Yahoo secretly scanned customer emails on behalf of U.S. intelligence

[Kid Dynamite 5903]

Course they're mental

 

I buy a £250k house and have to give the government £12500. That's not wealth distribution, it's just racketeering

 

I pay tax and NI on my wages my whole life, leave some

Cash to my kids and they get taxed on it all over again

 

You're the perfect citizen Renton accept everything and question nowt

[Dr Gloom 19813]

lots of people cant afford to buy a home. taxing those that can does help redistribute wealth via the state. it's one of the fairer taxes. ditto inheritance tax as the wealthiest cough up more. 

[adios 717]

Well I think they know that if we think we are being watched it modifies our behavior. We are the most studied thing on the planet. It might seem ridiculous to us but this thread will be recorded because of some of the words used. How does that feel?

Fine?  They must be fucking bored like.

[Renton 17745]

Course they're mental

 

I buy a £250k house and have to give the government £12500. That's not wealth distribution, it's just racketeering

 

I pay tax and NI on my wages my whole life, leave some

Cash to my kids and they get taxed on it all over again

 

You're the perfect citizen Renton accept everything and question nowt

Stamp duty on a 250,000 house is 2,500, not 12,500. It's fair because more expensive houses are taxed much more. You know, tax the rich?

 

Inheritance tax is a tax on the inheritor, not the deceased it is by far the best way to prevent wealth accumulating in families and frankly you are a tory if you don't support it.

 

If you wanted an example of a regressive tax you should have picked VAT, but never mind. I'm certainly not a perfect citizen but I know to have a society you need to pay taxes for it, and the less regressive the better in my mind. And yet you're a corbynite?

 

None of this has anything to do with big brother anyway.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Renton

[Dr Gloom 19813]

typical tory move to raise VAT during their austerity drive. 

[Happy Face 29]

 

Mass surveillance is used to gain advantages in all areas inc business, military, finance, intellectual property and keep an eye on everyone.

 

 

Snowden has been tweeting about what exactly they can pull from mails. Reads to me like searches for company logos on attachments are done

 

https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/783774835725959169

 

Always handy when looking for corporate insider info.

 

Easy to say companies would be daft not to secure it, but even Clinton was sending top secret shit to herself at home, and that bitch knows ALL this shit. No accounting for how stupid people can be at the top of governments and corporations.

[NJS 3977]

Stamp duty on a 250,000 house is 2,500, not 12,500. It's fair because more expensive houses are taxed much more. You know, tax the rich?

 

Inheritance tax is a tax on the inheritor, not the deceased it is by far the best way to prevent wealth accumulating in families and frankly you are a tory if you don't support it.

 

If you wanted an example of a regressive tax you should have picked VAT, but never mind. I'm certainly not a perfect citizen but I know to have a society you need to pay taxes for it, and the less regressive the better in my mind. And yet you're a corbynite?

 

None of this has anything to do with big brother anyway.

I've always been open to a discussion on whether taxing money more than once is fair with regards to savings or indeed VAT or IHT but the only problem is seperating earned and unearned income - IHT is definitely unearned and also should serve the purpose of supporting a meritocracy but doesn't quite work out like that thanks to avoidance mechanisms.

[Happy Face 29]

NYT reporting this tooling has been extended beyond it's claimed initial use which was to scan mails not for fighting terrorism, but using the terrorism related foreign surveillance act to allow scanning domestically for child pornography.

 

Who could argue with that implementation?

 

No way of having any checks on scope creep though.

 

Why do we all know the full email history of David Patreus and his mistress? Yet another example of someone who should have known better but probably assumed these powers wouldn't bite him on the arse, only the bad guys.

[Kid Dynamite 5903]

Stamp duty on a 250,000 house is 2,500, not 12,500. It's fair because more expensive houses are taxed much more. You know, tax the rich?

 

Inheritance tax is a tax on the inheritor, not the deceased it is by far the best way to prevent wealth accumulating in families and frankly you are a tory if you don't support it.

 

If you wanted an example of a regressive tax you should have picked VAT, but never mind. I'm certainly not a perfect citizen but I know to have a society you need to pay taxes for it, and the less regressive the better in my mind. And yet you're a corbynite?

 

None of this has anything to do with big brother anyway.

I don't agree with stamp duty for any priced house. 2nd houses makes more sense

 

Inheritance tax was probably a bad example but you've conveniently ignored nearly every other point I've made tonight

[Happy Face 29]

Why do we all know the full email history of David Patreus and his mistress? Yet another example of someone who should have known better but probably assumed these powers wouldn't bite him on the arse, only the bad guys.

Actually, Patreus made no such assumption. He assumed he would be a target and he shared access to an unencrypted mail account with his mistress where they would save draft mails that the other would read and delete.

 

FBI got all those.

[Renton 17745]

I don't agree with stamp duty for any priced house. 2nd houses makes more sense

 

Inheritance tax was probably a bad example but you've conveniently ignored nearly every other point I've made tonight

Why don't you agree that buying houses shouldn't be taxed? If you accept we need to tax to pay for services then why are you against a progressive tax which primarily hits the rich and property developers? It's a reasonable question I think. I actually get the impression you just don't like paying taxes, which is fair enough, but is at odds with your socialist leanings.

 

As for me not answering your points, that's simply a lie, look back on this thread. The truth is you haven't made any point other than make a vague suggestion that we are being "controlled" by a malevolent government and this has happened over the last 20 years. I've pointed out other than efficiencies gained by technology, this has always been the case. If you've got some other point, please reiterate it.

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

Stamp duty = less money for panties

[Renton 17745]

Well that's another thing. Some people won't like it, but I've long argued for a used panty tax.

[Rayvin 4964]

:lol:

[Gemmill 34422]

 

 

Google a b9mb making site may draw attention to the home office or police? Good.

Renton rubbishing the conspiracy theory whilst openly encrypting his posts to avoid detection.

 

*whispers* pssssst. Guys. He's in on it.

[Gemmill 34422]

[emoji38]

 

Which specific words?

 

Yoohoooo, hiya big brother.

Look at this! You weren't saying yoohoo to big brother two posts earlier were you, you fucking B!ld3rberger.

[Happy Face 29]

And when HF puts it like that, very believable they would destroy the career of an honest politician who didn't toe the party line, even today.

 

One more thing to be concerned about.  Cheers @@Happy Face

 

np

 

To wade in on the "big brother" argument between Renton and SEW, the fact that we are living in a surveillance state doesn't mean that any government (and subsequent governments) have moved forward on a policy of implementing a surveillance state with ominous intent.  

 

What we end up with can be a byproduct of genuine intent to fight crime.

 

The intelligence community have created tools that make it easier for them to find information on criminals, both before and after they commit crimes.  Nothing that Renton would hear any argument against.

 

It would be easier to fight crime if we all had cameras in all of our homes monitoring everything we do in private as well though. No-one would seriously advocate that.  Haven't we gone too far when everyone's email is not only collected but also scanned for buzz-words?

 

Even if you think it has not, then you must worry about who you vest with these powers.  As I mention above the FBI have illegally obtained emails from a four star general in a salacious sex story that saw him forced to resign.  Would these tools be used with restraint by Richard Nixon?  Or by Donald Trump?

 

It's not conspiratorial to imagine that the powers are being abused routinely, beyond the examples we have seen.   Nor is it logical to assume that they will only be used against those in power or fighting power violently.  Journalists and lawyers are especially in danger of having legitimate work pried upon.

 

Beyond that though, regular members of the public with no ties to any cause whatsoever have had their calls monitored by NSA staff reaching beyond what anyone would consider reasonable use of their tools...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/27/nsa-employee-spied-detection-internal-memo

 

The extent to which these tools invade on privacy and where they can be effective and how that should be implemented is one thing and a valuable debate that should be had.  To have them shrouded in secrecy is another.  Without any public recognition of which tools leave your liberty at risk and which tools have the security to protect your liberty we are not free people able to make informed choices on whether we like what our leaders are doing or should be replaced.

[Dr Gloom 19813]

Well that's another thing. Some people won't like it, but I've long argued for a used panty tax.

I wouldn't object to a progressive panty tax, which increased in line with secretion volumes

[Gemmill 34422]

Renton won't be around for a while. He's reading the newspaper in the light from his stained glass window, and secret messages are shimmering across the page like the fucking Da Vinci Code.

[ewerk 26284]

[Kid Dynamite 5903]

np

 

To wade in on the "big brother" argument between Renton and SEW, the fact that we are living in a surveillance state doesn't mean that any government (and subsequent governments) have moved forward on a policy of implementing a surveillance state with ominous intent.

 

What we end up with can be a byproduct of genuine intent to fight crime.

 

The intelligence community have created tools that make it easier for them to find information on criminals, both before and after they commit crimes. Nothing that Renton would hear any argument against.

 

It would be easier to fight crime if we all had cameras in all of our homes monitoring everything we do in private as well though. No-one would seriously advocate that. Haven't we gone too far when everyone's email is not only collected but also scanned for buzz-words?

 

Even if you think it has not, then you must worry about who you vest with these powers. As I mention above the FBI have illegally obtained emails from a four star general in a salacious sex story that saw him forced to resign. Would these tools be used with restraint by Richard Nixon? Or by Donald Trump?

 

It's not conspiratorial to imagine that the powers are being abused routinely, beyond the examples we have seen. Nor is it logical to assume that they will only be used against those in power or fighting power violently. Journalists and lawyers are especially in danger of having legitimate work pried upon.

 

Beyond that though, regular members of the public with no ties to any cause whatsoever have had their calls monitored by NSA staff reaching beyond what anyone would consider reasonable use of their tools...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/27/nsa-employee-spied-detection-internal-memo

 

The extent to which these tools invade on privacy and where they can be effective and how that should be implemented is one thing and a valuable debate that should be had. To have them shrouded in secrecy is another. Without any public recognition of which tools leave your liberty at risk and which tools have the security to protect your liberty we are not free people able to make informed choices on whether we like what our leaders are doing or should be replaced.

To address the point about cameras in people's homes

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/22/mark-zuckerberg-tape-webcam-microphone-facebook%3f0p19G=e?client=safari

[Renton 17745]

I don't think the secret services, by definition, will ever be transparent in what they do. I'm also sure there will be individual abuses performed by them which they probably will never be held to account for. However, this is not going to affect the vast majority of the population. I'd be much more concerned about police abuses, but if they're intelligence is anything like my own research work, there wil be much better safe guards in place. You would not believe how difficult it is for me to even access anonymised individual patient data for instance.

 

I don't know, there's so much wrong with the world that concerns me above this. Wealth inequality for me is the biggest issue, followed by environmental issues. I just don't see the dystopian future of 1984 happening personally.

[Happy Face 29]

This is not going to affect the vast majority of the population.

 

[Renton 17745]

To address the point about cameras in people's homes

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/22/mark-zuckerberg-tape-webcam-microphone-facebook%3f0p19G=e?client=safari

I can see why Mark Zuckerberg might take the precaution if taping up his Webcam, but J69 of Chester-le-street?

 

Howay man, find something else to complain about, there's plenty.

[Park Life 70]

It's so far beyond what we're discussing here. What we're having is a genuine debate about things that are already two decades out of date. If they target you they can predict what you think, what you are likely to do in any situation and the same for everyone you know or have ever had contact with.

 

For instance they farm data on say 100,000 individuals their computers have modeled who might be high risk, then they put out a fake news story or some social media claptrap and they monitor and calibrate the reaction and interaction of those individuals to the bait.

 

They're working on 'halo' where every person in the street will be colour coded and tracked with regard to their risk assessment based on experiments on the one above.

 

The intelligence services seed I'd say 90% of tech startups. No Parky it's some geezer who started in a garage!!11

Edited October 6, 2016 by Park Life