Hi all,
there´s another statement some NGOs ans CS groups have put together in
order to send it to the UN HR Council (which is currently meeting) on the
PRIS/NSA Case. Support came from "Europan Digital Rights" (BE) and other
influential NGOs like Bits of Freedom (NL), Open Rights Group (UK), La
Quadrature Du Net (FR) or Knowledge Ecology International.
http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa/
Personally, I would love to sign it, but I am also interested to read the
WMF statement first.
Best, Jan
2013/6/12 James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com>
Liam,
Relatively minimal exposure, to me, does not mean a thousand times
more exposure than we used to have.
I've already posted this to wikimedia-l:
"increasing surveillance ... does not decrease ... criminal
activities. Ironically, ... increased surveillance might ... increase
the number of inmates"
--
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42937.pdf
There is also the reason from first principles that everyone is guilty
of something if you look hard enough, and federal government employees
are not exempt from mandatory reporting requirements. All of them are
required to be truthful if asked what illegal activities they suspect
in the course of their work, which is a common question for both law
enforcement and intelligence gathering employees, who are charged with
interpretation of the PRISM data.
Can you think of any reasons that increased surveillance would not
lead to increased incarceration?
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Liam Wyatt <liamwyatt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 12 June 2013 16:41, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Liam,
Given that 1/1000th sampling of article readers' access logs has
recently been increased to complete archival for 30 days, it seems
preposterous and misleading to suggest that "we have relatively
minimal exposure in the legal/technical sense." Would you please
elaborate?
You're forgetting the crucial word "relatively".
I would prefer using banner space to urge a boycott of and individual
court actions against the companies who have been acquiescing to the
government's data access demands until Congress passes a law
abolishing and forbidding the practice of eavesdropping, because of
the high rate of incarceration in the US.
If you would like to gain consensus that Wikimedia projects use the
banner
space to promote a boycott of particular
technology companies, then I
suggest you write a userspace essay to that effect and then try to gain
consensus on each project. Good luck with that.
Do you believe there is a
direct causal relationship from the extent of surveillance and the
number of criminal convictions involving mandatory minimum sentences
in the US?
I have no idea. Perhaps you could do some research into the matter and
publish in a criminology journal.
_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
_______________________________________________
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
Advocacy_Advisors(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
--
Jan Engelmann
Leiter Politik & Gesellschaft
-------------------------------------
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Obentrautstr. 72
10963 Berlin
Telefon 030 - 219 158 26-0
www.wikimedia.de
Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://spenden.wikimedia.de/
**** Helfen Sie mit, dass WIKIPEDIA von der UNESCO als erstes digitales
Weltkulturerbe anerkannt wird. Unterzeichnen Sie die Online-Petition!
http://wikipedia.de ****
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.