Story

GCHQ head says privacy is not an absolute right

Preview

Mr Hannigan is an extremist (Score: 4, Insightful)

by tanuki64@pipedot.org on 2014-11-04 18:31 (#2TWT)

Mr Hannigan is an extremist and proof that better surveillance does not help against extremists.
Everyone who tries to erode civil rights is an extremist. But people are dumb. How many people
die in car accidents every year? According to Wikipedia: 32,999 in 2010 in the USA alone. How
many terroristic acts? How many died in terroristic acts in 2010 in the USA? 15 people.
According to:
http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/06/how-scared-of-terrorism-should
it is four times more likely to be killed by a lightning bolt than by a terror attack.
I doubt that in other countries the ratio is much different.

Would internet surveillance help to prevent terror attacks? Hardly. And I suppose the whole population
has to be monitored to solve, who did the last/next school shooting.

Again: There is only one 'crime' for which an all-over internet surveillance is necessary: Copyright violations.
Ok, to a lesser extend libel. But certainly not terrorism, drugs, or child porn.

Re: Mr Hannigan is an extremist (Score: 2, Interesting)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2014-11-05 11:35 (#2TX4)

it is four times more likely to be killed by a lightning bolt than by a terror attack.
The counter-argument to this is that the number of people killed by lightning is by nature fairly steady. The realistic worst-case for lightning deaths isn't that scary.
The worst-case for terrorism, however, is extremely serious. A 'bad year for terrorism' might involve abandoned nuclear submarines, poorly secured nuclear weapons, economic disaster, etc.

Moderation

Time Reason Points Voter
2014-11-06 15:56 Interesting +1 kerrany@pipedot.org

Junk Status

Not marked as junk