Free expression is democracy. Without it, political choice is a farce. You can have all the elections you want and they will mean nothing without the secure right to express, share information and advocate for your views. Canada's federal government has been no friend of the right to know since Prime Minister Stephen Harper came to power.
Large media conglomerates are piling on the pressure to ban these privacy protection services for any domains used for "commercial purposes". They're trying to make it even easier to access people's private contact information, so that they can sue domain owners who they accuse of copyright infringements.
Many Canadians are asking whether anything can be done to rein in the almost unimaginable surveillance powers revealed by Edward Snowden. From our research and consultation with privacy experts, there are a number of practical steps that can be taken to put a stop to surveillance abuses and better protect the privacy of Canadians.
Privacy commissioners regulate laws, they don't go on privacy witch hunts to make companies' lives difficult. There are lots of economic opportunities to do bad things, but society is at a shift where many people want to see the respectful thing done, and Facebook is not choosing the respectful thing here.
This is how Conservative MP Laurie Hawn responded to the now 140 plus businesses who have raised concerns in a letter published by the National Post about reckless spying Bill C-51: "[They] should seriously reconsider their business model and their lack of commitment to the values that bind us as Canadians."
In the space of a few short months since Bill C-51 was announced, hundreds of thousands of people have taken action to stop it: signing petitions, writing letters to local newspapers, phoning and writing to their member of Parliament, and hitting the streets in nationwide demonstrations in over 70 communities across Canada.
Small businesses across Canada are speaking up to warn the government about the economic damage that its "secret police" Bill C-51 will inflict on our economy. If Bill C-51 is passed, it will change Canada's economic climate for the worse, notably by harming Canadian commerce, trade, and data security. This upsurge in opposition from small businesses couldn't be more timely: committee hearings on the Bill are continuing today in the Senate, while the House of Commons could hold its final vote in just days.
Tech giants like Google, Facebook, Uber and Airbnb have entered unchartered policy territory where ethics debates, grey areas and government relations are the daily norm. While the seeming nuisance of having to deal with all these new policy implications all at once may seem cumbersome, the economic benefits and progress that has been made far outweigh the work.
Bill C-51 is an omnibus anti-terrorism bill that grants CSIS new information sharing powers and converts CSIS from a covert intelligence gathering organization to a covert enforcement agency. Ms. Soapbox is here to offer four simple suggestions to keep you out of trouble when Stephen Harper's majority government finally passes this monstrous piece of legislation.
There are already some technical experts suggesting you use duress passwords that wipe your device, but I would not recommend that -- that could have negative affects if you are considered to be tampering with evidence, or obstruction. I suggest you are better off in a position where you do not know your password, or exercise silence if in Canada.
Huge numbers of Canadians, including key Ottawa decision-makers, are pushing back hard against the government's Bill C-51, which proposes unprecedented new powers for Canada's security agencies. The bill effectively turns CSIS into a secret police force and would place every Canadian under a government microscope.
Anyone can be a victim of surveillance. If you've used any of over a hundred popular file-hosting websites in the past three years, chances are you've had your online activity collected and analyzed by CSEC, acting without a warrant and with no independent oversight. There is a great deal that can be done to tackle our privacy deficit.
The Harper government's newly introduced "anti-terrorism" legislature, Bill C-51, has been roundly condemned as an assault on privacy and free speech -- and rightly so. Besides hunting down would-be terrorists, the new laws could be used to stifle dissent, remove due process and lead to the creation of a secret police force, critics say. In a supposedly enlightened and democratic country such as Canada, these would be unwelcome developments to say the least. But there is a deeper cost to eroding privacy than just the spurring of undesirable changes in external entities such as courts and communications networks. Also at stake is the very freedom of Canadians to internally determine who they are and want to be.
Even more disturbing, it seems that CSE deliberately targeted Canadian IP addresses in violation of the law and contrary to repeated government assurances. They then cross-referenced the IP addresses of file-hosting users with other databases to learn the identity of these users. So basically, ending up as a target for in-depth surveillance could be as easy as clicking on a link.
Like an overwhelming number of Canadians, you said -- publicly -- that you didn't want to grant telecom providers immunity for handing over our sensitive private information to government without a warrant. But then at the last minute something changed. You voted for the Bill in Parliament, and I don't mind telling you that was a huge disappointment. I also can't help but detect a hint of shame in the blog post that you wrote explaining why you turned around and supported the Bill after speaking out so vociferously against it.
Q: "I was wondering who is able to access Ontario Ministry of Health lab records. I did a series of tests for a needle-stick injury, and was recently told that I could be discriminated against for a job in public health or insurance. When I looked it up on-line, it appears that insurance companies can access lab records. Is this true?"
The first letter of his surname has been distorted and made into an overarching awning which protects the surname, representing the public self or the professional self. In fact, some of the letters of the last name are tucked away, hidden beneath that dominant arcade, as if tucked away from public view. What do we know about Bill Cosby's private life?