It has to be clear that anonymity in Brazil is Forbidden by the Constitution. So it is strange that the brazilian president asks for 'democracy' and privacy when its own constitution does not allow anonymity. What she is saying is: "we are going to implement and force all gov. employees and others to use or OWN email, so we can snoop and guarantee 'our' democracy.... It will be bad if you did not get that job or contract.. Bad things happen To people Who do not agree with us.. Other 'privacy' fact about this govt is the mandatory GPS in each car in Brazil. To make surveillance AND check taxes.
Brazil is one of most intrusive state ask any reasonable brazilian if it rather have his data in 'Obama' hands or Brazilian Govt hands...
For all people I know they all better be in US datacenters than Brazilian Govt.
And it is strange that the Brazilian govt. is Always attacking the freedom os speech by requests to google..[1]
[1] - http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/government...
(order by country)
In this case, it is just ridiculous. The speech is serious and articulate, it touches a lot of important points, and defines a set of actions going forward.
And, it makes me want to do business with brazilian-based companies, once the announced more autonomous technologies are put in place. The internet needs to be decentralised again, and this is exactly the kind of step that can lead there. If the technological alternative offered in brazilian soil holds, I would definitively move all of my cloud footprint there.
ONCE.... Please do not wait do now... I am still waiting for speed rail here in Brazil, Cheap gas or electricity and Less than 44% of my GDP in Taxes.
But please do not take my 'hispterism' because I live in a bubble here in Brazil (native) and lived 3 years in US and 1 year in Middle East. I just came to the terms that after 35 years here we are STILL blaming US for 'everything' and we do not have nothing to blame us....strange..
about Spying: NO one country has this mass surveilance state patronized by public money in the world. its proven.. its scary, and its US..
This must stop, period.
if every citizen take care of its own country actions.. so they do not interfere badly with the other countries.. we would be just fine..
Anyway.. this happening its a warning to all of us.. we should listen carefully, and take good measures about it.. cause in peace time, they might look harmles or like a joke.. but in war time, or with dictatorships, they might have severe consequences
> if every citizen take care of its own country actions.. so they do not interfere badly with the other countries.. we would be just fine..
The US's spy complex is a MUCH bigger threat to those of us here in the US than it is to those abroad, and anyway there is nothing we citizens can do to stop it anytime soon, so don't hold your breath.
If you read the history of arms control talks between the US and the USSR, the only reason they worked was because both parties could verify that the other was honoring the agreement. The Russians could physically look at satellite photos and verify the US actually removed some of its ICBMs and vice versa.
There is no way to verify a country is not spying on you. As such, no country, no matter their rhetoric, is going to actually give up that ability for the hope that others do so as well. It's a suckers bet.
The solution to privacy in the face of foreign dragnet surveillance is cryptography.
You have to note that if you carry a mobile phone the state has easy access to equivalent data anyway (even when you're not in a car), so the reality is most people are providing it regardless of car GPS-related rules. (Co-presence of other device, movement time, and a rudimentary analysis of movement speed would be adequate information to determine one's probable mode of transport and activity profile ... habitual commute, unexpected deviation from established norm, etc.)
I was in Denmark recently and was reliably advised that the government tax department needs no warrant to access mobile phone location records for validation purposes. No warrant. On top of that, ATMs are curiously hard to find and businesses cannot spend over 10,000DKR/year in cash without triggering a government audit. Brazil is clearly not alone.
The sad fact is that most people are unaware, and the majority of the world is either sleepwalking in to totalitarianism or is there already.
I am going to go out on a limb and say that as system designers, builders or more (in-)directly as promoters of tech-fetishism, we in this community are equally at fault. We each have a responsibility to resist the construction and use of easily corrupted centralized systems and to educate those around us about their dangers.
In any case, it's true that Brazil doesn't really have real free speech in the sense Americans do. We have a nominal right to free speech per the Constitution, but there are so many loopholes: draconian slander laws, protection to candidates before elections, etc.
[1] http://www.conjur.com.br/2013-set-06/rodrigo-dornelles-veto-... (in Portuguese)
None of that invalidates President Dilma's point. I am actually the first one to criticize Brazil's lack of democracy, for example in the favelas (which are areas controlled by the drug traffickers and not by the state, and thus without real democracy), but in the international sphere she is absolutely right to raise the issue, as Brazil is an US ally and there was no reasonable explanation for the espionage whatsoever, especially to top-level officials. Furthermore, Petrobras is a oil exploration company -- This is effectively industrial espionage.
A.G.A.I.N Constitution
In portuguese: "IV - é livre a manifestação do pensamento, sendo vedado o anonimato; "
Translation : - Freedom of speech but anonymity is vetted
[1] = http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituic...
--Edited to do not appear arrogant --
The anonymity concept is one of pillars of privacy and democracy there are several articles about that but this sums up well [1]
So before our 'leader' bashes US to get some popularity votes can we fix our house first?
[1[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/right-anonymity-matter...
As a brazilian, I see that even though the speech is based on legit concerns, the bravado will end up more useful to secure Dilma's position in leadership (her popularity dropped this year, and by taking a jab at US she'll recover popularity with a portion of the electorate, who have a hatred for america) and make Brazil look like a beacon of freedom and transparency to the international community (or at least, strengthen it's multilateral diplomacy with the anti-US crowd).
The government will probably try to push a top-down agenda for (unilaterally) legislating and regulating Internet usage in Brazil in the next months, using the opportunity to force IT companies to move inside the country and heat the economy.
All in all, the Snowden scandal has been blown out of proportion by the media, and will now be used by leaders for all kinds of power play and political agendas. Anyone who understands the fundamentals of the internet can tell espionage is a feature that comes for free, and it's not like, suddenly, all countries in the world can get outraged to know the NSA has been spying. In fact, espionage is central to the diplomatic game, it only gets harder to justify on domestic affairs. US citizens have more right to be outraged than anyone else.
Of course we are.
A good start would be if a bunch of countries got together and stopped using a USD.
Also changing trade deals with the US would send a message.
The president cancelled a diplomatic presidents honorary visit to USA
Tough speech in ONU from a state chief against surveillance over civilians, companies, and the top state politicians, including the president* International companies will need to keep the data of brazilian citizens in datacenters domestically located.
* More Infrastructure investments: Optical cables all over.. so what doesnt need to pass through US will not route there (also a bunch of satelites)
* When we have a choice, comercially we will probably avoid buying anything from US
* We are not in XX century anymore, the industrial age is gone, some other country will rise in this new age (information?), so USA will need to review its arrogant and interventionist movements, as it will lose more and more its position of top dog.. the seat is kind of empty now.
So the next USA president better watch out for its own attitude, cause you guys are more and more dependent of other commercial partner countries ;)
For historical reasons, brazil has a wound from the militar dictatorship (with the USA interventionism of the 60's helping on the cup-d'etate), with the current president(a woman) victim of torture by the military regime when she was a student (for fighting to free its country from dictatorship).. so thats why privacy is a pretty serious matter here, for every educated citizen..
Brazil is like they say over texas.. we are peaceful, and cool people.. but dont mess with Brazil
If she was so 'tough' why she did not grant asylum to snowden??
I am very sure All us is scared about Brazilian almight Power.
and Sure the next president will mind to not 'offend' brazilian communist party..
The other part of me thinks it is prudent to keep an amicable relationship with the most powerful nation on earth. In those terms, I think it is very welcome that she expresses her angry through words. She is not hiding it or playing along with the USA by diminishing the impact of the surveillance.
Heck if all Rousseff said was just these two sentences, I'd still applaud her:
> A sovereign nation can never establish itself to the detriment of another sovereign nation. The right to safety of citizens of one country can never be guaranteed by violating fundamental human rights of citizens of another country.
The article mentioned, "She was imprisoned and tortured for her role in a guerilla movement opposed to Brazil's military dictatorship in the 1970s." The US supported the 1964 military coup, which put in place the Nazi-like security state which tortured her. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Brazilian_coup_d%27%C3%A9t...)
(And there's dissident lit from people who lived through these times, pointing out the domino effect this had for US intervention against other Latin American countries, emboldened by our success against Brazil. http://www.chomsky.info/talks/19850319.htm)
I concur.
> attacking the messenger while completely missing the message
Yes, but who cares about some president of some South American former colony? Obviously a shady individual. If it was, say, Chancellor of Germany, now that's a serious matter and human rights are at stake :)
Now just apply that logic to individuals, and you'll be called a nutjob libertarian.
Good luck to Rousseff making her argument, but I am not sure how spying on embassies violates anybody's "fundamental human rights." Is Brazil willing to stop spying itself?
Also, privacy IS a fundamental human right
You may dont feel it now, since your government doesnt make any movement against you, or your freedom.. and maybe its not that bad, right now.. but you ever wander.. if a hitler-like figure get elected to president of US, do you think anyone would be safe?
Imagine if you tell a joke about your government, and policeman jump right at your door to put you in jail for that, without a fair trial..
We never now... so in any case.. no government should try to achieve this kind of power..
And worse yeat, if you think they do it with the money you pay them in taxes..
so you pay, to empower them to crush you whatever they want..
Democratic governments are not so strong as one might think.. there are sereval politician in anyone country just waiting to something like that to happen.. think about that
Furthermore, I am not sure that spying on commercial companies is wrong. If information learned is redistributed to American companies, then that seems wrong to me. (Because it would invite retaliation, introduce unfair competition, etc.) But if the information is kept within the US government, then what exactly is wrong about that? Are you arguing that privacy is a fundamental right for corporations, too?
Hitler, etc.: This is all a strawman. I am only talking about spying on Brazil. But I'm sure it will get you upvotes, so feel free to bring up Mussolini, too.
> .... privacy IS a fundamental human right
"Rights" are not universal. Individual rights are not universal. It feels a bit like exporting a Western style thinking on the world and saying everyone should agree with it.
Notice how Obama said nothing about neutral parties, let alone civilians who are citizens of hostile countries. The "either you're with us or you're against us" philosophy is alive and well! Who really knows the definition of "with us" in a war on an emotion?
The sad thing is that, were the entire UN unified in condemnation of U.S. spying, nothing could come of it. The UN is, be design, absolutely toothless when it comes to permanent security council members. It's impotent enough even when it comes to countries like Syria! The only way to make the UN effective is to grant it real power, but that can never happen as long as some of the citizens it represents are more equal than others.
Ummm, even if it is, no one cares. Brazil would spy on US in a heartbeat if they could and probably try to spy on the US Embassy there. The spying I'm worried about is different, not the reading a foreign leader's email kind.
