1. The machinery being put into place is a dictator's wet dream. By creating the infrastructure, we are putting a gun to our heads, and trusting the person holding it (the government) to not pull the trigger. The government may be benevolent now, but that may not always be the case.
2. Once the machinery is in place, it makes it that much easier to change directions. Just look at how all of the powers granted by the PATRIOT Act are used to non-terrorism related investigations like the War on Drugs, or the War on (Paid) Sex. Look to the censorship programs in Europe / Australia. They were put into place to block supposedly 'only' child pornography. Now they are used to block other things.
3. How are we supposed to make sure that things aren't being abused when everything happens behind closed doors, and the members of Congress cleared to see more specifics aren't allowed to see very much of hte system.
> dictator's wet dream
I expect the same was said about satellites, telephone tapping, etc
Our defence against dictators does not lie in technology but in the ballot box.
2. Again the ballot box is the defence, but the reason it gets used is people are educated about the technology and the implications of abuse. I doubt that a US to ernment that took away a right to silence would suffer a few outcries from geeks. They would get roasted. (Unlike the UK)
3. Secret courts are banned for that reason. I think I would like to see a definition of national security like "ten thousand dead" or 3 % loss of GDP. Then when. That gets invoked we can make a sensible guess about how often it's likely. Otherwise, you put it in open court
Individuals are not the only ones to lose privacy in the coming years. Go ernment a will lose more
The government has more resources than common citizens have. Sure the government is losing privacy, but citizens can't be invasive of the government's privacy in the same way that the government is being invasive of citizens' privacy.
Can and will invade the government's privacy how? Maybe by forcing them to be more transparent, but I don't view that as "invading the government's privacy."
2. Once the machinery is in place, it makes it that much easier to change directions. Just look at how all of the powers granted by the PATRIOT Act are used to non-terrorism related investigations like the War on Drugs, or the War on (Paid) Sex. Look to the censorship programs in Europe / Australia. They were put into place to block supposedly 'only' child pornography. Now they are used to block other things.
3. How are we supposed to make sure that things aren't being abused when everything happens behind closed doors, and the members of Congress cleared to see more specifics aren't allowed to see very much of hte system.