<story><title>FBI: Companies should help us ‘prevent encryption above all else’</title><url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/06/04/fbi-official-companies-should-help-us-prevent-encryption-above-all-else/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>joshstrange</author><text>&amp;gt; &amp;quot;Privacy, above all other things, including safety and freedom from terrorism, is not where we want to go,&amp;quot; Steinbach said.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s where I want to go. Also you have YET to show ANY evidence that we are more safe or more free from terrorism by surrounding our rights to privacy.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;He also disputed the &amp;quot;back door&amp;quot; term used by experts to describe such built-in access points. &amp;quot;We&amp;#x27;re not looking at going through a back door or being nefarious,&amp;quot; he argued, saying that the agency wants to be able to access content after going through a judicial process.&lt;p&gt;You mean &amp;quot;Rubber Stamp Judicial Process&amp;quot;? Even if you didn&amp;#x27;t the mere fact that these backdoors (you can rename it all your want it&amp;#x27;s a BACKDOOR) exist make the whole system LESS secure. What a clown and this is the AD of the FBI&amp;#x27;s Counterterrorism Division??? Fuck....</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>staunch</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s nothing in the world that can provide &amp;quot;freedom from terrorism&amp;quot; which makes it even an even uglier lie. Even if it could, I&amp;#x27;d still be against it though, because there are many ways to fight terrorism that don&amp;#x27;t involve sacrificing the freedom our ancestors bought with blood. The FBI needs leadership that understand how to operate within American principles.</text></comment>
<story><title>FBI: Companies should help us ‘prevent encryption above all else’</title><url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/06/04/fbi-official-companies-should-help-us-prevent-encryption-above-all-else/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>joshstrange</author><text>&amp;gt; &amp;quot;Privacy, above all other things, including safety and freedom from terrorism, is not where we want to go,&amp;quot; Steinbach said.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s where I want to go. Also you have YET to show ANY evidence that we are more safe or more free from terrorism by surrounding our rights to privacy.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;He also disputed the &amp;quot;back door&amp;quot; term used by experts to describe such built-in access points. &amp;quot;We&amp;#x27;re not looking at going through a back door or being nefarious,&amp;quot; he argued, saying that the agency wants to be able to access content after going through a judicial process.&lt;p&gt;You mean &amp;quot;Rubber Stamp Judicial Process&amp;quot;? Even if you didn&amp;#x27;t the mere fact that these backdoors (you can rename it all your want it&amp;#x27;s a BACKDOOR) exist make the whole system LESS secure. What a clown and this is the AD of the FBI&amp;#x27;s Counterterrorism Division??? Fuck....</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>higherpurpose</author><text>Privacy, in the context of the government, also means &lt;i&gt;freedom to be left alone&lt;/i&gt;. I think that&amp;#x27;s quite an important freedom to have.&lt;p&gt;We really need to make stronger arguments for privacy. Too many people conflate real privacy (which I believe virtually &lt;i&gt;nobody&lt;/i&gt; actually wants to give away, if they truly understand what giving it away means) with &amp;quot;sharing stuff on Facebook and Instagram&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;One is an obvious &lt;i&gt;choice&lt;/i&gt;, and the other (the government, or even companies through non-transparent trackers, knowing everything about you) is not, but is forced upon you.</text></comment>