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

371–380 of 814 posts

Re: Pardon Snowden

#371

Post by tptacek »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #326
tzs wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"My position with Booz Allen Hamilton granted me access to lists of machines all over the world the NSA hacked. That is why I accepted that position about three months ago." "If I have time to go through this information, I would like to make it available to journalists in each country to make their own assessment, independent of my bias, as to whether or not the knowledge of US network operations against their peopl…

That says he accepted because he wanted access. Not because he wanted to leak the data. There are plenty of legitimate reasons why someone would find it interesting or fulfilling work to get access to machines on such a big scale. It's prestigious if nothing else. It's possible he meant for the purpose of leaking data, but it's wrong to assert it only due to your assumptions.

The second graf in the quote in the comment you are replying to refutes your comment.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#372

Post by dclowd9901 »

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…

I tend to doubt your fear is to have your "terrorism points" incremented in some database, but rather the cold and distant nature of the federal government makes it nearly impossible to reason through how you're _not_ a terrorist (assuming you're not). There's no organized mechanism by which you can disprove your terrorism affiliations. Otherwise, being put in a database would be as much an issue as changing the wrong address on your insurance policy.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#373

Post by daveloyall »

Just being nosy... here's the source of the page (post render) piped through sed 's/^[ \t]?//;s/>\n
    
    
    
    
    
     EDIT: I shuffled my valid external IP address...
...So, AcluOptIn is being forced to false?

I guess we can give them the benefit of the doubt and presume that my http client information is being saved to prevent automated form submissions?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#374

Post by whamlastxmas »

wildmusings wrote: post #359
whamlastxmas wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty shitty to throw the term "tinfoil hat" in an argument, especially so when discussing Snowden. It's also pretty silly to make the assumption that there hasn't been some sort of secret equivalent of conviction given everything we've learned about how opaque our government is.

You're simply wrong. FISA courts exist because Congress created them and gave them jurisdiction. There is no such thing as a secret conviction under US law. There is no such thing as a secret criminal trial, where the accused has no opportunity to defend themselves, under US law. Does not exist period.

Just like there's no such thing as domestic mass surveillance under US law? And who said he was tried in our criminal court system? If it's a matter of "national security" all due process flies out the window.

My point is there is literally no way for you to know and claiming people are wrong and dismissing them with "tin foil" arguments is shitty.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#375

Post by dsacco »

lettergram wrote: post #229
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…

By logging into "hacker news" regularly, mentioning the NSA (and probably other key terms: data collection, US citizen) I'm sure you are already on a list.

> By logging into "hacker news" regularly, mentioning the NSA (and probably other key terms: data collection, US citizen) I'm sure you are already on a list.

If the NSA really does maintain these macabre "lists", it's kind of hard to believe they'd be so unsophisticated as to put you on one for visiting a website called "Hacker News" that has nothing to do with the definition of "hacking" that they care about.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#376

Post by mangeletti »

paulintrognon wrote: post #64

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

If socialism isn't authoritarian, that means that people can opt out of social benefits, own their own property and things, and not have to pay taxes to cover others' social benefits, right? Without going to jail, right?

If not, then I guess we're talking about some form of authoritarianism.

To talk about "socialism" in a sense that doesn't break the non-aggression principle (necessary for non-authoritarianism), you need to think of volunteer communes. IOW, use pooled money (just think of it as a necessary evil) to buy 1,000 acres, build a master-planned community, and offer residency to people who pitched in to buy it, and then use socialism as the guiding ideology within that commune. If it doesn't work and people want to leave, they can leave.

That's a non-authoritarianism version of socialism. If you think there are others that exist in practice, I implore you to look into every true socialist country in history, including the currently failing state of Venezuela, wherefrom there is a mass exodus underway.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#377

Post by [deleted] »

mhurron wrote: post #209
draugadrotten wrote: post #205

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.

[deleted]

Re: Pardon Snowden

#378

Post by krschultz »

clarkmoody wrote: post #344
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…

> A mode of thought I would expect in socialist countries, not the US... The United States government has done an excellent bit of propaganda to convince the bulk of the public that they are the most free people on earth. We salute the flag and sing the national anthem at games. We have the presidents' pictures on the walls of our classrooms. We chant "USA" at political rallies. But the government of the United State…

Which country would you suggest is the most free today? Not trolling, just wondering if I was going to move somewhere else, where would I go?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#380

Post by hueving »

lettergram wrote: post #328
vcarl wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gary Johnson wants to get rid of the Department of Education[0] and is against mandatory vaccinations[1]. [0]: https://www.johnsonweld.com/education [1]: https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440

I'm not going to get into a flame war, but pretty much everything related to libertarians are freedom of choice. I strongly agree that mandatory vaccinations on a national level should not be required. As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. That is to say, I don't think I should, or society should pressure our beliefs on others. I would vaccinate my own children because it m…

People skipping vaccines does affect you. http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/
Post reply on HN