---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5OAjnveyJo

上述網址是VICE NEWS針對本次新冠病毒疫情對史諾登所做的採訪

節錄一下重點:

04:27

-The Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention uses data
provided by local telecommunications companies.
-Taiwan is doing a "mobile fence," so-called,where, if they know you're
infected,
they're going to put a mobile fence around you,
and if you leave, you're going to get in trouble.It's basically the --
your mobile phone is your new ankle bracelet.
So are autocratic regimes better
at dealing with things like this than democratic ones?

記者: 韓國的疾病管理本部使用了當地電信公司所提供的資料。



-I don't think so. I mean, there are arguments being made
that China can do things that the United States can't.
Now, that doesn't mean
that what these autocratic countries are doing
is actually more effective.
There are really only two things that we know to be true.
One is that no one knows the true number of infected
because we can only in the absolute best case
know the confirmed cases
of people that we've actually tested.
And once you start to layer in this autocratic,
or I would argue, more authoritarian type
of policy structure,
what you end up seeing is that instead of policy
being guided by science and facts,
you begin to see things like information releases
becoming political decisions.

史諾登: 不，我不這麼認為，有人爭論說中國可以做有些美國不能做的事情，但那並不代
表這些專制國家做事情更有效率。
現在有兩個東西我們是很確定的，第一，沒有人知道真正的確診數字是什麼，因為我們最
多只能依賴被檢測過的人來得到這個數字。
而在這些專制的政策結構下，這些資訊發布可能成為因政治因素的決策，而不是由科學和
事實來引導。

Now, this is not new.
In fact, the Spanish flu around 1918
did not actually originate in Spain.
It was actually spreading in World War I
through the trenches,
where everybody was in terrible conditions.
But the militaries of the day had imposed restrictions
on what the press could report
that could impact the war effort.
And so Spain, being a neutral country,
was publishing
what they were actually seeing in their country.
And so we just presumed, because they were the only ones
that were telling the truth, that it came from them.
Now we're a little further ahead than that today.
But that doesn't erase the fact that people in power
who see that there is a political advantage
to disguising or concealing or massaging
or denying numbers may choose to lie about it.
It's happened before and it's almost certainly happening now.

史諾登: 這不是新鮮事，1918年的西班牙流感事實上並非起源西班牙，在一戰時其實早已
在環境惡劣的壕溝內流傳。
當時的軍中對信息出入的限制十分嚴謹，因為有可能會影響戰爭的結果。
西班牙作為一個中立國，報導了當時在國內真實的情況，因為西班牙是唯一講真話的國家
，使我們誤認病毒起源於那裡。
今日的我們有進步了一些，但這並不會阻止那些握有權力的人因為政治利益而選擇掩蓋、
隱瞞或否認他們捏造出來的數字。
在過去發生過，現在就幾乎一定正在發生。

08:38

We've seen in countries like Taiwan and South Korea
and spreading also into more Western countries,
and of course, in the United States,
where it has begun as well,
the tracking and monitoring of the movements
of the whole of the human population
through the movements of our phones.
And it is, I think,
something that should raise cause for concern,
because when we talk about the applications,
and I'm sure we will,
they're saying they're using it for contact tracing.
This person gets sick. Where did they go?
Who may they come in contact with precisely
so they can produce these kind of text messages
that you describe?
On its face, it seems like it might be a good idea.
There is, of course, a natural presumed benefit here.
And yet, this level of contact tracing,
this method of contact tracing does not really work
on a pandemic scale.

史諾登: 在台灣和南韓，甚至是西方國家、美國，我們都可以看到藉由手機定位對全體人
口的追蹤和監控。
而我覺得這是我們必須要提高警覺的地方，當我們提到這些應用時，他們總說是為了追蹤
接觸者。當有人生病了，他去過哪些地方？
他們要怎樣精準的知道跟誰聯繫才能產生剛剛你提到的那種簡訊內容？
表面上來看，這是個好主意，但是這種程度的接觸者追蹤方式，在大流行規模時並不怎麼
有用。

-When I think about the future,
when any of us look at where this is heading,
we need to think about where we've been,
and sadly, these kind of emergency powers
that are born out of crises
have a perfect history of abuse.
I mean, down the board,
whenever you look at these things,
the funniest part about it in a dark way
is that the emergency never ends.
It becomes normalized.

史諾登: 我想在未來，任何人回頭看現今的情況如何發展時，都必須思考我們曾經做了什
麼。
悲觀的是，這些在危機之下產生的緊急狀態的權力，都有被濫用的歷史。
最好笑又可悲的是這些緊急狀況似乎沒有結束過，反而變得正常化了。

15:26

As authoritarianism spreads,
as emergency laws proliferate,
as we sacrifice our rights,
we also sacrifice our capability
to arrest this slide into a less liberal and less free world.
Do you truly believe that when the first wave, the second wave,
the 16th wave of the coronavirus
is a long-forgotten memory,
that these capabilities will not be kept,
that these data sets will not be kept?
Will those capabilities begin to be applied
to small-time criminality?
Will they begin to be applied to political analysis?
Will they begin to be applied
for doing things like performing a census?
Will they be used for political polling?
No matter how it is being used,
what is being built is the architecture of oppression.
And you might trust who is dealing with it,
you might trust who runs it.
You might go, "You know, I don't care about Mark Zuckerberg."
But someone else will have this data eventually.
Some other country will have this data eventually.
In your country, a different president
will have control of this data eventually,
and someone will abuse it.

史諾登: 當威權主義擴散，緊急法令暴增，當我們犧牲我們權利的時候，我們也犧牲了阻
止這個世界朝向更不開明、更不自由的方向的能力。
你真的相信當第一波，第二波，甚至第十六波新冠疫情被視為距離遙遠的記憶時，這些能
力和資料庫不會被保留下來？
這些能力會不會被用來對付相對較輕的罪刑？
又會不會被用來進行人口普查？
會不會被用來進行政治民調？
不管這個能力備怎麼使用，已經被建立的是壓迫性的體制。
你可能會信任只用這個能力的人，你可能會想：「我沒差，馬克祖克伯不關我的事。」
不過某些人將會擁有這些資料，某些國家將會擁有這些資料。在你的國家，不同的總統將
會掌控這些資料，而將會有人濫用它。

21:41

Because these systems, if we do not change them,
will not simply be used to monitor our health.
They're going to make decisions for us on an automated basis
to determine who gets a job, who goes to school,
who gets a loan, who gets a home,
and who does not.
And we today are being asked
in a moment of extraordinary fear,
"What do we want these systems to look like?"
And if we don't make that decision ourselves,
it will be made for us.

史諾登:
因為這些體制，如果我們不去改變它，它將會不只是用來監控我們的健康。
這個體制將會在自動化的基礎下決定誰可以貸款，誰可以買房子，而誰不行。
在今日我們在極度恐懼下被問道：「我們想要怎樣的體制？」
如果我們不作出決定的話，它將會為我們做出決定。

-----------------------------------------------------------------

懶人包:

史諾登認為台灣和韓國這些專制國家用手機定位監控疫情的方式以後有被濫用的可能性，
他還懷疑有些國家為了政治因素而隱瞞確診數字。
提醒我們要監督政府，不然以後政府用這些能力拿來做什麼事情不敢想像。

--
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 220.141.89.115 (臺灣)
※ 文章代碼(AID): #1Uadjc33 (Gossiping)
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Gossiping/M.1586658150.A.0C3.html