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

Pardon Snowden

pardonsnowden.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 814 posts

Re: Pardon Snowden

#111

Post by greyman »

allendoerfer wrote: post #20

I think the problem is, people do not care anymore. The scandal is over, business as usual. Only a small percentage of the population still cares about Snowden. I think the image of the NSA has been hurt and a change in legislation might get you some positive press in the future, but I do not think that pardoning Snowden would be worth the effort for a politician. On the other hand: Obama probably does not have to ca…

And then there are people like me, who don't see the situation as black&white, i.e. I am not signing that petition. In my opinion, for the sake of security, it is necessary to "cache" the whole Internet communication to prevent terrorists attacks and other dangers. Like what the Brits are doing and currently they didn't have any big attack after the London bombings.

I am not an American and I don't have a motivation to defend NSA or whoever, I just think that what Snowden did was partially wrong. Of course, caching the Internet like NSA and others are doing has human rights consequences, and those should be discussed publicly. But question the very existence of such practices is unreasonable in the situation the world is in nowadays. There are LOT of people in the world today who would want to wipe off the whole Western civilization, if they could... there must be a protection from them.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#112

Post by newman8r »

bertil wrote: post #96
BjoernKW wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory those are different. In practice though there hasn't been a single socialist country that hasn't at least devolved into authoritarianism or even has been so right from the start (Scandinavian Socialism and modern day German Social Market Economy could be considered exceptions but I doubt these can really be considered socialist.). People keep saying: "This isn't true socialism." Well, then true socialism se…

Not sure it’s a fair argument to exclude dozens of the wealthiest countries in the world because they own definition of socialism —that they practice— does not meet your imagined one. The definition is not complicated: have key industrial assets, notably transport infrastructure, owned by public authorities.

if you define success in terms of wealth (which is a decent way to do it for most people). But these 'wealthiest countries' are doing some pretty scary stuff in the world, and on massive scales which threaten the potential for future generations to even inhabit the planet comfortably without massive restrictions and compromises.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#113

Post by blowski »

pearjuice wrote: post #45

Snowden should be put on trial for committing treason. No matter how bad it is what he exposed. He broke the law[0]. What he exposed are policies of the United States by people put in power in a democracy and free country. If you don't want that shit happening in your country, let the people in power know. Go on the streets. Millions of poeple are not happy with what is going on, but literally nothing changed. Sadly,…

I agree with you that he should stand trial. That's what we do in law-based democracies, however justified we consider the individual's actions. The best, but unlikely, outcome is that he is given a fair trial, and a fair sentence if he's found guilty. But there's the rub - there's no way he'll get either a fair trial or sentence (or indeed a pardon). Whistleblowers everywhere would be encouraged if they believed they'd get fair treatment after leaking state secrets.

So we'll continue with what we have. Some people saying he's completely innocent, others saying he's completely guilty, and he himself will probably spend the foreseeable future right where he is.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#114

Post by consto »

akie wrote: post #103
JMCQ87 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're allowed your quota of one medium-impact dissident action per week, just like everyone else. As it helps to keep up maintaining the illusion of democracy and free speech, you are actually doing your country a great service. If you start to do more, however... Consider yourself warned. ^^ In this case, I can reassure you though: Online petition clicktivism has been shown to be very ineffective, so it's only cons…

Depends on where you are. I have friends in Turkey who signed an online petition and (the next day) lost their jobs over it. Some of the other people who signed that petition are not allowed to leave the country anymore, and some are even being detained. Very scary.

May I ask what petition?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#115

Post by iso-8859-1 »

JMCQ87 wrote: post #71
Dolores12 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an US citizen, you don't have to fear, you have freedom of speech.

I hope that was sarcastic. Otherwise it's hilarious, especially in this context.

I hope that was sarcastic.

Otherwise you are implying that the humor value of a comment is determined not solely by you, but partly from the intentions of the author.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#116

Post by pjc50 »

BjoernKW wrote: post #93
paulintrognon wrote: post #64

I believe when you wrote "socialist" you meant "authoritarianist"? Please don't mix-up those two concepts

In theory those are different. In practice though there hasn't been a single socialist country that hasn't at least devolved into authoritarianism or even has been so right from the start (Scandinavian Socialism and modern day German Social Market Economy could be considered exceptions but I doubt these can really be considered socialist.). People keep saying: "This isn't true socialism." Well, then true socialism se…

"Socialist" is too general a descriptor, and has been deliberately ruined by overgeneralisation. The distinction should be between "Social Democrat" and "Communist". The former believe in normal multi-party states with free elections.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#117

Post by captainmuon »

JMCQ87 wrote: post #76
nothis wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what? I don't think that's an unreasonable concern and it's exactly why this situation is so horrible. It's the return cold war communism paranoia. "Of course I'm allowed to do this, but will this get me on some watchlist?" I guess the ethical answer is that, the more people will sign this (think a million?), the less likely it is to be used as some kind of filter. Even though what's one million names in a d…

You're allowed your quota of one medium-impact dissident action per week, just like everyone else. As it helps to keep up maintaining the illusion of democracy and free speech, you are actually doing your country a great service. If you start to do more, however... Consider yourself warned. ^^ In this case, I can reassure you though: Online petition clicktivism has been shown to be very ineffective, so it's only cons…

I "love" how China actually tried to formalize this some time ago. Every citizen would get a citizen score, like our credit ratings, but grading how politically loyal they were. There was quite a bit of outrage on the western internet about this.

The "funny" thing is, our governments are probably doing very similar things (though still to a lesser degree, and secretly). A big difference is that China often doesn't have a sense of tact when it comes to not sounding dystopian, and happiliy uses phrases like "citizen score", "criminal elements" and "reeducation". Also Big-Character posters are still a thing [1], though slightly modernized.

Although, we are getting there. At O'Hare airport in Chicago I remember seeing a poster urging me to "be vigilant", which has a nice ring to it...

[1] http://justinmccandless.com/files/beijingSpirit.jpg "The Beijing Spirit: Patriotism Innovation Inclusiveness Virtue"

Re: Pardon Snowden

#118

Post by atmosx »

captainmuon wrote: post #60

Maybe a naive question, but what would the risk be for me to sign this? I wonder if I (a US citizen) might get trouble the next time at the border? Or get a higher score in some database, that combined with other things might get me into trouble? Increased scrutiny from the IRS (which should have nothing to do with this, but "they" might say hell why not?)? Inability to get security clearances in future? Being target…

About 3 years ago, a story broke up about a three-letter agency requesting from Twitter (subpoena IIRC) the list of handles who were following a particular Swedish Pirate Party politician.

I remember reading the article via twitter and after a while watching a tweet from the politician in question appear in timeline.

I didn't even recall following her, but at some point in time I did. I froze and panicked, my twitter account is eponymous.

What will happen to me when I cross the US border? Hopefully/Probably nothing, but the thought lies in the back of my mind.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#119

Post by felice_landry »

newman8r wrote: post #100

I am for a full pardon. The risks to our privacy are greater now than they have ever been and a lot of people think it will keep us safe. If I knew more about history I'd be tempted to compare it to something like a more insidious version of the cuban missile crisis, but it's probably a bad comparison. Any historians around here - what would you compare it to?

I'm not a historian, but consider that the "medium" if you like, the Internet, all it's awful mudpie history of protocols etc, is ripe for the plucking by both sides.

Do you stand idly by while the hostile ones (whatever that might mean) use it to their advantage, or do you get your government with their huge funds to help in this regard?

The latter, of course. Trouble is when that agency becomes rogue, which it certainly seems like the NSA have, with rubber stamping.

But we still need some form of accountable defense I think. It's just gone horribly wrong.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#120

Post by BjoernKW »

bertil wrote: post #96
BjoernKW wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory those are different. In practice though there hasn't been a single socialist country that hasn't at least devolved into authoritarianism or even has been so right from the start (Scandinavian Socialism and modern day German Social Market Economy could be considered exceptions but I doubt these can really be considered socialist.). People keep saying: "This isn't true socialism." Well, then true socialism se…

Not sure it’s a fair argument to exclude dozens of the wealthiest countries in the world because they own definition of socialism —that they practice— does not meet your imagined one. The definition is not complicated: have key industrial assets, notably transport infrastructure, owned by public authorities.

By that definition France is a socialist country. I suppose you could say that to some extent but France isn't what one usually thinks of when it comes to real-world socialism. I think socialists in particular will argue against that notion.

Even worse though: Most totalitarian countries fit that description, too.

Post reply on HN