How do you reply to

Ok wine aunt

"Thats cool. Can i watch you taking a shower?"

Because I'm trying to help them

"Give us a look at your phone then, mate."

Yes, please.

"Well, I do."

"Are you also okay with not being allowed to marry the person you love, even if you aren't a gay pedophile?"

Attached: 1549393939513.png (963x483, 241K)

did they ask you for help?

I think Its important to educate people about these sorts of things

"Okay; can I have your credit card, social security number, browsing history and access to your emails?"

>inb4 reported to Prevent

based free software evangelist

good, start by terminating your invasion of other peoples life, no one asked you for anything, you retarded nigger cunt on a horse

You already know where society is going
There are way too many other people who keep testing what the "free speech" area is
You can't stop them all from being fucking retarded
>let's see you explain your holy crusade to sub-humans outside the fucking internet and see what happens

To be fair, it mostly goes like
> I have nothing to hide *from police/fbi/cia/nsa/kgb*

The key here is to show that
1. Police/fbi/cia/nsa/kgb is not your friend and will never be
2. Backdoor of any kind will be inevitably used for malicious purposes

False equivalency.

it happens only on the internet so i can ignore retards

And add "if you won't provide these details then I will refuse to speak with you further, and forbid all mutual contacts from providing any services or knowledge that entails me."

Back in the 20s, the Jews had nothing to fear from the government either
But then the government was taken over, along with all its files

>1. Police/fbi/cia/nsa/kgb is not your friend and will never be
I don't get this meme. Your domestic intelligence service IS your friend, unless you are actively working to subvert the underlying principles of your society (e.g. trying to turn your country into a dictatorship).

>unless you are actively working to subvert the underlying principles of your society (e.g. trying to turn your country into a dictatorship).
user that's what the intelligence agencies are doing. That's why they're not your friend.

I don't get why privacy is still the biggest issue with corps stealing information when there are much more glaring problems
>information based profit gives them more incentive to just gurgle information rather than improve a product
>you get no rights because the service you get is """free"""
>you don't get to own anything, all is bevenolently rented to you
They're free to effectively treat the user like shit because you pay them wether you want to or not, especially if its companies that have their icky fingers all over the web.
judging by how google is still at all alive despite having not even one successful product, ads clearly earn them some disgusting amounts of bank that they doubtfully disclose properly, just dusting it away and claiming it to be some stock market profit.
You can see the results anywhere if you look, take google as a prime example, they basically contribute nothing to the world aside from their search engine and shitty browser, yet still for some reason they're one of the biggest players in tech. Youtube is working on a loss (unless you include information profit) and just about every creator complains about that platform being a pile of shit.
I'm almost convinced that privacy being the prime concern is just some result of a psyop so that nobody would notice that tech companies don't have to bother to make money anymore.

Just because you're not doing anything illegal doesn't mean you won't be persecuted for it in the future. "Lex retro non agit" stops being true as soon as someone in the govenrment decides it should - be it a new dictatorship, or power being given to a group that believes everyone who ever disagreed with them should be persecuted.
Besides,
>trying to turn your country into a dictatorship
is what everyone who seeks power ultimately wants to do

>it is not what you have, but what they can do with all that info about you

>nothing to hide but still none of anyone's business
>what if the fat creepy guy you blocked on Facebook could see your vacation pics or favorite dinner places
>what if some epic hackerman blackmailed you with your browsing history or that one chat you deleted to hide it from your partner

> Your domestic intelligence service IS your friend
My domestic intelligence service is actively trying to undermine my freedoms and acquire as many powers as possible. I'm not saying we should disband police/fbi/cia/nsa/kbs, I'm saying they are inherently in a conflict with a free and open society, and keeping them in check is of high importance for any democratic country.

Anyone who says they have nothing to hide are not thinking before talking. The default should not be "nothing to hide" but rather "nothing to show". Anything that I don't specifically publish should be automatically hidden and not public. I am not a circus animal.

enjoy your
>spam mail
>personalized ads
>unwanted ads
>having stranger watching you sleep
>having stranger following you to the bathroom and watching you take a shit
>having stranger cuddling you to sleep
>watching you jerk off
>know you sudo password
>know everything about you
basically it's like having god watching your life but it doesn't judge you and it's not god but a person and that person have your sudo password and they can sudo you to rm -rf /

So you leave all of your windows and doors open when you have sex?

This
I have everything to hide, and none of it is illegal or socially taboo or anything, it's just basic human dignity

Why would domestic intelligence agencies try to stop people from turning a country into a dictatorship, then? Wouldn't this align with their goals? I find this difficult to believe. I think you're just pulling unfounded allegations out of your ass.

>I'm saying they are inherently in a conflict with a free and open society, and keeping them in check is of high importance for any democratic country.
I 100% agree with you on this. No branch of the executive power should be left to their own devices. That's why we (I am talking about most of the Western world) have the division into judicial / executive / legislative powers.
Domestic intelligence agencies are tasked with protecting the citizens of their country from foreign intelligence, and to prevent powers (foreign and domestic) from taking steps that allow them to threaten the country and its order. You being a citizen of this country are also under your domestic intelligence services' protection, unless you are actively going up against them.

>My domestic intelligence service is actively trying to undermine my freedoms and acquire as many powers as possible.
That's just human nature, and not an inherent problem with intelligence services. People in power tend to try to accumulate even more of it. Wanting to abolish IS while wishing to keep power structures per se in place is hypocritical. Wanting an anarchist society would not be hypocritical, but is also unrealistic as those are highly likely to devolve into a dog eat dog shitfest until, surprise, surprise, human nature takes over, warlords arise, accumulate power and turn the whole shitshow into a dictatorship again.

Bottom line: Don't cry about the existence of ISs, and don't try to abolish them. Instead, use judicial and legislative processes to keep them in check. That means privacy laws, and independent judges that keep a watchful eye over the watchmen.

Privacy is the biggest problem with this because it affects you even if you don't actively use any given service, while the problems you listed can easily be solved by simply not using them. Take Facebook. The shitty user experience and the news feed filters are of no interest to you if you have no account, and media ownership is a moot point if you don't post on there. But they sure as shit can still collect, process and share data about you even without an account, because someone, somewhere will mention you in a comment, a Whatsapp message, or share a picture where you're visible in the background; or because you visited a website that uses a Facebook plugin.
The fact that they make disgusting amounts of dosh through advertising or whatever is completely irrelevant. You could easily avoid being bombarded with it by not using the service, but the issue is that it's YOUR data that's being used to tailor these ads. You're paying them, so that they can get paid by companies to display ads, so that you might one day decide to purchase from those companies and give them even more money.

>basically it's like having god watching your life but it doesn't judge you
This actually sounds like the preferable alternative.

Looks like Plato descided to show up

Enjoy being acused of thoughtcrimes.

> Don't cry about the existence of ISs, and don't try to abolish them
I didn't tho, they should be kept in check, not abolished. At the same time, citizens should be always aware of the danger of trading freedom for safety, don't submit automatically to any authority, and always treat the "agencies" with suspicion. They work for you, but they're not your friends.

Then show us your tits/pussy/dick

You don't even have to go that far. Every time I asked one of these posters to just post a simple face pic they will make excuses. Usually it's just "I don't care enough to do it" even though it would be trivial to do and help a lot to prove their point. They're just shitposters.

">Anonymous"

How do you do the meme arrows IRL?

Attached: images.jpg (181x220, 8K)

Yeah, that part wasn't directed specifically at you and more at the other two guys that replied. You seem rather reasonable.
>They work for you, but they're not your friends.
That's actually a better way to put it, yes.

>having stranger cuddling you to sleep
so I've been missing out on that just because I cared about privacy?

this is a virtue signal OP
they are saying they have nothing to hide
because they are good people
you have to appeal to their virtue signaling
example

>"I have nothing to hide"
>then you won't mind if I strip search your children
>"What!? You leave my children alone!"
>What? Do you think they have something to hide? Now I definitely need to strip search them or report your family to the authorities.

You legitimately can't be this retarded. In what universe are faceless entities with access to black budgets and god knows what tech NOT a breeding ground for the vilest corruption and abuse of power?

"From the authorities"

OK, so you don't have any factual proof, instead relying on dehumanization and the assumption that everyone is a greedy fuck.
Protip: The vast majority of people working for da gubbermint are, in fact, people. And they don't have a lot of power, either. Unless you're one of the, say, 100 top dogs in any given organization with more than a few thousand employees, you're such a bottom of the food chain Joe that there isn't any real power. In ISs specifically, chances are you're a paper pusher or one of the poor cunts that get sent in to infiltrate other cunts whose opinions you don't actually share, risking your life and that of the people near you.

Google "banality of evil".

>(((Eichmann)))
Hmm

web.archive.org/web/20180127173904if_/http://tehlug.org:80/files/solove.pdf

>The dude who signed the final solution
>((( )))
holy shit user you're dumber than the dumbest of Jow Forumstards

OK I skimmed the Wikipedia article (nice research, I know). You're referring to the argument that just because most Nazi soldiers, officers etc weren't fanatics but just average Joes, that the Nazi regime itself wasn't evil. In bringing up this reference, you're shifting the argument from "all intelligence services are inherently bad" to "intelligence services bear a surface similarity to the Nazi regime, which is widely considered bad, and so they too must be bad".
Keep in mind that the Nazi regime had entirely different objectives compared to domestic intelligence services nowadays, and that thanks to the process of Gleichschaltung, there was no division between the powers (judicial, legislative, executive) that could be used to keep the power-hungry fanatics at the helm in check.
I'm not saying that it's not theoretically possible for an intelligence service to turn into a puppet of power-hungry individuals that strive to turn the country into a dictatorship with them at the helm. My point is that if kept in check, intelligence services are actually too fucking busy doing their intended job to worry about seizing power, and that this is the case at least in my country. I can't speak for the US, but here in Germany the number of successful acts of terrorism and intelligence attacks by foreign powers is much lower than it would be if our domestic IS were plotting to subjugate the general populace (for which they wouldn't have the manpower anyway).

eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/busting-eight-common-excuses-nsa-surveillance

Google makes a pretty penny off government entities who use their G Suite.

> You're referring to the argument that just because most Nazi soldiers, officers etc weren't fanatics but just average Joes, that the Nazi regime itself wasn't evil.
No, it's a reference to the observation that an average Joe, when endowed with some limited power and placed into a strict hierarchy, is perfectly capable of dutifully obeying the most abhorrent orders just because they bear the authority of his superiors and he cares about his position in the hierarchy. So while an average government agent is a good guy, when acting as part of the agency he's perfectly capable of anti-constitutional acts and undermining the democracy just because the leaders of the agency order him so. See also Milgram experiment.

>what if the fat creepy guy you blocked on Facebook could see your vacation pics or favorite dinner places
Rude.

Did I ask to be put through education as a kid? No, and I didn't want it. But it's obviously better than being a sub-100 IQ retard.

You are making several grave assumptions here for which you have provided no proof:
0. ISs work on a strictly hierarchical basis akin to the military (not all of them do).
1. IS workers are given "abhorrent orders".
2. If an IS worker were to be given such orders, and if he were to refuse to execute them, he would have to fear for his position in the hierarchy.
3. Open dissent is the only way to refuse orders.
4. The IS's leaders inherently strive to perform anti-constitutional acts and to undermine democracy.
5. The IS's leaders have enough power to issue orders to aid in these goals, i.e. there is no bureaucracy or control that may prevent them from doing so.

In short, you seem to see ISs as inherently evil institutions, created by people in power in order to amass more power by ordering subservient individuals to perform heinous acts of barbarism against innocent citizens. You only ever speak about """"The Agency"""" as a faceless entity, or """"The Leaders""""; powerful, greedy people who can work around the system to do as they see fit. You ignore the institutions that were expressly created to keep those agencies in check.
Again, I do not know if things are different in the US, but if your country does not have those institutions, and really does have enough power to work around the system just to "keep the man down", then that seems more like a problem with the way your country's system works, and less like an inherent problem with ISs. Furthermore, you have not shown in what way anyone, especially people who allegedly already have the power to subvert the system that's supposed to keep them in check, would benefit from oppressing people with "nothing to hide".

Read "Ordinary Men" and remember that almost every totalitarian government last century was originally democratically elected. The argument isn't that the intelligence community is inherently evil; the argument is that it only takes a 2/3 congressional vote to make it so, and ergo that they shouldn't have the power they already wield lest the bureaucratic checks be removed. Further, when they have unfettered authority to use said resources, Joe will certainly follow abhorrent orders.
Perhaps that will never happen. Perhaps the NSA and their ilk will always be on the side of good, regular people. Perhaps they will always serve a republic that was conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. However, perhaps they won't. Much better to remain cautious.

>The argument isn't that the intelligence community is inherently evil
Good, that's the point I was trying to get across.
>it only takes a 2/3 congressional vote to [make them evil]
Wrong. It takes a dire situation that puts the system in peril; a lot of lobbying on the authoritarian parties' part; and the failing of the system in the years leading up to that, putting people into positions of power who are willing to seize these opportunities.
>and ergo that they shouldn't have the power they already wield lest the bureaucratic checks be removed
So you'd rather have castrated ISs (or none at all) on the off-chance that someone might make a play for power down the line? With no (functioning) IS / executive power, it'll only be a very short time until your country is, in fact, destabilized or economically ruined to the point of destabilization. Which plays directly into the hands of the authoritarian parties; they'll promptly CREATE intelligence services that are completely free of restrictions in the first place.
>Further, when they have unfettered authority to use said resources, Joe will certainly follow abhorrent orders.
True, which is why it is important to prevent them from gaining too much power, while at the same time giving them enough power to do their job. It's a fine line to walk, but it's worked out for the past near-century in my country.
>Much better to remain cautious.
Agreed. However, this does not mean that you should treat ISs as your enemy, as you (or whoever made this post ) seemed to imply. If you didn't, then that's my mistake. I probably overdid it by saying that "your domestic intelligence service is your friend", as I admitted here

I don't
Feels good joining the borg

Attached: Screenshot_20190213-122825-01.jpg (1080x496, 110K)

Yeah I'm a different user. You do raise some valid points, though. And looking back on all the failed anarchist rebellions like in Spain and Ukraine, they ended up losing because their militaries and intelligence were, as you said, castrated, and subsequently fell to stronger more regimented outside forces. I'll still, however, maintain that ISs are not your friend; if I'm to concede your point, I'll say that they're very useful but dangerous dogs that should be kept on a short leash -- apologies to dog people, of course.

>I have nothing to hide
They have nothing to hide. But they have a lot to hide from friends, families, strangers.

>post ends in 911
SHUT IT DOWN
Yeah, a short leash (i.e. maximum transparency on the IS's part, and adequate control from the outside) are important, as are opportunities for IS employees to report immoral / suspicious behaviour of their superiors or coworkers. Believe it or not, there are institutions like that, although maybe not in the US.

I like arguments like the one we've had. Everyone learns something.

The people who'll put babies on a no-fly list don't seem too friendly to me.

I just make a 360 degrees turn and walk away. I am not a retard to communicate with stupid people.

As someone who is greatly annoyed by babies, I would like to take the time to thank whoever does this.

Leftie Brit fag detected. You are the reason our country sucks.

>American blaming another American because euros are ruining our country
Ok?

>don't have any factual proof
There's declassified CIA and FBI documents that show any number of horrific violations of their citizens rights you FUCKWIT

Why are you wearing your clothes, then ? Who was your boyfriend? Did you had sex with him? How big was his dick ?

How many guys you had in College ?

Hiding something doesn't mean , it's something bad or shameful. It's just not meant to be known for general public.

Privacy is about your personal space not invaded, not about hiding things. You might not have personal space , but others do and you should not make people feel awkward for not wanting to share their nudes with the whole world. And the fact , that I don't want share my nudes, shall not be used to qualify me as terrorist affiliated with ISIL.

In short : You don't care about privacy, cause you have no personal space i.e you aren't alive.

Even shorter : Just shut the fuck up!

>I have nothing to hide
Until you do

well I do and it's no ones god damned business!

well nobody's perfect

how so?
I don't need the freedom, but others might need it and I understand why it is important.

>Up to you. For myself, I'd rather not have corporations watching me all the time, thank you very much.

Attached: buccelati.png (318x375, 209K)

The guy who did the photo series of frogs sitting on benches was considered a sick bastard when it was revealed he was impaling live frogs on nails.
Impaling frogs on live squirrels impaled on nails is a little over the top.

>but what about the toads and treerats
oh boo fucking hoo

>unless you are actively working to subvert the underlying principles of your society (e.g. trying to turn your country into a dictatorship).
Thanks exactly what most 3 letters agencies are doing, except they serve the capital instead of a political leader.

Attached: Alter.jpg (1200x1696, 312K)

Are you retarded?
I don't care if Google knows my credit card number because they are a multi million dollar company, they have no reason to rip me off, on the other hand, some random Jow Forums autist would probably use it to buy dragon dildos or something.

It's not wrong, though.

> Jow Forums made me paranoid about privacy so I would never know what it's like
Fuck you Jow Forums spy and cuddle me
I'm removing my security plug in and making a Facebook

Who here /assimilated/

Does it count as being 'ripped off' if this fine-detailed information about you; your aspirations, your habits, where you spend most of your time, the things that worry you or keep you up at night, your political leanings, the kind of things that outrage or inspire you, your vices... What if this information is being used to send you targeted information with the intent of modifying your behaviour? Directing and focusing your attention, influencing your purchasing decisions and your politics, your understanding of brand identities, your opinion on cultural topics, appealing to your base instincts.

The assumption many people make when confronted with these ideas, is that these technologies, the intention that drives their use, and the effect they have on individuals, are an inescapable fact of modern society. Perhaps even a necessary evil, if not a perfectly acceptable mechanism.

The term 'boring dystopia' gets banded about a lot, but I think it does a pretty god job of explaining where we are at.

Adam Curtis's Hypernormalisation films go some way towards discussing these and other attitudes and outcomes.

What you mention in your first paragraph is likely. Software will eventually be powerful enough to use the gathered data to predict the behaviour of individuals. We are likely to see at the very least incredibly aggressive advertisement models.
Some random autist might find a way to gain access to this information. Some random autist might be working on the Google project that stores your data, and intends to make it weak intentionally, or outright leak the data for everyone to see. Or some random autist is eventually going to have the chance to buy it; there are plenty of companies that farm data specifically to sell it. Or Google might just use it for unpleasant purposes themselves. The point is: There are more hypothetical owners to the data you give than meets the eye, and thus you should limit the amount of data you do give as much as possible.

You can't afford to be this naive after Snowden, the scums working at those agencies aren't your friend, what do you think they do when they get a hold of your nudes? They swivel on their chair and show their coworkers how much of a loser you are because you were born with a micropenis.

Why do I have to reply to somebody else having nothing to hide?

It is already happening.
See: advertising.

Read the rest of the conversation.
Can you point to any proof that they're trying to subvert democracy itself?
Note that I was not just talking about the American ISs specifically. They may be trying to do what you are alleging, but that doesn't mean ALL ISs are.