[samd]

Every American has to ask themselves, "Is this worth it?" Are the plots stopped and the lives saved worth the loss of privacy, the loss of trust and good will internationally, and most frightening of all, the unprecedented power this gives the government?

I don't think anyone can reasonably say that it is.

[uptown]

How about the loss of creativity? I feel that one of the long-term consequences of being constantly watched is that you learn to act in less experimental ways. You take fewer risks, and reduce your actions to what's "safe".

Ask yourself - how easy would it be to do your job if somebody you didn't know or trust was sitting behind you evaluating every decision you made.

In my opinion, the financial and societal implications of a populous that behaves strictly to conform for fear of consequence, translates to slower innovation, less technological advancement, and will have a long term negative economic impact.

[mikhailt]

It's not every American, it's every human being. This isn't just happening in US but most likely in every democratic country as well. We're not special or unique in this area, yes we should be leading the world in terms of how to protect our privacy but we haven't led in that area for decades. So I'm not surprised about this.

Now, as for the question. The problem is after 9/11, everything changed. People did task the government to prevent further 9/11 attacks and sadly, they can only do that by doing what they're doing now. IMO, 9/11 wasn't the point of what the terrorists were doing, but the aftermath of it.

I'm the man who believes that we don't deserve security if we use it to justify the loss of our rights. However, that belief is easily shaken when and if my family are harmed in an attack that could've been foiled, and my first reaction would be, why didn't the government stop it? So, you can see the problem right here.

Nothing is worth losing our rights over, we fought so many wars to protect it, suffered so many loss as the result of the wars, and yet, we're giving them up easily for terrorism.

[nwh]

> Now, as for the question. The problem is after 9/11, everything changed.

I'm not from the US, and this sort of statement really baffles me every time I hear it. There's nothing remarkable about the events really, probably more people get killed by fridges falling on them than by a terrorist attack, yet nobody seems to modify their lifestyle to avoid standing in front of them.

Can you explain to me what actually changed about the American lifestyle? I genuinely have no idea.

[anigbrowl]

Don't be obtuse. Of course it's remarkable, the only other reason you ever hear of 3000+ people being killed in the space of a few hours is when there's some large natural disaster like an earthquake.

Now, if you can't work out how the largest terrorist attack in history might have change the stance of the world's largest military superpower, with a knock-on effect on everyone else, then you're not trying. When I saw the events of 9-11 happening on TV I immediately knew it was going to result in years of war, just like the collapse of the Soviet Union obviously led to a de-escalation of military posture.

probably more people get killed by fridges falling on them than by a terrorist attack

Not at the same time, and crucially, not at someone else's pleasure. I'm not American either but the notion that people wouldn't or shouldn't react to something like this is just asinine. Frankly, I'm surprised it didn't lead to greater change in the US than it actually has.

[kamjam]

Not wanting to sound like an ahole but...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_an...

As for the parent comment, I know it changed everything. But beyond the initial years, how has it changed your life over, say the past 2 years. Is everything back to normal? How long do you continue changing your behaviour and living in fear? (I realise you're not American, just asking)

[tptacek]

Your argument is that Hiroshima didn't change anything?

[kamjam]

No, your first point. The US has been just as responsible mass death. And of course it changes a lot.

Don't be obtuse. Of course it's remarkable, the only other reason you ever hear of 3000+ people being killed in the space of a few hours is when there's some large natural disaster like an earthquake.

[anigbrowl]

Oh for heaven's sake. It was obvious that I meant during peacetime.

[mrt0mat0]

I agree. I think after 9/11, Americans were emotionally shocked into agreeing to all of this, not thinking what they were giving up. I get that, but it's been over 10 years. We need to snap out of it

[darkarmani]

> The problem is after 9/11, everything changed. People did task the government to prevent further 9/11 attacks and sadly, they can only do that by doing what they're doing now.

There are many ways they can do it. I hate argument from lack of imagination. That's why SCOTUS allows DUI checkpoints: supposedly the police can't do their job without them and they need them for public safety.

[k-mcgrady]

The scary thing is that citizens don't know how many plots these privacy invasions have stopped and therefore can't have an informed opinion on the matter and can't decide to fight back against these invasions of privacy. I'm sure plenty of plots have been stopped but would they still have been stopped without this information?

[dwild]

The scary thing is that it's possible. Personally I don't care of what they collect because I don't fear the present government. However I fear that any big entities can do the same or that any malicious group could infiltrate the government to get access to these data (or collect more).

The fact that we consider our online privacy as granted is the scary part.

[aryastark]

There is a fundamental difference between expecting privacy on the Internet, and the government actively collecting all data on all people and compiling a massive database linking all of this data together.

No one should expect privacy. There are sketchy ISPs, sketchy mail providers, hosting providers, etc.

But a few hackers collecting email from a few individuals is not the same as a massive database that links everything in entire world in one nice package. A few random hackers in Russia do not have the political machinery or military machinery of the US government. They generally don't care that you're pro-gay rights (or whatever). They aren't going to try to punish you for your political views. They probably just want money or to defraud you in someway.

The US government, however, wants to control you.

[irishcoffee]

> ...a massive database that links everything in entire world in one nice package.

Are you on facebook? Were you ever on facebook?

[aryastark]

Since when could facebook crush dissent and political movements with military force?

[irishcoffee]

Glad you saw my point. Unfortunate you chose to ignore it.

[anigbrowl]

The US government, however, wants to control you.

[Citation needed]

[chockablock]

I also fear that the availability of such extensive records on all citizens makes it more likely that an abusive government might come to power. I.e. what Snowden referred to as 'turnkey totalitarianism'.

[samstave]

The only reason you don't fear them is because you don't value your freedom enough.

[irishcoffee]

> The fact that we consider our online privacy as granted is the scary part.

Ignorant, actually.

'Privacy on the internet' is an oxymoron.