23 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Same goes here with personal surveillance

What is somewhat ironic is that we all want our freedom that the constitution provides us and we push back and rightfully so when those rights are infringed upon, but at the same time we jump to provide personal data on FB including pictures of ourselves and on other social media, and run around with a smart phone that tracks every where we go, and have done all this willingly. And in addition many have provided their DNA to sites like Ancestry.

Martin

Edited May 23, 20206 yr by MartinRex007

8 minutes ago, MartinRex007 said:

What is somewhat ironic is that we all want our freedom that the constitution provides us and we push back and rightfully so when those rights are infringed upon, but at the same time we jump to provide personal data on FB including pictures of ourselves and on other social media, and run around with a smart phone that tracks every where we go, and have done all this willingly.

Couldn't agree more, though many of us that do recognize that risk don't hang our personal lives out there quite so freely.  The fact that our information gets put out there by others that we are essentially required to deal with makes it that much harder.  Case in point, having HIPAA information shared with the public health dept by the health care providers, and then having them in turn share that with law enforcement.

 

10 hours ago, Alan_A said:

Thought we weren't getting political.

The safeguards placed into the FISA system failed.  I am not going to get into who dunnit, why they dunnit, etc--that's politics.  But its clear from recent events that the identity masking safeguards that were codified in 50 USC 36 cannot be relied upon.  It's a systemic failure of the safeguard, and one that is eminently foreseeable.  You don't assign security for the henhouse to a fox.  Any fox.

1 hour ago, birdguy said:

 

 

We are willing to sacrifice lives in war to protect our liberties and freedoms.  Why are we not willing to sacrifice lives in the coronavirus war to protect our liberties and freedoms?

 

Noel

As a person in the military, you decided that you were willing to sacrifice your life for liberty. That's a choice you made for yourself. I'm not sure you get to decide what sacrifice others make. I'm jot willing to sacrifice you. for example.

20 minutes ago, bobbyjack said:

As a person in the military, you decided that you were willing to sacrifice your life for liberty. That's a choice you made for yourself. I'm not sure you get to decide what sacrifice others make. I'm jot willing to sacrifice you. for example.

"We", the collective "we", have had to decide many times over history whether it was worth risking our safety for our freedoms and liberties. 

If "we" ever do decide that answer is no, I suggest that "we" and the grand experiment that is America are finished.

1 hour ago, MartinRex007 said:

What is somewhat ironic is that we all want our freedom that the constitution provides us and we push back and rightfully so when those rights are infringed upon, but at the same time we jump to provide personal data on FB including pictures of ourselves and on other social media, and run around with a smart phone that tracks every where we go, and have done all this willingly. And in addition many have provided their DNA to sites like Ancestry.

Martin, I have not succumbed to the social media craze.  OI am not on FaceBook, twitter, or any other such website.  I only inhabit a couple of flightsim forums like this one.

One evening while watching TV Siri came on.  When I investigated an found out my iPhone listen to everything I say I began to turn it off when not in use.

But on the other hand I would say FaceBook and iPhones can be controlled by the user-subscriber unlike any government surveillance.

Noel

Noel

31 minutes ago, bobbyjack said:

As a person in the military, you decided that you were willing to sacrifice your life for liberty. That's a choice you made for yourself. I'm not sure you get to decide what sacrifice others make. I'm jot willing to sacrifice you. for example.

What Bob Scott said.

Noel

It looks like the concept of peace or safety at any price does have it's adherents.  Maybe they always did.  Let's hope they never become a majority.

Noel

5 minutes ago, birdguy said:

It looks like the concept of peace or safety at any price does have it's adherents.  Maybe they always did.  Let's hope they never become a majority.

Noel

War with a foreign power is one thing. A war with ourselves seems to be quite another. In such a war, it gives me little comfort to know that others are willing to sacrifice me. 

I find it hard to equate a safer at home order with anything like bombs dropping on us. My rights (which have never been absolute) are not being taken away. In this war, there is too much we don't know about the enemy yet, to go charging about insisting on our rights.

1 hour ago, w6kd said:

The safeguards placed into the FISA system failed.  I am not going to get into who dunnit, why they dunnit, etc--that's politics.

With respect - the FISA system is prominent in the news in the US at the moment for partisan reasons.  I'd just like to make sure that that's not a motivation for the reference - because if it was, it would be a bit unfair to rank-and-file forum members, who, because of forum policy, wouldn't be allowed to respond.  That would amount to a sort of first-strike capability on the part of Avsim, and I'd want to push back on that.

If the FISA reference didn't have that motivation, then of course that doesn't apply, and I'll be glad to withdraw the objection, your honor...

21 minutes ago, bobbyjack said:

I find it hard to equate a safer at home order with anything like bombs dropping on us. My rights (which have never been absolute) are not being taken away. In this war, there is too much we don't know about the enemy yet, to go charging about insisting on our rights.

We are talking about CIVIL rights here Bob.  If we a re not prepared to defend them here at home then we will have lost them.  And the time to start defending them is when they are first proposed because once in place they tend to remain forever.

And COVID-19 has been a bomb dropped on us.  And there are casualties and deaths.  An army of scientists and medical professionals are on the front lines trying to get a handle on it.  Meanwhile let's not panic and throw away our liberties because a fraction of a percent of people are coming down with it and a smaller fraction of a percent are dying from it.

Noel

1 minute ago, Alan_A said:

With respect - the FISA system is prominent in the news in the US at the moment for partisan reasons.  I'd just like to make sure that that's not a motivation for the reference - because if it was, it would be a bit unfair to rank-and-file forum members, who, because of forum policy, wouldn't be allowed to respond.  That would amount to a sort of first-strike capability on the part of Avsim, and I'd want to push back on that.

If the FISA reference didn't have that motivation, then of course that doesn't apply, and I'll be glad to withdraw the objection, your honor...

Alan, I took the FISA post as an example of what happens when you surrender a right for the right purpose but it goes awry.  And once in place, no matter how awry it goes, it stays.

Noel

2 hours ago, w6kd said:

I find myself wondering when the New Hampshire flag will be changed to a red banner with a yellow streak up the middle, with the words "Live Free or Die" replaced with "Do What You're Told"

Or changing the words of the 'Do Not Tread on Me' flag to 'Go ahead and stomp on me.'

Noel

1 minute ago, birdguy said:

Alan, I took the FISA post as an example of what happens when you surrender a right for the right purpose but it goes awry.  And once in place, no matter how awry it goes, it stays.

Noel

If that was the case, I'd probably disagree with FISA as an illustration - but I'd be willing to accept that the use of the example isn't partisan.

Just to add another perspective - and perhaps to restore balance to the Force (though we know how that went...) - here's a Pro Publica article about contact tracing.  It favors the old paper-and-shoe-leather method, and is skeptical about the value of cell phone apps and other invasive technologies.  Worth a look.