Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

popsci.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 180 posts

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#121

Post by ashitlerferad »

dcposch wrote: post #87
mirimir wrote: post #15

Excellect! It's the most cogent analysis that I've seen from him. Damn, what a fucking hero! A few comments, however ... > ... we had to go to the dark side to be able to confront the threat posed by bad guys. We had to adopt their methods for ourselves. He's using "we" there in reference to the government. But it can also be read with "we" as you and me, and "bad guys" as the government ;) But then, I claim a broad…

> ve has lots of vis personas Are those typos? You touched on the cyperpunk fantasy: using multiple online identities, all kept carefully separate from each other and from your real identity. (There's an excellent short story called True Names that explores this idea.) For the majority of ordinary, nontechnical people, there are lots of simpler solutions. * Use cash. In Berlin, many ordinary people have an awareness…

Most cash is easily surveilled as it has serial numbers on it. Only coins are a safe form of cash but have a huge disadvantage of being exceptionally bulky.

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#122

Post by ashitlerferad »

deepnet wrote: post #52
nickpsecurity wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Without Stallman's foresight of the need for public domain open source software, there would only be proprietary software, all subject to PRISM." Or proprietary, shared-source software provided by nonprofits or companies in jurisdictions that aren't surveillance heavy. No, you don't need FOSS to avoid PRISM lol. It has its advantages in resisting totalitarianism for sure but you don't actually need them. More of aut…

There was a cultural change when Bell was broken up and UNIX became less laissez-faire, a paradigm shift. Software became valuable and not just bundled with hardware. Stallman saw it coming early enough that he had completed his GNU Free toolchain in time for Torvalds to use it. A developer community is less likely to arise when your modifications can be closed and you cannot fork. If your business runs in someone el…

The GPL is not magic pixie dust:

http://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/log/2015/11/27/sfc-supporter/

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#123

Post by ashitlerferad »

soared wrote: post #81
crpatino wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the false premise? Why do you think 'faith' is required in a logical argument? What future?

"police and the government then have the authority to search through your entire life in your pocket just because you are pulled over for a broken taillight: " Is false.

Isn't it routine?

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#125

Post by nickpsecurity »

ekianjo wrote: post #94
discardedrefuse wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're super paranoid you shouldn't trust any version of truecrypt. Read the fascinating story of Paul Le Roux... https://mastermind.atavist.com/ He created E4M (which truecrypt was based on) and is rumored to have been one of the creators of truecrypt. Apparently he's also been a US government asset for a while.

So what? Snowden even said that Truecrypt was one of the only tools that currently the NSA could not defeat. I'd rather trust him on that than your opinion on the matter.

Same shit I said to Moxie about GPG. There's only a few things consistently stopping them. Best endorsement ever if you ask me. I still push for even greater levels of security and assurance but what stops NSA at the moment is one hell of a starting place.

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#126

Post by nickpsecurity »

tanderson92 wrote: post #78
0xCMP wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had no idea. I'm not downplaying Snowden. The guy is 100% a hero in my eyes. But, to claim we in tech community were all like "I have no idea this was happening" is completely bogus.

It was also very easy to dismiss us as conspiracy theorists. And indeed we were. The Snowden revelations are useful as a way of saying "we predicted the state was engaging in mass surveillance and they denied it while they continued the program". That is immensely useful for the future.

I agree. I agree in a specific way: people were always thinking that anything with a significant chunk of people would've been revealed by a bunch of them. There's probably thousands involved in everything in the Snowden leaks from government to private industry. About biggest stuff, only one or two people talked while the rest worked in secret by the thousands to make it happen for around 10 years.

That's one hell of a counter to the bullshit I keep hearing that nothing secret or evil could happen if it's 2 or more government people.

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#127

Post by nickpsecurity »

mirimir wrote: post #113
komali2 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is your OP getting downvoted? Are we assuming they're an SJW because they informed us of the popular meaning of those words? I knew what those words meant and would have shared as well, despite how much I detest the SJW movement.

Damn, I don't even know what SJW is , without googling it ;) Edit: Oh, social justice warrior. Meh. Me, I'm just an old anarchist ;)

It's a person suffering from Saint John's Wart per Google. Apparently, it's been going through the bloodstream into the brain to have mental effects that are hard for scientists to characterize. Suffice it to say, it may be responsible for a good chunk of non-video traffic on the Internet and its victims may not even understand why they involved themselves. DARPA and the FDA are said to be teaming up to deal with the epidemic but the results remain to be seen so far.

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#128

Post by partiallypro »

0xCMP wrote: post #16

> But at the same time, we technologists as a class knew academically that these capabilities could be abused, but nobody actually believed they would be abused. Because why would you do that? It seemed so antisocial as a basic concept. I guess so? Not me though. Snowden literally only proved what I had learned on my own. > But we were confronted with documented evidence in 2013 that even what most people would consi…

Yeah...there was a pretty hit movie in the 90s about government abusing surveillance powers with two power house actors (Enemy of the State.) I think what Snowden did was good generally, but I think he thinks too highly of himself. Almost everything he leaked was already suspected or known, he just pushed it into the public eye.

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#129

Post by stephengillie »

ajkjk wrote: post #119
komali2 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They is the easiest, and already fully adopted, option. Why bother trying to add another?

Are you unable to think of an argument? It's not hard to list some ways in which using 'they' as a singular pronoun when gender is ambiguous is confusing and undesirable. It's not a stretch to then argue we should have a better alternative.

It's like how some languages don't have ternary operators. We just have to muddle through and sometimes "take the long way" to describe someone without implying a gender or sex or other attribute.

Re: Edward Snowden: The Internet Is Broken

#130

Post by tmnvix »

Well yes, the internet is broken. That article is inaccessible to me. I am redirected from popsci.com to popsci.com.au which, it appears, doesn't have the article in question. I just get a message telling me "Oops! Something went wrong. Please scroll down to find your content." The content isn't there and there is no way to select the non-au site. Very broken.
Post reply on HN