@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Într-o era digitală plină de amenințări, confidențialitatea ar trebui să fie considerată în continuare un drept inalienabil?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Cum vă afectează posibilitatea de a vă monitoriza amprenta digitală sentimentul de libertate și încrederea în guvern?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Ați accepta mai multă supraveghere guvernamentală dacă ar reduce semnificativ actele de teroare?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Dacă siguranța ta ar fi în joc, ai fi dispus să renunți la intimitate și unde tragi limita?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Gândul de a fi urmărit sau ascultat de cineva pe care nu-l cunoști te face inconfortabil și de ce?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Imaginează-ți viața ca pe o carte deschisă; cum ar schimba asta modul în care comunicați online?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Ce ai face dacă ai afla că mesajele tale personale sunt monitorizate pentru a preveni potențialele crime?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Când, dacă vreodată, credeți că beneficiile supravegherii depășesc dreptul la intimitate?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Cum te-ai simți dacă conversațiile tale personale ar fi ascultate fără acordul tău pentru securitatea națională?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Ai simțit vreodată că intimitatea ta a fost compromisă și, dacă da, care ar trebui să fie limitele acelei invazii?
@3BGPRHR3 ani3Y
Yes, but only under the scrutiny of the courts where necessary to protect citizens either collectively or individually
@3BGP2KN3 ani3Y
No, not at all. I think phone calls and emails should be private. It is not other peoples business and they don't need to know what we are talking about.
@3BGMGP73 ani3Y
Only in severe circumstances where national security is threatened.
@3BGLWPV3 ani3Y
They should only be able to monitor people who have been identified as a threat, and only by court order
@3BDL75V3 ani3Y
I say 'no', but only because I see a growing society that has less and less respect for the 'Honour system' and I believe that even though this may be an important tool to protect against suspected crimes of terrorism, it will be abused and misused.
@3BD78GZConservator3 ani3Y
if this was an ironclad method to reduce terrorism, then yes. otherwise, this is an invasion of privacy
@3BCM9WC3 ani3Y
I feel like the federal government should be allowed to monitor emails and phone calls that are flagged with key words that insinuate a possible terrorist or illegal act.
@3BC5V7K3 ani3Y
I find this to be a ridiculous notion. Under certain circumstances it would be permissible but its a blatant intrusion of privacy and completely unnecessary. A acceptable situation is someone suspected for crimes, but just monitoring people for the sake of doing so is completely illogical.
@3BC2FSD3 ani3Y
No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications, It is the citizens responsibility to protect the country in this case since the government cannot possibly handle everything and proper education provided on the subject in schools on a side note they are taught in a way that does not create future paranoia. Once a threat is flagged by citizens only then should authority intervene. Immigrants will have to be under surveillance for as long their education into citizenship is provided, and Immigrants with a history of violence or fraud will not be allowed into the country.
@3BBWFYN3 ani3Y
I'm torn...I am concerned with the federal government having cart blanche access to private information, yet I am for being able to prevent acts that negatively harm groups of innocent people.
@M553243 ani3Y
Yes but only with a court order or a percieved threat
@M3FKP23 ani3Y
Yes, after proving that the act is necessary for National security, and combating organized crime and child pornography