This is in India, but coming soon to a country near you (or the one you are in already).
I don’t get why they never suggest making it completely public every email, phone call and bank transaction of politicians and judges then… also, please, force them to wear a chip so we can always know their location… it’s ok to give it some hours of delay for security reasons, we just need to know where you have been to, no need to worry if you have nothing to hide.
Of all the people in the world that need or should have it mandatory to have round the clock public surveillance … it should be our political leaders
They claim to be working for the people … yet the people never really know what the fuck these leaders are doing
Blowing Bubba not good enough for you?
We still don’t know who bubba is. Is he Bill Clinton? A horse? A fictional shrimp tycoon? Who knows?
Always bad when the net policy is made by old people which confuse an remote control with an smartphone.
I see a lot of “camera’s in their bedroom” arguments.
That’s a bit unfair, because the Indian government doesn’t have camera’s installed in your bedroom.May I instead suggest to Indians to buy Huawei/ZTE phones, routers or camera’s in your own bedroom that point outside to public places?
I mean the public has nothing to hide right?
Right?I may have nothing to hide, but I have absolutely NOTHING I want any govt to see.
I wouldn’t want people to know what financial transactions I had in 2008, not because they were suspicious, but because the type of person who wants to know should scare anyone. Imagine if someone came up to you and listed every grocery item you bought in the last ten years I would be very concerned.
Ugh, so tired of this old argument. Nothing to hide doesn’t mean everything to show. There, now let’s get on with our lives.
Back in the late 90s when people started saying that to me, I’d just say ok, get naked RIGHT NOW. What, now you’ve got something to hide?
A few people took me seriously from that but it usually just fell short.
It isn’t the best way to say it. A better way is ‘show me all your electrical bills from the past . Months, also I want to know how much you weigh right now and I want you to tell me again in three months’.
It will be just as offensive but carry more weight. Also if they blow up in your face just calmly reply with ‘what? Is there something wrong? Maybe your health is declining and your job needs to be taken by a healthier person? Are you running a growing operation? Is that why your electric bill struck a nerve?’
Hmmm. Wonder how much they have to hide
I have a lot of things I want to hide from every single government.
Damn straight. I mean people in the US who live in states were weed is legal might end up crossing statelines to places where weed is still illegal. Also many people who live in countries that have either decriminalized or legalized drugs have forgotten that possession of those drugs in other countries is often very harshly punished.
I have seen multiple accounts of Canadians and Americans going into the UAE with medicinal THC/marijuana on them and not realizing that simple possession of any of that drug is punishable by up to life in prison there. There was a guy a long time ago who was jailed for a long time for literally a microscopic bit of weed on the sole of their shoes. That last one was some utter bullshit. I live in Canada and there are TONS of marijuana smokers and THC users here, I probably have stepped on more than one thing that has had THC or weed in it, so I might have some of the stuff on my clothes/shoes without even knowing it.
‘People with nothing to hide’ don’t exist. All of us have something that we’d like to keep private or even secret.
Sometimes it’s little silly things we do when nobody’s watching, like tasting our pets’ food. Other times it’s porn and what specific kind we read/watch/play. And in a tiny, miniscule minority of cases it’s crime. Even fewer of those cases are crimes that actually hurt anyone.
Depriving 99.99% of the population (the remaining 0.01% are politicians) of basic rights just to pretend you’re stopping crime that 0.001% of the population is comitting. Pretend, because we know it doesn’t even work anyway.
Nearly 25 years of mass, global surveillance by the NSA, CIA and FBI, and they failed to catch even a single terrorist or terrorist-to-be. Meanwhile there’s a public shooting almost every day.
It’s not just about basic human rights or fundamental principles of society. These programs simply don’t work. It’s a waste of resources. The only result is bulk data gathering on the citizens. I wonder what that could be used for…?
And when they did catch mass shooters or terrorists it was usually due to an informant or someone who knew the would-be criminal and reported on them.
Meaning a trick that dates literally to antiquity is still the main way they are thwarted.
If you are doing nothing wrong then you don’t need to hide your face or need guards.
Being private as obidient protects being private as disobidient.
This goes for the supreme court too, right?
What about if a person working for the public sector contacts a journalist about corruption? Or if a nurse contacts a journalist on how bad a hospital (owned by public sector) is controlled? Are those things that are worth hiding? And how should a normal person hide it if everything is monitored?
And what about the future? Even if it is currently legal to be positive to radical ideas such as trans-people, immigration or environment, how will they ensure that a future government doesn’t make one of those things illegal and then comes after people who endorsed the radical idea?
“I have nothing to hide” is such a dumb argument.
Are you always going to have nothing to hide?
Because it’ll be too late to start caring about privacy when you do.
I heard a lawyer argue something like this once in court, regarding the the fourth and fifth amendments:
These laws are not meant to protect the innocent, they are meant to protect criminals. The founding fathers who penned it were traitors and seditionists who fought a war against their own country. They wrote these laws so that guilty people would be able to avoid punishment if proper procedures aren’t followed, and certain rights aren’t upheld.
I’m not sure how much I agree with that, but it was definitely an interesting take.
‘Don’t Talk to the Police’ is about exactly that.
Whoever said that is full of shit. The right to silence was born out of the religious persecution that was rife in Europe in the 16th and 17th century, where coerce confessions and forcing people to incriminate themselves, even if it was bullshit, was commonplace. Also religion played a role. Lying in some circumstances was a mortal sin, but at the same time people acknowledged that people would naturally lie in order to protect themselves. So in order to make it possible for people to not commit mortal sins and not lie to authorities, the simple right to not answer questions and not have their silence used against them was eventually mandated.
If people did not have the right to silence, all the authorities have to do is just coerce a confession out of a suspect and not investigate anything else. This happens all the time in China and Japan. Japan technically does have the right to silence in their constitution, but in practice it does not exist. If you refuse to answer questions and clam up during interrogations, they will take it as an admission of guilt and as far as I know, no judge refused that.
In China you are required to answer any ‘relevant’ question posed by police, you only have the right to deny irrelevant questions. So basically if they accuse you of robbing and murdering some shopkeeper, you have to give an account of yourself, but if they ask you what you had for lunch today, you can decline to answer that question. Stupid, but it is what it is.
The right to silence was born out of the religious persecution that was rife in Europe in the 16th and 17th century, where coerce confessions and forcing people to incriminate themselves, even if it was bullshit, was commonplace
I think that’s what he was talking about. His argument is that the Founders did things that could incriminate themselves to their old government, and there were no protections in place to shield them from, for instance, self incrimination. The ‘validity’ of the law, I think, isn’t particularly germane.
The problem is this: You don’t know what you need to hide or that you even needed to hide it until it is too late.
Look at what is going on in the United States right now, LGBTQ rights are taking a massive beating. While hate crime laws are still in place, that is not a guarantee. Transpeople who revealed they are trans under safer conditions can’t take that shit back when someone like Trump and his cronies are in power and abso-fucking-lutely will put transpeople in extermination camps.
I, like many people on many Lemmy platforms, have been anti-Trump for a very long time. I thought Trump was an absolute fool well before his 2015 bid for presidency and I was honest to god shocked that he was taken seriously and actually won! Now basically any criticism of Trump is being prosecuted and Trump critics can and have been violently attacked.
I made numerous posts all over the internet criticizing and mocking Trump. Many have been made using temporary email, but my OPSEC online was eased into, meaning there was a lot of stuff from the past that I used under ‘real’ emails. My facebook page, which I never wanted (my family made it for me without any concern of what I wanted many years ago) is still active even though I cannot remember the last time I logged in and posted, and it does contain anti-fascist, anti-Trump comments and posts. Deleting the FB page might make denial a little easier, but if they decide to demand any information from FB (who will comply without a warrant) they will see it.
Given that the United States WILL NOT ‘go back to normal’ once Trump kicks the bucket, there is no telling how the regime would use this data against its opponents.
Supreme Court outlaws clothes. What criminal acts are hiding in those robs? Only the guilty would hide it
This is in India, but coming soon to a country near you
It came here first
here
Which is…?
