FOIPA Request to the FBI Processing

[Anon136]

Sorry this is a bit off topic. but does anyone else here immediately look for a poking stick any time they see a bear?

[Herodes]

Sorry this is a bit off topic. but does anyone else here immediately look for a poking stick any time they see a bear?

I usually go the other way.

[danieldaniel]

Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIPA) sounds great. However, is it really as great as it sounds ? How many persons are responsible for finding the information that somebody requests ? And how can we trust that all information is handed over ? It seems like it's very easy for an official not to hand over some specific information because of [randomexcuse/law], and the person who initiated the FOIPA would be non the wiser. I guess there are laws governing this, but they're not worth more than the people actually processing the requests, and who's overseeing them, and do the overseers just accept any report they receive, or do they do any investigation on their own?

I feel it's a bit like the white house petitions. We care blablabla.. But in reality the most powerful party twist anything to their advantage anyway.

It's not like we're going to get the FBI papers about how they're working in regards to ongoing cases, or future cases.

Apparently there's a leaked memo from the FBI regarding bitcoin:
http://cryptome.org/2012/05/fbi-bitcoin.pdf

And as we can see from all the wikileaks cables, the Us Govt. are big liars, and they do fear the truth, how can we at all trust such a government - with anything at all ? How can we trust that they process our requests in a fair way ? Sorry, I don't trust them at all. And when you receive a response, and they say: This is what we've got, and they given you some token information, you have no way of knowing that this information is all they've got.

There *are* laws governing it, and the people that oversee it are FBI employees. 

And, also, that "FBI" memo was most likely fake.  That's been discussed.

And, I mean, if you don't trust the US government enough to not 100% lie to you about a formal request, then you shouldn't live in the US.

[Anon136]

Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIPA) sounds great. However, is it really as great as it sounds ? How many persons are responsible for finding the information that somebody requests ? And how can we trust that all information is handed over ? It seems like it's very easy for an official not to hand over some specific information because of [randomexcuse/law], and the person who initiated the FOIPA would be non the wiser. I guess there are laws governing this, but they're not worth more than the people actually processing the requests, and who's overseeing them, and do the overseers just accept any report they receive, or do they do any investigation on their own?

I feel it's a bit like the white house petitions. We care blablabla.. But in reality the most powerful party twist anything to their advantage anyway.

It's not like we're going to get the FBI papers about how they're working in regards to ongoing cases, or future cases.

Apparently there's a leaked memo from the FBI regarding bitcoin:
http://cryptome.org/2012/05/fbi-bitcoin.pdf

And as we can see from all the wikileaks cables, the Us Govt. are big liars, and they do fear the truth, how can we at all trust such a government - with anything at all ? How can we trust that they process our requests in a fair way ? Sorry, I don't trust them at all. And when you receive a response, and they say: This is what we've got, and they given you some token information, you have no way of knowing that this information is all they've got.

if you don't trust the US government enough to not 100% lie to you about a formal request, then you shouldn't live in the US.

I wonder if you would mind qualifying this statement?

[danieldaniel]

Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIPA) sounds great. However, is it really as great as it sounds ? How many persons are responsible for finding the information that somebody requests ? And how can we trust that all information is handed over ? It seems like it's very easy for an official not to hand over some specific information because of [randomexcuse/law], and the person who initiated the FOIPA would be non the wiser. I guess there are laws governing this, but they're not worth more than the people actually processing the requests, and who's overseeing them, and do the overseers just accept any report they receive, or do they do any investigation on their own?

I feel it's a bit like the white house petitions. We care blablabla.. But in reality the most powerful party twist anything to their advantage anyway.

It's not like we're going to get the FBI papers about how they're working in regards to ongoing cases, or future cases.

Apparently there's a leaked memo from the FBI regarding bitcoin:
http://cryptome.org/2012/05/fbi-bitcoin.pdf

And as we can see from all the wikileaks cables, the Us Govt. are big liars, and they do fear the truth, how can we at all trust such a government - with anything at all ? How can we trust that they process our requests in a fair way ? Sorry, I don't trust them at all. And when you receive a response, and they say: This is what we've got, and they given you some token information, you have no way of knowing that this information is all they've got.

if you don't trust the US government enough to not 100% lie to you about a formal request, then you shouldn't live in the US.

I wonder if you would mind qualifying this statement?

My point was that if you can't trust the US, then I don't see why he lives there.

[Herodes]

And, I mean, if you don't trust the US government enough to not 100% lie to you about a formal request, then you shouldn't live in the US.

What makes you think I do ?

[danieldaniel]

And, I mean, if you don't trust the US government enough to not 100% lie to you about a formal request, then you shouldn't live in the US.

What makes you think I do ?

Good point.  Let me revise that to the simple fact that I trust the government to tell the truth.

[Herodes]

Good point.  Let me revise that to the simple fact that I trust the government to tell the truth.

When the US invaded Iraq, they said it was because Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Numerous officials said so, in UN hearings.

We all know it was a lie. So let's trust them for all small things still ?

[danieldaniel]

Good point.  Let me revise that to the simple fact that I trust the government to tell the truth.

When the US invaded Iraq, they said it was because Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Numerous officials said so, in UN hearings.

We all know it was a lie. So let's trust them for all small things still ?

Do you really think Bitcoin is a matter of national security?

[Herodes]

Good point.  Let me revise that to the simple fact that I trust the government to tell the truth.

When the US invaded Iraq, they said it was because Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Numerous officials said so, in UN hearings.

We all know it was a lie. So let's trust them for all small things still ?

Do you really think Bitcoin is a matter of national security?

No

[danieldaniel]

Good point.  Let me revise that to the simple fact that I trust the government to tell the truth.

When the US invaded Iraq, they said it was because Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Numerous officials said so, in UN hearings.

We all know it was a lie. So let's trust them for all small things still ?

Do you really think Bitcoin is a matter of national security?

No

QED (that's what this means, right?  Case in point?).

[Herodes]

QED (that's what this means, right?  Case in point?).

Sure, get your point.

However, on a general note, if the incentive not to act in according to a regulation or law is big enough for an official, there can be corruption, and evading of the truth.

Also on a general note, no system is stronger than the people involved in it. For instance, it can be hospital policy that patient information is under no circumstances to be given over the phone to anybody.

Then you simply call in, and present you with your name, and ask for your patient records. Promptly you have it read to you there and then. It could've been a new assistant, unaware of the rules, or just trying to be helpful, and thus breaking the rules.

Same way, a judge can throw out a case pointing to a certain law, when he in fact knows that a sharp lawyer would've buried him.

So it's all down to the action of single people, and a system is no better than what checks are made and in place. And as an outsider, we can only chose to trust or not to trust a company or a government branch to do what they promise to do.

I'm not saying bitcoins are a matter of national security at this point, but you get my point.

[danieldaniel]

QED (that's what this means, right?  Case in point?).

Sure, get your point.

However, on a general note, if the incentive not to act in according to a regulation or law is big enough for an official, there can be corruption, and evading of the truth.

Also on a general note, no system is stronger than the people involved in it. For instance, it can be hospital policy that patient information is under no circumstances to be given over the phone to anybody.

Then you simply call in, and present you with your name, and ask for your patient records. Promptly you have it read to you there and then. It could've been a new assistant, unaware of the rules, or just trying to be helpful, and thus breaking the rules.

Same way, a judge can throw out a case pointing to a certain law, when he in fact knows that a sharp lawyer would've buried him.

So it's all down to the action of single people, and a system is no better than what checks are made and in place. And as an outsider, we can only chose to trust or not to trust a company or a government branch to do what they promise to do.

I'm not saying bitcoins are a matter of national security at this point, but you get my point.

Yup, I get your point as well.  There is no way for me to really verify that the gov. wasn't lying, but I trust that they won't.

[Herodes]

Yup, I get your point as well.  There is no way for me to really verify that the gov. wasn't lying, but I trust that they won't.

Yes, exactly.

[scintill]

OP, got an update?  I checked the linked status page and it says they are still processing.  I understand they are supposed to respond by a deadline, and surely it has passed by now!

[danieldaniel]

OP, got an update?  I checked the linked status page and it says they are still processing.  I understand they are supposed to respond by a deadline, and surely it has passed by now!

They missed it.  I've mailed 2 letters asking them on the status with no response.  I even put a tracking sticker on one of them and it DID get there alright.

[TheFootMan]

OP, got an update?  I checked the linked status page and it says they are still processing.  I understand they are supposed to respond by a deadline, and surely it has passed by now!

They missed it.  I've mailed 2 letters asking them on the status with no response.  I even put a tracking sticker on one of them and it DID get there alright.

There's been a couple of congressional hearings allright - the number of documents mentioning bitcoin within the FBI has probably skyrocketed by now, and the same with all other 3-letter organizations.

Funny thing is though. The law doesn't mean jack shit when it comes to a branch of the government breaking it. If your request is not priortized, it could just as well've been sent to /dev/null. In fact I think that sending a request directly to /dev/null is often more efficient, because then you have with 100% certainty established the fact that you won't ever get an answer.