(Aug 29, 2016, 06:55 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]Warrants are warrants and honestly they should have been allowed to do it a while ago IMO.
For a warrant to be issued there needs to be sufficient evidence of a crime being committed. A citizen wanting privacy is not evidence of a crime being committed, nor should it be.
(Aug 30, 2016, 12:44 AM)Kung Fury Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 29, 2016, 06:55 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]Warrants are warrants and honestly they should have been allowed to do it a while ago IMO.
For a warrant to be issued there needs to be sufficient evidence of a crime being committed. A citizen wanting privacy is not evidence of a crime being committed, nor should it be.
But as others have said, so long as you're breaking no laws there will be no reason for a warrant to be issued?
(Aug 30, 2016, 01:05 AM)James Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 30, 2016, 12:44 AM)Kung Fury Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 29, 2016, 06:55 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]Warrants are warrants and honestly they should have been allowed to do it a while ago IMO.
For a warrant to be issued there needs to be sufficient evidence of a crime being committed. A citizen wanting privacy is not evidence of a crime being committed, nor should it be.
But as others have said, so long as you're breaking no laws there will be no reason for a warrant to be issued?
The rule change the article is talking about would allow the FBI to obtain a warrant to hack someone's computer if that person makes an attempt to conceal their location or online activity. There's a link to the court filing in the first post of this thread.
(Aug 30, 2016, 12:44 AM)Kung Fury Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 29, 2016, 06:55 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]Warrants are warrants and honestly they should have been allowed to do it a while ago IMO.
For a warrant to be issued there needs to be sufficient evidence of a crime being committed. A citizen wanting privacy is not evidence of a crime being committed, nor should it be.
A warrant is a warrant, they would not get one unless they had evidence. Suspicious activity is a good example. I think it's fair to say that a VPN can be called fishy. Sure you want to keep things private and so on but honestly as the saying goes "Locks are for honest people". It's perfectly possible to go and do stuff on a computer WITHOUT having a VPN. And if you're doing stuff that requires a VPN then wouldn't you say that's a bit unhonest?
Also, the FBI is not going to go and get a warrant on every VPN user. They simply do not have the resources. I think this applies to more dangerous criminals and systems and so on.
You can call it an invasion of privacy, but in my eyes all you have to do is not use it. They already know where you live so why be upset about it? And if you're worried about other people finding out where you live, maybe you should rethink the people you hang out with or whatever you're doing that requires you to have a VPN.
(Aug 30, 2016, 06:05 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 30, 2016, 12:44 AM)Kung Fury Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 29, 2016, 06:55 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]Warrants are warrants and honestly they should have been allowed to do it a while ago IMO.
For a warrant to be issued there needs to be sufficient evidence of a crime being committed. A citizen wanting privacy is not evidence of a crime being committed, nor should it be.
A warrant is a warrant, they would not get one unless they had evidence. Suspicious activity is a good example. I think it's fair to say that a VPN can be called fishy. Sure you want to keep things private and so on but honestly as the saying goes "Locks are for honest people". It's perfectly possible to go and do stuff on a computer WITHOUT having a VPN. And if you're doing stuff that requires a VPN then wouldn't you say that's a bit unhonest?
Also, the FBI is not going to go and get a warrant on every VPN user. They simply do not have the resources. I think this applies to more dangerous criminals and systems and so on.
You can call it an invasion of privacy, but in my eyes all you have to do is not use it. They already know where you live so why be upset about it? And if you're worried about other people finding out where you live, maybe you should rethink the people you hang out with or whatever you're doing that requires you to have a VPN.
I just wanted to watch US Netflix...
(I pay for RA4WVPN, lifetime, and it is really useful in many use cases)
(Aug 29, 2016, 10:48 PM)Bismo Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 29, 2016, 10:15 PM)Tails Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 29, 2016, 09:51 PM)Bismo Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 28, 2016, 10:00 PM)Tails Wrote: [ -> ]+support, take down more criminals. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear - I would gladly let police search my home without a warrant because there is nothing illegal.
its funny cuz ur name is tails.
xdd
xddd ikr lol its funny cause your da sells avon rekt
i hope you have 2 kids
and once they start to grow up and learn on their own and you watch them become young adults
and then
they all get leukemia
hah that would be a good meme
(Aug 30, 2016, 06:05 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]And if you're doing stuff that requires a VPN then wouldn't you say that's a bit unhonest?
There are plenty of non-malicious uses for VPNs. Like the other guy said, it can be used to access region-blocked content. Some internet providers throttle sites like Netflix, and using a VPN circumvents that. Connecting to a public WiFi hotspot leaves your traffic vulnerable to interception by malicious hackers, but using a VPN solves that problem. It's wrong to think that someone using a VPN is doing something fishy.
Preditor Wrote:maybe you should rethink the people you hang out with or whatever you're doing that requires you to have a VPN.
Saying this is like saying you should rethink what you do that makes you close your curtains at home. Exercising your rights is not evidence of a crime and is not something you should be rethinking.
Preditor Wrote:in my eyes all you have to do is not use it
This logic is flawed. Imagine you live in a country that punishes those who speak out the government. You could make a similar argument of "You can call it a violation of freedom of speech, but all you have to do is not speak out against the government," but that's not a solution at all.
Preditor Wrote:I think this applies to more dangerous criminals and systems and so on.
I don't understand how people can keep forgetting the
very important fact that the
FBI has a history of targeting activists and journalists. (read the links guys)
Let's take Martin Luther King for example, a man who most people agree was a good person, did a good thing for this country by leading the civil rights movement, and even has his own holiday that we celebrate.
He was the subject of extensive surveillance by both the FBI and the NSA. At one point, the FBI even
sent an anonymous letter to him urging him to kill himself. He wasn't the first activist to receive this kind of treatment, and he definitely won't be the last. Things like these are the reasons why we shouldn't lie to ourselves and say that only "bad" people will be targeted by the government, because the evidence shows that this is not the case
at all.
Every single right we have, we have for a good reason. The Bill of Rights was written by people who experienced having their rights violated by the government and knew the values of these freedoms. Even though society has changed a lot since then, the rights American citizens have are principles that are essential to a free society, and are not things that should be disregarded lightly.
But as the saying goes "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
(Aug 31, 2016, 01:08 AM)Kung Fury Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 30, 2016, 06:05 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]And if you're doing stuff that requires a VPN then wouldn't you say that's a bit unhonest?
There are plenty of non-malicious uses for VPNs. Like the other guy said, it can be used to access region-blocked content. Some internet providers throttle sites like Netflix, and using a VPN circumvents that. Connecting to a public WiFi hotspot leaves your traffic vulnerable to interception by malicious hackers, but using a VPN solves that problem. It's wrong to think that someone using a VPN is doing something fishy.
Preditor Wrote:maybe you should rethink the people you hang out with or whatever you're doing that requires you to have a VPN.
Saying this is like saying you should rethink what you do that makes you close your curtains at home. Exercising your rights is not evidence of a crime and is not something you should be rethinking.
Preditor Wrote:in my eyes all you have to do is not use it
This logic is flawed. Imagine you live in a country that punishes those who speak out the government. You could make a similar argument of "You can call it a violation of freedom of speech, but all you have to do is not speak out against the government," but that's not a solution at all.
Preditor Wrote:I think this applies to more dangerous criminals and systems and so on.
I don't understand how people can keep forgetting the very important fact that the FBI has a history of targeting activists and journalists. (read the links guys)
Let's take Martin Luther King for example, a man who most people agree was a good person, did a good thing for this country by leading the civil rights movement, and even has his own holiday that we celebrate. He was the subject of extensive surveillance by both the FBI and the NSA. At one point, the FBI even sent an anonymous letter to him urging him to kill himself. He wasn't the first activist to receive this kind of treatment, and he definitely won't be the last. Things like these are the reasons why we shouldn't lie to ourselves and say that only "bad" people will be targeted by the government, because the evidence shows that this is not the case at all.
Every single right we have, we have for a good reason. The Bill of Rights was written by people who experienced having their rights violated by the government and knew the values of these freedoms. Even though society has changed a lot since then, the rights American citizens have are principles that are essential to a free society, and are not things that should be disregarded lightly.
But as the saying goes "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Last I checked there's a major difference between using a VPN and having your freedom of speech stripped from you.
Also the only viable excuse I can see is hackers which even then maybe just don't use public wifi? And if regions block certain things then they block it for a reason and that means they don't want you accessing it unless they make it able to get to.
And honestly, I don't think any of us here are a journalist or news person that the FBI wants to get to. It's very unlikely they'd target you for wanting to watch netflix or something like that.
And what you do behind closed curtains is what you do, just note that a lot of things people do behind those are considered illegal.
As innocent as people can make these devices appear, I think it's fair to say we all know that things like this are most likely used for things more than just "privacy".
(Aug 31, 2016, 01:33 AM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]Last I checked there's a major difference between using a VPN and having your freedom of speech stripped from you.
Privacy and free speech are both basic human rights and are equally important.
Preditor Wrote:Also the only viable excuse I can see is hackers which even then maybe just don't use public wifi? And if regions block certain things then they block it for a reason and that means they don't want you accessing it unless they make it able to get to.
If a VPN can ensure safety along with the convenience of public wifi, I see no reason not to use one. And if you find a reason for region-blocked content that is actually a good reason and not some bs corporate reason, let me know. Also, I know this doesn't really apply to the US, but in other countries people use things like VPNs and Tor to circumvent censorship, and if that isn't a "viable excuse" then I don't know what is.
Preditor Wrote:And honestly, I don't think any of us here are a journalist or news person that the FBI wants to get to. It's very unlikely they'd target you for wanting to watch netflix or something like that.
It doesn't really matter if any of
us are activists or journalists. If the FBI uses this to try to silence any activist or journalist anywhere, then the system has failed and the FBI is going against the very freedoms it claims to protect. Of course they're not gonna get a warrant for you for watching Netflix, but if you are part of some sort of social or political movement the FBI doesn't like and you happen to be using VPNs or Tor to exercise your right to privacy, they can get a warrant to hack your computer.
Preditor Wrote:And what you do behind closed curtains is what you do, just note that a lot of things people do behind those are considered illegal.
So you think most people do illegal things behind their curtains now? I'm pretty sure most people close their curtains just because they don't like random people looking into their house at night. Pretty reasonable if you ask me. The same principle can be applied to your online activity.
Preditor Wrote:As innocent as people can make these devices appear, I think it's fair to say we all know that things like this are most likely used for things more than just "privacy".
I think you just need to stop assuming most people who like to exercise their right to privacy are some kind of criminal when in reality most of these people just don't like others figuratively breathing down their neck.
I never did any bad things and one day I received post from the police about saying "too nationalistic" things in the internet. So, they watched me without any "proper" reason. I belive that much people are beeing watched without any warrant or for a silly reason.
(Aug 31, 2016, 02:19 PM)Nudelsalat im Panzer Wrote: [ -> ]I never did any bad things and one day I received post from the police about saying "too nationalistic" things in the internet. So, they watched me without any "proper" reason. I belive that much people are beeing watched without any warrant or for a silly reason.
You live in Germany right? The "volksverhetzung" you have is fucked up. Hell, Germany even looked into if two or three Facebook bosses broke that law because they did not clean up "racist" comments about the refugee wave last year. So they probably had a warrant because you may have broken that law. We have a similiar law here in Sweden called "Hets mot folkgrupp". It is a bullshit law that can be used against you for speaking your mind, so much for freedom of speech, eh?
The law is called "Incitement to hatred" in English I believe.
(Sep 4, 2016, 07:03 PM)connbob Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 28, 2016, 08:32 AM)Soviethooves Wrote: [ -> ]I ain't got nothing to hide.
"Saying you don't need privacy because you have nothing to hide is like saying you don't need freedom of speech because you have nothing to say." - Edward Snowden
"I ain't got nothing to hide." -Soviethooves
(Sep 4, 2016, 09:03 PM)Humla Wrote: [ -> ] (Aug 31, 2016, 02:19 PM)Nudelsalat im Panzer Wrote: [ -> ]I never did any bad things and one day I received post from the police about saying "too nationalistic" things in the internet. So, they watched me without any "proper" reason. I belive that much people are beeing watched without any warrant or for a silly reason.
You live in Germany right? The "volksverhetzung" you have is fucked up. Hell, Germany even looked into if two or three Facebook bosses broke that law because they did not clean up "racist" comments about the refugee wave last year. So they probably had a warrant because you may have broken that law. We have a similiar law here in Sweden called "Hets mot folkgrupp". It is a bullshit law that can be used against you for speaking your mind, so much for freedom of speech, eh?
The law is called "Incitement to hatred" in English I believe.
Right. Thanks for this good text. The law "Volksverhetzung" is really fucked up. The government can use it against nearly every sentence. You can get up to 12 years of prison if you say "I dont think that the NS regime killed 6 million jews".
![[Image: AuKznoF.png]](https://imgur.com/AuKznoF.png)