Jump to content
1961

[Surveillance Topic] DA's for next year

Recommended Posts

What sort of DA's do you think will be run on next year's topic. Where are some good places to look for DA evidence. I have a pretty solid ISIS DA already written(and Terrorism + Crime DA's are going to be prevalent of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm probably going to write some sort of hacking vigilanteism DA.  Quite possibly a cyber-bullying DA too.  At least, I know what these things will look like.

 

But really, I think the best negative ground will be policy-level Ks, like a K of the current legal conception of privacy in the modern world, or a K of expectations of privacy.  You don't need high theory for good K ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some Legal-esque DA - you know, like being relevant to the Constitution and such - Maybe Federalism DA can make a comeback xD

 

I heard about some Terrorism DA's arising but those can EASILY be beaten with Islamophobia arguments 

Edited by Theparanoiacmachine
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Some Legal-esque DA - you know, like being relevant to the Constitution and such - Maybe Federalism DA can make a comeback xD

 

I heard about some Terrorism DA's arising but those can EASILY be beaten with Islamophobia arguments 

 

We hit this team every tournament this year who ran that, but called it 'civil war DA' and would get so mad if we called it states rights or federalism and correct us during our speeches because they were so adamantly convinced there was a difference. (I have the flash before they called it civil war and after, it's the same open evidence shell)

Edited by kylerbuckner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some Legal-esque DA - you know, like being relevant to the Constitution and such - Maybe Federalism DA can make a comeback xD

 

I heard about some Terrorism DA's arising but those can EASILY be beaten with Islamophobia arguments 

Islamaphobia will be a fun aff next year.

 

But yeah, legality disads are going to be very fun if they find coherent internal link stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What sort of DA's do you think will be run on next year's topic. Where are some good places to look for DA evidence. I have a pretty solid ISIS DA already written(and Terrorism + Crime DA's are going to be prevalent of course).

 

There is only one DA that matters. 

POLITICS 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhh... Child Porn DA anyone? 

 

Serious uniqueness problems.  The US already sucks at catching purveyors of child pornography.  (Hence Anonymous's Operation Darknet, because the government wasn't getting the job done).  

 

And the types of things the FBI currently does to catch child pornographers - sting operations, etc... - are things that aren't going to be curtailed by any reasonable affirmative.  So the link story is going to be pretty bad too.

 

Basically the only way to make this work is with a CP (using CP solvency to create uniqueness for the DA) that does whatever surveillance the affirmative is attempting to curtail (because otherwise you just lose flat out on the perm, since the DA's uniqueness problems means it won't create competition for you).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Basically the only way to make this work is with a CP (using CP solvency to create uniqueness for the DA) that does whatever surveillance the affirmative is attempting to curtail (because otherwise you just lose flat out on the perm, since the DA's uniqueness problems means it won't create competition for you).

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) I see what you did there.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about: surveillance by the US government is encouraging new privacy technology and its adoption, we're on the verge of making privacy easy and default, that privacy technology is important globally and also solves the case. Maybe mix this with some K-esque literature on privacy from cyber libertarians. We shouldn't have to rely on government to voluntarily refrain from spying on us - they will just change their mind once the next catastrophe hits. We should use technology to keep ourselves safe, it's the only thing that's actually reliable. Even if they do win US politicians tend to be good, leaders abroad are not nearly so nice. And there are corporations to consider as well, and minor actors within the US government who aren't watched carefully enough, and independent hackers.

Amusingly, this is compatible with a politics DA despite its negative opinions on government. Could also use a counterplan to boost privacy technology, if uniqueness seems weak.

Edited by Chaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about: surveillance by the US government is encouraging new privacy technology and its adoption, we're on the verge of making privacy easy and default, that privacy technology is important globally and also solves the case. Maybe mix this with some K-esque literature on privacy from cyber libertarians. We shouldn't have to rely on government to voluntarily refrain from spying on us - they will just change their mind once the next catastrophe hits. We should use technology to keep ourselves safe, it's the only thing that's actually reliable. Even if they do win US politicians tend to be good, leaders abroad are not nearly so nice. And there are corporations to consider as well, and minor actors within the US government who aren't watched carefully enough, and independent hackers.

 

Amusingly, this is compatible with a politics DA despite its negative opinions on government. Could also use a counterplan to boost privacy technology, if uniqueness seems weak.

 

That argument pretty much fails on face.  Look up Ladar Levison and his now-defunct company Lavabit.  If you do develop surveillance resistant technology, the government will take you to court under a gag order so extreme you can't even tell people you need a lawyer.

 

Bonus: Appeals court decided on a technicality - Levison never objected to the contempt finding.  Of course he didn't, there wasn't an actual hearing for the contempt charge at which he could object.  Government victory by creating a catch-22 where in order to appeal you needed to do something that you never had the opportunity to do.

 

There's an Aff in that case somewhere, just a matter of deciding exactly how to go about it.

Edited by Squirrelloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about some sort of Accountability DA with A Police Camera CP against a TOPICAL race affirmative . Honestly if we created a forum of accountability against are police that could somehow garner the same impacts ,or a different impact ground than the affirmative .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That argument pretty much fails on face.  Look up Ladar Levison and his now-defunct company Lavabit.  If you do develop surveillance resistant technology, the government will take you to court under a gag order so extreme you can't even tell people you need a lawyer.

 

Bonus: Appeals court decided on a technicality - Levison never objected to the contempt finding.  Of course he didn't, there wasn't an actual hearing for the contempt charge at which he could object.  Government victory by creating a catch-22 where in order to appeal you needed to do something that you never had the opportunity to do.

 

There's an Aff in that case somewhere, just a matter of deciding exactly how to go about it.

Bit late to the party but I thought I'd reply anyways.  The problem with lavabit is that is wasn't developed in a way that precluded them from sharing data.  They didn't include a "we want the SSL key" demand in their threat model, and got screwed when it happened anyways.  That's not to say that Lavabit didn't do some things right, but in the end the government court ordering data on an insecure service isn't the best example.  On the flip side, pretend services like Tor, PGP and usage of the darknet to conduct affairs become commonplace.  There are attacks against all of these services (correlation attacks, attacks taking advantage of shitty PGP setups, and the shit the FBI did to Silk Road respectively), and if we're being honest nothing is ever truly secure BUT if the internal link to the DA is true and things like this become mainstream it will be highly difficult to conduct the widespread dragnet surveillance that the supposed impact cards talk about.  (as evidenced by those NSA powerpoint slides that basically say "yeah we can't watch every tor user and know who they are and that really sucks")

Edited by Backcountryguy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, will those exist? 

 

Just PIC out of the state and read Wilderson

There are plenty of topical affs that talk about racial issues. And it turns out that there is actually a pretty good lit base arguing that not everything the state does ever is bad

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty of topical affs that talk about racial issues. And it turns out that there is actually a pretty good lit base arguing that not everything the state does ever is bad

like passing TPA would be an awesome government action 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like passing TPA would be an awesome government action 

Don't think that's gonna happen though, the UQ from a while back is defunct, both parties are avoiding it mostly now.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-fight-for-trade-authority-faces-radically-altered-political-landscape/2015/04/22/0a378a90-e8e8-11e4-aae1-d642717d8afa_story.html

 

Also, for anybody who cares to cut it, there's a good "Republicans don't give a fig about how much PC Obama has anymore, they just want him out."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...