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

481–490 of 814 posts

Re: Pardon Snowden

#481

Post by exhilaration »

1024core wrote: post #456
foo4u wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an US citizen, I no longer salute that piece of cloth or sing the national anthem at sports games. I don't even bother standing for it and encourage others to do the same to show our distaste for how our own government treats us. I was disgusted in the 2000's when being against the Iraq war was not only being flaunted unpatriotic but not supporting our troops. That's BS. I support our troops and would rather not h…

> I will sign the petition and if some asshole gives me trouble at the border for it, so what? I'm a US citizen and entitled to re-enter my country. F them. I posted this reply earlier too, but figured I'd respond here also. The US government has, in the past, refused entry to US citizens. They do this not at the border, but at the foreign airport. Say you fly to Germany, and then try to come back. They'll tell the a…

That's exactly right, here's a real-world example:

But the worst cases are those like Long's: when the person is suddenly barred from flying when they are outside of the US, often on the other side of the world. As a practical matter, that government act effectively exiles them from their own country. "Obviously, I can't get to Oklahoma from Qatar if I can't fly," said Long. "Trying to take a boat would take weeks away from work just for the travel alone, and it's not affordable. If I can't fly, then I can't go back home."

- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/05/muslim...

Re: Pardon Snowden

#482

Post by brashrat »

peterkelly wrote: post #347
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…

This is the so-called "chilling effect" that's one of the most worrying implications of mass surveillance on a society... people feel afraid to speak out due to a concern they may be added to a list of some sort, and face negative real-life repercussions due to expressing their free speech. There were a couple of times where I actually called the public contact numbers for NSA & GCHQ regarding particular stories abou…

chilling effects need to be kept in perspective; for example, while I'm completely fearless about telling off the govt whenever I wish, no way I'm going to reveal how I feel about Snowden to the HN community: I'd be ostracized!

Re: Pardon Snowden

#483

Post by icecold12741 »

felice_landry wrote: post #119
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 cert…

That debate will always be at the forefront of security. In the 19th century, when the first professional police departments were established, people were outraged and convinced that the police were there to take away their liberty.

It doesn't excuse all action to improve security, but we do have to occasionally align our security with modern standards. What would happen if we left all cybersecurity (including banks, power systems, etc) to the private sector?

And then, where do we draw the line? Is it okay for the FBI to target people who visit a child pornography site? Most would say yes... People who download The Anarchist's Cookbook? Probably another yes. But what about collecting info on the people who supported that whole ordeal with Clive Bundy? Or people who belong to a non-state sponsored militia? That's where the line starts to gray for many. The point being, it's never cut and dry.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#484

Post by tormeh »

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…

>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.

That does sound very authoritarian, honestly. Maybe that's why there are so many libertarians in the US - it's a reaction to the authoritarianism in American culture.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#485

Post by tomc1985 »

brashrat wrote: post #482
peterkelly wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the so-called "chilling effect" that's one of the most worrying implications of mass surveillance on a society... people feel afraid to speak out due to a concern they may be added to a list of some sort, and face negative real-life repercussions due to expressing their free speech. There were a couple of times where I actually called the public contact numbers for NSA & GCHQ regarding particular stories abou…

chilling effects need to be kept in perspective; for example, while I'm completely fearless about telling off the govt whenever I wish, no way I'm going to reveal how I feel about Snowden to the HN community: I'd be ostracized!

What about a negative opinions? OSTRACIZED! Didn't like someone's show HN? OSTRACIZED! Didn't make your post happy enough? OSTRACIZED! Cuss a bit? OSTRACIZED! Offend the army of apple/react/nodejs/cloud/social fanatics? OSTRACIZED!

Not that it matters, ostracization means losing a few HN epeen points, so meh :)

(In the interest of keeping topicality, one could argue the above are examples of chilling effects in a community)

Re: Pardon Snowden

#486

Post by maxerickson »

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…

Yeah, destruction of evidence and seafood smuggling are just everyday activities.

(those are both real examples from the book...whether there was a great deal of intent in the lobster tail case is disputed, but it was a pattern of shipments involving thousands and thousands of pounds of tails)

Re: Pardon Snowden

#487

Post by justhw »

bisRepetita wrote: post #270

Who are these guys? Registrar is in Panama. The site says "partnership with ACLU and Amnesty International", but I cannot find any links from those sites to pardonsnowden.org Both ACLU and AI have their own petition forms with different letters. https://www.amnesty.org/en/get-involved/take-action/edward-s... https://action.aclu.org/secure/grant_snowden_immunity Wondering if ACLU and AI are a little late to confirm, o…

Ed himself tweeted that it's a collaboration between ACLU, Amnesty and HRW. https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/776090123616288768

So, we're good?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#488

Post by philsnow »

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…

Not enforcing vaccinations leads to loss of herd immunity [0] which means that you (and any children you may have) are more likely to catch whooping cough, typhoid, etc etc.

Therefore by your logic, you should be for mandatory vaccinations. This is a valid and consistent opinion for a libertarian to hold.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

Re: Pardon Snowden

#489

Post by marcosdumay »

Chronic9q wrote: post #219
ionised wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He agreed that targeted surveillance is necessary (I do too), not this indiscriminate 'collect it all' bulk surveillance of entire populations that we have now.

Isn't that what startups do these days? Collect every piece of damn information from each user visiting their site? Log when they hover over a link and all?

Morals aside, startups are after typical behavior. When you do analytics, you normally want to discover things something between 5% to 90% of your users. Most companies even have problem for getting into that 5% limit because it is too small.

Terrorists are a few hundred, spread through the billions of people. Or, on the same kind of numbers, around 0.0000001% of the people the NSA spies on.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#490

Post by verisimilidude »

tdhz77 wrote: post #294

Snowden is a traitor. He gave up diplomatic cables that hurt our alliances all over the world and most of what he released ended up in Osama Bin Ladens hands. I can't name one good thing that has come from his whistleblowing. Perhaps, you didn't read the Patriot Act? It's pretty easy to see this guy basically said hey they are using the Patriot Act... Silly.

Can't tell if you're joking or not. But just in case you're not...

Osama Bin Laden was killed in May 2011. Snowden handed the NSA documents to journalists in May 2013. Needless to say, Bin Laden never saw the Snowden disclosures.

Snowden did not release the diplomatic cables. That was Manning via Wikileaks, and that happened in November 2010. Snowden didn't even dump his documents, he gave them to journalists.

Many good things have come from the Snowden disclosures, among them a much increased awareness of our digital privacy, and important conversations around privacy vs. security in the new century. But if you need concrete examples, the disclosures have also led to reforms like the USA Freedom Act.

If you're serious, please, go die somewhere. If you're trolling, I think you bit off too much here. The density of misinformation, while impressive in its own way, is too much to be believable.

Post reply on HN