Yahoo let the NSA read your email before you even opened it

>>56956740
i hope trump purges the cia + nsa if he gets in

>>56956762
Trump likes the NSA, anon.

>>56956740

It's not like GMAil doesn't, they just don't get caught..

:^)

>>56956762
Trump wants the NSA to have more power than they have now.

File: Sen-Rand-Paul-filibuster-3-06-2013.jpg (73KB, 640x473px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 640x473px

>>56956762
Yeah, you're in for a heck of a shock.

https://www.isidewith.com/candidate-guide/donald-trump/domestic-policy/nsa-domestic-surveillance

http://truthinmedia.com/trump-supports-reauthorizing-patriot-act-nsa-metadata-collection/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/2/donald-trump-edward-snowden-kill-traitor/

If you wanted a president who would fight for privacy rights, Rand Paul was your man.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/05/21/408417139/sen-rand-paul-stages-filibuster-to-protest-patriot-act

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZLYwSPbNXo

>>56956816
>>56956781
>>56956872
i'm hoping he's just doing that as part of his image of being the pro-law and order candidate. i know the cia hates his guts, so he can't be all that bad

>>56956909

Yeah well, 'murrica already lost.

Either it's "why can't we just drone assange?" Hillary or "Law and Order" Pepe.

No way out.

REMINDER: Yahoo and Firefox have a search deal.

Everything you type into your search field is being sent to the NSA. Most normies on Firefox won't even bother to change their search engine setting.

>>56956781
He views the NSA surveillance programs as a necessary evil, he doesn't like the NSA or the CIA themselves.

>>56956740
tfw 99,99% of it was spam.
tfw yahoo shared it with other fags too

>>56956957
law and order pepe at least says he's against a one world government, which is the biggest evil and is inevitable at the current rate

Fun fact: The NSA practices bulk data collection on any email service you're using.

Now stop bitching and deal with it. Feel free to kill yourself if you've voted democrat for this sort of shit in the first place.

>>56957100
Hillary is a fucking liar.

>>56957120
i use gandi mail
>Feel free to kill yourself if you've voted democrat for this sort of shit in the first place.
bush was just as bad

>>56956872
Big strike against trump sure but you're delusional if you think Hillary won't do the same thing. But add searching for and flagging non-progressive wrongthink.

>>56956740
Welcome to the club.

Everyone else not in the USA (and all things going in and out from the USA for any reason whatsoever) already was okay to watch without any court order or anything, and they made the laws "protecting" US citizens from such abuse very shaky.

Actually, in a way "fuck you" for not voting everyone responsible out of office.

>>56957176

Bush was amateur hour compared to the dindu adminstration and cuckservatives who publicly stated they wouldn't challenge him on anything because MUH SOMETHING HIS GREAT GRANDPARENTS DIDN'T EVEN EXPERIENCE YET ALL BLACKS WANT TO BITCH ABOUT.

>>56956740
Is this any worse than letting the NSA read your email only after you opened it?

>2016
>using yahoo

they all deserved it

>>56957593
the purpose is to move the overton window

>>56956762

>average Trumpette intelligence

You don't even know the person you're supporting you underage fuck.

>>56957636
i actually have a 140 iq and am not underage

File: Pablo-Escobar.jpg (65KB, 835x525px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 835x525px

>>56956740
i'm gonna encrypt my cocaine and my guns brb

>>56957686

I think the major problem is that most people really don't care, including yourself.

If you care, why haven't you attempted to get together with at least one or two other privacy-valuing anons to come up with ways to fight this? With a bit of effort, you could build the base for what could become a popular movement that people support for values of privacy - you could focus your efforts partly on some political action demanding rights be protected, but also investing in various new technologies like open-source but encrypted OS's, software, new search systems, etc.

>>56957686
>>56957777
>form political party on privacy and similar values
>die in a tragic car accident due to a sudden brake failure, stove explosion, "natural causes"

no thanks

>>56957686
>>56957777
>>56957806
A privacy-oriented PAC?

>>56957806
die in a tragic suicide by two self inflicted gunshot wounds to the back of the head

>>56957806

I'm not suggesting a political party. I'm suggesting making public statements, setting up crowd-funding for new technologies, etc. I'm saying I don't see very much organisation at all, even though there seems to be widespread appreciation for values of privacy and anonymity online - there's very little action.

I genuinely would throw in money if there was some sort of movement which was clearly encouraging and funding NEW, and open (that is, stuff that's transparent) technology and software. I would ideally like to support a group which even so much as defends the right to view and possess actual CP. Not because I like CP myself but because as I see it, if we allow ANY ground to government\police, we lose the rest pretty quickly. CP is pretty harmless IN ITSELF.

Most people who claim to support privacy and freedom online won't go that far though, and I think that's a major failing.

>>56957809

What does PAC stand for?

>>56957883
>What does PAC stand for?

Political Action Committee.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacfaq.php

>which even so much as defends the right to view and possess actual CP

epic

this is why we will never get off the ground. yes - we see the point you're making, but you know damn well as soon as you say something like that, in the eyes of the general public you've just lost all your support

>>56957914

Ok well not that.

It'd be better ignoring politics entirely, really.

We need to be funding various new programs and even OS's, but stipulating that funding should focus only on programs that are developed in ways that we can see the code (I'm a complete retard with technology and the technical terms here, but I hope you can get what I'm saying), but which also protects users.

People have been campaigning against the Federal Reserve and Central Banking for almost 100 years and have gotten literally nowhere. Yet with emerging 'currencies' like Bitcoin and now various new payment and banking apps, we could genuinely see the end of government-backed currency and the creation of new ways of trading between people that completely circumvents the state and central banking - which would put ALL the power back into the hands of actually productive individuals, it would undermine statist ideologies including feminism, etc. It would be one of the most positive developments in a long time. Technologies like this will work to undermine those systems of power because the it puts the government in the position of having to try to claim the right to control very basic rights of freedom of communication - and this is increasingly untenable.

There's a political concept called "direct action", which has in the past meant - instead of lobbying for more welfare programs for example, people went into communities and built businesses that sold things cheaper. It cuts out the government and political interference which those people saw as corrupting. Online movements for privacy should be doing a similar thing.

But literally where are there?

>>56957924

Well the issue with CP and many other things (like opposing feminism) is that most men as individuals are absolutely terrified of standing up and vocally stating these things, because they know their lives will be miserable from then on.

If these opinions are stated clearly, in language that appeals to rationality and to the defence of rights, in some form of 'covenental agreement' or 'manifesto', and if lots of people can anonymously lend their support and numbers to it - it would have more success. It wouldn't be hard to write a simple paragraph or two that clearly denounces sexual violation of children while defending the point that nobody should be prosecuted for possessing that material.

File: example.png (11KB, 1038x173px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 1038x173px

>>56957999

...and here's an example of what I mean. Someone posted this on r9k 16 minutes ago.

>THE NSA IS SPYING ON EVERYONE ALL THE TIME
Old news. There is absolutely nothing that can be done at this point. Even if all the people involved in these projects were thrown in prison, they would simply continue the projects in secret.

>>56957686
Is it wrong that I've given up at this point and just want them to start spying on everything and installing backdoors everywhere because I can't wait to see hackers find the backdoors and wreak havoc on an scale never seen before?