Comments on: NSA spying on digital publics

By: Shari

Shari — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:01:45 +0000

There are no background checks at NSA and I can prove it. I was married to the head of an agency at Homeland Security for 7 years when he was in the military, in 1971. We have a daughter. Daddy didn’t feel like paying child support, so the district attorney had to prosecute him. Daddy disappeared, so the DA tracked him down and found him working for NSA way back in 1986. NSA is an agency full of old military cronies who cover for each other. Daddy never reached higher than E4 in the Navy, and base command threatened to bust him for alcoholism. He was discharged right after that in 1971. So how did Daddy get from point A to head up an agency inside NSA? His cronie friends got him the job.

I kicked him out in 1976 for drugs. Less than 2 years later, he was hired by NSA because he speaks a foreign language. The defense language guys are the biggest bunch of losers on the planet, they all cover for each other. It was 7 years of getting drunk and lying. Never once in 30 years ever picked up a phone or offered to support his own daughter. Never saw his own kids after 1979. So why didn’t DOD come and ask me why I threw him out and if he was living up to his family responsibilities – since DOD has this grand and glorious background check they brag about? Nobody from DOD ever showed up at my place.

The DOD is a cronie network of old military losers, who lie and cheat, and cover up for each other. Give me a break!

By: Jessica

Jessica — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:09:20 +0000

Thank you for sharing. I believe our only hope is it revisit the the law that made accessing senators, er, I mean people’s, video rental history and library records.. only when politicians worry about what they do do we get any kind of law coverage. most senators dont have myspace accounts – so who cares if it gets mined. On the other hand, a particular congressman with the 90,000 bribe, having his deleted emails come up as evidence, is probably thinking about his, I mean our, privacy

By: Jessica

Jessica — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 23:13:24 +0000

Sure would be nice to get a law additionaly protecting our digital lifeystyle, just like what was made years ago for librar records and video rentals… but maybe that law was made to protect political hopefulls from answering questions about the porn and brokeback mountain they rented – one could only hope that this pendulum of privacy rights will swign back the other way where it belongs. Things like this cause people to not use the internet and stifles communication which in turn stifles progress for artists, ideas, inventions, collaborations and more.

thank you for poiting it out.

Perhaps the EFF or somebody can give us action where we can put hope in motion instead of just hoping those in power do the right thing.

By: Mark Brooks

Mark Brooks — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 03:52:32 +0000

Some very interesting (and critical) legal precedents will be set in the next few years I’m sure.

Background check legislation is being pushed onto internet dating sites. (see home page of http://www.idate2006.com for legislation listing).

Myspace is being hammered by the press for being a feeding ground for those with malicious intent towards youngsters. At least with paid dating sites there’s a way to track people down through their credit card registrations. There’s not much to go on with the likes of Myspace. Anonymity all the way.

I generally disagree with Myspace filtering/blocking. Schools, OK, perhaps. Best Western in Utah??? The wireless ISP they use blocks Myspace because it is a dating site. Huh?

Still, it’s amazing just how open and unaware youngsters are on Myspace. They’re committing private information of the highest order to public and now, government dissent.

Mark Brooks
editor, onlinepersonalswatch.com

By: Mark Brooks

Mark Brooks — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 03:51:33 +0000

Some very interesting (and critical) legal precedents will be set in the next few years I’m sure.

Background check legislation is being pushed onto internet dating sites. (see home page of http://www.idate2006.com for legislation listing).

I generally disagree with Myspace filtering/blocking. Schools, OK, perhaps. Best Western in Utah??? The wireless ISP they use blocks Myspace because it is a dating site. Huh?

Still, it’s amazing just how open and unaware youngsters are on Myspace. They’re committing private information of the highest order to public and now, government dissent.

Mark Brooks
editor, onlinepersonalswatch.com

By: Joseph Hunkins

Joseph Hunkins — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:31:38 +0000

>>I’m all in favor of tracking down malicious individuals

By: sylvia

sylvia — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:46:20 +0000

an interesting and frightening read. thanks.

By: Ken Leebow

Ken Leebow — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 06:40:06 +0000

Well, a number of years ago, Scott McNealy said it best: “You’ve got no privacy. Get over it.”

BTW, I find it interesting that all the FaceBook members are voluntarily providing face-recognition to all who are interested.

Ah, ain’t technology grand?

By: Ken

Ken — Sun, 11 Jun 2006 12:59:09 +0000

Dana, I agree on all points (huge congrats on quals, by the way).

One element I’d like to add is that I find it almost as troublesome that private sector actors are allowed to maintain such records (and worse), with virtually no legal restraint. Think VoterVault and Demzilla, or one of the scores (hundreds?) of credit or consumer-profiling databases that exist.

To my knowledge, there’s also nothing preventing the government (or either party) from contracting analysis based on such data.

A brave new world, indeed.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Sat, 10 Jun 2006 22:23:37 +0000

To update your AT&T privacy invasion story, it looks like the U.S. government is all set to “wiretap” VoIP services as well. See this New York Times article.