On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:42:42AM +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
> On Monday 10 Sep 2007 10:05 am, Venky wrote:
> > Forgive me for a couple of naive questions - but just to clarify
> > things - are you actually okay with the government recording the
> > keystrokes of every person using a cyber cafe, and more
> > importantly, do you buy the argument that national security is
> > inherently more important than individual privacy?
> >
> > For argument's sake, I will accept your position that your bank
> > is just as likely to misuse your personal information as the
> > police are.
>
> Thank you for understanding my point.
>
> I see your question as being in two parts which I will answer separately
Actually, my main question was - "do you buy the argument that
national security is inherently more important that individual
privacy". Based on your response, I presume you do not either.
> >"are you actually okay with the government recording the
> > keystrokes of every person"
>
> No. I am not okay with this. By no means. But if the government chooses to
> impose this on me - I will fight it on my terms rather than fighting the
> government where it hold the cards. More on that below.
That's assuming you can fight it on your terms. As we have seen
already, if your privacy needs happen to conflict with the
government's "national security" needs, you lose. We already
have companies exerting their right to control the way we use the
hardware we "own". Controlling our means of communication would
be just as easy.
> >"are you actually okay with the government recording the
> > keystrokes of every person using a cyber cafe"
>
> I don't care if they do. I assume I am being watched in a cybercafe.
And how much further would this kind of surveillance be
acceptable? Cameras in public restrooms? The same "national
interest" arguments could apply here, and it would be just as
easy to enforce this. We could work around it by not using
public restrooms anymore, but would that make the move
acceptable? And does it mean people who are forced to use public
restrooms deserve to lose their privacy?
> Living is this world is living in the middle of a power game in which those
> who have power over you will exert that power, and you will exert power where
> you can.
Sure, but the government is, for most purposes, all-powerful. It
can pretty much do anything it chooses to, and it will get away
with it as long as it can get enough people to vote for it in the
next election. All we can realistically attempt to do is vote it
out - and the only real weapon we have to achieve that would be
to "educate" the voters. Frankly, I don't see that happening -
given our present political setup[1] - but like I said, it is the
only weapon we have. "I will fight it on my own terms" is not
going to work for too long with the playing field as skewed as it
is.
Venky.
[1] Desperately trying to shield the arguments from my "All
government is evil" bias! :)
