| I didn't say it metadata is irrelevant, I said that it is fundamentally different than the content of messages. Trying to derive 'intent' from 'knowing who you talk to' is not possible with any degree of reliability. You can make some minor probabilistic inferences, but that's it. The most important advantages of metatadata are establishing those engaging in criminal networks - which is very salient, in which case I think metadata is the right solution. I have a distant family member (barely related) - who sells cocaine and is a grade A douche-bag/thug/criminal. He beats people. Proudly. I think he was caught because of this - the RCMP was able to establish his network and they took down him and his thug buddies. Guns, beatings, I think a murderer in there. I'm glad they finally got him. 500m from my flat in Montreal, there is a polytechnic school where 11 young men decided to join ISIS - they were caught just before getting on the plane - again, I think that the tech worked the right way here, but again, it's hard to be specific. FYI - even 'socialist utopian paradises' usually have more aggressive policies than this. Sweden, for example, captures 100% of packets leaving/entering the country and look at all o it's contents - as just one example. As a Canadian citizen, I have zero problems with CSIS thus far - there hasn't really been a single case of this information being abused in a manner that affected the lives of a citizen in a negative way. The lack of these cases of abuse is salient. I'm far more concerned about 'other countries' surveillance programs, as a non-US citizen, the NSA is free to capture anything they want about me without really any oversight and that's a little too nefarious. As an operational compromise, I would try to enact the following: CSIS can capture metadat long term, but then to actually access that data - they need a warrant from a judge. This way - my idiot second cousin's rights are protected, but as soon as the RCMP catches a local thug and can access that thug's 'network' - with a warrant, it's shown that my dirtbag cousin's name comes up, with criminal intent easy to identify in ensuing investigation. Similarly with 'terrorism'. A local Imam contacts CSIS and says 'so and so in my congregation is asking about how to join ISIS' - then, with a warrant, CSIS can see who he's communicating with, and with further investigation, get a proper warrant for more information. Somewhere in there, there is a solution, I think. |