In the wake of PRISM, should we give up on online privacy?

By Christopher Reynolds on June 14, 2013, 5:00 PM
cloud, privacy, vpn, guest, prism, ivpn
Editor’s Note:
This is a guest blog by Christopher Reynolds, Head of Business Development at IVPN. IVPN is a VPN privacy service, and Electronic Frontier Foundation member, committed to defending online freedoms.

Depending who you ask, the scandal over PRISM, the NSA's secret data mining program, is either mere confirmation of what we already knew, or a shocking revelation that should drive people onto the streets in protest. It's certainly true that many people suspected internet services, such as Google and Facebook, were open houses to government agents, but there's a difference between suspicions and hard evidence.

Now we know the US government doesn't need to enact legislation such as CISPA in order to ride roughshod over civil liberties, it really does beg the question: Is online privacy a lost cause and is online anonymity impossible to achieve? Well, if you ask me, there's good reason to be cynical over the concept of online privacy, but with a few key tools tools and best practices, we can still reclaim a private space on the internet and surf – almost – anonymously.

Email and social

If you want to take privacy seriously then you'll have to make sacrifices -there's no way around it. This means many of the most convenient online services, such as web-based email and social networks, need to be purged from your online life. While this distrust of major providers such as Gmail, Yahoo and Microsoft could extend to all email providers, you could argue that smaller companies, which are not behemoths heavily reliant on government lobbying and co-operation, could offer better privacy protection.

Following this reasoning, privacy-orientated email services such as RiseUp, could be good alternatives if you really want to use web-based email. But ideally you should avoid using web-based services and only store your mail locally (or even rent your own Virtual Private Server). You can use encryption tools such as GPG/PGP to protect your data (though whoever your emailing will need to use the same encryption), web-based tools like Sendinc (though you're trusting a third party again) and encrypted versions of POP or IMAP. Just remember, if you email someone with a Gmail or Yahoo account you're back to square one. 

You could also ditch Google and Bing, and start using a more privacy-oriented search engine like DuckDuckGo. But as long as your IP is obscured (which we'll get onto later), you can still use Google privately if you employ a cookie blocker like Ghostery and don't log into your account.

When it comes to social networks it's interesting that Twitter was not on the PRISM's list of compromised companies – especially since Twitter has a track record of defending users.

VPNs and TOR

If you want to browse the web anonymously then the most common, secure, and easy-to-use tools, are The Onion Router (TOR) and commercial VPN services (I2P is also worth looking into for peer-to-peer sharing). But VPN services and TOR both bring different problems to the table.

TOR is generally a very effective tool to keep your IP address private and hidden from surveillance. It's also free and used successfully by journalists, dissidents and privacy-conscious citizens. But it does have vulnerabilities. The most obvious being the ability to passively monitor the connection of both a sender and receiver of data over the TOR network and therefore correlate traffic. This is doable because anyone can run a TOR exit node.

The other vulnerability is the so-called 'bad apple' attack, which involves injecting traffic to trigger an insecure UDP connection, which in turn can reveal an IP address.

Commercial VPN services don't suffer from these vulnerabilities, but they do suffer from potentially much worse flaws. The problem with VPN services – providing they use a secure standard like OpenVPN – is that you have to trust the company providing your service. A cursory look at many VPN privacy policies will reveal that such trust is easily misplaced - policies often either explicitly state they log data in the same way as an ISP, or they’re so vague that you don't know either way.

There are some good resources to get around this problem such as TorrentFreak's round-up of VPNs that don't log data and my own company's ongoing guide on understanding VPN privacy policies. Of course, a good way of mitigating the vulnerabilities of TOR and VPN services is to combine both services to achieve security in depth.   

The biggest barrier

So to summarise; yes, you can achieve a high degree of anonymity online without any specialist knowledge, but regaining your online privacy is not a simple task. It requires some work and a few sacrifices.

Perhaps herein lies the biggest problem. While many of us were up in arms over the PRISM revelations, how many have since changed their online behaviour in the last few days? How much of that outrage translated into closed Gmail accounts and TOR installations? Maybe it’s still too early to assess the fallout, but my suspicion is the main barriers to online privacy – other than the illegitimate behaviour of law enforcement - is our own apathy.




User Comments: 40

Got something to say? Post a comment
2 people like this | cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

How many more PRISM topics do we need to start within one week? It's starting to get confusing which topic is which.

1 person liked this | Darkshadoe Darkshadoe said:

Too many people are just sheep with the attitude ' I do nothing wrong so I do not care if the government spys on me'. Well these people need to realize that some of the stuff they say will be used against them at some point if needed.

JC713 JC713 said:

Meh. It is a given that there is surveillance. Privacy was never there to start with. Internet and privacy dont mix.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Internet and privacy dont mix.
Thats where you are wrong. Just because it doesn't mix, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make it mix.

I ask nothing more for myself than congress ask for themselves. If you tell me that congress allows this surveillance amongst themselves, I will reconsider. Good luck convincing me though.

MilwaukeeMike said:

Too many people are just sheep with the attitude ' I do nothing wrong so I do not care if the government spys on me'. Well these people need to realize that some of the stuff they say will be used against them at some point if needed.

When you say 'Government' do you mean some person working for the govt, or just a govt computer program. Because I'm not worried there's a group of people who are looking through the internet history of every person in the country. Since I really doubt Techspot, facebook and Netflix trigger their terrorist filters, I don't have much to worry about.

What worries me is when they make a filter for the opposing political party and then send the IRS a list of names for audits.

JC713 JC713 said:

Thats where you are wrong. Just because it doesn't mix, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make it mix.

I ask nothing more for myself than congress ask for themselves. If you tell me that congress allows this surveillance amongst themselves, I will reconsider. Good luck convincing me though.

True. So you think that if congress does surveillance on themselves, you will accept this? That is fair.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

True. So you think that if congress does surveillance on themselves, you will accept this? That is fair.
It's not actually congress doing the surveillance is it?

Guest said:

In 99' it was Echelon now in 2013 it's Prism. Let me in form the masses, if it has 1's and 0's in it which are know as bits, Aunt Samantha and Uncle Sam is sniffing, filtering, viewing, etc. Your encryption is useless to Sam and his clan, these boys have been cracking 2048 bit for a few years now, so lets move on. How can we kill Windows 8. I don't want a tablet OS on my Desktop.

ReederOnTheRun ReederOnTheRun said:

So to summarise; yes, you can achieve a high degree of anonymity online without any specialist knowledge, but regaining your online privacy is not a simple task. It requires some work and a few sacrifices.

I don't get why someone would go through all of that trouble to stay anonymous. As if anyone is going to care what sites you go on (unless you're doing something illegal).

The biggest false assumption people make when complaining about privacy is that the big bad companies or the government actually care about your lives so much that they would single you out just to learn your dirty online secrets. The reality is that nobody will pay any mind to you guys, because you really aren't that interesting. I know I'm not.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

You know, online surveillance probably has helped us avoid terror plots and attacks.

OTOH, organizations like the RIAA & MPAA like to try to spin illegal downloading into a terrorist enterprise that needs the full weight of every governmental law enforcement brought to bear on it.

Did you buy knockoff handbag recently? If so, you're funding terrorism, or so they tell us.

So, don't buy any counterfeit handbags online, to avoid the interceptions of your web traffic and Email, which could lead to a life sentence for treason.

1 person liked this | gcarter gcarter said:

I'm joining the "I dont give a rats a*s" crowd on this one... who cares if someone 25yr old govermnet tech knows that I checked into my local coffee shop with my 6yr old daughter, or that I sent a picture of ladies boobies to my brother...

Apparently the homosexuals would complain - articles such as this one...

[link]

#meh

JC713 JC713 said:

It's not actually congress doing the surveillance is it?

No lol.

1 person liked this | Guest said:

"In the wake of PRISM, should we give up on online privacy?"

How would that work? The American citizens take a vote and pass on their privacy, thus making spying on the rest of the world okay? Disgusting.

Chazz said:

In 99' it was Echelon now in 2013 it's Prism. Let me in form the masses, if it has 1's and 0's in it which are know as bits, Aunt Samantha and Uncle Sam is sniffing, filtering, viewing, etc. Your encryption is useless to Sam and his clan, these boys have been cracking 2048 bit for a few years now, so lets move on. How can we kill Windows 8. I don't want a tablet OS on my Desktop.

Lololol.

2 people like this | Guest said:

Nobody monitors all the data coming in from the PRISM partners - the system only flags certain keywords and then this usually happens:

"For the six months ended December 31, 2012, Microsoft received between 6,000 and 7,000 criminal and national security warrants, subpoenas and orders affecting between 31,000 and 32,000 consumer accounts from U.S. governmental entities (including local, state and federal)," said John Frank, Microsoft's vice president.

Facebook said it got between 9,000 and 10,000 requests targeting between 18,000 and 19,000 accounts during that period.

high_NSA high_NSA said:

So to summarise; yes, you can achieve a high degree of anonymity online without any specialist knowledge, but regaining your online privacy is not a simple task. It requires some work and a few sacrifices.

I don't get why someone would go through all of that trouble to stay anonymous. As if anyone is going to care what sites you go on (unless you're doing something illegal).

The biggest false assumption people make when complaining about privacy is that the big bad companies or the government actually care about your lives so much that they would single you out just to learn your dirty online secrets. The reality is that nobody will pay any mind to you guys, because you really aren't that interesting. I know I'm not.

Maybe you don't understand the concept of politics or the magnitude of knowing everything you do. It's a lot of power to know everything about someone. Let's say just ONE of these geeks has business/.financial/political motives to gain information about their competitor. They can read competitor emails, access proprietary information, and find the tiniest bits of information that could possibly lead to extortion.

Another scenario. Let's say a millionaire or billionaire is are having an affair. (not being a legally married affair. Just boyfriend /girlfriend) Gov't Geek tells his buddy about said affair. Buddy to go make a phone call to billionaire and go make some easy money.

The scenarios are endless. You need to think outside the box. Just because certain people aren't terrorists or running illegal operations doesn't mean the information won't be used against them if put into the wrong hands. !

Who is policing the police? I'm sure you think you're safe from this because you're a law abiding citizen. I'm sorry but you're wrong. This is too much power and I'ts absolutely in the wrong hands. I'm positive this will happen in the future. LOADS of political extortion. Such as the IRS extortion scandal.

ReederOnTheRun ReederOnTheRun said:

Maybe you don't understand the concept of politics or the magnitude of knowing everything you do. It's a lot of power to know everything about someone. Let's say just ONE of these geeks has business/.financial/political motives to gain information about their competitor. They can read competitor emails, access proprietary information, and find the tiniest bits of information that could possibly lead to extortion.

Another scenario. Let's say a millionaire or billionaire is are having an affair. (not being a legally married affair. Just boyfriend /girlfriend) Gov't Geek tells his buddy about said affair. Buddy to go make a phone call to billionaire and go make some easy money.

The scenarios are endless. You need to think outside the box. Just because certain people aren't terrorists or running illegal operations doesn't mean the information won't be used against them if put into the wrong hands. !

Who is policing the police? I'm sure you think you're safe from this because you're a law abiding citizen. I'm sorry but you're wrong. This is too much power and I'ts absolutely in the wrong hands. I'm positive this will happen in the future. LOADS of political extortion. Such as the IRS extortion scandal.

I'm not sure you understand how it works. All of the information is automatically sent through a filter and only the information that looks like it belongs to a terrorist is allowed through. THEN if any of the information belongs to an American citizen, it is actually locked away and can't be viewed by the NSA without a warrant.

They aren't spying on Americans, they're trying to extract information on foreign terrorists off of the American servers that the information has been stored on. They have a lot of oversight and have done as much as possible to keep American citizens out of it.

1 person liked this | high_NSA high_NSA said:

I'm not sure you understand how it works. All of the information is automatically sent through a filter and only the information that looks like it belongs to a terrorist is allowed through. THEN if any of the information belongs to an American citizen, it is actually locked away and can't be viewed by the NSA without a warrant.

They aren't spying on Americans, they're trying to extract information on foreign terrorists off of the American servers that the information has been stored on. They have a lot of oversight and have done as much as possible to keep American citizens out of it.

I understand how it's supposed to work. How they SAY it works. You need to 100% trust what they are saying (is only for terrorists!) and trust 100% that no one will take information outside of the arena. Well guess what? It already happened! These guys are computer programmers. Do you think they have the capacity to change the way the information is handled? This is what businesses and people do to crush the competition.

Honestly you're really going to believe what the government tells you.? "I promise guys, we're only using this for terrorist! What about the Children!??!"

ReederOnTheRun ReederOnTheRun said:

I understand how it's supposed to work. How they SAY it works. You need to 100% trust what they are saying (is only for terrorists!) and trust 100% that no one will take information outside of the arena. Well guess what? It already happened! These guys are computer programmers. Do you think they have the capacity to change the way the information is handled? This is what businesses and people do to crush the competition.

Honestly you're really going to believe what the government tells you.? "I promise guys, we're only using this for terrorist! What about the Children!??!"

Do you have any shred of proof for these claims? Do you even know if they COULD do that if they wanted to with all their oversight? Just because it's making for good headlines, doesn't mean all the bogus is true.

Try informing your argument with facts instead of fear, and maybe I'll take you seriously.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Do you have any shred of proof for these claims? Do you even know if they COULD do that if they wanted to with all their oversight?
And just exactly how are we to find out? Everything is done behind closed doors. The media is a failure because they can't relay the information we should know.

The phrase "If you have nothing to fear, you have nothing to hide", is most certainly a one way street. And I'm sick of these one way streets where the gov is involved. I will never listen to a "do as I say not as I do" speech, especially coming from a governing body.

Guest said:

The major problem here is what is a terrorist? Today a terrorist is seen as someone whom is going to go out with the intention of hurting lots of innocent people in some way for one or more reasons. But tomorrow a terrorist could be considered someone whom is being quite vocal and indeed quite successful in organizing people to rally against the governments decision to invade Iran or some other strong political subject that is against the governments view.

What we see today is just a sneak peak at a system that has been designed from the very start to be big, and so therefore to be used big. It's easy to see it's intention when you look at it's scale. You don't use an atomic bomb to kill 100 to 200 hundred people, you use it to devastate all.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

You don't use an atomic bomb to kill 100 to 200 hundred people, you use it to devastate all.
And your point of bringing weapons of mass destruction into a loss of privacy discussion is what exactly?

Jake Woods said:

If you don't think that terrorists are using the same technique's being discussed in this article/comments you're deluding yourself. Only the dumb terrorist gets to be the suicide bomber! What this means is the the government is spying on everyone else. The government said that it had stopped several attacks. If this were true, as soon as this whole scandal broke don't you think the NSA would have listed specific times and dates. Wouldn't some of these alleged stopped attacks made the news somewhere. Come on.

1 person liked this | ReederOnTheRun ReederOnTheRun said:

And just exactly how are we to find out? Everything is done behind closed doors. The media is a failure because they can't relay the information we should know.

The phrase "If you have nothing to fear, you have nothing to hide", is most certainly a one way street. And I'm sick of these one way streets where the gov is involved. I will never listen to a "do as I say not as I do" speech, especially coming from a governing body.

Actually, they have revealed how it works. It's just not the same thing you want to believe, so you are rejecting it. The problem is you're belief lacks falsifiability. You think that if the government doesn't spill some terrible damning secret, they must be lying; but if they were to admit to a damning secret, you'd accept it immediately. Regardless of what the government is actually doing, you think they are always doing something to betray everybody they are trying to protect.

Scientific Theory 101

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

You think that if the government doesn't spill some terrible damning secret, they must be lying; but if they were to admit to a damning secret, you'd accept it immediately. Regardless of what the government is actually doing, you think they are always doing something to betray everybody they are trying to protect.
Thats just it, they are not giving us a reason to think good or bad of them. I will never trust an organization that closes the door on a discussion that will adversely effect everyones lives. If the organization wants me to stand behind them, they will include my opinion in the discussion.

From a personal stand point; any organization that will not include my opinions in a discussion that effects my life, does not deserve my support.

But you see we don't even know which opinions to offer, because we never know what is being discussed.

The Gettysburg Address

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

"new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people"

What a load of hog wash!! We are no longer being governed by the people. And freedom was also freedom from governmental control which is why we were also given the right to bear arms. We are no longer free and lose more and more of our freedom each day.

1 person liked this | ReederOnTheRun ReederOnTheRun said:

Thats just it, they are not giving us a reason to think good or bad of them. I will never trust an organization that closes the door on a discussion that will adversely effect everyones lives. If the organization wants me to stand behind them, they will include my opinion in the discussion.

But you see we don't even know which opinions to offer, because we never know what is being discussed.

"new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people"

I can think of one reason to think good of them - they're a key part of the United States Intelligence Community that protects the entire nation from foreign and domestic threats. Honestly, if they wanted to screw over all American citizens, they would probably just quit doing their jobs.

And "by the people, for the people" does not equal every single citizen knowing about every single national defense project. We elect people for that, and most defense projects MUST be kept secret in order to work. This is a day and age where knowledge does more to win wars than any number of troops. There is absolutely no incentive to open up all of our secrets to a conspiracy theorist like you. It would give absolutely no benefit, as you wouldn't understand how or why any of it is done; and it would put the entire nation at risk.

Seriously, think about what you're saying. Even if PRISM was really bad, I'd more likely suggest changing our government officials; not passing some new law to check with every citizen before doing anything. That's just stupid.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I can think of one reason to think good of them - they're a key part of the United States Intelligence Community that protects the entire nation from foreign and domestic threats.

Seriously, think about what you're saying.

If we would mind our own business, we wouldn't be painting a giant bullseye on our backs. You say the "United States Intelligence Community" protects against threats. I say "United States Intelligence Community" creates threats. If you think the very thing we are using to protect ourselves is not the very thing that threatens us, then it is you that are not thinking.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Thats just it, they are not giving us a reason to think good or bad of them. I will never trust an organization that closes the door on a discussion that will adversely effect everyones lives. If the organization wants me to stand behind them, they will include my opinion in the discussion.

From a personal stand point; any organization that will not include my opinions in a discussion that effects my life, does not deserve my support.

But you see we don't even know which opinions to offer, because we never know what is being discussed.

The Gettysburg Address

"new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people"

What a load of hog wash!! We are no longer being governed by the people. And freedom was also freedom from governmental control which is why we were also given the right to bear arms. We are no longer free and lose more and more of our freedom each day.

Ya know Clifford, all this grandiosity really is overkill.

First of all, we aren't being governed by a government, we're being governed by corporate America, who it turn is running the government.

Corporate America is telling us what to like, how to be cool, what to buy, what to think, what we should get next. So, Madison Avenue is the propaganda arm of the US government.

In spite of the fact that a person in Congress is worthless and corrupt, the people in that person's home state or district keep sending them back. I think they call that a "favorite son". It isn't what you know, is who you've bamboozled that gets you reelected.

The best part of John McCain is still in North Vietnam. That didn't stop a s***load of people from trying to elect him president.

But even more importantly, this topic begs the question, "who the f*** does everybody think they are"?

Even the NSA has budgetary considerations, and they can't possibly study the lives of every single person in the country in depth. The time or need for it simply doesn't exist. In large part, none of us are that important. At least I figure I'm not important enough to think the NSA is going to drop everything, and devote a cadre of manpower into finding out if I'm trying to make myself blind the old fashioned way.. And even if a rogue NSA agent were to try and blackmail me about that, I guess the video would end up on YouTube, because I simply don't have the money to stop it.

From time to time, I see news stories about gangs of people beating up a single defenseless person, or other heinous acts, then bragging about it by posting a video of it on Facebook. At times like these, I'm glad somebody is watching over us.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Ya know Clifford, all this grandiosity really is overkill.
Couldn't that be said about anyone, that doesn't bend over and just take it?

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Couldn't that be said about anyone, that doesn't bend over and just take it?
Well no Cliff. Some of us just fidget a bit, then moan softly, like cattle.....:oops:

You'll see this sign at this sheep's pasture, "the hell with the wolves, it's the farmer you have to worry about"....

high_NSA high_NSA said:

Do you have any shred of proof for these claims? Do you even know if they COULD do that if they wanted to with all their oversight? Just because it's making for good headlines, doesn't mean all the bogus is true.

Try informing your argument with facts instead of fear, and maybe I'll take you seriously.

. Hmmmm A fact for my argument? I would need to prove that a geek (if he or she wanted) could remove any security level (secret or TOP secret) documents or files from the compound to do with them as they please? You're right. I doubt that's possible. Oh Wait..?

Sure call me crazy or paranoid. But this is just the tip of the ice burg. They are not going to spend all that money and not have any way to justify it as only for terrorist groups. They can't make money off that!

ReederOnTheRun ReederOnTheRun said:

. Hmmmm A fact for my argument? I would need to prove that a geek (if he or she wanted) could remove any security level (secret or TOP secret) documents or files from the compound to do with them as they please? You're right. I doubt that's possible. Oh Wait..?

Sure call me crazy or paranoid. But this is just the tip of the ice burg. They are not going to spend all that money and not have any way to justify it as only for terrorist groups. They can't make money off that!

Yeah, every citizen should have access to all of our top secret programs. That's a great idea! I mean it would let us feel good knowing what is going on, and there is no way our enemies would find out about any of it!

Oh wait... Yes they totally would. That would be a stupid idea, and there would be literally no benefit from doing it. Just look at my replies to Clifford if you still don't get it.

And they ARE making money off that. Finding terrorists is literally exactly what they are being paid to do.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I'm only going to say this once. Why is it we are being monitored by surveillance? It's fear of not knowing what we might do.

It's hidden secretes that draw violence as if it was a magnet. Holding secretes is drawing violence but yet they fight by watching everyone else. I don't see any progress being made in stopping this violence period. Anyone who thinks surveillance is the key (to make myself clear I said key, I didn't say it wasn't needed) to stopping violence is as delusional as our governmental offices. You can't stop a magnetic force by replacing all the surrounding items with plastic.

1 person liked this | Guest said:

Never give up, Never surrender!

MonsterZero MonsterZero said:

First, prove your program works....Then we can talk about my right to privacy.

If it "helps to foil terrorist plots" then please by all means, do prove your theory.

/popcorn.

kuroiei kuroiei said:

Well, I'm not from the USA. Never been and sadly, there's a slim chance that I will in the next 10 years or so. Never voted for my Internet freedom or privacy, because I never had the chance. In Poland even SOPA - that benefited mostly American ventures! - was introduced and enforced behind our backs, with no media exposure at all. The point is - why do I / we outside the USA have to conform to that particular law or government action? I don't want to offend anyone, because I know that it isn't the fault of he people there, but rather the gov / companies, but... a little democracy and freedom, please?

Peace.

avoidz avoidz said:

Well, it was fun while it lasted.

treetops treetops said:

I never put my real name on anything unless I have too, not even my amazon account has my real name.

TheBigFatClown said:

And just exactly how are we to find out? Everything is done behind closed doors. The media is a failure because they can't relay the information we should know.

The phrase "If you have nothing to fear, you have nothing to hide", is most certainly a one way street. And I'm sick of these one way streets where the gov is involved. I will never listen to a "do as I say not as I do" speech, especially coming from a governing body.

Actually, they have revealed how it works. It's just not the same thing you want to believe, so you are rejecting it. The problem is you're belief lacks falsifiability. You think that if the government doesn't spill some terrible damning secret, they must be lying; but if they were to admit to a damning secret, you'd accept it immediately. Regardless of what the government is actually doing, you think they are always doing something to betray everybody they are trying to protect.

Scientific Theory 101

IRS scandal, Benghazi scandal, the list goes on and on. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely. Get your head out of the sand. If I had the power to control you without limits do you think I wouldn't exercise it? But to do that I gotta take away your guns first.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Religion is the ultimate culprit; watch as they kill everything because their god is spppppppeeeeeeeeciiiiiiiiaaaaalllllllll.
Fighting for a religious cause is pathetic, there is not one religion that believes God will not fight his own battles.

There was a problem posting your comment. Please try again in a minute (error code: USER_BANNED).
That was probably an intellect scanner rejecting your gibberish.

I seriously didn't get anything from your rambling!

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.