You need to remember that the Google database covers over a billion people, and the only way you would ever stand out in such a crowd is if you have a reason, and in that case—standing out over a billion people—it likely means you have a reason for standing out, and that likely means you are the classic case of a serial bomber. I would much rather have the FBI gain access to his information and get him off the streets before he kills a cute exchange student from China (oh and some 8-year-old).

If they pre-emptively catch him, that means he can't be a serial bomber, right?

Nothing in life will change as a result of them having my information. So get over it already.

Maybe as a result of having yours, but as a result of having any of ours? Who knows. Additionally, some people have a somewhat intimate notion toward their personal information; they drone on about their hopes and dreams, their secrets, and their vices. Having someone see it, even a complete stranger that doesn't care at all, is understandably objectionable.

I wouldn't like an FBI agent reading my secrets any more than I'd like to be examined by a TSA agent. There's a line of privacy that shouldn't be crossed. If we should have all of our information exposed with the hopes of finding criminals, then all of us would just as soon be strip-searched at any given moment with the hopes of finding firearms or drugs. It is my believe that if the latter is ridiculous, so is the former.

If they pre-emptively catch him, that means he can't be a serial bomber, right?

That would be the purpose, yes. A cute Chinese girl was killed in Boston because they waited until after the bombs exploded before catching them.
Of course there is no way to know who will do what in the future, so it is not as if I am proposing the Future Corps realistically, but it is a nice thought experiment. Given that the future can’t be changed, why do we wait until it unfolds and people die before we act?

Technically, those brothers were guilty the day they were born. We just didn’t know until afterwards.

Maybe as a result of having yours, but as a result of having any of ours? Who knows. Additionally, some people have a somewhat intimate notion toward their personal information; they drone on about their hopes and dreams, their secrets, and their vices. Having someone see it, even a complete stranger that doesn't care at all, is understandably objectionable.

I wouldn't like an FBI agent reading my secrets any more than I'd like to be examined by a TSA agent. There's a line of privacy that shouldn't be crossed. If we should have all of our information exposed with the hopes of finding criminals, then all of us would just as soon be strip-searched at any given moment with the hopes of finding firearms or drugs. It is my believe that if the latter is ridiculous, so is the former.

My quote was actually, “Nothing in life will change as a result of them having my—or your—information.”
That aside, this isn’t really debatable with me. I am on TV and in theaters, 2 movies—including a major role in one—this year alone. I don’t understand the concept of privacy, nor do I see its necessity. Don’t do weird things and you have no reason to be suspicious of people having your information. And again you forgot what I told you to remember: No one in the FBI is going to see your information. You will not appear as a result on any of their filters or searches. I don’t agree that anything is “understandably objectionable” but it doesn’t matter anyway if no one ever actually sees your information. Understandably objectionable to have a stranger see your information, but no one will, so what is the objection? Over 1 billion people through which they need to wade, and you think you are special enough for them to notice your information in all of that mess?

Not to you directly, but in general, let’s be realistic. In about 3 months I will have an IMDB page, I interact with Cynthia on Facebook regularly (and in real life when we have jobs together), and I have signed autographs on the streets before. And I am not so pretentious as to think anyone cares about me. I am not going to be noticed at all by the FBI in that mess of over 1 billion people. No one cares. So I can’t understand what the big fuss is. Not to you directly, Ectara, but in general I want to ask, “Who do you think you are? What makes you so special that the FBI would ever ever ever in a million years even glance over your information let alone take the time to absorb it in? You must think pretty highly of yourself.”

Not saying this to any specific person but I think it gets the point across. I seriously can’t understand the issue here at all. Let’s say they had a database of 1 person, which is me. They could search all day long for terms related to terrorism/crime and never see my information, even though I am the only one in the database. It’s already 0% before you add over 1 billion more entries to that database, so what are the odds then?

Sorry but anyone who cares about this must be unrealistic. It’s not possible that anyone could truly believe he or she would actually end up as a result of one of their filters/searches, unless the search was “*”, in which case it is still not possible that you would be on the top 100 pages of results and ever actually be seen/noticed by their staff. You already submitted your personal data to Google. We are talking about another digital copy of it existing on another server and nothing else. It’s never going to be seen etc. And why do you think the FBI would see it when Google, who already has it, won’t? You don’t seem to mind the fact that Google already has your information and any random employee can get into the server and look at it. You seem to be realistic that that will never happen at Google, yet the chances of anyone seeing it in the FBI are roughly the same, so why does that bug you out?

Let’s be realistic, people.

L. Spiro

The fact is however that before the "War on Terror" the FBI and police had to get warrants for that type of information. Now they can just run ramshod over your privacy as they please. Why? And why should I be ok with that? Because I'm not a criminal? It's because I'm not a criminal that that should not happen in the first place. Also, your situation is very different. You have volunteered to be in an industry where --quite frankly-- you throw your privacy out of the window. That's something most people know, but many don't truly understand, when getting into the entertainment industry. So yeah, you've accepted the lack of privacy for the fortune and fame. But the rest of us have not made that decision and surely don't want that decision made for us. Especially when there is no fortune or fame.

Even before the Patriot Act snafu, the government can already sniff you out. With Facebook and Google now tracking your browsing habits, it just makes things a little bit easier for them.

For the most parts in your life, having the government keeping track of your stuff is mostly a necessity, part of cohabitation rules in a regulated society. If you want to have full privacy, then live by yourself in a jungle. You will leave tracks and records as you interact with people.

The most concerning part, however, is having private organizations like Facebook and Google, or anyone else, to have access to that information. Don't liberally use them like posting self photos, and regularly checking in. Limited use of Facebook and any other social networking sites is possibly the best form to combat loss of privacy. Use the free time to plot your world domination outside the Internet.

Because I'm not a criminal? It's because I'm not a criminal that that should not happen in the first place.

That's a misconception. You are a criminal, unless proven otherwise. That's how things work in a Nazi state.

History repeats itself. Bush and the New York Zionists murdered a few thousand innocent people back in 2001 to get a causa belli against "The Muslim", and to get an agreement within the people to take some "necessary measures" to protect your Freedom (with a capitalized F) against the evil Arabs. It's none different from what Adolf did here 75 years ago, or from what Nero did in Rome two millenia ago. If only people cared about history...

Seriously? You don’t trust the FBI? I don’t care how they treat criminals.

Of course I'd trust the FBI every day, especially when they do things like spurring some below average intelligence young man up and provide the monetary means to build a bomb, and when he fails doing that even provide the bomb (a dynfunct one, but still) too. Just so they can present a "dangerous terrorist" that they've caught.
It's the same pattern over and over again: Rule by fear, present an enemy, kindle hate. After that comes the "enemy has secret weapons" trope, and there you have your legitimation to invade another country. Did I say "if people only cared about history" already?

But either way, what do you care about the FBI collecting data about when you went to cinema and what web sites you visited while you own a biometric ID card and there's cameras in every street which, without any doubt, are able to do biometric identification. And then there's the RFIDs that you're carrying, not only the ones in your clothes or shoes, but also the one in your ID card. Further, every single of your phonecalls is wiretapped and scanned for keywords (if nothing else) and each and every of your emails is being scanned. All that is only done to protect you from the evil terrorists, of course, for no other reason.
You fear that someone might spy on your life by asking Google? Come on, wake up.

Let’s be realistic, people.

Your 'realism' is completely and utterly ignorant of history and all of the reasons why civil liberties are important. I don't have the time or patience to give a history lesson, so I'll just jump straight to achieving Godwin's law right now:

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Catholic.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Just a few decades ago, all our internal spy/investigative agencies spent all their time compiling lists of suspected communists and other "subversives". You think this stopped just because the USSR collapsed?
These branches of the state have always existed and will always exist. It's their job to protect the state from being challenged, to hunt down the enemies within and prevent them from challenging the status quo.
It's not just communists that rate on this scale. Did you go to any 'occupy' events? Subversive. Been to an environmental rally? Subversive. Gay pride march? Subversive. Associated with (ever talked to, share a name with, been in the same room as) any of the above people? Subversive. etc.

These days with modern technology, their job is even easier. They automatically collect and collate files on all of us, whether we rank as a risk or not. Hopefully most of us are low on the risk scale so we're not harassed... and hopefully none of you ever have your family, friends or property put at odds with the status quo in any way, such as being injured by "big industry" etc, such that you feel the desire to become an activist (i.e. seditious), because they've already got all the information they need pre-prepared...

You think that just because we get to vote every 4 years that somehow these watch-dogs will be any less ruthless in the task that they've always been trusted to carry out? Even in this modern, civilized age, we still have them abducting innocent citizens off the street, dragging them into unmarked vans, beating them, threatening them and so on, just to keep their "subversive" activities under control.

To be ok with the creation of a police state "because terrorism", or because you're not a criminal is dangerously ignorant.

Hitler.

Let’s be realistic, people.

Your 'realism' is completely and utterly ignorant of history and all of the reasons why civil liberties are important. I don't have the time of patience to give a history lesson, so I'll just jump straight to achieving godwins law right now:

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
 
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
 
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
 
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
 
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Catholic.
 
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Dam thats deep...

My quote was actually, “Nothing in life will change as a result of them having my—or your—information.”

Funny, your post was edited after I started mine. Not really a fair jab.

Technically, those brothers were guilty the day they were born. We just didn’t know until afterwards.

So, let's let the FBI take our DNA and fingerprints the day we're born, and have them scan our brain for psychotic tendencies before giving us to our mother.

In about 3 months I will have an IMDB page, I interact with Cynthia on Facebook regularly (and in real life when we have jobs together), and I have signed autographs on the streets before.

And I am not so pretentious as to think anyone cares about me.

Who do you think you are?

So, in other words, since it doesn't bother you, we're being unrealistic. Thank goodness you're not involved in making these decisions.

Don’t do weird things

I'll do whatever the heck I want. I pay for the Internet service.

And again you forgot what I told you to remember: No one in the FBI is going to see your information.

That's like saying that walking through a room full of blind people naked is perfectly fine. What if one of them is not blind, one of them bumps into you, or someone's looking through the window? They might not be "searching", but they would have the information now, and not discard it. So, what happens if it becomes part of my background check, and I get denied a government service or firearm purchase due to my online activity? What is to say they wouldn't give it to some other agency?

It’s never going to be seen etc.

Then why do they want it? Think about that one.

And why do you think the FBI would see it when Google, who already has it, won’t? You don’t seem to mind the fact that Google already has your information and any random employee can get into the server and look at it. You seem to be realistic that that will never happen at Google, yet the chances of anyone seeing it in the FBI are roughly the same, so why does that bug you out?

Google's underhanded policies, outright breaches of privacy, anti-trust, and other offenses against its users are a different topic. Don't mistake my upset here as complacence somewhere else.

They could search all day long for terms related to terrorism/crime and never see my information, even though I am the only one in the database.

What if they aren't looking for terrorism? What fits the definition of crime? What if they are just looking for a pattern, and jump to conclusions with cutting off your government resources based on the fact that you can't help looking like a disturbed individual? Once you give that information to them, what they do is fair game.

It’s not possible that anyone could truly believe he or she would actually end up as a result of one of their filters/searches, unless the search was “*”, in which case it is still not possible that you would be on the top 100 pages of results and ever actually be seen/noticed by their staff.

What if it isn't them that does the searching, but you? You get pulled over for a routine traffic stop, get carded for alcohol, renew your car's registration, apply to carry a firearm... and there's your ID, carrying out an act that garners suspicion. Your associated data can be pulled for inspection now, to look for patterns.

Let’s be realistic, people.

Hm... Do you even live in the US? It's pretty easy to not care at all, when we don't share the same government.

To be ok with the creation of a police state "because terrorism", or because you're not a criminal is dangerously ignorant.

I agree, because what if they decide what if something you've always done is now considered illegal? You've been condoning borderline unconstitutional behavior (you wouldn't want them wiretapping, right?), but what if they now consider your actions terrorist and try to pre-emptively watch you? Just because you're in the clear now, doesn't mean you'll always be. And you will give them the right to decide.

The FBI has nothing compared to the power that the IRS holds - READ THIS to see what powers that agency has.

The FBI has nothing compared to the power that the IRS holds - READ THIS to see what powers that agency has.

Perhaps if the post cited its sources, and didn't show a heavy bias against a particular party, I'd believe it had credibility.

I do, however, believe that the IRS has a lot of information about ordinary citizens. You're more than welcome to submit another link to prove your point.