Everyone is under surveillance now

[bogeyman]

"The US intelligence whistleblower Edward Snowden has warned that entire populations, rather than just individuals, now live under constant surveillance.


“It's no longer based on the traditional practice of targeted taps based on some individual suspicion of wrongdoing,” he said. “It covers phone calls, emails, texts, search history, what you buy, who your friends are, where you go, who you love.”


Snowden made his comments in a short video that was played before a debate on the proposition that surveillance today is a euphemism for mass surveillance, in Toronto, Canada. The former US National Security Agency contractor is living in Russia, having been granted temporary asylum there in June 2013.


The video was shown as two of the debaters – the former US National Security Administration director, General Michael Hayden, and the well-known civil liberties lawyer and Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz – argued in favour of the debate statement: “Be it resolved state surveillance is a legitimate defence of our freedoms.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/03/everyone-is-under-surveillance-now-says-whistleblower-edward-snowden

The NSA's own slogan is "collect it all", so that says everything does it not. And how do the security services and others use the information they obtain from the NSA? What if some of those that have this kind of information are corrupt? Many people have so much technology and use mobile/cell phones and the internet it seems very little privacy is left.

[Matt P]

I watched the Kerry Cassidy Sean Stone interview recently where they were talking about how in the 60's our government had the computing power of what the public had in 2000. I bet even that probably didn't adequately do the difference justice. I'm sure it's safe to say that there is no such thing as privacy anymore, even if you don't use a cell phone, credit cards or a computer. With satellites and other technologies, we're probably all monitored in real time.

Matt

[truth4me]

I watched the Kerry Cassidy Sean Stone interview recently where they were talking about how in the 60's our government had the computing power of what the public had in 2000. I bet even that probably didn't adequately do the difference justice. I'm sure it's safe to say that there is no such thing as privacy anymore, even if you don't use a cell phone, credit cards or a computer. With satellites and other technologies, we're probably all monitored in real time.

MattFirmly agree.

[STR]

I don't understand the need for the expense but whatever. I mean people volunteer so much! They hand it right over man. Look on FaceBook or Twitter. They tell where they are, when, how long they are staying, their plans next month, deaths in the family, when they'll be out of town, why and for how long and over and over they do this. I see it in my own family and friends daily. Why would the NSA or the CIA or the FBI spend a dime when they have these tools already in place and can tell at a glance not only what you are doing but usually where you are located on the planet by the cell or handheld you carry, car you drive, money you carry, bar codes in your wallet and built in scans that tell when you buy and from where and more? There is no reason to do it if you already tell them most of what they want to know.

[T Smith]

They don't care how much money it costs. The more it costs, the less your dollar will buy, which is hardly of any concern to them.

If you were in a game of chess and you knew every move your opponent was going to make next, it wouldn't be too hard to check mate your opponent, even if you were playing against a superior player. You would plan your moves accordingly.

All the data collecting provides exactly that kind of intel for social engineers. Based on complex algorithms and statistical analysis, they have a pretty good idea how we subjects will react en masse in any given situation they throw at us.

[MargueriteBee]

Just stay offline and use cash whenever possible. LOL!

[Dorjezigzag]

It is quite possible that this mass surveillance is less efficient, it is the difference between looking for a needle in a sewing box and a haystack.

qttB6JN4488