Whether or not surveillance involves iDevices or some other electronic means, privacy protections in the U.S. today are a pale shadow of what was envisioned in the Fourth Amendment. The landscape changed dramatically with the passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and establishment of the FISA court, which authorizes secret searches. In today's environment, it is not unexpected for government security agencies to seek methods to surreptitiously pry out private information from people's devices. A watershed would be reached, however, if companies like Apple were ever forced to provide government agencies with back doors to phones and other communications. If uncontrolled surveillance can be done, it will be done, and the FISA courts will mean nothing. That crosses the line to totalitarianism and guts any remaining force to the Fourth Amendment.
Some of the research is secret. Some of it isn't. But the organization itself is not secret.
All I can tell you is this, my wife worked for a company which provided them software which was not use in a secret work they were doing since it was basic commercial software. However, she was not allow into any of their facilities without a through background check and she visited a number of their labs to provide training. She could not even visit without a invite from someone at the facility.
I also know they share information on things which they do not deem secret anymore. You can go to their website and they are willing to licensing technologies the develop. But the initial research was consider secret but, sometime they find thing which have no secret value so they license it to the general public. You just have to share profits from their technologies back with the lab.
Sandia is one of the core DOE weapons engineering labs - there is nothing secret about its basic mission. It has other diverse research interests of varying degrees of classification, including unclassified.
Whether or not surveillance involves iDevices or some other electronic means, privacy protections in the U.S. today are a pale shadow of what was envisioned in the Fourth Amendment. The landscape changed dramatically with the passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and establishment of the FISA court, which authorizes secret searches. In today's environment, it is not unexpected for government security agencies to seek methods to surreptitiously pry out private information from people's devices. A watershed would be reached, however, if companies like Apple were ever forced to provide government agencies with back doors to phones and other communications. If uncontrolled surveillance can be done, it will be done, and the FISA courts will mean nothing. That crosses the line to totalitarianism and guts any remaining force to the Fourth Amendment.
Sen. Rand Paul:
Quote:
The Founding Fathers warned of a Federal Government bent on usurping the power, rights, and privacy of its States and citizens. In the last nine years, the Federal Government has expanded the scope of its power at an alarming rate, while blatantly ignoring the Constitution.
Whether it's passing the 315 page PATRIOT Act without a single member of Congress ever reading the bill, proposing a National ID Card, establishing FISA courts and utilizing warrantless searches, or betraying the medical privacy of ordinary citizens, the Federal Government has overstepped its limited powers as stipulated in the Constitution.
I am working to reassert the rights and privileges of the 50 states and over 300 million Americans. The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights. I believe that America can successfully protect itself against potential terrorists without sacrificing civil liberties, and I reject the premise that the Federal Government must be given a blank check in the name of national security.
That is why I was the only Senator to object to the reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act, when it came up in the Senate with no debate or discussion.
This is the same government American puppets worship and defend at any chance they get.
I remember a few morons on this site doing just that.
WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!
We have sheep defending police who rape children, kill the elderly and are happy to shoot down any unarmed citizens. Yet the sheep public sit back and rationalize a reason for these pigs. These murderers and rapists are paid by OUR tax dollars to abuse us and control us and we turn away as if we don't see a thing and even defend these government hired thugs.
Tim is exercising poetic license when he talks about "human rights". What exists to protect one's human rights? Is there a world Constitution? Is there a "Citizens of Earth" Bill of Rights? Of course not. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights are unique to the US and only applies to US citizens. That these guaranteed protections no longer protect, nor are they guaranteed should have caused an immediate response from Americans. That there has been no substantive response is evidence that most people are ignorant of their actual rights and the real LIMITED function of government.
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights clearly only applies to the USA, but there is certainly a wider protection - the UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights being the most obvious.
Sadly, many governments, especially the USA, but here too in the UK and I'm sure many other countries in the EU are continual abusers of human rights. There's plenty of information published, but it doesn't make the front pages of the papers - only the horrendous human rights abuses by whoever our current enemy is are awarded that accolade.
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights clearly only applies to the USA, but there is certainly a wider protection - the UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights being the most obvious.
Sadly, many governments, especially the USA, but here too in the UK and I'm sure many other countries in the EU are continual abusers of human rights. There's plenty of information published, but it doesn't make the front pages of the papers - only the horrendous human rights abuses by whoever our current enemy is are awarded that accolade.
The US contributes twice the amount of the next biggest contributor to the UN (25% vs, 12%), so the UN is really just a projection of US power.
It should be clear that Sandia National Lab is not government owned, rather, it is a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin which trades on the NY stock exchange. Thus, Sandia is a FOR PROFIT CORPORATION that in some ways is a competitor to Apple Inc.
It appears that Sandia is profiteering by attacking Apple Inc. and the customers and security of Apple Inc. products. It would seem to me at very least that Apple Inc. had a corporate obligation to its customers and shareholders to use legal process to (1) stop Sandia from undermining its technology (2) insure Apple customers are protected from the malicious activity of Sandia, and (3) recoup from Sandia the monetary value of Sandia's malicious activity towards Apple Inc., including the loss of reputation damages to Apple Inc.
Is it o.k. in corporate America that one corporation so blatantly attacks another? What is Apple going to do to protect its customers and right this wrong?
Comments
Whether or not surveillance involves iDevices or some other electronic means, privacy protections in the U.S. today are a pale shadow of what was envisioned in the Fourth Amendment. The landscape changed dramatically with the passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and establishment of the FISA court, which authorizes secret searches. In today's environment, it is not unexpected for government security agencies to seek methods to surreptitiously pry out private information from people's devices. A watershed would be reached, however, if companies like Apple were ever forced to provide government agencies with back doors to phones and other communications. If uncontrolled surveillance can be done, it will be done, and the FISA courts will mean nothing. That crosses the line to totalitarianism and guts any remaining force to the Fourth Amendment.
Some of the research is secret. Some of it isn't. But the organization itself is not secret.
All I can tell you is this, my wife worked for a company which provided them software which was not use in a secret work they were doing since it was basic commercial software. However, she was not allow into any of their facilities without a through background check and she visited a number of their labs to provide training. She could not even visit without a invite from someone at the facility.
I also know they share information on things which they do not deem secret anymore. You can go to their website and they are willing to licensing technologies the develop. But the initial research was consider secret but, sometime they find thing which have no secret value so they license it to the general public. You just have to share profits from their technologies back with the lab.
Sandia is one of the core DOE weapons engineering labs - there is nothing secret about its basic mission. It has other diverse research interests of varying degrees of classification, including unclassified.
Whether or not surveillance involves iDevices or some other electronic means, privacy protections in the U.S. today are a pale shadow of what was envisioned in the Fourth Amendment. The landscape changed dramatically with the passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and establishment of the FISA court, which authorizes secret searches. In today's environment, it is not unexpected for government security agencies to seek methods to surreptitiously pry out private information from people's devices. A watershed would be reached, however, if companies like Apple were ever forced to provide government agencies with back doors to phones and other communications. If uncontrolled surveillance can be done, it will be done, and the FISA courts will mean nothing. That crosses the line to totalitarianism and guts any remaining force to the Fourth Amendment.
Sen. Rand Paul:
The Founding Fathers warned of a Federal Government bent on usurping the power, rights, and privacy of its States and citizens. In the last nine years, the Federal Government has expanded the scope of its power at an alarming rate, while blatantly ignoring the Constitution.
Whether it's passing the 315 page PATRIOT Act without a single member of Congress ever reading the bill, proposing a National ID Card, establishing FISA courts and utilizing warrantless searches, or betraying the medical privacy of ordinary citizens, the Federal Government has overstepped its limited powers as stipulated in the Constitution.
I am working to reassert the rights and privileges of the 50 states and over 300 million Americans. The Federal Government must return to its constitutionally enumerated powers and restore our inalienable rights. I believe that America can successfully protect itself against potential terrorists without sacrificing civil liberties, and I reject the premise that the Federal Government must be given a blank check in the name of national security.
That is why I was the only Senator to object to the reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act, when it came up in the Senate with no debate or discussion.
continued: http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=7
Quote:
Is it not against the law to intercept and hack communications?
We have laws upon laws upon laws... So many that not even the people whose job it is to enforce those laws know what in the hell is legal or not!
Supreme Court rejects plea to ban taping of police in Illinois
Police Arrest Illinois Man For Videotaping Traffic Stop
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/09/29/police-arrest-illinois-man-for-videotaping-traffic-stop/
I remember a few morons on this site doing just that.
WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!
We have sheep defending police who rape children, kill the elderly and are happy to shoot down any unarmed citizens. Yet the sheep public sit back and rationalize a reason for these pigs. These murderers and rapists are paid by OUR tax dollars to abuse us and control us and we turn away as if we don't see a thing and even defend these government hired thugs.
Copblock.org
Tim is exercising poetic license when he talks about "human rights". What exists to protect one's human rights? Is there a world Constitution? Is there a "Citizens of Earth" Bill of Rights? Of course not. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights are unique to the US and only applies to US citizens. That these guaranteed protections no longer protect, nor are they guaranteed should have caused an immediate response from Americans. That there has been no substantive response is evidence that most people are ignorant of their actual rights and the real LIMITED function of government.
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights clearly only applies to the USA, but there is certainly a wider protection - the UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights being the most obvious.
Sadly, many governments, especially the USA, but here too in the UK and I'm sure many other countries in the EU are continual abusers of human rights. There's plenty of information published, but it doesn't make the front pages of the papers - only the horrendous human rights abuses by whoever our current enemy is are awarded that accolade.
The US contributes twice the amount of the next biggest contributor to the UN (25% vs, 12%), so the UN is really just a projection of US power.
rather, it is a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin which trades
on the NY stock exchange. Thus, Sandia is a FOR PROFIT CORPORATION
that in some ways is a competitor to Apple Inc.
It appears that Sandia is profiteering by attacking Apple Inc. and the
customers and security of Apple Inc. products. It would seem to me at very least
that Apple Inc. had a corporate obligation to its customers and shareholders
to use legal process to (1) stop Sandia from undermining its technology (2)
insure Apple customers are protected from the malicious activity of Sandia, and
(3) recoup from Sandia the monetary value of Sandia's malicious activity towards Apple Inc., including the loss of reputation damages to Apple Inc.
Is it o.k. in corporate America that one corporation so blatantly attacks another?
What is Apple going to do to protect its customers and right this wrong?
Do women refer to each others’ ‘racks’ in that way?
I hear women refer to other women as "chicks" all the time, strangely enough. Even I never call a woman a chick.
Yeah, I hear dolls calling other babes chicks, too.