Either everyone allowed to collect metadata or noone should.
Is this part of a general policy of "either everyone should be allowed to (x) or no one should?" or do you have an actual argument as to why this should be policy is the case?
Because there's a long-standing tradition in this country, one with good reasons for being in place, for limiting government and especially law enforcement's abilities in certain ways beyond that which we allow for private individuals and corporations.
And there's also the whole "government is legally REQUIRING people to track this metadata AND give it to the government" thing which is a good ways beyond anything a private actor has done (and is why the government is reasonably not allowed to do certain things, since they tend to try and use the force of law to get what they want).
Analogy:
A brick and mortar store keeps track of everyone who comes and goes from their building and what they buy while they're there. Maybe they share some of this information with the companies that produce the products being sold in the store. Maybe sometimes that information is used in questionable ways, such as sending catalogs to a customer's address without notifying the customer that when they submitted their address for some other purpose that it would also end up on a mailing list. But for the most part, it's used for improving the functioning of the business, and any inconveniences caused are pretty easily amended or circumvented by any customer who cares.
A government collects all the information that every brick and mortar store in the country collects on its customers, threatens any that refuses to cooperate, and uses this information almost exclusively for the purpose of fucking with people they don't like. They do this under the guise of providing protection from an astronomically unlikely threat, there is no recourse for anyone who disagrees, and anyone who disagrees is likely to be treated as a part of that threat.
I think there's a difference.
So, corporations should have the right to do it but government? You guys went full libertarian.
So let me argue as I would against a libertarian: Corporations are not your friends. They are ruthlessly devoted to profit, and history shows that are far less benevolent then the government given the same powers. You speak of minor differences in service? I beg to differ. Google has control of its market, and is just beginning to expand its power. Monopolies, which can and do easily form by throwing around economic instead of legal weight, could take the situation to new heights; moreover, their political will would be unstoppable, so now you have a key holder who will do everything in their power to squeeze you dry.
And about the Government, you seem to genuinely believe that it will act in your interests less then a corporation in the same case. Look at private vs public sector and see where things are. Corporations don't have any pretense about trying to screw you, and they are guaranteed to have no one looking it for you(Except of course for government regulators) And to have the audacity to complain about corporate influence controlling everything, and yet on the same page to think they should be able to do something like this.
To believe that corporations should have a right to do what you call unethical, but not government, Is just; I don't even know. Google is not a brick-and-mortar store, Facebook isn't, and they have a lot of info. Your premise requires that I have absolutely Zero trust in my government, and more trust in the inability of Corporations to abuse. I simply will not believe that. I prefer a government to a corporation, simply, and nothing can be said that will convince me otherwise.
Poll
7 (6.5%)
Author
Topic: Bay12 Election Night Watch Party (Read 833278 times)