If what we believe to be true is in-fact true regarding data collection - isn't every future President compromised? Somewhere, in the massive archive of phone calls and emails and financial transactions that make-up the digital profile of their path from birth to the door of the White House is a lie, or a half-truth, or something that doesn't quite mesh with the public persona they represented in order to attain elected office. Somewhere in that archive is something in their past that could be used against them in a way that would render their Presidency impotent at the very least. Wouldn't those with access to this information use that for their own gain? To show the newly elected President what they know, and leverage him or her to make things happen in a manner that benefits their objectives.
Now step down the ladder of power and authority. Couldn't the same methods be used against Senators? Congressmen and women? Or maybe judges, mayors, police chiefs? Stock Markets? Banks? CEOs? College admissions boards? The potential targets are endless and infinite.
A brilliant quote from Sneakers:
"There's a war out there, old friend. A world war. And it's not about who's got the most bullets. It's about who controls the information. What we see and hear, how we work, what we think... it's all about the information!"
The world where these things are possible scares the hell out of me - because I fear that the amassing of this information will inevitably lead to its abuse.
1) Connections with security services pay off. For a modest fee you'll be provided with a dossier on your competitor's embarassing past. For a larger fee this dossier can be passed to local prosecutor's office.
2) Almost all of opposition goes way, mired on one scandal or another, sometimes way back from Soviet past, when facts mysteriously "turn up" just at the highlight of someone's political career.
I don't see this as a world war because at the end countries are sharing a lot of intelligence between allies. I see this as a war against people, as a new way of developing absolutist states where they don't need to use violence domestically with so much information available.
All this happen while people are happy with the latest mobile devices and 4g connections.
Its recursive. What applies to everyone, applies to everyone within the NSA/intelligence community too...as long as they stay staffed with people atleast.
Don't think it's that recursive. If you run for office, and an embarassing photo or phone call from the past is "leaked" anonymously to ruin your chances, you cannot turn around and leak something on intelligence community.
If such a system can control a future president, it can also control a future head of the NSA, or whoever else works within the system going down the foodchain, to the point where it becomes too much of a risk to its own existence.
Basically, they are not immune from control, if they build a system that knows everything about everything.
EDIT: And as for "you cannot turn around and leak something on theintelligence community" you dont have too...future Snowdens and Mannings (who are growing up, fed on all sorts of conspiracies on reddit and other fora) will.
> future Snowdens and Mannings (who are growing up, fed on all sorts of conspiracies on reddit and other fora) will.
The future equivalents of Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning could very well be detected and put under control before they have a chance to blow the whistle. It seems in the wake of the Snowden revelations that the NSA is already considering making conformism to authority a more important criterion to be hired, and if they were to use their collected information to profile new hires they should have a really good idea about interests and inclinations.
Now step down the ladder of power and authority. Couldn't the same methods be used against Senators? Congressmen and women? Or maybe judges, mayors, police chiefs? Stock Markets? Banks? CEOs? College admissions boards? The potential targets are endless and infinite.
A brilliant quote from Sneakers:
"There's a war out there, old friend. A world war. And it's not about who's got the most bullets. It's about who controls the information. What we see and hear, how we work, what we think... it's all about the information!"
The world where these things are possible scares the hell out of me - because I fear that the amassing of this information will inevitably lead to its abuse.