Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

No, but most of the time, people only care about something if they have any experience with it.

In most of the Western countries I have been to, regular people don't care too much about surveillance, using the old argument of "if you haven't done anything bad you shouldn't be worried". However, in countries like mine(Poland) which were communist, where every phone call was listened to, there was censorship, the government ran huge archives with notes on everyone who could be of any political interest(basically what the NSA is doing now), people are very,very sensitive about surveillance. Why? Because a lot of older people understand that just because you haven't done anything wrong doesn't mean that you are safe. I think the younger folk is beginning to forget about this, but a lot of parents are doing a good job of making sure their children understand that government surveillance of citizens = bad.

Americans and British people simply have no frame of reference(and I am not saying this as an insult), so of course they do not make comparisons to STASI methods - they simply never had STASI.



You said "No", but I don't find the contradiction...


You - "If you see something, keep calm and carry on..."

Me - "No(...as in, no, do not keep calm and carry on, because....)"


OK, I get it, I should have put that in quotes, because that is the message I perceive from BBC, not my message.


> As if the others that had not been subjected to STASI methods of surveillance should not be worried.

He contradicts that sentence? (At least in my understanding) Why shouldn't the people be worried? They aren't worried, but they should be.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: