221–230 of 814 posts
Why would the Russian connected Trump hunt down a Russian spy?
/s ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about comparing it to the war on drugs over the last 100 years? is the war on privacy taking a similar path? Starts out using racism by claiming we need to restrict privacy (drugs) to prevent muslims (hispanics) from terrorizing us. Next it's associated with sexual deviants (reefer madness), and anyone who opposes it must be one of them. Then people start to realize that privacy isn't just an ideal, but it's a ph…
Lots of crazy shit has been walked back over the years, and I assume it felt very doom-y at the time. That said, I don't see this being walked back. Snowden outed the US Government as ever conspiracy theorist's worst nightmare minus lizard people, and the country kinda shrugged.
Not even close.
For one, many non-crackpots (IT/infosec professionals and academics) strongly suspected NSA possessed capabilities similar to these and were probably exploiting them for many years before Snowden. Most details weren't known, but many people were not remotely surprised by the revelations.
Actual conspiracy theorists tend to believe far more ridiculous scandals. Most of them believe mass homicides are orchestrated by governments to achieve political goals (Bush destroyed WTC to invade Afghanistan and Iraq; Obama murdered Sandy Hook children to pass stricter gun control legislation). If any conspiracy like that were ever proven in the same way NSA surveillance was, the shitstorm would (justifiably) be 1000x worse.
But it is true that history almost definitely will not treat NSA's current actions kindly. It's only a matter of how far away we are from that time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of the 3 possibilities for granting pardon (Obama, Clinton and Trump), the only real chance for Snowden is Obama.
> Of the 3 possibilities for granting pardon (Obama, Clinton and Trump), the only real chance for Snowden is Obama. Yep. I'd put it as zero with Clinton, non-zero but statistically insignificant with Trump, and 25% with Obama.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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". Clintons "basket of deplorables" is a reminder that this sense of tact could change after the election.
Shit slinging during an election is hardly new. And talking shit about the other side is hardly an indicator of some massive policy change.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of the 3 possibilities for granting pardon (Obama, Clinton and Trump), the only real chance for Snowden is Obama.
> Of the 3 possibilities for granting pardon (Obama, Clinton and Trump), the only real chance for Snowden is Obama. Yep. I'd put it as zero with Clinton, non-zero but statistically insignificant with Trump, and 25% with Obama.
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…
I signed it and to be honest I'm not the biggest fan of Snowden but think he deserves an opportunity for pardon. I'm honestly not the slightest bit afraid of retaliation, and if I was targeted it would be evidence in favor of Snowden's cause. I don't understand how an American citizen could be afraid of exercising their free speech rights -- if they are violated, then one can vocally draw attention to their situation…
Because some random American has no practical recourse in such an event.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Okay, not to break up the tinfoil hat party here, but you're not going to get dragged off to US prison for following Birgitta Jónsdóttir (Icelandic, not Swedish) on Twitter.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2093796/Emily-Buntin...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/28/us-custom...
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Descriptive vs normative statements. Surprisingly difficult for people to differentiate between the two.
If you look at my comment, it even was normative, but the other way round. I called the situation a "problem".