Letters to the Editor
thelastnamechosen
Published Letters: 161
-
Minus one
[Read the article: The WSJ editorial page lies about our surveillance laws]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Everyone, even including the most stalwart opponents of the bill, such as Sen. Russ Feingold and Rep. Rush Holt, agrees that FISA should be amended to exempt from its warrant requirements foreign-to-foreign calls routed through the U.S. There is no "debate" about that provision and the WSJ's claim that this is what is being debated -- and that the "Left" believes that such eavesdropping is illegal -- is just false.
I will stand up and say I don't agree with this provision or the way it is being packaged and sold.
The issue is whether the federal government can force a US citizen or company to provide access to their papers, records and computer equipment, without a warrant, as long as the government is pursuing foreign-to-foreign communications.
-
Nobody gets off the planet
[Read the article: The fun and excitement of civilization wars (fought from afar)]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glenn, you say this now, but once my population has been placated with Colosseums and Temples, I will reach Gunpowder first and everyone will then taste my wrath.
Oh, does anyone want to trade Wine for some "Incense."
-
State of the Onion
[Read the article: The courts and Congress affirmatively conceal and protect lawbreaking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Unless the Supreme Court is going to affirm that Federal amnesty overrules State law, it isn't quite over. I would imagine there are state laws that have been violated too.
If (when) the Supreme Court does end up ruling that Federal law can invalidate State law in this case, can we just go ahead and eliminate the States as legal entities? Let's just redo the whole thing. It seems awful silly to have State based elections for a Federal system and two sets of laws when only one really applies.
-
Well Regulated
[Read the article: The courts and Congress affirmatively conceal and protect lawbreaking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Frankly, my dear said,
Telecommunications and telecommunication companies are not regulated by the states. They are regulated by the FCC.
I am not sure if the FCC can preempt state laws against spying, fraud, murder, rape or other state crimes just because they happen to be committed by an individual that works for a "telecommunication company."
But, ultimately whatever the Supreme Court says goes.
-
Robots are everywhere...
[Read the article: The courts and Congress affirmatively conceal and protect lawbreaking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
ondelette said,
If we allow all the data to be collected and analyzed, and then only require a warrant to read the conclusion, have people been spied on or not?
If I make a robot that hunts down and kills people who are dancing to Phish, has anyone really been killed? Have I really committed murder if I don't ever see the robot again?
I agree we are heading to this argument and I have heard it actually offered a few times but it is absurd on its face.
-
I am so cereal.
[Read the article: The courts and Congress affirmatively conceal and protect lawbreaking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Frankly, my dear, ... said,
There is a considerable difference between a crime committed by someone who works for a telecommunications company and a crime committed by a telecommunications [company].
Could you elaborate?
Anyway, I went through this once before. See...
You seem to be saying in the letter you linked to that there may be State laws that have been violated, but you just don't believe they will be pursued by State officials. This is somewhat different than "Telecommunications and telecommunication companies are not regulated by the states. They are regulated by the FCC."
I agree with your prediction that State action is unlikely, but again, this is a different point.
-
The complicated relationship
[Read the article: GOP politics in a nutshell]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Hopefully not a dupe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYpqHb8qMME&feature=related
Sums it all up perfectly, I think.
-
sysprog @ 01:46 AM
[Read the article: What Howard Kurtz means by "media scrutiny"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As always, excellent work. I think the issue that "essentially you don't know where the recipient is going to be" is applicable to all stored internet communications. With internet proxies, real time communication is also subject to the same issue of locating the sender and receiver.
I swear, the government's problem seems to be a bunch of tech illiterate old people complaining how hard spying is now that we have computers and the internet. People are no longer forced to use protocols dictated by a handful of communications monopolies and the government is in a panic. How sweet they have had it in the past and how hard the future will be. What the hell are they going to do about encryption?
A attempted definition: Data mining is the belief that increased data sets and advancements in the predictive ability of artificial intelligence will overcome encryption and the ability of individuals to write communications software.
-
Whyyy! Whyyy!
[Read the article: Shocking new revelation: Unchecked government powers get abused]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Never attribute to malice that which can be satisfactorily explained by stupidity.
I would never attribute any malice to that quote, but any aphorism that segfaults when it reaches Tanya Harding needs to be rewritten.
-
Oh Yoshimi
[Read the article: The banality of the surveillance state]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You don't drown the girl to test the witch, you test the witch to drown the girl.
One idea behind data mining is not that it works as a predictive tool, but that it gives the executive a sky full of cloud animals with which to construct the guilt of any enemy that cannot be challenged or reviewed by a court.
The "predictive" algorithms will be seen as the crown jewels of national security secrets and classified with one of Cheney's made up extra double top secret designations. The Robot says you are guilty, please ignore the man behind the curtain.
------
Those evil-natured robots they're programmed to destroy us. She's gotta be strong to fight them so she's taking lots of vitamins.
'Cause she knows that it'd be tragic if those evil robots win. I know she can beat them.
Oh Yoshimi, they don't believe me but you won't let those robots defeat me.
Yoshimi, they don't believe me but you won't let those robots eat me.