NZ backed the US in lobbying against the UN resolution to protect privacy

Forums › Off topic › NZ backed the US in lobbying against the UN resolution to protect privacy

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#955633 20-Dec-2013 19:32

Klipspringer:

This is really getting extremely tinfoilish now...

I can think of multiple examples where this sort of thing has happened already.

Its no different to me recording a conversation/video of somebody without their knowledge and then using that conversation/video against that person in the way you describe. I could even do it with their personal emails. Heck Ive lost count on the amount of times Ive heard stories like this on the news.

The only difference? Somebody in power will have the surveillance/email. Is that really a threat? No.

Ummm.... Given recent history, I suspect that a fair number of citizens in a fairly long list of countries (including Russia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, the eastern bit of Germany, Egypt, Iran, China, Cambodia, North Korea, Cuba and Zimbabwe) would probably dispute that claim. And with good reason.

Surveillance should only be carried out under a tight regulatory framework (where the default is a presumed right of a citizen to privacy) , properly authorised under reasonable suspicion and with independent oversight. Anything else....... well that road is well trodden, and you can see where it usually ends.

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#955640 20-Dec-2013 19:55

In South Korea it ended with two spy agencies trying to influence the election last year. The story was buried prior to the election but citizens have been keeping it alive and eventually the protesting forced a prosecution.

JimmyH

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#955641 20-Dec-2013 19:56

Linuxluver:

This is true in Canada, the UK and Australia.....but NZ has the Green Party who WILL do things differently - and better - if given the numbers to make it so. Greens tend to be curious people who pay attention....which is why they are so often out of step with the less curious who prefer to ignore so much around them.

It's becoming something of a rule that you can either let the Green Party do it today...or wait for a major party to do it in 20 years when it's become an emergency. Climate change is just one example. Public transport would be another.

Personally, I don't really care whether National or Labour form the next government.

I don't really want the Greens in it however. I quite like their position on surveillance, and some of their environmentalism (right up to the point where they start inclining to heavy-handed rules and compulsion, then I go cold). However, I don't like their looney-tunes hard-left big-government economics.

They are more accurately described as a watermelon (green on the outside but read all the way through) party than an actual green party. Particularly under the current leadership.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#955649 20-Dec-2013 20:34

JimmyH:
Linuxluver:

This is true in Canada, the UK and Australia.....but NZ has the Green Party who WILL do things differently - and better - if given the numbers to make it so. Greens tend to be curious people who pay attention....which is why they are so often out of step with the less curious who prefer to ignore so much around them.

It's becoming something of a rule that you can either let the Green Party do it today...or wait for a major party to do it in 20 years when it's become an emergency. Climate change is just one example. Public transport would be another.

Personally, I don't really care whether National or Labour form the next government.

I don't really want the Greens in it however. I quite like their position on surveillance, and some of their environmentalism (right up to the point where they start inclining to heavy-handed rules and compulsion, then I go cold). However, I don't like their looney-tunes hard-left big-government economics.

They are more accurately described as a watermelon (green on the outside but read all the way through) party than an actual green party. Particularly under the current leadership.

So this is an opportune time to give an example of unforeseen consequences. I do not claim ownership of this idea as it comes from the book Totalitaria
Look at the smart meters we all have fitted to our household electrical supply. The ones that can report automatically back to a centralized database. Every household can be surveilled to see how big their carbon footprint is.
So it is the future, the Green Party hold the reins of power, they decide for the good of the planet that anyone who uses more energy than appropriate should be named and shamed, or worse punished. They subpoena power company records and go to work.
Conversely, I do find it a little perplexing that people who are worried about governmental surveillance are often happy to divulge information to commercial enterprises. ISPs , Google, Facebook, Apple, Twitter, Amazon, eBay, Instagram. What sort of information? Just harmless things like who your friends are. But what about if a friend of a friend is deemed in the future to be an 'evil-doer'. Are you guilty by association?
Look at Google's motto, "Don't be evil", but is the current definition of evil going to be the same in 10 year's time?
I used to be a 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' kind of person, but I am growing increasingly uneasy. Even this post may be used against me in the future.

edit: syntax

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#955651 20-Dec-2013 21:13

I hate the current uncontrolled surveillance however I also know its not 1984.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

SaltyNZ

8869 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9554

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#955667 20-Dec-2013 23:16

KiwiNZ: I hate the current uncontrolled surveillance however I also know its not 1984.

Not yet, but it's heading that way (slowly -but surely), and as long as the people in power keep shouting 'terrorists!' the voting majority will do nothing to stop it.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Linuxluver

5833 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1639

Trusted

Subscriber

#955676 21-Dec-2013 00:14

JimmyH:
Linuxluver:

This is true in Canada, the UK and Australia.....but NZ has the Green Party who WILL do things differently - and better - if given the numbers to make it so. Greens tend to be curious people who pay attention....which is why they are so often out of step with the less curious who prefer to ignore so much around them.

It's becoming something of a rule that you can either let the Green Party do it today...or wait for a major party to do it in 20 years when it's become an emergency. Climate change is just one example. Public transport would be another.

Personally, I don't really care whether National or Labour form the next government.

I don't really want the Greens in it however. I quite like their position on surveillance, and some of their environmentalism (right up to the point where they start inclining to heavy-handed rules and compulsion, then I go cold). However, I don't like their looney-tunes hard-left big-government economics.

They are more accurately described as a watermelon (green on the outside but read all the way through) party than an actual green party. Particularly under the current leadership.

I can tell you don't really know much about them, then. I won't disturb your prejudice there.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#955723 21-Dec-2013 09:41

SaltyNZ:
KiwiNZ: I hate the current uncontrolled surveillance however I also know its not 1984.

Not yet, but it's heading that way (slowly -but surely), and as long as the people in power keep shouting 'terrorists!' the voting majority will do nothing to stop it.

Here's an example of what happens when information sharing is uncontrolled:

Disabled woman denied entry to U.S. after agent cites supposedly private medical details

Canadians with mental illnesses denied U.S. entry: Data entered into national police database accessible to American authorities: WikiLeaks

There is really no justification for sharing information like that with a foreign power.

It's clear there are some serious questions to be asked.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#955738 21-Dec-2013 10:27

gzt:
SaltyNZ:
KiwiNZ: I hate the current uncontrolled surveillance however I also know its not 1984.

Not yet, but it's heading that way (slowly -but surely), and as long as the people in power keep shouting 'terrorists!' the voting majority will do nothing to stop it.

Here's an example of what happens when information sharing is uncontrolled:

Disabled woman denied entry to U.S. after agent cites supposedly private medical details

Canadians with mental illnesses denied U.S. entry: Data entered into national police database accessible to American authorities: WikiLeaks

There is really no justification for sharing information like that with a foreign power.

It's clear there are some serious questions to be asked.

OMG! So there really is covert government surveillance, monitoring the movements of the mentally unwell.
The North American shrink industry had better change psychotherapy methods - from denial to "it's okay - they're spying on everybody these days".

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#955769 21-Dec-2013 11:43

Where the information comes from does not really matter. In this case it is not surveillance but for all the effect it might as well be.

The point is when you have information floating around that information can be applied to any purpose and used for any reason and it will be:

"Originally, Canada's intent in allowing US officials access to CPIC [Canadian Police Information Centre] was to provide the US Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection officials with information about people with criminal records, says Sullivan. US officials are apparently now using the information in a way it was not originally intended, and most Canadians aren't aware their country is providing that data to the US, Sullivan says."

Neither of the people in the articles above have criminal records.

Like most things in this area it took concerned citizens working together to figure out what was going on.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80658 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41072

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#955798 21-Dec-2013 13:28

gzt: Where the information comes from does not really matter. In this case it is not surveillance but for all the effect it might as well be.

The point is when you have information floating around that information can be applied to any purpose and used for any reason and it will be:

"Originally, Canada's intent in allowing US officials access to CPIC [Canadian Police Information Centre] was to provide the US Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection officials with information about people with criminal records, says Sullivan. US officials are apparently now using the information in a way it was not originally intended, and most Canadians aren't aware their country is providing that data to the US, Sullivan says."

Neither of the people in the articles above have criminal records.

Like most things in this area it took concerned citizens working together to figure out what was going on.

I am quoting with bold and underline to show that people with no criminal records were wrongfully denied something based on some information that wasn't supposed to be shared coming from a government database that was shared for other purposes.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

johnmo

113 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 23

#955813 21-Dec-2013 13:57

Privacy.

If you have nothing to hide then leave all the curtains in the house open "all the time"!!

JimmyH

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#956334 22-Dec-2013 22:15

I would like to see how the "If you haven't done anything wrong you have nothing to worry about" brigade respond to that one!

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#956389 23-Dec-2013 09:10

johnmo: Privacy.
If you have nothing to hide then leave all the curtains in the house open "all the time"!!

JimmyH: I would like to see how the "If you haven't done anything wrong you have nothing to worry about" brigade respond to that one!

We dealing with two totally different things here.

Leaving curtains open “all the time”, Lets see

1)      I would not be very popular around the neighborhood. It probably would not go down too well with the old people who walk past my house on a regular bases, the kids next door etc..
2)      But then I probably would not be worrying too much about point 1 because every body else s curtains would also be open. I'm sure my time behind closed curtains is a hell of a lot less interesting than the majority of people in my neighborhood. (The tinny house etc…)
3)      The “spying bill” has already been passed and I can still sleep with my curtains closed, and my neighbor still has no idea as to what time I take a shower every morning.

Leaving ones curtains open all the time is not the same as saying I having nothing to hide. When I say I have nothing to hide I’m saying that I’m a law abiding citizen. Its not the same as me saying I’m comfortable to show the world how well I was blessed.

I still like a fair bit of privacy from my neighbors etc.. There is a level of trust here between myself and the police who have the power to setup surveillance if they felt they needed to. I’m comfortable with allowing them to setup surveillance at my place if they chose to do so (I’m not a criminal), its nowhere near the same as never closing my curtains and living a life for all to see.

There are already certain laws in place around how “evidence” is used, and who its shown to. “Evidence” or videos of me picking my nose while watching the IT crowd would be treated just like any other evidence. It won’t be broadcasted all over the world for all to see. It would be shown inside the courts and used there as “evidence”. At worst, whats they going to see anyway? There is still a level of privacy as to who gets to watch that video. Most people are assuming that this surveillance is just made public for all to see. That’s incorrect.

Whats the point of being paranoid about this? Too many variables here for me to loose sleep over it.

-          Firstly, are the police going to watch me? I'm just your average law abiding citizen so I really doubt they going to take any interest in me.
-          Secondly, if the police do decide to watch me, and put up hidden cameras etc, they not going to see very much.
-          Thirdly, I would have to worry now that some corrupt officer takes whatever was filmed, and decides to make it public to the world. I really doubt this would happen because the corrupt officer would loose his job over it. This corrupt officer would be breaking the law.

Personally I’m not going to loose sleep over this, this law has already come into effect. Its got its disadvantages as I pointed out above, but hey I would rather see the tinny house down the road being closed down, or the “child molester” seeing the inside of a jail cell because of evidence obtained by surveillance.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#956398 23-Dec-2013 09:31

gzt:

Disabled woman denied entry to U.S. after agent cites supposedly private medical details

Canadians with mental illnesses denied U.S. entry: Data entered into national police database accessible to American authorities: WikiLeaks

There is really no justification for sharing information like that with a foreign power.

It's clear there are some serious questions to be asked.

NZ immigration performs similar checks on people arriving in NZ. In fact, people have to declare their health status on their visa application forms. Immigration needs to validate that the information is correct.

I personally have no problem with this. Is it fair that I as a NZ tax payer fund our health system so that people like this can come into the country, take advantage of our health system, at my expense?

NZ and Australia shares police databases as well.

This is a good thing, it keeps the criminals out.

Or are you saying we should not be sharing this type of information?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7