Quotes About Privacy

The political solutions proposed against encryption are not going to work against terrorism.

We are expected to believe that anyone who objects to the Department of Homeland Security or the USA Patriot Act is a terrorist, and that the only way to preserve our freedom is to hand it over to the government for safekeeping.

The NSA is not listening to anyone's phone calls. They're not reading any Americans' e-mails. They're collecting simply the data that your phone company already has, and which you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy, so they can search that data quickly in the event of a terrorist plot.

Snowden's revelations shocked the world and made it very clear why we need to have some way to look over those who look over us. With increasing terrorist attacks, security is critical, but not without any accountability or oversight.

This is a big debate concerning the values of the society in question: Whether the risk of a terrorist act is more important than the 100 percent right to privacy.

The government does things like insisting that all encryption programs should have a back door. But surely no one is stupid enough to think the terrorists are going to use encryption systems with a back door. The terrorists will simply hire a programmer to come up with a secure encryption scheme.

Terrorists will always find a way to communicate. They will always find a solution.

If Britain is going to investigate journalists as terrorists - take and destroy our documents, force us to give up passwords and answer questions - how can we be sure we can protect our sources?

I want to collect more records from terrorists, but less records from innocent Americans. The Fourth Amendment was what we fought the Revolution over! John Adams said it was the spark that led to our war for independence, and I'm proud of standing for the Bill of Rights, and I will continue to stand for the Bill of Rights.

We know there are terrorists communicating with individuals in the United States. We just can't see what they're saying.

Telegram is heavily encrypted and privacy-oriented, but we're no friends of terrorists - in fact, every month we block thousands of ISIS-related public channels.

A cardinal principle that we must not stray from - no exceptions - is that your genetic information is your business in terms of who sees it. Nobody should be gaining access to that information without your explicit permission, and nobody should be requiring you to take a genetic test unless you decide that that's what you want to do.

If we start exposing what gets said in a grand jury, you won't get anybody to testify.

I'd hate to live where people knew my history. I love familiarity on holiday but not at home, as I'm sure my neighbours would testify - if I'd ever met them.

People want chat histories. They're a permanent testimony of a relationship.

Prior to the passage of the Patriot Act, it was very difficult - often impossible - for us to share information with the Central Intelligence Agency, with NSA, with the other intelligence agencies, and likewise, for them to share information with us.

Remember: if you can see the Empire State Building, The Empire State Building can see you.

old Google Glass monitored what people watched; now Google Everywhere monitors what they think. Although Glass came to know Scoble better than even his spouse, Everywhere knows him better than he knows himself.

You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it. Scott McNealy, co-founder, Sun Microsystems

The larger looming issue is the very real loss of personal privacy and the lack of transparency about how it happens. The marvels of the contextual age are based on a tradeoff: the more the technology knows about you, the more benefits you will receive.

If you are using an internet service for free, you are not the customer, you are the product.

What was once an anonymous medium where anyone could be anyone," Eli Pariser wrote in 2011, "is now a tool for soliciting and analyzing our personal data.

This may be the great Achilles' heel of the Internet under capitalism: the money comes from surreptitiously violating any known understanding of privacy.

Sobre la felicidad no dijo una palabra, supongo que porque la consideraba algo estrictamente privado y acaso, ¿cómo llamarlo?, pantanoso o movedizo