The problem was that those articles didn't really answer the questions. Can you provide a source that says that private tweets are scanned and stored? Let's start with that.
AGAIN The questions WAS (and please, re-read, because this WAS the question): What arrests? Were they arrested for more than piracy or something else? In which case the poster got TWO answers, one from a link I posted and one with information that someone else posted about people who were ARRESTED for COMMENTS that weren't in reference to piracy. Also, that was a question from someone else. You're piggybacking on something you didn't even bring up. As I've said, you don't want my links, you have trouble with the source info. AGAIN: if you have questions, GO GET ANSWERS you can trust. Use your brain. And again, this has little to do with the original post. But you don't care, you just "like to argue".
But, in case you honestly want to know, that information probably won't come to you via google search, since google is in close partnership with Twitter and CISPA and because those abuses are often COVERED UP and then DISCOVERED by people like the 'criminal' that was referred to earlier. There is, however, this quote from another abuse twitter HAD TO admit to (storing contact information without consent) after being found out Tweets do last forever, but it is unclear as to how long deleted tweets are retained for. "Log data", such as users IP address, referring page, pages visited, search terms, and even "other actions" and "interactions with our website" may be recorded and stored. In reaching out to Twitter, to clarify how long other data, including tweet data is retained for, the company did not respond immediately for comment.
That passage is from an article dealing with uploading contact lists. Also, deleted tweets are a tricky issue. As far as I'm concerned, what you post on the internet is basically permanent. I'm not sure if you can truly ever completely delete something you posted. This is actually an interesting issue. Twitter has argued that rights to tweets belong to the person who posted them. It was the government that was trying to argue that tweets belonged to Twitter, which would make it easier for them to access hidden tweets with a warrant. I think this is still an ongoing battle.
DIRECT FROM STOPCISPANOW Hey Friend, Some people are saying CISPA is dead. It’s a little more complicated than that -- the Senate will very likely break up CISPA into a few bills, and we’re not sure yet what that will look like. The bad news: CNET has obtained 1,000 pages of government documents that reveal the Obama administration secretly authorized a backdoor for warrantless online wiretapping. Basically, the government promised not to prosecute companies for breaking privacy laws as long as they co-operated with government spying. CISPA is just legislative backup for what the U.S. government has been already doing secretly (and possibly illegally) -- violating our online privacy rights. We don’t want to live in a country where that’s okay. Help us respond quickly and loudly! It's unacceptable for the U.S. Government to violate the world’s online privacy, regardless of what acronym they use for it.
"Big Brother is Watching YOU!" You silly girl! So what? It's really quiet simple. Guns and ammo. But I'll bet most of the cry babies here don't even own a weapon.....Including you Just a meat and potato type of guy asking a question. What's more likely, Big Brother ruining your life in or a member of the expanding Freak-a-zoid population crossing paths with you or someone you love? I think owning a weapon is just as important as voting although I have considered to stop voting. Think we have reached a point to where it doesn't matter whether or not you vote. The "Big Brother Machine" has had control for many years. And that reinforces the need to own weapons. In a sense, it's a form of voting that scares the crap outa people that need to feel that way. Whole lotta people would not get killed if more people carried that kind of voter ID. The mass murder in Texas some years back. The psycho killed what, 25 people before shooting himself. It was a busy restaurant with hundreds of Texans eating. The State moved quickly and fixed that. Odds are it couldn't happen again. The psycho would never have had the chance to reload because there's too many cowboys packing now. The way it should What about the subway guy Bernard Getz. After he emptied a clip into a bunch of hoods, guess what didn't happen on the subways until "Big Brother" locked him up? The freak-a-zoids were too worried some one might shoot back. It was a crime-free week on the subway. Quiet simple isn't it? I just go fishing and think about it. Really, I would like to know why more people do not own a weapon. And maybe just as important is why they think they don't need a weapon. Maybe Big Brother controls more than you realize. Sheeple
You've got the quote wrong. Orwell didn't use such capitalization. Also, I think you missed the point of Nineteen Eighty-Four. To be fair to you though, most do.