225
I'm always concerned when the GOP does something I agree with.
That was my reaction too. What am I missing.
I don’t think it’s some grand conspiracy. The right doesn’t like when other people take ownership of their stuff. Private data is private
They just don’t want the world to know they have grndr accounts.
Or their porn search history
Probably sacred someone was going to buy THEIR info 😆
This is actually most likely the case. His fanbase typically does not have the highest cunning when it comes to commiting crimes. That, coupled with the Republicans planning hate crimes and the such, probably encourages requiring agencys get warrants before accessing the metric shit ton of data that brokers sell. It would make it harder to gather evidence if another insurrection occured.
Usually any ideological overlap I have with the GOP is made in bath faith on their part. That, or the reason they arrive at the "right" conclusion involves reasoning much different than my own.
But hey, sometimes you just gotta take the win in life.
I'm really encouraged to see that congress is actually doing something to revive the 4th amendment. It is essentially dead in the digital space right now.
The vote was pretty bipartisan, actually. There is a faction in both parties that wants this and a faction in both parties that doesn't.
Republicans:
- Yay: 123
- Nay: 90
- Present: 0
- No Vote: 5
Democrats:
- Yay: 96
- Nay: 109
- Present: 1
- No Vote: 7
It scares me how many in both parties believe that warrantless surveillance of citizens is appropriate. Sure, maybe law enforcement can't perform warrantless themselves, but I don't see much difference between doing it themselves and buying it from professional data brokers.
In fact, it is almost certainly more efficient and less costly to buy the data than to develop their own systems for collection and sorting. Getting this kind fo info on suspects might not even be possible for law enforcement without purchasing it.
at face value it seems better than nothing, but in reality if the data can be bought then it doesn't really help in the end. what would be more effective (imo) in protecting privacy would be to prevent the collection of data in the first place.
Well, even a broken clock is right twice a day, you know. But I absolutely agree with the sentiment.
Wasn't there a news piece or comedy bit where someone bought all sorts of 3rd party info from databrokers on all of congress or something and what they got spooked?
Not sure but it sounds like a John Oliver move
Yep, that's who it was.
Thanks!
Edit: he said he won't release it if they pass laws protecting all consumers.
this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
225 points (100.0% liked)
politics
18852 readers
3622 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS