Three months after Edward Snowden’s leaks began to reveal the
extent of the U.S.’s mass surveillance program, “serious people”
are beginning to make the case that it’s time for the outrage and
indignation to subside and give way to a “national conversation”
about the future of surveillance. So has the moment come for us to
consider how much surveillance we can accept?
The national debate we’re supposed to have is routinely framed as one about choosing how much privacy and liberty to give up in exchange for security, not about whether such a tradeoff is necessary at all.
“It’s important to understand that you can’t have 100 percent security and then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience—we’re going to have to make some choices as a society,” President Obama has said. And echoing him, former NSA director Michael Hayden last week said: “The question is how much of your privacy, and your convenience and your commerce do you want your nation’s security apparatus to squeeze in order to keep you safe. And it is a choice that we have to make.”
http://reason.com/archives/2013/09/23/how-much-surveillance-can-we-accept
The national debate we’re supposed to have is routinely framed as one about choosing how much privacy and liberty to give up in exchange for security, not about whether such a tradeoff is necessary at all.
“It’s important to understand that you can’t have 100 percent security and then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience—we’re going to have to make some choices as a society,” President Obama has said. And echoing him, former NSA director Michael Hayden last week said: “The question is how much of your privacy, and your convenience and your commerce do you want your nation’s security apparatus to squeeze in order to keep you safe. And it is a choice that we have to make.”
http://reason.com/archives/2013/09/23/how-much-surveillance-can-we-accept
No comments:
Post a Comment