“White House collects Web users’ data without notice”

[jonnycsd]

[quote=CricketOnTheHearth]The only two major options for affecting what our leaders do is voting them in or out of office, or taking to the streets in armed mobs. A third option is economic, but there is only so much corpor-rat crap we can refuse to buy… gotta eat and drive to work, after all.

And if our vote is rigged and gamed, and we are never presented with any but corporately-approved candidates, what options does that leave us?

[/quote]

IMHO gerrymandering has really shifted power away from the voter and towards the parties and thier clients, which are often corporations and nearly always special interest groups. Generally, the politicians running in a gerrymandered district already know if it will go Democrat or Republican. What matters to them is wining the parties nomination, not winning the election. Gerrymandering pre-allocates seats to each party and effectively removes the need for politicians to respond to ALL of thier consituents and replaces it with the need only to respond to the party they affiliate with.

To fix this, the enire concept of gerrymandering needs to be banished!

[partypup]

[quote=air_ogi]partypup, you are misinformed. I know the article is a bit confusing, but it is your responsibility to do a bit of research on something that sounds completely improbable and comes from a biased source.

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube

[/quote]

Air, I hear you, and thanks for including that link. Unfortunately, it doesn’t allay my concern because this information is still being gathered “without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama’s promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet. ”

When my friends post comments to my Facebook page, I don’t archive their posts. Do you? Do you even have that capability? Why does the White House have the capability to archive posts on Facebook that other users do not? And if you DID have this capability, wouldn’t you let your friends know, “Hey, by the way, I plan to collect all the information you send my way.” I would immediately wonder, “Why do you need to do that?”

No matter how you slice it, there is no transparency here. If he were Dubya, I would just chalk it up to another totalitarian erosion of my civil liberties. What more would I expect from that goon?

Maybe this kind of double-speak doesn’t bother you because it’s coming from Obama. So be it. But I’m not partisan. And to masquerade as a promoter of transparency and then take this kind of action without the consent of posters is disingenuous, at best. Is that the kind of *change* you were expecting?

[partypup]

[quote=air_ogi]partypup, you are misinformed. I know the article is a bit confusing, but it is your responsibility to do a bit of research on something that sounds completely improbable and comes from a biased source.

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube

[/quote]

Air, I hear you, and thanks for including that link. Unfortunately, it doesn’t allay my concern because this information is still being gathered “without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama’s promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet. ”

When my friends post comments to my Facebook page, I don’t archive their posts. Do you? Do you even have that capability? Why does the White House have the capability to archive posts on Facebook that other users do not? And if you DID have this capability, wouldn’t you let your friends know, “Hey, by the way, I plan to collect all the information you send my way.” I would immediately wonder, “Why do you need to do that?”

No matter how you slice it, there is no transparency here. If he were Dubya, I would just chalk it up to another totalitarian erosion of my civil liberties. What more would I expect from that goon?

Maybe this kind of double-speak doesn’t bother you because it’s coming from Obama. So be it. But I’m not partisan. And to masquerade as a promoter of transparency and then take this kind of action without the consent of posters is disingenuous, at best. Is that the kind of *change* you were expecting?

[partypup]

[quote=air_ogi]partypup, you are misinformed. I know the article is a bit confusing, but it is your responsibility to do a bit of research on something that sounds completely improbable and comes from a biased source.

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube

[/quote]

Air, I hear you, and thanks for including that link. Unfortunately, it doesn’t allay my concern because this information is still being gathered “without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama’s promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet. ”

When my friends post comments to my Facebook page, I don’t archive their posts. Do you? Do you even have that capability? Why does the White House have the capability to archive posts on Facebook that other users do not? And if you DID have this capability, wouldn’t you let your friends know, “Hey, by the way, I plan to collect all the information you send my way.” I would immediately wonder, “Why do you need to do that?”

No matter how you slice it, there is no transparency here. If he were Dubya, I would just chalk it up to another totalitarian erosion of my civil liberties. What more would I expect from that goon?

Maybe this kind of double-speak doesn’t bother you because it’s coming from Obama. So be it. But I’m not partisan. And to masquerade as a promoter of transparency and then take this kind of action without the consent of posters is disingenuous, at best. Is that the kind of *change* you were expecting?

[partypup]

[quote=air_ogi]partypup, you are misinformed. I know the article is a bit confusing, but it is your responsibility to do a bit of research on something that sounds completely improbable and comes from a biased source.

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube

[/quote]

Air, I hear you, and thanks for including that link. Unfortunately, it doesn’t allay my concern because this information is still being gathered “without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama’s promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet. ”

When my friends post comments to my Facebook page, I don’t archive their posts. Do you? Do you even have that capability? Why does the White House have the capability to archive posts on Facebook that other users do not? And if you DID have this capability, wouldn’t you let your friends know, “Hey, by the way, I plan to collect all the information you send my way.” I would immediately wonder, “Why do you need to do that?”

No matter how you slice it, there is no transparency here. If he were Dubya, I would just chalk it up to another totalitarian erosion of my civil liberties. What more would I expect from that goon?

Maybe this kind of double-speak doesn’t bother you because it’s coming from Obama. So be it. But I’m not partisan. And to masquerade as a promoter of transparency and then take this kind of action without the consent of posters is disingenuous, at best. Is that the kind of *change* you were expecting?

[partypup]

[quote=air_ogi]partypup, you are misinformed. I know the article is a bit confusing, but it is your responsibility to do a bit of research on something that sounds completely improbable and comes from a biased source.

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube

[/quote]

Air, I hear you, and thanks for including that link. Unfortunately, it doesn’t allay my concern because this information is still being gathered “without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama’s promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet. ”

When my friends post comments to my Facebook page, I don’t archive their posts. Do you? Do you even have that capability? Why does the White House have the capability to archive posts on Facebook that other users do not? And if you DID have this capability, wouldn’t you let your friends know, “Hey, by the way, I plan to collect all the information you send my way.” I would immediately wonder, “Why do you need to do that?”

No matter how you slice it, there is no transparency here. If he were Dubya, I would just chalk it up to another totalitarian erosion of my civil liberties. What more would I expect from that goon?

Maybe this kind of double-speak doesn’t bother you because it’s coming from Obama. So be it. But I’m not partisan. And to masquerade as a promoter of transparency and then take this kind of action without the consent of posters is disingenuous, at best. Is that the kind of *change* you were expecting?

[afx114]

PP, you are naive to think that anything you post on a public forum or profile doesn’t have the potential of being archived, whether it is done by the owner or anyone else who can see it.

I have a feeling the White House also archives letters it receives via ye olden pony express and has been doing so for hundreds of years. How is this any different? I don’t recall them notifying anyone that they’ll be archiving any mail they receive, but I guarantee you that they do. Generally when you send someone something, it is implied that they will keep it.

[afx114]

PP, you are naive to think that anything you post on a public forum or profile doesn’t have the potential of being archived, whether it is done by the owner or anyone else who can see it.

I have a feeling the White House also archives letters it receives via ye olden pony express and has been doing so for hundreds of years. How is this any different? I don’t recall them notifying anyone that they’ll be archiving any mail they receive, but I guarantee you that they do. Generally when you send someone something, it is implied that they will keep it.

[afx114]

PP, you are naive to think that anything you post on a public forum or profile doesn’t have the potential of being archived, whether it is done by the owner or anyone else who can see it.

I have a feeling the White House also archives letters it receives via ye olden pony express and has been doing so for hundreds of years. How is this any different? I don’t recall them notifying anyone that they’ll be archiving any mail they receive, but I guarantee you that they do. Generally when you send someone something, it is implied that they will keep it.

[afx114]

PP, you are naive to think that anything you post on a public forum or profile doesn’t have the potential of being archived, whether it is done by the owner or anyone else who can see it.

I have a feeling the White House also archives letters it receives via ye olden pony express and has been doing so for hundreds of years. How is this any different? I don’t recall them notifying anyone that they’ll be archiving any mail they receive, but I guarantee you that they do. Generally when you send someone something, it is implied that they will keep it.

[afx114]

PP, you are naive to think that anything you post on a public forum or profile doesn’t have the potential of being archived, whether it is done by the owner or anyone else who can see it.

I have a feeling the White House also archives letters it receives via ye olden pony express and has been doing so for hundreds of years. How is this any different? I don’t recall them notifying anyone that they’ll be archiving any mail they receive, but I guarantee you that they do. Generally when you send someone something, it is implied that they will keep it.

[UCGal]

I assume that anything I put on the internet is not private.

It’s kind of silly to think otherwise. Even if the site you’re posting to has privacy assurances – there are still hackers.

It’s the internet, after all.

[UCGal]

I assume that anything I put on the internet is not private.

It’s kind of silly to think otherwise. Even if the site you’re posting to has privacy assurances – there are still hackers.

It’s the internet, after all.

[UCGal]

I assume that anything I put on the internet is not private.

It’s kind of silly to think otherwise. Even if the site you’re posting to has privacy assurances – there are still hackers.

It’s the internet, after all.

[UCGal]

I assume that anything I put on the internet is not private.

It’s kind of silly to think otherwise. Even if the site you’re posting to has privacy assurances – there are still hackers.

It’s the internet, after all.

[Author]

Posts