* on the Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 06:14:18PM +0200, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote: > What politicians don't seem (or simply don't want) to understand is that > the problem of these LI-technology lie in the huge potential for abuse and > misuse. > Politicians sometimes seem to live in an ideal world, where there is no > corruption and no abuse of power (or they are simply not negatively > affected by it...).
It's very simple: Privacy is not opposed to security, but privacy is rather the first step to achieve security. The USA with its lax privacy protection has huge problems with fraud, much more so than Europe or Switzerland.. And _anything_ that undermines privacy, even if it comes from the. state/police side (like data retention -- fucking stupid idea to make ISPs amass data ready to be compromised by criminals) will lead to higher criminal-rates. You can't fight crime by giving the criminals more opportunities. But that's precisely what all these "lawful interception" laws do. Cheers Seegras -- "Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin "It's also true that those who would give up privacy for security are likely to end up with neither." -- Bruce Schneier _______________________________________________ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
