.

www? Ain't nobody got time fo dat!

RetroShare [0] does this, too, and covers many other communication needs (mailing, chatting, forum, etc.) while being p2p/decentralized/public-key-encrypted/open source.

[0] http://retroshare.sourceforge.net/