digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

See the original image at privacyinternational.org

U.S. is now an "endemic surveillance society"

privacyinternational.org — America now joins Russia, the U.K., and China as one of the world's endemic surveillance societies. Still think Orwellian comparisons are hyperbole?

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • AbortionsTickle, on 12/30/2007, -14/+160Ugh. This is almost disgusting. How could our leaders do this? How could they turn Our America into what it is today?
    • Rotzooi, on 12/30/2007, -5/+83With still 30% of the population behind them, and the other 70% apathetic, the answer would be: very easily, thank you very much.
    • fractalman, on 12/30/2007, -6/+42Americans have become sheep. Sheep are happy to follow their shepherd. Time to stop being sheep and do something. Replace congress. Don't vote a single congressman back into office this year. Replace them all.
      • Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 12/30/2007, -15/+8I would vote to put Obama back in congress, but with any luck he will be in the white house. I'd also support Dennis Kucinich, Robert Wexler, and the other house members who have the balls to impeach the Dick. (Pun intended.)

        Other than that, I'd happily replace them all.
        • elnerdo, on 12/31/2007, -1/+6No. Replace them ALL. That means 'with no exceptions'
      • MaximusPryme, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4I'd vote to keep Ron Paul if he doesn't become President or sent to the gulags for "corrupting America" or "being a terrorist" or maybe they'll just be blunt about it and say they'll arrest him for "being a tattle-tale".

        I'd also keep Kucinich, Obama, and Wexler. Yea, other than that they can all go to hell.
      • iainc, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Use your 2nd amendment rights: organise an armed, million man march on Washington DC and hang the bastards who are in power. You can't make an omelet without breaing a few eggs. It'd be a start.
      • bbardlbradd, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2It's even worse hearing people say "It's time to do something" and no one does anything... ever. Maybe a few "radicals" stand out on the corner of a busy street, screaming at people who are driving by @ 40-50mph and blasting brittany spears...

        If you've read anything about any other nation in the world, for an excellent example, about France or about Venezuela, you'd know that there are entire nations out there that care about politics and they'll hit the streets together and ***** things up if something gets out of hand... I don't see this in America, not on that level... People just don't care enough, we're all too selfish to take time out of our busy days of watching American Idol to protest together to halt this ginormous failing machine and correct it before it reaches it's breaking point or ends up killing all of us.
        • Waterrat, on 01/02/2008, -0/+1 I think we do care enough,but i feel the elite has worked very hard to keep us apathetic and to keep us from believing we have any effect on what happens in this country....They don't want us to wake up and smell the coffee, cause if we do they are in deep cow dung.
    • rheaume, on 12/30/2007, -1/+15YOU have done this.
    • krnldmp, on 12/30/2007, -0/+30Since Americans started referring to politicians as "Leaders".
      • TDR25, on 12/31/2007, -0/+5They're no leaders of me, they're mis-leaders.
    • pimpofpixels, on 12/30/2007, -2/+31Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

      Our nation was founded be people skeptical of government who designed a system with safeguards to limit the power. Unfortunately, the more power you have the more you can erode those safeguards, and the more dated those safeguards become the less their specifics can shield us from the conditions of modern life.

      I'm POSITIVE that if the constitution were written today there'd be provisions to shield us from our government spying on our email, telephones, and Internet activity.

      "Those who would give up liberty for security will get neither."
    • AdamGeld, on 12/31/2007, -5/+6It's called money. Some people value it way too much.
    • matador3, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2The law perverted! And along with it all the collective forces of the nation! The law, I say, not only turned aside from its proper end, but made to pursue a directly contrary end! The law become the instrument, instead of the restrainer, of all kinds of cupidity! The law itself perpetrating the very iniquity that it is its function to punish! Certainly, if this is so, it is a serious matter, to which I should be allowed to call the attention of my fellow citizens.

      http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
      http://www.freeaudio.org/fbastiat/thelaw.html
    • Nellyp86, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1because we let them.
      ..sad, really
    • SpyDerMann, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1You said it, they're your leaders. The rest has just been following.
    • dbt10, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2It benefits them completely, more power is amassed centrally while the citizens of the country would rather worry about the Spears' sisters lives. Meanwhile there are democrats with no backbones afraid of losing money from lobbyists. It seems like the nation is collectively thinking "oh I'll put it off until the next election."

      It's sad that the only man with balls currently is the precise one whose government has run America into despair by creating a theological authoritarian state.
    • spargett, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1"We" voted for them.
    • jjmckay, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Many reasons why. One of the bigger reasons is widespread human insanity. Another would be that we don't truly respect the Constitution 'en masse. Another is that we easily fall prey to fear mongering by politicians and the media. Another reason is that we often blame 'capitalism' and so-called 'open markets' when they are, in fact, not that at all. We haven't had either for some years now.

      My adviice: Wake up America. Stop taking everything so seriously. That would be a step towards sanity. Sane actions from an insane society are not possible. The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle - great read on understanding our widespread human insanity. Or his book "a new earth".
    • iainc, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Don't blame your leaders. Blame yourselves for letting it happen.
    • caferrell, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4So we're in the same category as China, Russia and Singapore......
      This has become so incredibly disheartening that I catch myself thinking about turning my back on my responsibility as a citizen and just giving up. That is what happens to many thoughtful people; the task is too daunting, the increase in State power has been so swift and all-pervasive, it appears that we cannot stop it. It appears that rebellion, even peaceful rebellion, will accomplish nothing more than to put our families at risk. It seems tempting to settle into apathy, to sit back and watch the entertainment that the Organization has prepared for us.
      So maybe we should just get more SOMA and chill out somewhere.
      Nah, ***** that! I am an American dammit, and I will defend my freedom.
      • njcarlos, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1For a second, I was about to kick you in the nuts. However, you redeemed yourself in one line of text.
        • Waterrat, on 01/02/2008, -0/+2TV is your SOMA and if you don't like that SOMA,try the other one,it's called religion.
  • ahughes, on 12/30/2007, -4/+102Most disturbing to me is how Canada's ranking is "decaying".
    • AROZ, on 12/30/2007, -2/+24I hope we don't get sucked into that black hole.
    • oneoverzero, on 12/30/2007, -3/+10I'm disturbed that the freest country is Greece.

      Good think I'm taking the language in high school, may find myself moving there if America fails to improve.
      • heliox, on 12/31/2007, -18/+3Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
        • Blazekun, on 12/31/2007, -2/+15I hope you realize what an inane comment that is. That's like saying "I quit!" and having your boss go "You can't quit! You're fired!" It's stupid and reeks of douchebaggery.
          • CorpT, on 12/31/2007, -10/+4So does thinking taking Greek in High School and threatening to move there if America fails to improve.
        • oneoverzero, on 12/31/2007, -2/+10My intent wasn't to leave right away, instead it was to do all I can to create change here, but if we move into a full blown police state, I'm not sticking around.
        • TDR25, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2No offense man, but I don't think you'd be allowed to leave either. You know with a police state and all, they wouldn't allow too many people to leave the country.
      • amiches, on 12/31/2007, -9/+1Try, you know, graduating high school before making decisions like "what to do if America becomes a fascist police state"
      • Beiximosi, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Oh man, your school teaches Greek? Lucky bastard.
      • Skooma714, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2In before "Sparta"
    • cheesehead, on 12/31/2007, -0/+18I used to be proud to be Canadian. But it seems we've just become too nice, and we've allowed too much American Corporate influence to corrupt our gov'ts. Federally and Provincially. A good place to start the cleanup would be to run lobbyists and their political whores out of town or jail them. In real jails not like Conrad Black's country club.
      Lobbyiing is just another word for bribery. I wonder how much lobbying/ bribery Jim Prentice required to try to steal our digital rights over Christmas?
      • UNL1M1T3D, on 12/31/2007, -1/+8Clean the lobbyists out while you still can. The only way to get all the lobbyists out of Washington is with a 1 megaton warhead.
      • oxdeltaxo, on 12/31/2007, -0/+7That won't be enough, they're like cockroaches.
    • forgottend, on 12/31/2007, -0/+13This is what happens when you elect Stephen Harper. He is trying to suspend Habeas corpus, and the liberals are afraid to vote against him because they don't think they can win in a new election. Thank god we still have the French in canada or else we would be as screwed as the US is.
      • oxdeltaxo, on 12/31/2007, -2/+1Yep, too bad some of the French Canadians want to separate :/.
      • Protonz, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2I really like the minority government setup in Canada, much better than the winner of 51% takes all in the US. I think this is probably helping more than anything to slow down the increase of government power. It sure isn't stopping or reversing it though.
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Yeah Stephen Harper has some pretty rotten ideas.
    • DarkyHelmety, on 12/31/2007, -0/+6Especially since last year we had the deep green rating.... ugh, somebody get that clown out of the prime minister chair. Corruption is preferable to a controlling society...
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Still seems Canada has one of the worlds highest scores.
    • vidar808, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Canada will be a part of the 'North American Union' if you don't watch out!
    • 42Vindictive, on 12/31/2007, -2/+2I am also afraid. But alas, I am not 18, so I have almost no say whatsoever.

      If our freedom is to be improved, voting laws need to be ratified.
    • topace3000, on 12/31/2007, -4/+1Thank god some ***** organization with a clear political goal gave you a higher arbitrary number. Grats!
  • Dumbledorito, on 12/30/2007, -8/+172Your Digging of this article has been noted and forwarded to the proper authorities. Your employer may be contacting you. Please make no sudden movements until next Wednesday.
    • AdamGeld, on 12/31/2007, -1/+12The sad thing is, that if something like that actually happened, I wouldn't be surprised.
  • Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -2/+107It is true that we're headed down a perilous path. However, I take heart in the fact that freedom has never had a better friend than the Internet and the cell phone. At no time in history has information been so easily available to the masses.

    Protect the Internet as it currently exists, and we'll have a better chance at defeating the fascists within our society.
    • baalzebub, on 12/30/2007, -0/+27i would trust a two-way radio (Ham) more than i would trust a cellphone, AT&T controls most of those cellphone towers without which your cellphone would be a brick, and i am sure AT&T are in collusion with the US Government and monitors it all and would pull the plug on anyone they want to...
      • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2Cellphone is more secure because of obscurity principle. Yes, you're phone call may well be intercepted and recorded, but AFAIK they don't keep them very long and the chances of your call being picked out of the hundreds of millions made each day are very slim.
        It'll be a different story if the technology ever makes full archiving of collected data feasible.
        • baalzebub, on 12/30/2007, -1/+1there is a hell of a lot of bandwidth between 1800KHZ and 450MHZ lets see you find a specific someone in that...
          • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2Fair enough, I didn't realise there were that many channels to play with to be fair. I don't reckon they could pick a single conversation out of either, really, as yet.
            OK - say you know (for example) a drug dealer and you want to call him to order some illicit goods, you don't call him up and shout "OI MR DRUG DEALER! I WANT SOME DRUGS! COME AROUND MY HOUSE AND SELL ME SOME!".
            You'd probably just say something vague and even if they are listening, which they almost certainly aren't, they wouldn't know what you meant. If you really were one of these terrosist lads, tho, it'd be difficult to plan a major operation over the phone without letting on.
            So I'm relatively sanguine about phone tapping.
          • williamdyer, on 12/31/2007, -1/+3@jambox

            First, let me get the usage nitpick out of the way: "Sanguine" means excited, literally flushed.

            Second, let me assure you that the whole freaking reason the world has digital signal processors is that the NSA has been building machines for the past 30 years to try to listen to everything.

            In that time, the number of people talking has, maybe, doubled, worldwide.

            The computer power applied to listening to them has increased by a staggering amount. Something like 6 or 7 orders of magnitude. You could probably funnel all U.S. telecom voice traffic into a single fiber, and build a single machine powerful enough to listen to all of it. You don't need "acres" of computes to do that.

            But be assured the NSA is buying and building acres of machines that powerful. They are very likely measuring everything they can think of in every message they can suck into Fort Mead.
      • norcalscan, on 12/30/2007, -0/+6Amateur radio (as with any radio) can be listened to by the NSA just as easily as NSA looking at the logs of our ATT calls. There are countless remote RF monitoring stations. More under the auspices of FCC and Military resources, but nonetheless, they're all in bed with each other. FCC remote monitoring facility just north of Livermore in Bay Area, Military HF communications covering acres of land just south of Dixon (west of Sacramento). But yes, I will rely on my amateur radio when ***** hits the fan (by natural OR political disaster)
        • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -2/+2Have you got a generator? When that meteorite strikes, mains power ain't going to last too long.
    • Derelict267, on 12/30/2007, -6/+17Say yes to net neutrality.
      • nakani, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Let's involve government in the internet
      • thallium205, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3say NO to net neutrality. Keep it free!
        • atheinostic, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2Without legal protections, the net won't be free
      • jjmckay, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2Net neutrality is direct government intervention into the Internet. Don't buy into the promises of government that they'll help you! They won't! They'll corrupt it into their own ends as we surrender our freedoms!
      • Misesean, on 01/01/2008, -0/+2As someone said a few weeks ago: "Net Neutrality" is to net neutrality as "PATRIOT act" is to patriotism.
    • KSUdesigner, on 12/30/2007, -0/+6Both are great tools to get information to the masses, but at the same time both are also great tools for government surveillance.
      • GhostyBoy, on 12/30/2007, -1/+4Government surveillance relies heavily on the idea that you THINK you are being watched. It is beyond impossible for them to sort through all this information, although they could have a few search filters for keywords and phrases.
        • williamdyer, on 12/30/2007, -3/+3They automate the sorting. You ARE being watched. If you do not act to destroy the system, your freedom is lost.
          • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -2/+2Where's your evidence of this Will? Do you know that you need probable cause and the location of the likely camera to get a warrant from a judge to look at the camera data? TO get that far you need to commit a crime.
          • Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -1/+2@noah

            Not true, noah. You know the last thing businesses would like to do is get on the bad side of law enforcement. They'll always freely share what they have taped.
    • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -0/+4sadly, cell phones are neither private nor safe. nor is most internet communication.
    • Jugalator, on 12/31/2007, -0/+9Still, clinging on to the online world as a free outpost is saddening and clearly not enough in a modern society.

      This map is much worse than former editions I've seen, and as one would have guessed, the world overall is in a downward spiral especially since the 9/11 attacks. These attacks must have surpassed Bin Laden's wildest dreams in their effect.
    • krusader3z, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Props. Dugg twice if I could.
  • chadseld, on 12/30/2007, -1/+42The question is not "How could our leaders be so blind to the dangers of a surveillance society?" The dangers only affect the 'people' and our leaders no longer consider themselves to be part of that group.
    • HesNikke, on 12/30/2007, -0/+19part of the problem is that our SERVANTS came to think of themselves as our LEADERS. think about it.
  • Derelict267, on 12/30/2007, -19/+40How do we equate with the UK in terms of surveillance? We don't have CCTV cameras on every block...
    • Dumbledorito, on 12/30/2007, -5/+20In the US, the businesses have them and happily turn their recordings over whenever needed. We also have those lovely AT&T switching rooms that the NSA likes to listen to on rainy afternoons.
      • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -3/+6And you think that has more to do with government conspiracy than it does with business owners worried about being robbed and the criminal getting away? You can bitch about how they assume everyone is a criminal when they have cameras but assuming everyone was innocent didn't exactly work. If we knew who was guilty beforehand we wouldn't need courts.
    • Derelict267, on 12/30/2007, -0/+20Also, please tell me why Germany is in the green. That seemed out of place and I looked into it and found this on wikipedia:

      The Netherlands and Germany are reputed to have the highest levels of covert governmental mobile phone tapping. The article on telephone tapping states:
      "There were proposals for European mobile phones to use stronger encryption, but this was opposed by a number of European countries, including the Netherlands and Germany, which are among the world's most prolific telephone tappers (over 10000+ phone numbers in both countries in 2003)."
      In 2002 German citizens were tipped off about the scale of tapping, when a software error led to a phone number allocated to the German Secret Service being listed on mobile telephone bills. [5]

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance
      • Jugalator, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4The US is reputed to have large scale "pre-emptive" phone wiretapping in effect too, so I'm not so sure this is negatively distinguishing Germany.

        Anyway, the reasoning behind the respective ratings is explained in detail in the article.
      • hinchb, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2Somebody failed geography. I think you mean GREECE. I'm thinking that the 14 other people that dugg you up must've been in your class.
    • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -3/+6Neither do we. Get your facts straight!
      • widgetmaker, on 12/31/2007, -5/+2We're caught several hundred times a day on average in the uk. Every shop you visit, every major public place, every office, every car entering the centre of London...
        To clarify though most the cameras do do good (ie stopping street crime)but alot are unnecessary. However the situation is not Orwellian by any means.
        • Parisjune, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4..."not Orwellian by any means"??? The UK has the most CCTV cameras in the world. Exactly when do you think it becomes Orwellian?
    • meatmcguffin, on 12/30/2007, -6/+14You ***** moron.

      Seriously. As much as it would make you feel better about the USA turning into a police state, there are not cameras on every block. There are many surveillance cameras in the *centre* of the *capital city* because it's been rocked by terrorism so many times (IRA, etc) and it's one of the World's economic powerhouses. There are no cameras on private property and no one is forced to have one on their property. They are all clearly marked, require a license, have accountability and most are for businesses who use them to protect from crime. The government own a few but mainly to keep the peace.

      Not that i agree with any of this, personally i think it's abhorrent, but there are certainly not 'cameras on every block'. Go back to worrying about the potential suspension of habeas corpus in your own country.
      • Myonosken, on 12/30/2007, -0/+8I'd like to add to this, stray outside of Manchester, London, Sheffield etc, and you'll find that there are hardly any government cameras. I know where I live, which is VERY near Sheffield, we have 2 and these are listed at the local council office.
      • JohnP, on 12/30/2007, -2/+4Id just like to point out that most americans believe that the UK is a dictatorship, not only because theyre generally exposed to massive levels of ***** in their own countries, but because of the flow of anti UK BS that comes from the news crop press, even in the UK. Check the link for a blaring example.

        http://digg.com/world_news/The_UK_holocaust_teachi ...
        • Derelict267, on 12/30/2007, -1/+5I don't believe the UK is a dictatorship! I know they're a Parliamentary Democracy and I do like the UK I think they should be our greatest ally. I don't know why everyone gets so offensive :( I didn't mean any offense.
        • meatmcguffin, on 12/31/2007, -1/+2Ironically, it's our own press that keeps the government in line, from the papers to Private Eye. They violently complain against ever government initiative from the millenium dome, to the crossrail, to id cards to the scandal of the missing data. This country tolerates it because, on the off chance the papers are right, they are fighting for an important cause.

          Also, most americans believe they have more freedoms than the rest of the World, UK included.

          I won't lose sleep over what they say.
          • JohnP, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4Thats the thing though, its tolerable when its contained in the UK, but this stuff goes international, and you end up with situations like the "UK schools deny holocaust to please muslim terrorist children" e-mails being dropped in every americans inbox. Then every time you meet an american who has e-mail, youre told about what a ***** 1984 islamist state you live in, and youre expected to keep a straight face.

            It is widely evident on digg that the US mob majority believe some utter bollocks. It must be a cultural thing, because the UK isnt short on morons.. I guess the intelligent people in the UK dont give so much time to the morons.
      • Derelict267, on 12/30/2007, -1/+4I didn't mean any offense by it, no need to throw insults =/. I like the UK, I'm just trying to give some perspective.
        I did exaggerate a bit but that should be obvious, though I looked at the information I had:

        In 2002 it was estimated[2] that the United Kingdom was monitored by over fifteen million CCTV cameras, some with a facial recognition capacity, with practically all town centres under surveillance. Serious concerns have been raised that the facial biometric information which will be stored on a central database through the ID Card scheme could be linked to facial recognition systems and state-owned CCTV cameras to identify individuals anywhere in the UK, or even to compile a database of wanted citizens' movements without their knowledge or consent. Currently, in the City of Westminster, microphones are being fitted next to CCTV cameras. Westminster council claims that they are simply part of an initiative against urban noise, and will not "be used to snoop", but comments from a council spokesman appear to imply that they have been deliberately designed to capture an audio stream alongside the video stream, rather than simply reporting noise levels.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance
        • Myonosken, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3If you'd been to London, the amount of cameras in the centre probably equates to bout 10 of that 15 million.
        • meatmcguffin, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4Apologies for throwing insults. You're clearly smarter than the usual idiot who rolls out that stupid argument without checking the facts. I must admit, on paper it does seem bad, but there honestly are very few cameras anywhere except the heavily built up areas in London and even then it isn't as noticeable or choking as the statistics would suggest.

          I don't think there's any reason to be too worried just yet. The press in this country are incredibly fierce, we have the BBC, an incredible nonbiased news source, and satire is a very popular and appreciated form of entertainment. It's why i don't feel the government too much, we have three failsafes to inform 90% of the public of what they need to fear.
    • manicleek, on 12/30/2007, -1/+14The UK doesn't have CCTV on every block, it does have them all over the place in town and city centers, but not where the general populace lives in the suburbs. I honestly couldn't tell you where the nearest CCTV camera was to where I live. Whilst the situation may be getting worse, it's no-where near as bad as some people make it out to be.

      Also, whilst CCTV is prevalent in city centers I find it hard to condemn given the fact that my life was saved by them once.
      • spudnic, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4Yeah I came here to answer the question posed in the description with a 'yes'.
        Anyone who thinks security cameras in public places is even remotely like 1984 obviously hasn't read the book.
      • Skooma714, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1It is still unnerving. I won't go to England because of it.

        Then I again I could probably skirt it by staying away from London.
    • Parisjune, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1http://edition.cnn.com/2007/TECH/08/01/nyc.surveil ...
  • Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 12/30/2007, -37/+8Shamless political plug? Yes.
    Likelyhood of being dugg down? Yes.
    But I will never give up hope.

    OBAMA '08.
    http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
    • StormCommander, on 12/30/2007, -0/+17I dare you to name some things that Obama says that fixes problems like these...
    • pateo, on 12/31/2007, -4/+3Left wing puppet. Please, no.
  • gcauthon, on 12/30/2007, -4/+15The colors don't even match up with the legend. Could the chart be a little more confusing? I think they screwed up the red/maroon (Australia, Brazil, etc.). But WTF is Greece? There are two greenish colors in the legend and neither of them match.
    • whahaa, on 12/30/2007, -0/+5they match on my screen. greece is 3.1-3.5 adequate.

      maybe it's your monitor?
  • MutatedNantuko, on 12/30/2007, -18/+27"Still think Orwellian comparisons are hyperbole?"
    Yes?
    • tmccool, on 12/30/2007, -16/+5Agreed. This is just another alarmist story. CCTV cameras can't be an invasion of privacy if they are watching over public street corners. What are you doing on that street corner that you don't want anyone to know about?
      • KiwiHopeful, on 12/30/2007, -1/+9The problem with the 'you have nothing to fear if you're doing nothing illegal' argument is the danger that what you are doing today becomes illegal tomorrow.
        • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -4/+2Which doesn't matter because you can't be charged for crimes that weren't crimes when you did them.

          If they start rounding up people that pick their noses on CCTV then you worry, but now, they're watching for the muggers, pick-pockets, or idiot drivers that used to get away with it.
          • tmccool, on 12/30/2007, -7/+1Let's be honest. Even if the Democrats do a bad job in Congress, we have a free media that still holds the government responsible for its faults. There's no point in getting up in arms about surveillance cameras.
          • Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -2/+8@tmcool

            "...we have a free media that still holds the government responsible for its faults."

            For the love of whomever is dearest to you, tell me you are joking.
          • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2You have access to media outlets from outside the country, even if you believe that the media in the US is controlled, you still have a free media outlet.
      • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -1/+6Selling crack.
      • atheinostic, on 12/30/2007, -0/+9Are you under the impression that governments are run by angels?

        Martin Luther King, Jr. was under "surveillance" by the U.S. gov't. You know what he was doing on a street corner? Leading mass protests against unethical government policies.

        The FBI tried discredit King and scuttle the civil rights movement by revealing things about his private life, possibly even manipulating surveillance data that they had harvested without warrants.
        • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2Martin Luther King is an excellent example. I think he would suffer less harrassment if he were arounf these days though, even if the technology has improved to enable more invasive surveillance, the FBI and such are a lot more professional than the nutcases they had back then. Like Hoover. I hate him so much! They say he once sent MLK a depressing letter hoping he would kill himself.
      • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -4/+0in the words of an earlier post,
        you ***** MORON.
        Move to a totalitarian country where you belong. Some of us like the goddamn BILL OF RIGHTS. Try North Korea, why don't you?
      • randomerratum, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1The question is what am I doing on the street corner that i WANT people to know about... the answer, nothing. I'm not doing anything legal or illegal - but whatever I do, I don't trust anyone to do what they will with that information. I don't want the government to see my medical information, read my digg posts, watch my bank account... I'm not doing anything wrong, but I don't trust anyone that wants to put our lives into a secret database!

        It's not us, it's them.
      • Skooma714, on 12/31/2007, -0/+11. It's a question of degrees. If you let them take an inch they will try to take the yard.
        2. In the USA it is not a duty of the government to watch everybody according to the Constitution.
    • Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -1/+8Freedom of Movement is a Constitutionally recognized right; as is anonymity. If you cannot move freely, anonymously, that is a problem.
      • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -5/+3You know that the cameras are responses to other problems that we complained about and wanted taken care of right? Also you do know that you remain anonymous and free to move unless a crime is reported in the area of a camera and the see you in the act of a crime when they check the tape.
        • Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -5/+5That's like saying the government has a right to set up a camera in your living room so long as it only checks it if and when there's a crime committed in your home.

          Also, many of these cameras actually have someone on the other side viewing the footage. So, it's really not an "if x happens y will occur" type scenario as you paint it.
          • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -3/+3It's not the same at all! The government has responsibility for what happens on the street, but not in your living room, essentially unless someone complains about it.
            CCTV is put in to reduce petty crime and sometimes it helps with more serious stuff as well - I don't know of anyone who has been harrassed by the state because of CCTV footage..?
        • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -3/+3No, Napoleone, it's is not anything like that at all. Firstly the government does not install cameras in stores, store owners do. So using your analogy it would be like me putting my own camera in my own home out of fear of a crime then allowing the police access to the specific timestamped data from that camera IF a crime occurs.

          As for cameras that are being watched they are watched because X has happened enough before that they know to watch for X and act to stop it.

          Regardless you are free to move and remain anonymous until you commit a crime.
        • bobcrain, on 12/31/2007, -2/+0No, actually it's like putting a camera in a rental property you own. Then telling the potential renter that if they don't want the cameria there tuff luck!

          Drive down any street in a city and just count how many you pass by. Stop at the local mall and see how many are in the parking lot.

          Then next step will be Electronic ID cards with a chip that can be tracked using GPS... Of course for our safety.
          • noahhoward, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1You haven't been to many places in the US have you? Any street? Any city? Utter *****.
    • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -0/+0Mutated, indeed. Haploid.
    • bieber, on 12/31/2007, -3/+3The very fact that there's a front-page Digg article comparing America to 1984 proves that the comparison is very much hyperbole...
      • atheinostic, on 12/31/2007, -1/+6Circular reasoning works because circular reasoning works!
  • daxsymbiont, on 12/30/2007, -8/+3You can keep them in 'sensitive public areas', but get them off people's homes.
    • krnldmp, on 12/30/2007, -1/+8No. Put them on your homes. Bring them with you. Record video of police and government officials. It's the "public" cameras that you have to worry about.
      • Urusai, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2Hell yeah; watch the watchmen.
      • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2Yeah, if a rent-a-cop gives you a tasering and nobody sees it or films it, they get away with it.
    • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -1/+5Where do you live that has a camera in your house?
  • Frostman3D, on 12/30/2007, -22/+15If we don't take our country back now, we never will. This is our last chance. I don't want it to come to bloodshed, but I'll fight to be free.

    RON PAUL NOW DAMMIT!
    • heebeejeebie, on 12/30/2007, -10/+4Do you think the fact you are able to post what you just posted without fear doesn't mean you are free?
      • williamdyer, on 12/30/2007, -2/+6Most Chinese dissidents are not jailed. What is your point?
  • amrizzle, on 12/30/2007, -12/+13Anybody else get paranoid about digging this article? :P
    • StormCommander, on 12/30/2007, -3/+4No.
    • widgetmaker, on 12/31/2007, -2/+1No because I'm not paranoid.
      • Waterrat, on 01/02/2008, -0/+1 if your not paranoid,your just not paying enough attention!
        Read Chomsky's "Understanding Power."
  • enuz4, on 12/30/2007, -13/+3Buried for the multiple shades of red. Red on the map and on the key are different.
  • scabbers, on 12/30/2007, -3/+9Some surveillance would be useful in Greece, considering the police like to beat people up all the time!
  • ESTEBEVERDE, on 12/30/2007, -6/+49It's not our leaders.

    It's US.
  • StormCommander, on 12/30/2007, -22/+14This is what everyone's talking about... Ron Paul is the only candidate who has realistic fixes for America's problems.
    • williamdyer, on 12/30/2007, -4/+4Kucinich is a good choice too. Vote ONLY for peace candidates.
      • breezytrees, on 12/31/2007, -2/+3peace has nothing to do with it. privacy invasions are done for our "safety." It can be safety from anything... guns... child porn... axe wielding rapists.... etc
  • heebeejeebie, on 12/30/2007, -18/+18How many of you know anyone that has had anything bad happen to them from government surveillance? The worst I've had happen to me was a photo ticket for running a red light. Which I deserved. I see all these posts about us losing our rights due to all of this eavesdropping happening but have never seen anything reported where any american citizen has been inprisoned, fined, killed, etc.
    • Pake, on 12/30/2007, -11/+7Now you've done it. Some conspiracy theorist is going to come on here any minute and tell you that you can't do this and that and that they heard from a friend that their friend's brother's mother's grandma's nephew's 2nd aunt's ex-husband was imprisoned in Gitmo. Oh, the the Dailykos told them so.
    • Dumbledorito, on 12/30/2007, -1/+11I'm sorry, but that's classified... because we say so.
    • KiwiHopeful, on 12/30/2007, -9/+7Have you not seem the *many* videos of police videotaping people as they exercise their Constitutional right to freely assemble and redress grievances? The tapes were used as part of a larger effort to gather information about protesters, whose names were then added to databases and 'watch lists.' Now, why would the government be doing such a thing?
      • heebeejeebie, on 12/30/2007, -4/+7By what fact do you base that the tapes were used in a larger effort to gather info on protestors? Have you seen the database? Has this been reported on 60 minutes? NY times? Anyplace? Or is this an opinion?
      • Pake, on 12/30/2007, -3/+5Oh, you mean the videos they are required by law to take so that if anything happens, the court has video evidence? You know, the same ***** reason all police vehicles are required by law to mount cameras to their dashboards...
      • adeptusliberus, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1They actually record this so that if ANYONE- cops or protesters- do anything illegal- it's on video, which can be shown in court. It's not like there's a Flowers By Irene( ala the simpsons) truck outside your house after you've been to a protest. Also, local law enforcement may have the right to remove protesters if they're blocking traffic, according to local state or county codes.
      • Notasheeple, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1I don't know but Hitler's Gestapo did similar things................
    • Derelict267, on 12/30/2007, -4/+6Oh god here come the posts with the train repair yards oh oh I mean "FEMA Death camps"
    • Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -6/+17How many of you know of anyone who's been to one of the CIA's overseas secret prisons? How many of you know someone in Gitmo? See? So long as you know of no first hand accounts, there is nothing to fear.

      You're a ***** idiot.
      • heebeejeebie, on 12/30/2007, -6/+4And you are obviously a Mensa genius but you didn't answer my question. Who do you know that has been affected negatively by US surveillance? Go ahead and show your true IQ by calling me a ***** idiot again and staying away from the question I asked and spouting BS about Gitmo and CIA prisons.
        • Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -3/+5CIA and Gitmo are *****? Go try selling that one out in the open, away from the reply section. And let's see how fast you get discredited.
        • atheinostic, on 12/30/2007, -1/+7If the government violates anyone's liberty, everyone's liberty is threatened.
        • HesNikke, on 12/30/2007, -3/+11First they came for the Jews
          and I did not speak out
          because I was not a Jew.
          Then they came for the Communists
          and I did not speak out
          because I was not a Communist.
          Then they came for the trade unionists
          and I did not speak out
          because I was not a trade unionist.
          Then they came for me
          and there was no one left
          to speak out for me.

          Pastor Martin Niemöller
      • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2Seriously you're equating being picked up in a war zone when you were a perceived threat to being watched on a camera in the 7-11?
      • madroneDorf, on 12/31/2007, -0/+0Evidentaly we picked up people in Afghanistan using domestic survelliance.

        Not that I'm defending Gitmo or Secret prisons, but it's not related to domestic privacy
    • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -6/+3You are simply too cretinous to bother replying to. I was going to quote the famous Niemoller passage but I doubt seriously that you can READ anything but far right propaganda screeds.
      You cretin, where do you think totalitarianism starts? Not with a bang but with a whimper. Oh, sorry, that's literature and beyond you. In words of one syllable, CIVIL RIGHTS ARE STOLEN ONE INCH AT A TIME.
      Try reading some history. Oh, sorry. You can't read. much less think.
      • heliox, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4You like the word - cretin, don't you? Did you just learn it?
        • jsmu, on 12/31/2007, -2/+0No, it's simply so difficult to find appropriate descriptions for people like you that when one hits on a useful word one tends to overuse it. :-)
      • daverave999, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3I feel the need to point out that 'CIVIL' and 'STOLEN' are both words containing more than one syllable.
        • jsmu, on 12/31/2007, -1/+0So sorry I couldn't stick to monosyllables--I know how much more difficult it made your reading experience.
      • adeptusliberus, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2jsmu, you're just being a dick here. No one is going to listen to you, or take anything you say seriously. You can't sway someone's opinion by insulting them and questioning their ability to read.
    • atheinostic, on 12/31/2007, -0/+14I don't know him personally, but Yaser Esam Hamdi was an American citizen and he was imprisoned illegally for years - and was never charged with a crime. When the U.S. Supreme Court finally forced the Bush Administration to either charge him with an actual crime or release him, Bush decided to release him.

      He is just one example, of course, but that example is an illustration that the principles of our democracy are being formally disregarded by those in power.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaser_Esam_Hamdi
    • breezytrees, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4it's not just surveillance cameras that invade your privacy... in many many other ways your privacy is invaded daily. Whenever I go to the airport and the guy takes me aside and feels up my genital region for example.... Or when I go to starbucks and browse the wifi, starbucks is legally required to report suspicious activity I make. My isp monitors what websites i go to. Our phone call records are monitored and stored in a giant database by the NSA. Who else knows what they do.

      And you worry about surveillance cameras?
    • jjmckay, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Its a good question you ask. How do you qualify 'bad'? I'd say that %100 of the US population has had something bad happen to them already on account of state-ism here. Look at your pay check. What do they take? Are we serfs? We are all victims of threats by our government. We must comply, by law, or face persecution. We are servitude to them, not the other way around. The greatest threats to a society come not from common criminals but the so-called trusted elite. You don't know what the future has in store for us. Better to be cautious and concerned rather than apathetic.
  • Hetman, on 12/30/2007, -11/+16First off I like Ron Paul. But seriously the Ron Paul supporters peddle just as much fear as every other politician. If not more. It is sad because I do not think Ron Paul actually believes what most of his followers do, If you watched him on Glen Beck you would see that. They showed him a couple of clips of rabid conspiracy theorists that are pro Ron Paul. And you could tell he was surprised by how they acted. O well it is not his fault.
    • vbullinger, on 12/31/2007, -1/+3He also mentioned the New World Order on Glenn Beck's show and in his book "A Foreign Policy of Freedom."

      On the YouTube debate, he mentions global government (New World Order), the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and the North American Union.

      He does know all about them, he just can't say that he does.
      • GalacticXenu, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1I think some of the NAU/NWO stuff is silly but what I'm truly afraid of is not a bunch of people in backrooms whispering to each other about plans to control the world, and more about an ideological bent towards unifying the world--and, with government, meaning less personal autonomy.
    • xlop, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Dude I watched the Glen Beck interview. If you think 9-11 Truthers are "most" of his followers, you are horribly misinformed.
    • silverlinkx2, on 12/31/2007, -5/+0"Ron Paul peddles just as much fear as every other politician."

      Fixed.
      • GalacticXenu, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2You're right, things have been looking up for civil liberties especially since 9/11.
  • dillibob, on 12/30/2007, -2/+8and north korea isnt one too?
    • Jugalator, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Most likely. But I think they're only listing countries they have definite information on.
  • imaref, on 12/30/2007, -1/+28We're a surveillance society because we allow it...
    • noahhoward, on 12/30/2007, -6/+2We allowed it because we were sick of criminals getting away
      • teaBagger, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3You need a good Tase Bro
      • Jugalator, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4And criminals still get away a lot. Moar CCTV's! Moar! :-P
      • breezytrees, on 12/31/2007, -1/+3I guess your one of those people who can't take care of themselves so you want the government to do it for you.
    • GalacticXenu, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3"we" didn't allow it; "they" did. They, being the masses, ignorant and afraid, and the politicians, more than willing to give them more tools to use for whatever.

      Face it, you are one person, and those that care, are in the minority. You have no freedoms in a democracy, you have no freedoms in a totalitarian state, and you have no freedoms in an anarchy as others will soon take them away.

      What to do?
  • dudefather, on 12/30/2007, -1/+6the goverment must be well aware by now that I go to tesco, if they look at my clubcard details, they will even know what I have bought!
    • unitedkronos, on 12/30/2007, -1/+2I don't think the government would have any use for your grocery shopping, but banks and store cards keep track of what we buy with them anyway.
    • widgetmaker, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1You do know they have software that monitors people (anonymously) through the store to see their buying habits.
  • matman, on 12/30/2007, -7/+4New Zealand has a constitutional protection score of 2? Surprising as technically speaking, New Zealand does NOT HAVE a constitution.
    • KiwiHopeful, on 12/30/2007, -0/+9New Zealand does, in fact, have a constitution. It is not a single document, as in the United States, nor is it an unwritten constitution. Instead, it is a collection of different documents, including (but not limited to) the Constitution Act of 1986 and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act of 1990 and the Treaty of Waitangi.

      New Zealand also has an independent judiciary which has the power of judicial review, meaning that it can rule that the Parliament has overstepped its powers and can invalidate any laws that violate the Bill of Rights.

      NZ's government is built on English Common Law, so I would assume that individuals have the right to habeas corpus and due process, and that bills of attainder are forbidden.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_New_Z ...

      http://www.justice.govt.nz/pubs/other/pamphlets/20 ...
    • williamdyer, on 12/30/2007, -1/+6Contrary to common misconceptions, constitutions do NOT "grant rights." They are supposedly helpful in restraining governments, but the situation in the U.S. makes that debatable.
      • williamdyer, on 12/31/2007, -0/+5Dugg down? Ha. Read Amendemts IX and X of the U.S. Constitution. Those amendments state this principle explicitly.

        Rights are universal. All humans have them. Governments do not grant those rights.
  • GhostyBoy, on 12/30/2007, -8/+40In 5, 4, 3, 2....
    Left-wing hippie libtard moon-bat conspiracy theorist tin-foil hat wearin' anti-Americans!!!

    There, I saved you trolls the trouble. Now they don't have to endlessly repeat themselves with ad hominem attacks and chop-logic.
    • sonnybobiche, on 12/30/2007, -2/+5You know, ad hominem attacks are only launched against people when the person in question is considered a moron because of what they think and do. Sounds pretty reasonable. With that said, I dugg you up, because the only argument that has a chance in hell of convincing someone they are wrong is one that addresses the issue at hand.
      • atheinostic, on 12/30/2007, -1/+4Ad hominem attacks sound reasonable to you?
        • sonnybobiche, on 12/31/2007, -3/+1Yes. As I said, ad hominem attacks are reasonable when the type of person you're dealing with is commonly believed to be a dunce.
  • uziko, on 12/30/2007, -13/+1Won't be long before all you is the color black on that map. The sooner the better.
    • Jugalator, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2The first part is unfortunately kind of insightful from what the trend looks like, but your last sentence completely threw me off. :-p
      • breezytrees, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1heheh the last sentence was sarcasm i hope
  • lordmetroid, on 12/30/2007, -1/+10The world has gone darker since last year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_International :(
  • ussoldier, on 12/30/2007, -4/+19Try this experiment next time you go into town. Pretend you have a couterfeit bill (use areal fifty from your wallet, or a twenty), and pretend you want to break it into smaller bills to clean it. But there's a catch... when you do, you want to be absolutely sure your face or body is not caught on camera when you are doing it.

    Go anywhere where a 'financial transaction' takes place, and you will see it is under surveilance.. you can not with draw money out or spend money anywhere without being taped, with the exception of transactions between private individuals and maybe vending machines. ATMs, gas station pumps, cash registers everywhere, anywhere you go where you use cash or a credit card to spend money, or withdraw money, and you are being photographed or video taped.

    You never notice how much you are under surveilance, everywhere, until you try this experiment. Then its like lifting the veil over your eyes, you start to see the cameras everywhere. Its frightening how pervasively saturated we are wtih them in America, now as bad as England.
    • Hetman, on 12/30/2007, -0/+18It just so happens at places where financial transactions take place are very likely to get robbed. And all these places you are talking about are private businesses. Even if the government had no surveillance's private companies would. They are protecting their assets. If I owned a store I would defiantly have a camera on the register. 1 for employee safety. 2 so I could catch employees stealing if they did. 3 to catch non employees who are stealing from me. A private citizen does have a right to protect his property. And anyone who does not is naive.
      • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -10/+0you are not naive, you are imbecile.
        • heliox, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Not only do you use "cretin" a lot, you tend to call people names. Cretin, imbecile...
    • widgetmaker, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4You mean all those cameras that mean people don't try to stab and rob me every time I go to take out money? (not condoning it just saying they do help things..)
    • thedragon4453, on 12/31/2007, -2/+6Yeah, I think this kind of falls a bit into the tinfoil hat department. I work in a business that uses surveillance equipment on cash registers. I am also aware that there is no way for the government to use that equipment, short of walking in with guns and demanding the tapes.
      • joshuabowers, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Well, they could probably request to see the footage, and, if you decline, get a subpoena for the recordings if they have probable cause that a crime was recorded on them. That's far different than storming the place with guns blazing.
  • Hetman, on 12/30/2007, -12/+16Rudy Gullinia "elect me or America will fall"
    Ron Paul "Elect me or America will fall" Regardless of your stances please stop with the fear mongering. I do not care who you are. Seriously all I want is a politician who tells me what he believes in and says he hopes that it will help America. Fear mongering just makes me sick of the whole entire political atmosphere.
    • uziko, on 12/30/2007, -1/+7It's no fun if we act like everything is ok, we gotta have an artificial Armageddon mentality, it make politics so much funner.

      "Elect me or America will fall" sounds a lot better than "Elect me and I'll make America a little bit better".
    • salivalnz, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Garry Kasparov? :-P
    • Parisjune, on 12/31/2007, -3/+4Please prove your Ron Paul statement.
      • GhostyBoy, on 12/31/2007, -0/+5I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and although Ron Paul did not say that, too many of his supporters are running around alienating everyone and being fanatical about it. You know that even if he proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt you wouldn't believe it and you would still vote for him.

        Although America would probably benefit from going back to the constitution and bringing the troops home, Ron Paul himself is not perfect, so chill out.
    • GalacticXenu, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2You're right, Ron Paul's (and a few other politicians') talk about dwindling civil liberties is nonsense. Let's go back to eating a cheeseburger and watching TV because the current political establishment will ensure everyone is free, safe, and that things are fine and dandy.
  • Joomal, on 12/30/2007, -0/+6Is this hardly surprising?
  • SilverBlade2k, on 12/30/2007, -1/+20You know what they say, keep people fed and entertained, and they will be happy..
    • ronpaul20008, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3too bad america is lacking any kind of entertaining entertainment. it's all corporate mainstream trash.
      • Waterrat, on 01/02/2008, -0/+2 So true...Supplemented with corporate ;"Buy me buy me garbage. "
    • thallium205, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1and pornography
  • bingobongony, on 12/30/2007, -11/+4To answer the question asked...absolutely...Because my PRIVACY is still intact. I am not sure what part of PUBLIC place idiots think gurantees them privacy when they are outside of their homes. But I do know this. The government does not know what I am doing in my apartment.
    • EuphopiaB, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3No, but all it takes is a judge with a pen (not even that for the FBI and Federal government) for them to bash in your door and execute a search. The only reason you consider it privacy is it hasn't been taken from you yet. Just like your "right" to bare arms, it is guaranteed to you until it is decided you no longer deserve it. Also, your right, there is no legal problem with the government putting CCTVs on the corner of ever block and every place possible. The issue stands, however, as do you want to live in a society with a government that has the capacity to do such a thing. I don't want my government to have such ability because in the very possible event the government is working against me as an individual, I would rather the government be smaller. I simply don't trust humanity enough to be reasonable, fair and just with the power gained from said activity.
    • Dumbledorito, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3Not to mention the use of infra-red cameras and other technology that makes walls as opaque as glass. Then there are unwarranted wiretaps, packet sniffing, etc. Then there's your financial activity that can be tracked via the web or credit cards, bank transfers and so on. Your life can be an open book pretty much on a governmental whim.
    • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -3/+1YET, idiot. Give it a few years. The government knows more about you than your haploid mind can ever comprehend, and I hope someday that information is used to torture or imprison you. It would be fitting.
    • Jugalator, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3"The government does not know what I am doing in my apartment."

      lol, that's all you care for, right? Not about knowing whom you call or do online even not being a suspect, or how functional the habeas corpus is, etc? As long as you can ***** in your apartment without the gov't seeing which girlfriend you did it with and eat your peanut butter sandwiches afterwards, everything is fine and dandy, right?
  • RooDoG, on 12/30/2007, -1/+7I'm moving the Greece
  • krnldmp, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2It works both ways. Google "B'Tselem shooting back".
  • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -3/+7Living in the UK, it doesn't seem so bad because despite all the hyperbole, our government is pretty benign. None of the stuff in the report really affects me, much more important is how, through sheer incompetence, the government somehow managed to lose a disc with everyone's name, bank details, address and phone number on it. I think that is the most important example of how this "data" stuff can go horribly wrong.
    The thing we need to worry about is the technology. Soon it will probably become possible for there to be a central store of all information about an individual, archived for ever more, the only question is if governments will actually do it.
    For now all you have to do is be good and keep your head down and the state leaves you alone aside from the odd speeding ticket, but, if in the future the technology is made use of, society will change forever.
    Essentially, CCTV and phonetapping isn't nearly as scary as some make out, but large centralised stores of personal data are very bad because even millions of records can fit onto pretty small physical media and so they're almost bound to get lost, stolen, sold and exploited.
    • Parisjune, on 12/31/2007, -1/+5Same attitude in Australia. Even the same word "benign". What a bunch of sheep.
  • Herostratos, on 12/30/2007, -4/+7There was no countries on that chart better than "systematic failure to upholds standards". I suspect the scale is made such that they can present something alarmist. Also, from what I know about the different countries I highly doubt they got Europe right.

    I am rather sceptical of the increasing powers of government to monitor it's citizens, and this is precisely why we can't present our case using sensationalist and unserious charts like this.
  • whahaa, on 12/30/2007, -1/+8FTA "In terms of statutory protections and privacy enforcement, the US is the worst ranking country in the democratic world. In terms of overall privacy protection the United States has performed very poorly, being out-ranked by both India and the Philippines and falling into the "black" category, denoting endemic surveillance."

    sigh... i think i gotta start thinking about moving to greece.
    • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -0/+2Hmmm, they have got hookers. And moussaka!
  • Look4Truth, on 12/30/2007, -1/+11"Strength through unity, unity through faith."
    • greeninoregon, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1"I'm a god fearing American and I'm god damn proud of it!"
      Not.
  • OttawaMarcin, on 12/30/2007, -0/+3Polska is Yellow! Woohoo, a few steps above the rest.
    • Skooma714, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2I find it odd that a country who spent 60-70 years under two consecutive police states would even dare make baby steps in the direction of a surveillance society.
  • amightywind, on 12/30/2007, -20/+4I view America as the '1000 year Hyperpower'. The entire world dreams American dreams of limitless opportunity and prosperity. Even enemies like the Ruskies and Chinks. But, sadly, we rot from within with feckless liberals who hate their country. Fortunately these are relatively few.
  • Nostromo13, on 12/30/2007, -1/+6The colours don't even bloody match.
  • ElBoss, on 12/30/2007, -7/+52When they came for the communists,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a communist.

    When they locked up the social democrats,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a social democrat.

    When they came for the trade unionists,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a trade unionist.

    When they came for the Jews,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a Jew.

    When they came for me,
    there was no one left to speak out.
    ~Pastor Martin Niemöller
    • theangrybaby, on 12/30/2007, -2/+11I don't know who's digging you down, I love this quote
      • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -5/+2But how is it relevant to a discussion of legilslative policy concerning data protection and the state's responsibility to safeguard privacy?
        • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -3/+6Hmmm. How is a quotation dealing with the insidious rise of Fascism relevant to a discussion of US legislative policy?
          GOLLLLLLEEEEE, GEEEEE, GAWRSH, DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
          How do you manage to cross the street unaided?
    • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -5/+0A
      M
      E
      N
    • Codename46, on 12/31/2007, -1/+5When they came for the machine guns,
      I remained silent;
      I did not own a machine gun

      When they came for the semi-automatic military-style rifles
      I remained silent;
      I did not own a military-style rifle

      When they came for my Fudd guns
      there was no one left to speak out
      ~ARFCOM
      • Waterrat, on 01/02/2008, -0/+2 When they came for the atheists I did not speak up,
        for I am not an atheist.

        When they came for the moderate christians,
        i did not speak up,for i am not a moderate christian.

        When they came for the gays,i did not speak up.
        For i am not gay.

        When they came for all the women who had an abortion,I did not speak up,
        For i never had an abortion.
  • jeffreymunro, on 12/30/2007, -4/+20I love the Americans who defend their country by saying "we'll north korea and china are there too"... is that really a list you want to be on? wake up already guys!
  • over900000, on 12/30/2007, -5/+0in before inaccurate
  • sdlvx, on 12/30/2007, -1/+14I'm reporting you all to mini-truth. Have a nice day.

    I, for one, look forward to serving Big Brother, and reporting you all is the only True American (tm) and Patriotic (tm) thing to do.
  • JohnP, on 12/30/2007, -1/+3Doesnt really make much sense to me, because the criteria are not exactly fitting. For example constitutional protection and ID cards are listed as problems in the UK, yet the UK doesnt have ID cards, or any glaring issues with constitutional protection. And thats just the first two criteria...

    So yes, its pretty much all hyperbole.
    • jambox, on 12/30/2007, -0/+4With the constitution, we probably get low marks because we haven't got one. At least, not as Americans understand it.
      • JohnP, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3If thats the issue then this entire list is 100% pure horse *****.

        Also, how long ago was the US patriot act passed? Yet this website claims that the USA has fallen in ranks only THIS year....

        The UK has no issues anywhere near that of the patriot act. I honestly think the whole list is fabricated from popular opinion.
        • jambox, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Well, the HMRC lost that disk, that a) shows we're already exposed and b) public opinion will form against data gathering.
  • TremorX, on 12/30/2007, -5/+5Dude go away I'm batin'

    Ooh yeah cut me off a piece of that
  • Sogui, on 12/30/2007, -4/+5Because groups like Privacy International recognize that they wouldn't exist or get attention if they said "everything is going great!"

    Not to say "thing are going great!" but you have to recognize that these groups ALWAYS have a bias because they need to put out sensationalist or alarmist pieces to draw more attention to their cause. I had never heard of Privacy International until this article, so for them it's "Mission Accomplished" even though their standards may be arbitrary and their perspective biased.
    • adeptusliberus, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1Agreed. Anything from this organization will certainly be biased toward alarmist thinking. They are not a neutral organization that analyzes surveillance practices through cold, scientific eyes. Take a look at what they have to say, but don't accept every little thing you see as true, from ANY source.
  • jsmu, on 12/30/2007, -1/+7How many of you know ANYONE moronic enough to think that endemic government surveillance does no harm? How many of you have ever heard of 'disappearing' people? Can you say Latin and South America? can you say Stalinist Russia? Can you say America under the yoke of Georgie Porgie?
    • Waterrat, on 01/02/2008, -0/+2 I keep waiting for them to make Chomsky 'disappear...
      I hope it never happens.
  • DigitAl56K, on 12/30/2007, -3/+2I for one feel safer with the government watching me 24/7. As long as I don't break any of the rules I'm sure I'll be just fine. Of course, I don't know what the rules are, they change them all the time, there's enough of them to fill shelves full of books, and half the time law enforcement doesn't even follow them themselves, but in the end all of this surveillance is a small price to pay to know that there is absolutely no chance of anything bad ever happening to me whatsoever. And I didn't just say this because they're monitoring everything I type... :S
    • AdamGeld, on 12/31/2007, -0/+1I find it disgusting that you are willing to give up all of your privacy simply so you could have the possibility of being safer. It's not only disgusting, but it's sad. Your safety is your responsibility, don't expect anyone else to care about it as much as you do. If you think that anyone else will act in your best interest all of the time, I don't know what to tell you. I encourage you to think about the issue more.
    • DonTazeMeBro, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2How much safer are you from dying in an accident, or having a heart attack... one does wonder.
  • macwac, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1No offense but the ranking etc.. is just a bit off (a bit being heavily understated).
  • tufftugg, on 12/30/2007, -2/+5How the land of the free has died. And what is really comical, is they don't realize it, still doing that "America is best", kinda like North Korea's song and dance.
    • EarlOfLade, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2Just a quick glance at any statistic over at nationmaster.com would show that USA is far from #1 in most areas.
    • Hetman, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2To me you seem niave. The land of the free has died. The land of the free has never existed. Will maybe for a few white men through out history. Our government has done very nasty things to its own citizens before. One great example is the Japanese american citizens during WWII. And the analogy about North Korea fails in so many ways. Our government and society are way different than anything you would see in North Korea. In North Korea they still do not know anyone has landed on the moon. Their is no free information. If you are north korean you cannot log onto digg and be like north korea are like the nazis.
      • AdamGeld, on 12/31/2007, -0/+2You're right, we have never been a perfect country. Those that say we are "number one" or "the best country" are simply ignorant. Period.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.