No they won't.
NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
21–30 of 35 posts
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#22There's no way to win here. If the government outright abolished the NSA at noon, there would be dozens of hn comments at 12:01 saying "Yeah, but did they really abolish it?" or "But what about all the bad things they did when they existed? or "They'll just do something even worse next". It seems like distrust of authority is just a part of some people's personality. Perceived wrong doing by the government in the pas…
Wow, I don't know that I've seen such a perfect example of Battered Woman Syndrome outside of a rerun of Cops. By "Perceived wrong doing", you mean clear and well documented violations of the law - right? Portraying people who don't immediately prostrate themselves before the throne of state power as having some sort of personality defect is pretty funny as well.
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#23A somewhat inaccurate headline. As Marcy Wheeler writes:
"Just a tiny corner of the phone dragnet will shut down, and the government will continue to collect “telephony metadata records in bulk … including records of both U.S. and non-U.S. persons” under EO 12333. Hypothetically, for every single international call that had been picked up under the Section 215 dragnet and more (at a minimum, because NSA collects phone records overseas with location information), a matching record has been and will continue to be collected overseas, under EO 12333."
https://www.emptywheel.net/2015/11/27/the-government-wants-y...
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#24There's no way to win here. If the government outright abolished the NSA at noon, there would be dozens of hn comments at 12:01 saying "Yeah, but did they really abolish it?" or "But what about all the bad things they did when they existed? or "They'll just do something even worse next". It seems like distrust of authority is just a part of some people's personality. Perceived wrong doing by the government in the pas…
Our security apparatus is the boy who cried "wolf" (okay, actually they cried "terrorist", but close enough). They've repeatedly lied to Congress and to the people, including lying about having programs and lying about shutting down programs. Given that background context, distrust is appropriate here!
There is no short-term fix but in the long run the authorities could probably win back some trust if they henceforth were consistently truthful and transparent and actually held somebody responsible the next time lawbreaking occurs.
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#25A somewhat inaccurate headline. As Marcy Wheeler writes: "Just a tiny corner of the phone dragnet will shut down, and the government will continue to collect “telephony metadata records in bulk … including records of both U.S. and non-U.S. persons” under EO 12333. Hypothetically, for every single international call that had been picked up under the Section 215 dragnet and more (at a minimum, because NSA collects phon…
> international call
It's important to remember that Snowden has confirmed several times that "international" is referring to the physical wire/fiber/radio they are tapping, not the people at each end of the call. In a packet switched world, any call can become "international" if the packets are sent by way of the Bahamas. ("misconfigured" BGP is a traditional method)
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#26 Good. We can all pretend we believe it.
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#27As required by law, the NSA will end its wide-ranging surveillance program by 11:59 p.m. EST Saturday (4:59 a.m. GMT Sunday) and expects to have the new, scaled-back system in place by then, the White House said. "As required by law"? The government violated the Fourth Amendment and the director of national security committed perjury (1). As required by law, justice officials and prosecutors should have brought charg…
Where was it found the NSA violated the 4th amendment?
Oh, please. There comes a time when even you have to give up the legalistic approach, and just acknowledge plain fact.
The NSA has had dragnet surveillance of most or all of the US internet for some years. If that's not a 4th Amendment violation, then nothing is.
If you want legalistic, narrow (razor thin!) interpretations of all "rights", then they're not really rights, they're just something for lawyers to natter on about. Further, Lee Greenwood's "Proud to be an American" becomes nothing but parody.
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where was it found the NSA violated the 4th amendment?
Oh, please. There comes a time when even you have to give up the legalistic approach, and just acknowledge plain fact. The NSA has had dragnet surveillance of most or all of the US internet for some years. If that's not a 4th Amendment violation, then nothing is. If you want legalistic, narrow (razor thin!) interpretations of all "rights", then they're not really rights, they're just something for lawyers to natter o…
[deleted]
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where was it found the NSA violated the 4th amendment?
Oh, please. There comes a time when even you have to give up the legalistic approach, and just acknowledge plain fact. The NSA has had dragnet surveillance of most or all of the US internet for some years. If that's not a 4th Amendment violation, then nothing is. If you want legalistic, narrow (razor thin!) interpretations of all "rights", then they're not really rights, they're just something for lawyers to natter o…
> The NSA has had dragnet surveillance of most or all of the US internet for some years. If that's not a 4th Amendment violation, then nothing is.
Even assuming that were true, I disagree it would be an archetypal 4th amendment violation. Privacy on the Internet doesn't exist as a matter of fact. Anyone who controls a router between you and your destination can see your Internet traffic. When you try to apply the 4th amendment to the Internet, you're not asking the government not to intrude on an otherwise private space (i.e. the heart of the 4th amendment). You're asking it to indulge a purely legal fiction of privacy.
Re: NSA to shut down bulk phone surveillance program by Sunday
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, please. There comes a time when even you have to give up the legalistic approach, and just acknowledge plain fact. The NSA has had dragnet surveillance of most or all of the US internet for some years. If that's not a 4th Amendment violation, then nothing is. If you want legalistic, narrow (razor thin!) interpretations of all "rights", then they're not really rights, they're just something for lawyers to natter o…
> The NSA has had dragnet surveillance of most or all of the US internet for some years. If that's not a 4th Amendment violation, then nothing is. Even assuming that were true, I disagree it would be an archetypal 4th amendment violation. Privacy on the Internet doesn't exist as a matter of fact. Anyone who controls a router between you and your destination can see your Internet traffic. When you try to apply the 4th…
And on even number days you will argue the people don't have the right to create unbreakable privacy for themselves, and that a search warrant has to be a guarantee of being able to read what the searcher finds.