|
|
|
|
|
by whinythepooh
2396 days ago
|
|
> What do people really feel? They probably feel being stalked. They must be anxious and paranoid. > On a final note, the few people in US that scoff at surveillance are the same people who line up to get $1600 smart phones Like they have a choice not to have a "smart" phone. Like with dumb-phone they can avoid cell-tower tracking, voice recording. The people that scoff at surveillance are an indicator that something is broken. State and corporate stalking must stop. |
|
I don't think there's any kind of cell phone that can avoid being triangulated. I believe it has to do with call routing.
If that mechanism was completely removed, wouldn't there be no way for us to get phone calls, and calls would drop between towers.
Wouldn't a better way of exploring this be to begin at who is accessing the data and why? Businesses have a legitimate case to access their own information to provide a better experience, at the very least.
Also if it's a criminal / national security purpose, what's wrong with the idea of a big data / hay stack warrant, in certain circumstances? Isn't there some situations where it'd clearly make sense?
> The people that scoff at surveillance are an indicator that something is broken.
While there's probably always a case to improve things, when I read conversations on data privacy, I feel many don't want to draw nuance into the technical and legal specifics.
Regardless of society, isn't there always a certain kind of person, due to their upbringing, feels persecuted, though? Isn't there also a type of person who just raises a stink out of pure catharsis? Aren't they almost always ignorant of basics behind the law or technology of what they rant about, often both?
If it was really a sincere thing, why not go into details: e.g. For instance, GPS'ing a vehicle. State or federal law? What predicate / proof is needed? Is there a notification or redress? How long does it last? Any scoping/minimization? Is it supervised judicially or administratively?
While I think of it, maybe there's a reason these things are kept ambiguous, I guess in every country: I don't think people want organized criminal enterprises like mobsters, spies, drug lords, and terrorists gaming the system.
> State and corporate stalking must stop.
I don't think all government surveillance is the same. In most cases they seek authorization to access a private businesses data some how.
If someone is a "normal" consumer, a hospital patient, etc. I don't think the conversation is the same anymore. Wouldn't this be what most normal people care about?