View previous topic :: View next topic |
Should governments be able to monitor everything we say, do and read? |
Yes. If you're not a criminal, you shouldn't need privacy. |
|
30% |
[ 4 ] |
Yes, but only if they keep it to themselves. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
On the internet, sure, but not in "real" life. |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
No. Some kind of right to privacy is important. |
|
61% |
[ 8 ] |
|
Total Votes : 13 |
|
Author |
Message |
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: Does privacy matter? | |
|
This issue has been kicked around a bit on here lately, so I thought it deserved its own thread.
As many will have noticed, the supposed terrorist threat has led the government to fast-track a number of "security" measures, several of which expand their ability to monitor and store information. Whatever they say, these are not "temporary" laws. They are here for good.
As technology develops, these surveillance mechanisms will only expand. The only question, then, is where should they stop? How far is too far (CCTV in every house? Recording of all face-to-face conversations?)? And do you trust this government—and all possible future ones—enough not to care?
Should anything be private? What do you think? _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace
Last edited by David on Sun Sep 21, 2014 8:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
I'd prefer to discuss it in private. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
I think one thing that gets somewhat overlooked in this whole debate is that we members of the wider general public have no real idea how effective similar laws in the US and UK have been in stopping more potential 9/11 or London bombing terrorist acts in there early or even imminent stages of planning and undertaking. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
9/11 showed that we are in a kind of asymmetric war : low-level most of the time, but potentially vastly destructive given the chance. The enemy uses electronic media as perhaps its key strategic resource.
I think that justifies a high level of scrutiny at present, and like most of the British public, I am relaxed about how things stand at present in the UK. I think I'd be the same in Australia from what I can see.
Electronic surveillance has apparently uncovered several plots, and at present it seems to me justified to assure he security of myself and my family. It is important that the official access to and usage of data be circumscribed by law and legal review, and that the powers be reviewed from time to time. As the poll questions do not seem to provide for that, I didn't answer ! _________________ Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Sun Sep 21, 2014 10:59 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
This is a push-poll, David. You're better than that. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | This is a push-poll, David. You're better than that. |
Poorly worded no doubt. if I tick the first option I'm agreeing to allow surveillance cameras in my lounge room which is not what I mean. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
If so, then perhaps you agree with something more like the third option?
Pies4shaw wrote: | This is a push-poll, David. You're better than that. |
Any recommendations on how to word it better? Happy to start again from scratch. I do intend this poll seriously. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
Privacy doesn't matter until a previously good government or leader goes full on tyrant. In other words, it may not matter now or 10 years from now but if you give it up now, then you'll regret having done so at some time in the future.
Unless you like the idea of living in Communist East Germany and having the Stasi (AFP) listening and watching everything you do and neighbours dobbing you in do get in the good books when they hear you say something over the fence then it's best to fight for it now. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Oh. Huh. I can see how I might get into the idea of living, but maybe not in Communist East Germany and having the Stasi AFP listening and watching everything you do and neighbours dobbing you in do get in the good books when they hear you say something over the fence then it's best to fight for it. |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
I would express it this way. If someone wants access to my privacy, they need to demonstrate hey have a track record of competence and diligence, and of embracing processes of accountability rather than undermining them.
Many of those wanting more control lack the credentials to warrant it, and the the commitment to accountability.
I wouldn't accept otherwise in an accountant, let alone someone dealing with matters of such importance. _________________ In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
Post subject: | |
|
I totally agree we should watch, monitor and openly discuss everything.
It (the government) is our servant and we should have to right to question and be informed of everything it does. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Wokko wrote: | Privacy doesn't matter until a previously good government or leader goes full on tyrant. In other words, it may not matter now or 10 years from now but if you give it up now, then you'll regret having done so at some time in the future.
Unless you like the idea of living in Communist East Germany and having the Stasi (AFP) listening and watching everything you do and neighbours dobbing you in do get in the good books when they hear you say something over the fence then it's best to fight for it now. |
And that's the argument isn't it? It's the same logic as people use to justify guns in the USA, that if the government ever goes feral the populace needs to be armed to be able to rise up.
Look it's not a bad argument. If you take the side that if you aren't doing anything criminal then you don't need privacy, then that assumes that what is criminal and what is legal is based on reasonable scenarios and not a totalitarian government.
There's a strong argument though that privacy only protects those who are doing the wrong thing. If no one had privacy, no one could steal your stuff.
The government currently know how much I earn, where I earn it from, my medical treatment history and whether or not I own any firearms (based on current laws)
My bank knows where I spend my money. I can get graphs and data from them on how and where I spend it.
My ISP knows what websites I go to
My phone company knows who I call and when, and who calls me and when. It also knows where I am and when.
there's more, that's just the main ones.
I'd be interested if anyone can provide personal examples of where Privacy is/has been a positive thing. NB, I said personal, I'm not interested in hypotheticals. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Despite my strong unease with CCTV, data retention proposals and the like, I sit on the fence a little bit on this issue. One of the reasons I'm tempted to support a right to privacy is that I feel our society isn't progressive enough yet to deal with the consequences (specifically in regard to civil liberties) of not having one. If we can mature enough (and institute enough legal protections re: freedom of speech, association and so on), then perhaps I too will see a right to privacy as unnecessary. So long as stuff like this can happen, I think there's reason to be worried about an absolute surveillance state.
stui magpie wrote: | I'd be interested if anyone can provide personal examples of where Privacy is/has been a positive thing. NB, I said personal, I'm not interested in hypotheticals. |
Wikileaks? Ironic, I know, given the point of their existence was to reveal secrets, but that operation would have been shut down in a heartbeat if they hadn't been able to work under the radar.
On a more personal level, there are casual critical remarks I've made in the past in private about my various workplaces that could have seen me sanctioned if my employers were sufficiently authoritarian to crack down on it. I keep my Facebook profile private for the same reason.
I have to say I've also appreciated the ability to talk about pretty much any topic I like face-to-face without being marked as a political dissident or undesirable. I don't think that would have been possible if we knew that we were under constant surveillance—you'd be a lot more careful about what you said, I would imagine.
One of the central issues here is that governments, even relatively open, democratic ones like ours, aren't perfect. If we lived in a utopia ruled by infinitely wise philosopher-kings, perhaps this wouldn't be an issue, but under our current system there's absolutely no guarantee that government decisions will be fair, logical or measured. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Despite my strong unease with CCTV, data retention proposals and the like, I sit on the fence a little bit on this issue. One of the reasons I'm tempted to support a right to privacy is that I feel our society isn't progressive enough yet to deal with the consequences (specifically in regard to civil liberties) of not having one. If we can mature enough (and institute enough legal protections re: freedom of speech, association and so on), then perhaps I too will see a right to privacy as unnecessary.
|
Interestingly, there is no explicit right to freedom of speech in Australia, as far as I recall : the constitution, for example, does not provide such, amd the practice of free speech is really only protected by common law and an independent judiciary. There are also notionla protections for the AustGov's subscription to various Human Rights conventions, though i can't recall whether withdrawal from those would be easy or difficult for the exectuive.
That said, common law is the basis of a legal system that has worked pretty effectively over the past 100 years or more in Australia. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
|