@AlecMuffett @jenvalentino @runasand @nytimes @gabrieldance @SteveBellovin Solid point. Much reporting on LE access demands (or "concerns") overlooks that the powers they have today are unprecedented and abnormal in a way our constitutional system does not anticipate. Status quo "should" be presumptively undesirable, yet editorial tone implies otherwise
@AlecMuffett @jenvalentino @runasand @nytimes @gabrieldance @SteveBellovin From a human rights perspective, a global reduction in mass surveillance capability is a desirable reversion to the mean. It is astonishing, and I would argue discrediting, for those claiming a public safety interest advocating for any new means of surveillance "at scale."
@AlecMuffett @jenvalentino @runasand @nytimes @gabrieldance @SteveBellovin Surveillance at scale is precisely the problem, because it is an expression of influence at scale. If you look at the problems we're dealing with in almost every country, they are variations on this theme.
@AlecMuffett @jenvalentino @runasand @nytimes @gabrieldance @SteveBellovin When institutional power—government and corporate—no longer requires targeting, problems arise. It is the synopsis of our era. Thanks for listening.
