-
You asked and we delivered! AMPReviews now provides the option to upgrade to VIP access via paid subscription as an alternative to writing your own reviews. VIP Access allows you to read all the hidden content within member-submitted reviews AND gives access to private VIP-only forums in each city. You can upgrade your account INSTANTLY by visiting the Account Upgrades page in your own user profile and using a valid credit card to purchase a subscription. You can get to this page by clicking the link in any review, by clicking the red "See the Details Now" banner on the home page, and by clicking the Purchase Private Details link in the navbar at the top of every page
Contact Tracing
- Thread starter OlderGuy77
- Start date
Such a intellectually worded argument!
But about what I would expect from you.
So tell me--with numerous terrorist and criminal groups fully invested in coordinating and operating in a web-intensive manner, explain to me just how to counter that while giving "you" 100% privacy?
How many 9/11 kind of events have been prevented because data was collected and cross linked? You know, the kind of stuff people of both parties have pointed out for 20 yrs is something we need to do better.
How many large drug shipments are you willing to let into the US--with or without a wall--and how many terrorist hijackings to satisfy your craving for 100% privacy?
The tradeoff conversations are long overdue. And I would welcome any REASONABLE thoughts you could contribute.
But if your biggest worry in life is that because you were careless, someone MIGHT think you called an AMP sometime in the past, then I doubt what you might contribute to the bigger conversation.
And if your best eloquence is "Bunk", I no longer doubt, I know.
But about what I would expect from you.
So tell me--with numerous terrorist and criminal groups fully invested in coordinating and operating in a web-intensive manner, explain to me just how to counter that while giving "you" 100% privacy?
How many 9/11 kind of events have been prevented because data was collected and cross linked? You know, the kind of stuff people of both parties have pointed out for 20 yrs is something we need to do better.
How many large drug shipments are you willing to let into the US--with or without a wall--and how many terrorist hijackings to satisfy your craving for 100% privacy?
The tradeoff conversations are long overdue. And I would welcome any REASONABLE thoughts you could contribute.
But if your biggest worry in life is that because you were careless, someone MIGHT think you called an AMP sometime in the past, then I doubt what you might contribute to the bigger conversation.
And if your best eloquence is "Bunk", I no longer doubt, I know.
Quite literally none, as were learned when people like Gen. Keith Alexander were made to testify before Congress after the Snowden PRISM revelations. When asked how many terrorist attacks had been prevented, anywhere in the world, as a result of the dragnet surveillance the state carried out in foreign countries for over a decade, as well as the collection performed on USians by their spying partners at GCHQ and elsewhere, he first claimed 2 (perjured himself under oath basically). He later revised that down to 1, which they offered context for: They prevented a New Yorker, a taxi driver, from sending ~1000 USD to an individual in Africa who possibly had ties to Al Nusra or some similarly named org, a group which later shot up a shopping mall in, if I recall, Kenya.
All of them, considering all drugs should be decriminalised and the state should get involved in the supply side of eg cocaine, heroin, etc as has been shown to reduce harm and dependency across the board in all countries where it has been tried. Portugal successfully reduced violent crime by 50,% in the decade following their decriminalising of all substances across the board.
I certainly understand the need for an administrative body that can trace the spread of disease, since the original SARS epidemic this has been evidenced as an effective means of minimising damage to a population (and, as it turns out, an economy). There's no reason to so publicly advert your bootlicking fetish in the course of urging people to be sane though!
All of them, considering all drugs should be decriminalised and the state should get involved in the supply side of eg cocaine, heroin, etc as has been shown to reduce harm and dependency across the board in all countries where it has been tried. Portugal successfully reduced violent crime by 50,% in the decade following their decriminalising of all substances across the board.
I certainly understand the need for an administrative body that can trace the spread of disease, since the original SARS epidemic this has been evidenced as an effective means of minimising damage to a population (and, as it turns out, an economy). There's no reason to so publicly advert your bootlicking fetish in the course of urging people to be sane though!
Too bad. For a while it seemed you were making some good input--even though your first point, though technically accurate, is a very very small piece of the surveillance world.
You raise the issue of legalization of drugs, and give your opinion--which I partially agree with.
But then you take a shotgun to much of your credibility with your closing post. Especially since it is a completely gratuitous insult because you think you know my position on something I never stated. My point was that the topic needs national discussion--is THAT what you call a bootlicking fetish? Rather odd use of the term.
On a curious side note: That was quite a lengthy initial post.
You raise the issue of legalization of drugs, and give your opinion--which I partially agree with.
But then you take a shotgun to much of your credibility with your closing post. Especially since it is a completely gratuitous insult because you think you know my position on something I never stated. My point was that the topic needs national discussion--is THAT what you call a bootlicking fetish? Rather odd use of the term.
On a curious side note: That was quite a lengthy initial post.
I was simply hypothesizing about potential incursion into peoples’ private lives. You can disagree and we shall see. My concern is that people don’t seem to be concerned about talk by leaders of an “army of tracers”. This can be subtle and gradual enough as to not arouse objections until it becomes difficult to reverse. My “bunk” was in response to your mocking lecturing tone. I have no desire to waste my time dueling with an anonymous know-it-all whose underlying basis for the snarky act may have been my reference to Biden. So be it
Are there other sources besides Screenrant? I try to find other sources on this matter but can't find them. I'm not sure law enforcement is using contact tracing to catch anyone. They normally use closed circuit TV cameras and triangulation of cell phone towers to try to catch anyone, if accurate. Facial recognition is already used to try to catch anyone. My understanding is that contact tracing alerts people of possible persons tested positive by using bluetooth technology anonymously. This Screenrant article has nothing to do with the anonymous technology of contact tracing. I doubt the article is true and factual.