Feds Push for Tracking Cell Phones

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
You know, this kind of stuff is just getting out of hand. Tracking your whereabouts on your cell phone? I could see if this was a government issued phone but still, even then, doesn’t the public have ANY reasonable expectation of privacy? The government sure doesn’t seem to think so.

"This is a critical question for privacy in the 21st century," says Kevin Bankston, an attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who will be arguing on Friday. "If the courts do side with the government, that means that everywhere we go, in the real world and online, will be an open book to the government unprotected by the Fourth Amendment."
Click to expand...
 
Isn't there that whole Bill of Rights part of the constitution that prevents unwarranted search and seizure? I'm pretty sure that this would qualify as such.
 
pretty much all the congresses and administrations we have had for the past 20 yrs have wiped thier asses with the constitution. And to make matters worse, the supreme court goes with popular opinion instead of the law half the time. So no, this is not much of a suprise.
 
Just another step towards 1984. This is why we can't lose our 2nd Amendment rights. After that is our 1st Amendment rights, followed by our natural human rights.

WtBadAss got it right about our Supreme Court except for one thing. The Supreme Court (for the most part) makes better decisions than either the Legislative or the God Forsaken Executive Branch.
 
They already do this, they just want to make it legal so it can be used in prosecution.
And no, there's no expectation of privacy anymore if you use modern technology.
 
See, this is all good. Just one more item on the list of "Reasons to start another revolution against the government". They'll know exactly where we all are when we go knocking on the feds door telling them to GTFO.
 
jvz555 said:
Turn location off.
The End. :)
Click to expand...

Actually, all that does is turn off that feature for YOU and prevent you (or someone else tied into your friends & family, for instance) from using location-based services. E911 is always on and beyond that, those cell tower records are always being generated.
 
Every time the government pushes for things like this, we need to ensure they are the first (and ultimately ONLY) ones to adopt it. ID chips/cards, cell tracking, etc.... The public has a right to keep an eye on their elected officials. If they are doing nothing wrong, they have nothing to fear, right?
 
you americans lost all your rights at the patriot act. when will you folk actually do something about this? i thought you were revolutionaries, but i see you are devolutionaries..
 
Its reality. Every conversation you have on a phone(cell or otherwise), every email you send, is monitored. Right or wrong, it just is. Denial wont change anything.
 
Wow...yet another massive infringement on civil liberties by the overreaching Bush administration.

O wait...

How's that hope and change working out for you, hippies? It's hilarious that you spent 8 years whining and bitching about generally unobtrusive and common sense security measures like warrantless tapping of international phonecalls only to elect a prez that wants to go all 1984 on us and track our every move.
 
Ualdayan said:
You do realize you can't turn off your phone's reporting of its location right?
Click to expand...

Sure you can...pull the battery.

Or use a cash paid for disposable phone then teh report doesn't link to anyone...just the phone.
 
That didn't take long for someone to pull the political party card.

Both parties are historically guilty of exactly the same things. The only difference left is who supplies the money, and who does the majority of the complaining for four years.
 
Snobok said:
Isn't there that whole Bill of Rights part of the constitution that prevents unwarranted search and seizure? I'm pretty sure that this would qualify as such.
Click to expand...

Not since the patriot act, and specifically FISA mate.
 
BloodyIron said:
you americans lost all your rights at the patriot act. when will you folk actually do something about this? i thought you were revolutionaries, but i see you are devolutionaries..
Click to expand...

They took care of that too by labeling dissidents as "terrorists". If you are a "terrorist" the Constitution doesn't apply to you and the government can make you disappear without repercussion. Convenient eh?
 
JCDenton said:
Wow...yet another massive infringement on civil liberties by the overreaching Bush administration.

O wait...

How's that hope and change working out for you, hippies? It's hilarious that you spent 8 years whining and bitching about generally unobtrusive and common sense security measures like warrantless tapping of international phonecalls only to elect a prez that wants to go all 1984 on us and track our every move.
Click to expand...

Hey, we have plenty of hope and change! Our employment status CHANGEs from "employed" to "unemployed" and we HOPE we can feed our kids. We HOPE we can pay our mortgages. We HOPE we won't be labeled a terrorist when we get mad and start rebelling against the government. Yep, plenty of hope and change going on.
 
synapsis said:
That didn't take long for someone to pull the political party card.

Both parties are historically guilty of exactly the same things. The only difference left is who supplies the money, and who does the majority of the complaining for four years.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Two ends of the same candle burning away freedom. Criminals all.
 
The government has probably been doing so for years anyway; it's just that they're now seeking 'permission' to do so.

My philosophy is that you can never expect the government to protect something they don't want you to have. If you want privacy, you got to protect it yourself. Don't carry around an active cell phone, don't post crap on the social networking sites, etc. Naturally, that only goes so far with the amount of data mining and leaks happening around the world, but it's certainly better than walking around with the false impression that the government cares about protecting individuals when people (apparently) don't care enough to do anything themselves.
 
Ibanezfoo said:
Exactly. Two ends of the same candle burning away freedom. Criminals all.
Click to expand...

^ THIS

We have No Rights, folk. That was over along time ago. And Yes, the 'aisle' that seperate the parties is fictional. Just rebranded rhetoric. Not a damn bit of difference in a dem or a repub todays ACTIONS. Sure the words and enflamming crap, different, but the ACTIONS?

SAME

Its all an illusion to manage the sheeple. keep em spun up on meaningless crap... meanwhile..dont pay attention to that man behind the curtain... :mad:
 
I didn't know the constitution mattered. The constitution is an evolving document according to Justice Ruth Ginsburg. Therefore the meaning within the constitution changes with the times. It means you can read your own meaning INTO the text rather than getting THEN meaning FROM the text. Who cares about what the framers of the constitution says. If Ruth says your constitutional rights have been dropped, then too bad for you. What the founding fathers intended in the constitution is irrelevant to her.
 
Parmenides said:
I didn't know the constitution mattered. The constitution is an evolving document according to Justice Ruth Ginsburg. Therefore the meaning within the constitution changes with the times. It means you can read your own meaning INTO the text rather than getting THEN meaning FROM the text. Who cares about what the framers of the constitution says. If Ruth says your constitutional rights have been dropped, then too bad for you. What the founding fathers intended in the constitution is irrelevant to her.
Click to expand...

Edit.... typo THEN is supposed to be THE
 
Go for it, I'm headed to lunch in a half hour....they can track me all they want. Maybe they'll find a good restaurant or two
 
XBarbarian said:
^ THIS

We have No Rights, folk. That was over along time ago. And Yes, the 'aisle' that seperate the parties is fictional. Just rebranded rhetoric. Not a damn bit of difference in a dem or a repub todays ACTIONS. Sure the words and enflamming crap, different, but the ACTIONS?

SAME

Its all an illusion to manage the sheeple. keep em spun up on meaningless crap... meanwhile..dont pay attention to that man behind the curtain... :mad:
Click to expand...

GR2009032100104.gif


Yep, no differences at all. Never mind that the largest Bush deficit is smaller than the smallest Obama deficit. In fact, the first Obama deficit is larger than Bush's 8 year total. And soon we will be told that taxes just "have" to be raised as Obama tries to pretend that he is a deficit hawk. I think this graph shows a pretty big difference in ACTIONS.

I will tell you another huge difference: one party wanted to increase the cost and decrease the quality of healthcare for people who are currently insured so that jobless deadbeats could get insurance. The other party stopped it cold.
 
JCDenton said:
Yep, no differences at all. Never mind that the largest Bush deficit is smaller than the smallest Obama deficit. In fact, the first Obama deficit is larger than Bush's 8 year total. And soon we will be told that taxes just "have" to be raised as Obama tries to pretend that he is a deficit hawk. I think this graph shows a pretty big difference in ACTIONS.

I will tell you another huge difference: one party wanted to increase the cost and decrease the quality of healthcare for people who are currently insured so that jobless deadbeats could get insurance. The other party stopped it cold.
Click to expand...

Oh man, you have a graph from the Washington post. What you write must be true then. Ok then, I take back all the stuff I said. The Republicans F'n RULE! Get them' terrorists at any cost buddy! Keep fightin' that there war on drugs! Personal freedom sucks! Yeeeeeeehhhhhhhaaaaaaaawwwwwwww!

:rolleyes:
 
Ibanezfoo said:
Oh man, you have a graph from the Washington post. What you write must be true then. Ok then, I take back all the stuff I said. The Republicans F'n RULE! Get them' terrorists at any cost buddy! Keep fightin' that there war on drugs! Personal freedom sucks! Yeeeeeeehhhhhhhaaaaaaaawwwwwwww!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Just curious...do you dispute the accuracy of the data in the graph or are you just trying to duck the issue by shooting the messenger?
 
JCDenton said:
Just curious...do you dispute the accuracy of the data in the graph or are you just trying to duck the issue by shooting the messenger?
Click to expand...

The accuracy of that graph is irrelevant in this discussion, which I thought was about freedom, not spending money. Everyone is ripping on the Obama regime (which may be factual... I think he is the antichrist but thats besides the point) but I've never paid more taxes than under the Bush regime. Politics always polarizes and there's a few of us at least that say hey wait a minute, you guys are arguing semantics. BOTH sides are stripping away freedom, albeit under different pretenses. ;)
 
JCDenton said:
GR2009032100104.gif


Yep, no differences at all. Never mind that the largest Bush deficit is smaller than the smallest Obama deficit. In fact, the first Obama deficit is larger than Bush's 8 year total. And soon we will be told that taxes just "have" to be raised as Obama tries to pretend that he is a deficit hawk. I think this graph shows a pretty big difference in ACTIONS.

I will tell you another huge difference: one party wanted to increase the cost and decrease the quality of healthcare for people who are currently insured so that jobless deadbeats could get insurance. The other party stopped it cold.
Click to expand...

by the way, that 09 defecit includes the 700+B stimulus package, as such it's not a proper representation of what's going on.

fact check please.
 
americans proudly gave up the constitution on 9/11 so they could feel like it safe to fly on planes until this whole terrorism thing blows over.
 
BloodyIron said:
by the way, that 09 defecit includes the 700+B stimulus package, as such it's not a proper representation of what's going on.

fact check please.
Click to expand...

Ok, so somehow deficit spending isn't deficit spending? LOL

Nobody forced Democrats to give 700+B to unions and other interest groups. It certainly didn't stimulate the economy. I think that graph is a perfect example of what's going on: Democrats wasting a shitton of money with absolutely nothing to show for it. Which brings me to my next point.

The accuracy of that graph is irrelevant in this discussion, which I thought was about freedom, not spending money. Everyone is ripping on the Obama regime (which may be factual... I think he is the antichrist but thats besides the point) but I've never paid more taxes than under the Bush regime. Politics always polarizes and there's a few of us at least that say hey wait a minute, you guys are arguing semantics. BOTH sides are stripping away freedom, albeit under different pretenses.
Click to expand...

You haven't paid more taxes because the Bush tax rates are still in effect. Chances are that you will at some point pay more taxes to cover this spending though. If you're poor, your year-end tax bill probably won't increase appreciably, but you'll still be paying disguised taxes. For example, many Dem leaders are lobbying for a Europe style VAT. So technically "you" wouldn't be paying the taxes, it's just that everything you bought would cost 10-20% more. Same with cap and trade. "You" won't be paying the taxes but your electric bill will double.

And this brings us full circle back to a discussion of freedom. In my opinion, the number one determinant of personal freedom is money. It affects where you live, what you drive, what you eat, if you can afford to quit a job you hate, if you can have children, if you can retire, and every other aspect of life. Reducing the amount of money in my pocket affects my day to day freedom in a far more profound way than some imagined infringement on "civil liberties." When pressed, whiny hippies struggle heavily to point out any real impact something like the Patriot Act has had on their lives. The outrage is theoretical rather than at any actual injustice they've suffered. I'm more of a pragmatist who doesn't give a shit about civil libertarian principles. I only ask how costs compare to benefits. In the case of the Patriot Act, the real freedom costs are very low because the government doesn't have the resources to act on its powers. If they were tapping 25% of phonecalls warrantless it would be a problem, but I don't particularly care that .000001% of phonecalls are being tapped. That seems like a petty thing to be concerned about when there is a near 100% chance that Democrats will steal a larger portion of my paychecks than Republicans.

That also touches on why I find cell phone location tracking problematic but don't care about 90% of the Patriot Act. If this is implemented, then there's a 100% chance my location data is aggregated and made available for later use. On the other hand, a wiretap has to occur contemporaneously and there's no record of what was said on my call unless I'm in that .000001% that gets tapped.
 
jvz555 said:
Turn location off.
The End. :)
Click to expand...

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

Their are records of every single tower you registered with. When you' make a call, the wireless company knows roughly where you are. If you're moving, they know where you're heading.

All of this stuff is stored in a data warehouse and stays there for a period of time (I'm not certain what the government requirements are, but it's more than a year).

I believe that even if your phone is off, there are ways to get information, so long as the battery is in.....however, that's not the type of information that Texas used.

I don't know how anyone can say we have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Most people do believe that both who they call and the content of their calls are private.

If this stands, it sounds like they could effectively check on anyone's calls for any reason.

Definitely big brother material.
 
jc have you been in a closet? the government records all calls and messages in the united states, all of them, and they employ hundreds of people to randomly listen. these are private phone calls, business calls, all calls. if you have talked on the phone in the last decade there is a recording of it somewhere and theres a chance a real human listened to it, legally. yes, chances are nobody heard it because there are far too many calls for them to manually listen to all of them, but computer techology will soon do all that for us. youve been warned.
 
JCDenton said:
GR2009032100104.gif


Yep, no differences at all. Never mind that the largest Bush deficit is smaller than the smallest Obama deficit. In fact, the first Obama deficit is larger than Bush's 8 year total. And soon we will be told that taxes just "have" to be raised as Obama tries to pretend that he is a deficit hawk. I think this graph shows a pretty big difference in ACTIONS.

I will tell you another huge difference: one party wanted to increase the cost and decrease the quality of healthcare for people who are currently insured so that jobless deadbeats could get insurance. The other party stopped it cold.
Click to expand...

Well there is something a little strange about those numbers. It could quite possibly be due to the fact that governments fiscal year might not be yearly. Meaning the 08 budget might actually end in January. The reason why I say this is because the TARP is missing from these numbers. This is not the stimulus package. This was passed in 08 to the tune of 700 billion dollars. So the question is where is it in these graphs?

While Obama has his faults for sure, to sit up there and make some Limbaugh political statement about "deficit" spending as if there A) wasn't a reason for it and B) like deficit spending started all of a sudden once he stepped into office is lunacy and C) the thread is about CELL PHONES not Obama.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top