2016 Postmortem

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)

70. Any IT person who votes for Hillary is a fool

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 02:01 PM

Nov 2015

First, she supports expanding H1B visas which is being used by systematically by corporations to import cheap labor and bring down wages in STEM jobs.

Second, she supports wanting a back door in our technology so the government can invade our privacy. That's not only bad because it lets big brother in our lives, but it's bad because any backdoor will CERTAINLY be exploited by hackers. So you are basically compromising security, giving up freedom, all in the name of security. It makes no sense.

Like the old saying.....when you sacrifice freedom for security, you lose both.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

115 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hillary joins the authoritarian bandwagon demanding encryption backdoors in our devices. [View all] backscatter712 Nov 2015 OP

Yeah, protecting privacy and security = bad candidate. JaneyVee Nov 2015 #1

Hillary's doing about the exact opposite of protecting privacy and security. n/t backscatter712 Nov 2015 #2

And there it is. Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #5

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #11

Give me a break pinebox Nov 2015 #39

It is impossible to reliably ban encryption; you can however weaken security (a "Bad Thing") JonLeibowitz Nov 2015 #42

Exactly. It's the same three-letter-agency creeps trotting out the same authoritarian garbage. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #44

Up is down, red is blue, north is south... Scootaloo Nov 2015 #49

. JonLeibowitz Nov 2015 #52

Did you notice all the poutrage down thread? leftofcool Nov 2015 #53

What are you whining about this time? sibelian Nov 2015 #73

No. No, you don't know any script kiddies who can break good encryption. DisgustipatedinCA Nov 2015 #78

apologist Loudestlib Nov 2015 #62

Are you for real? CoffeeCat Nov 2015 #65

Bollocks. sibelian Nov 2015 #74

Back doors mean you are not protecting privacy. jeff47 Nov 2015 #86

She likes the back door Fairgo Nov 2015 #97

Lol, doing the opposite of protecting privacy is what she's doing. But some people are okay with sabrina 1 Nov 2015 #90

"Protecting Privacy" by spying on us through our phones/tablets etc? AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #91

"Protecting Privacy" AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #92

Demanding government have unlimited access to everyone's shit is not "protecting privacy" Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #93

Hillary is notorious for stating anything to sooth the Progressive BASE Rockyj Nov 2015 #110

How is what Hillary wants protecting privacy and security? n/t cui bono Nov 2015 #112

I am glad she is doing this now, before the first primary vote is cast FlatBaroque Nov 2015 #3

The progressive facade is fading TM99 Nov 2015 #12

I've never thought of her as a Progressive or a Liberal. Fuddnik Nov 2015 #29

Except she wears pantsuits. cui bono Nov 2015 #113

I've said all along she is NO progressive! pinebox Nov 2015 #40

Agreed. TM99 Nov 2015 #41

Resorting to "fear terrorists while I protect you" can't happen soon enough. arcane1 Nov 2015 #101

Me too. freedom fighter jh Nov 2015 #82

Clinton supporters on DU will now all be in favor Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #4

Maybe Prosense will make an appearance again. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #6

And some disinformant would splain Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #7

What makes you think she hasn't already posted in this thread? bahrbearian Nov 2015 #9

Very true, she may have had a firmware upgrade. n/t backscatter712 Nov 2015 #10

The fact that I can read. n/t JTFrog Nov 2015 #13

My thoughts exactly Fairgo Nov 2015 #99

Dehumanizing your opponents Dem2 Nov 2015 #23

I don't think prosense will be back until after the primaries SwampG8r Nov 2015 #77

That reads equally well bvf Nov 2015 #8

Wait, weren't you demanding an "intelligence response" to ISIS just last week? ucrdem Nov 2015 #14

Human Intelligence doees not mean hootinholler Nov 2015 #16

Intel pretty much means communication intercepts ucrdem Nov 2015 #21

Human Intel specifically means an agent gathering intel hootinholler Nov 2015 #26

Sure on Masterpiece Theater ucrdem Nov 2015 #34

Apparently you don't know the difference between a detective and a spy hootinholler Nov 2015 #36

Yes I'm behind on my Sunday evening viewing. nt ucrdem Nov 2015 #37

I don't believe you're current on the definition of human intelligence. DisgustipatedinCA Nov 2015 #79

Translation: Fuddnik Nov 2015 #43

Would Snowden et al. still be breathing under Bush/Cheney? ucrdem Nov 2015 #67

This is the only way to stop future terrorist attacks from happening. As for privacy concerns, Laser102 Nov 2015 #45

Then we should be supporting those who aren't committed to further undermining privacy. GoneOffShore Nov 2015 #80

As distinguished from a "stupid, knee-jerk response" Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #95

Typical response by her. Wanting to have it both ways, but leaning on the side of intrusion. EndElectoral Nov 2015 #15

She should pass this by the banks whose lifelines depend on secure communication. longship Nov 2015 #17

Insanity: 99Forever Nov 2015 #85

You take what is a balanced call for experts to examine the issue BootinUp Nov 2015 #18

It's a simple question. Should the government have a master key to look in everyone's phone? Cheese Sandwich Nov 2015 #19

A very good question. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #22

The Democratic party has historically protected privacy with judicial restraints BootinUp Nov 2015 #28

After seeing what Snowden revealed about the NSA, that's not good enough. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #60

I just don't see a majority in the US taking your viewpoint BootinUp Nov 2015 #68

And, as Glenn Greenwald said on Democracy Now! a few days ago, Fuddnik Nov 2015 #35

Yes. They should. And they should be able to use that key only under court order. randome Nov 2015 #50

And when others work out that key? jeff47 Nov 2015 #87

So we just ignore child pornographers and organized crime and hope they go away? randome Nov 2015 #105

No, we stop pretending they'd be stupid enough to not use proper encryption. jeff47 Nov 2015 #106

Not everyone uses an iPhone. Apple is the only company offering full-proof encryption, right? randome Nov 2015 #107

No. Android has had it for years. (nt) jeff47 Nov 2015 #108

"Balanced" "Experts" my arse. sibelian Nov 2015 #75

You want an expert, I'll give you an expert. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #84

Hillary- ruffburr Nov 2015 #20

Yep, she thinks she's won it, so she's kissing up to her powerful fuckbuddies now. n/t backscatter712 Nov 2015 #24

I'm still trying to ascertain what she is doing... CoffeeCat Nov 2015 #71

Clinton ignores the direst of warnings: Betty Karlson Nov 2015 #25

Do you worry about profits much- ruffburr Nov 2015 #27

There are indeed. Betty Karlson Nov 2015 #31

I'll remember this when I hear 'Supreme Court' pengu Nov 2015 #30

Good point. eom Betty Karlson Nov 2015 #32

My God this is such a good point. nt stillwaiting Nov 2015 #48

Ugh...she's the worst. SoapBox Nov 2015 #33

GTFO Hillary! NOW! pinebox Nov 2015 #38

The Supposed Progressive - Flops - Now Supports Electronic Tyranny - This Citizen Is Not Surprised cantbeserious Nov 2015 #46

This is a perfect illustration of what Hillary is mindwalker_i Nov 2015 #47

who honestly didn't think the new iPhone security SleeplessinSoCal Nov 2015 #51

Or by any number of 'run-of-the-mill' criminal enterprises. randome Nov 2015 #56

*fear the authorities* Cosmic Kitten Nov 2015 #66

Right. Because child pornographers and organized crime don't exist except in our imaginations. randome Nov 2015 #104

Agreed. nt BootinUp Nov 2015 #72

the NSA used its post 9-11 surveillance blank check to help the DEA target drug users. Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #100

There is nothing in that article that suggests small-town pot users were targeted. randome Nov 2015 #103

Right. The drug war has no excesses, and only big bad drug cartels are targeted. Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #109

It is not possible to create a backdoor that only the "good guys" can use. jeff47 Nov 2015 #88

Yes, it's maddening when cops set up a stingray the parking lot of a Phish show to bust pot smokers Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #98

Welp, I am glad her 'slip is hanging' as my Gram used to say...However, I cannot believe AzDar Nov 2015 #54

Was there any question that she would? CharlotteVale Nov 2015 #55

So much better than a Republican because she will Ed Suspicious Nov 2015 #57

DEVELOPMENT OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY AND RISK OF ABUSE OF ECONOMIC INFORMATION OnyxCollie Nov 2015 #58

Using a crisis to go full authoritarian - She is really bad. fbc Nov 2015 #59

She's had plenty of opportunities to learn (the hard way) as the email snafu has demonstrated... n/t backscatter712 Nov 2015 #61

"Wipe a hard drive? Like with a cloth?" fbc Nov 2015 #63

That was "befuddled grandma" Hillary, "gosh golly i just have an aol.com email address" Hillary Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #96

But she doesn't know what *Wipe* a computer mean??? Cosmic Kitten Nov 2015 #64

From the link MaggieD Nov 2015 #69

She's not listening to the computer security experts. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #76

It is not possible to create a backdoor that only "the good guys" can use. jeff47 Nov 2015 #89

Any IT person who votes for Hillary is a fool davidn3600 Nov 2015 #70

she'd vote for the Iraq War again too ibegurpard Nov 2015 #81

big surprise that she would be on the wrong side of this issue Vattel Nov 2015 #83

NSA shares surveillance data with DEA, to assist them in investigating and arresting pot smokers. Warren DeMontague Nov 2015 #94

Yep Parallel Construction. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #102

NSA shares surveillance data with FBI, who shares surveillance data with corrupt US Attorneys, OnyxCollie Nov 2015 #111

Prosecuting, or blackmailing. backscatter712 Nov 2015 #115

The Secret Service codename for Hillary Clinton is . . . Major Hogwash Nov 2015 #114