It's a pretty interesting article, but as a Brit I just don't get why American's are so concerned about privacy. In England, there is basically no 'right to privacy' in law. As such the police (and anyone else really) are free to track me like this, on CCTV, whatever. If I am innocent, and have nothing to hide, I don't really see what the issue is in this.
Just for example, there have been and still are many places where being outed as gay can be anything from a major embarrassment to a firing offense to a death sentence. A perfectly innocent person who should not have anything to hide must conceal where they go and who they meet for their own safety. Governments should not be trusted any further than necessary.
Turing was similarly naive - in admitting to a homosexual relationship - and the government chemically castrated him and effectively hounded him to suicide. What's decent isn't always the same as what's legal.
And even if you think it is, and somehow know all the laws - which I'm convinced is impossible - and you think you've nothing to hide, can you really say the same about all the people with power over you? Politicians, police, doctors etc? Who will be open to coercion via whoever controls the surveillance apparatus. - Can you really say that no law will ever be put in place curtailing your freedoms in a way that you'd find unacceptable?
Information is like a weapon. Altering the balance of surveillance contributes to strategic political instability. Got to think very carefully about how you do it; when, why, what the costs are.
The fact is we currently are not living in a brutal dictatorship where our freedoms are limited or none. However we do see some fairly regular evidence of authorities abusing their power, and again this issue is also another conversation entirely... Circling back to the my first point, we're taught that the country was founded on the principal of a limited government and many freedoms and guarantees, in fact founded with a supposed guarantee of it. Then you see things (ab)used for personal/political/whatever gain at the expense of those things promised to you. Now I don't know about you, but I don't like having things that I appreciate forcefully taken from me.
For instance, did you know that absent-mindedly walking towards an officer while you are pacing back-and-forth during a police interview can be charged as a count of assault on the officer? Really.
Saying that, I think the process they used here is a good one. If there was some sort of guarantee that the data collected for this search would be deleted (and not left, free for any bored policeman to delve into at any point in the future) then I'd have no issue with this type of investigation. The people they caught were committing potentially violent crimes. A little bit of privacy violation is definitely worth stopping them before they actually hurt someone.
For a list of failures of this system, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_.... Most successes didn't get reported. However this history does leave people in the UK with a rather different perspective on universal surveillance than Americans.
It's because they value invividual freedom and had a revolution. A population saluting their monarchs in street parades wouldn't necessarily understand.
>If I am innocent, and have nothing to hide, I don't really see what the issue is in this.
That's total BS.
For one, a lot of stuff that moves society forward, is done by people that have a lot to hide (from the backwards regime that is). From reporting on government wrongdoing, to breaking DVD encryption to investigating drug lords, etc. Especially since current governments are so aggresive to penalize even tame and civil protests and activism.
Some examples: you think Veronica Guerin had nothing to hide? How would you like if the names of her sources were made known, and they were killed to?
Did Alan Turing had something to hide? Don't think of such a case as something that only belongs in the past, and it's a solved problem now. How much of BS stuff that's now concidered illegal would be OK in the future?
Second, that's not even true for the ordinary boring citizen. How many people have done stuff like going to a brothel, driving while drunk sometimes, taking e in clubs when they are young, fighting with their spouse, etc? Would you want your browsing history to be made public to potential employees?
It's quite frustrating to watch people completely ignore the fact that if a power and capability exists, it will be abused (accidentally or knowingly) for dubious ends. And those with power and capability seldom relinquish it willingly.
It's quite something for an individual who has never experienced the discomfort of being watched because that's the way it's always have been. Once you taste time away from an unblinking eye, you never quite feel the same under its gaze... whether that gaze is obvious and plain to see or not.
I personally don't like the idea of G4S, Serco, A4E, etc. having that much power over me.