The Feds Cut a Deal With In-Flight Wi-Fi Providers

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Think you are safe from government spying when you fly the friendly skies? Think again.

According to a letter Gogo submitted to the Federal Communications Commission, the company voluntarily exceeded the requirements of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, or CALEA, by adding capabilities to its service at the request of law enforcement. The revelation alarms civil liberties groups, which say companies should not be cutting deals with the government that may enhance the ability to monitor or track users.
Click to expand...
 
TwistedAegis said:
If you read the news, there is good reason for this. The word "privacy" is going to become synonymous with the dodo bird.
Click to expand...

As long as your not doing anything wrong, there's no real reason to be upset about this. If there are millions of drones in the sky watching every move, and cameras in our homes, I'll be upset. But until then, I don't really care.
 
PCunicorn said:
As long as your not doing anything wrong, there's no real reason to be upset about this. If there are millions of drones in the sky watching every move, and cameras in our homes, I'll be upset. But until then, I don't really care.
Click to expand...

Right, like the FBI using wiretapping of MLK Jr. sleeping with women other than his wife to convince him to kill himself. God forbid you did anything potentially morally wrong, but legal, and then cross someone the wrong way. But that was the past, it will never happen again!
 
because some terrorist would REALLY want to look up bomb making recipes while he's on the freaking plane?

I'd have no problem with this whole invasion of privacy thing if it was truly equal... meaning you can spy on my internet traffic all you like, but on the other side of that coin, we the public get to spy on every government employees internet use. I'm sure there are quite a few senators and cabinet members who would have a fit if I requested to see what they were doing. When I throw the line "if you aren't doing anything illegal than you have nothing to worry about" -- I dont think that would have the same weight when *I* say it, right?

unless I get to spy on them, they can't spy on me. Sounds pretty fair IMO.
 
collegeboy69us said:
because some terrorist would REALLY want to look up bomb making recipes while he's on the freaking plane?

I'd have no problem with this whole invasion of privacy thing if it was truly equal... meaning you can spy on my internet traffic all you like, but on the other side of that coin, we the public get to spy on every government employees internet use. I'm sure there are quite a few senators and cabinet members who would have a fit if I requested to see what they were doing. When I throw the line "if you aren't doing anything illegal than you have nothing to worry about" -- I dont think that would have the same weight when *I* say it, right?

unless I get to spy on them, they can't spy on me. Sounds pretty fair IMO.
Click to expand...

That is fair ... Feinstein doesn't agree though.... she threw a fit when there was a bit of reciprocity.
 
Try living in a third-world, soon-to-be-communist country and tell me privacy does not matter. Also, try having a different political opinion in a country like this and still keep the "if you're doing nothing wrong..." mantra.
 
cdr_74_premium said:
Try living in a third-world, soon-to-be-communist country and tell me privacy does not matter. Also, try having a different political opinion in a country like this and still keep the "if you're doing nothing wrong..." mantra.
Click to expand...

The origins of politically correct was to be in-line with the ruling political power...
 
Right or wrong, nothing to hide or not, it is none of your business what i am doing, simple as that.

Maybe i am the type of person who like to have my life private and not potential shared amongst strangers.
 
PCunicorn said:
As long as your not doing anything wrong, there's no real reason to be upset about this. If there are millions of drones in the sky watching every move, and cameras in our homes, I'll be upset. But until then, I don't really care.
Click to expand...

BAAAA.. That's a good sheep. You're exactly what the government wants it's sheeple to think.

You think it just goes to millions of drones and watching your every move over night? No, people would lose their shit. But how about 1 drone for 'your protection'? Oh sorry that isn't enough, now we need 2 to keep you safe. and so on.... If we don't stop this shit now, that's exactly where we'll be. You know what they say about frogs and boiling water.....
 
to me, if you're worried, the simple solution is to not use the in-flight wifi.
 
Biznatch said:
BAAAA.. That's a good sheep. You're exactly what the government wants it's sheeple to think.

You think it just goes to millions of drones and watching your every move over night? No, people would lose their shit. But how about 1 drone for 'your protection'? Oh sorry that isn't enough, now we need 2 to keep you safe. and so on.... If we don't stop this shit now, that's exactly where we'll be. You know what they say about frogs and boiling water.....
Click to expand...

That was a silly comment, and only underlines your lack of understanding (making sheep noises and calling people names).

This isn't Nazi Germany, and the debate around this topic proves it. Be constructive, your just being childish.

Do we need oversight? Yes. There is a reason the founding fathers setup the American system with by separating powers, that tradition should be continued. You cannot run a nation without power, its the concentration of that power that becomes dangerous.

Will we be monitored? Yes. You cannot honestly expect otherwise, and if you think this is bad, go to the UK where CCTV practically monitors your every move (china is the same). The key is again in separation of powers, a small example those monitoring don't judge, those judging don't monitor.

Does it help when people resort to Knee-Jerk reactions? No, never has, never will, there is always a better way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top