Pardon Snowden • Hacker News Board

Re: Pardon Snowden

#641

Post by nemof » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:26 PM UTC

convolvatron wrote: post #530

nemof wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "funny" thing is, our governments are probably doing very similar things perhaps in capital driven liberal countries it's called Credit Ratings - rather than your worth being judged through your loyalty, it's judged through your willingness to spend and accrue debt. not trying to sound bleak and cynical, but just a thought.

why so tentative? i pay my limited bills on time, i have taken on debt twice and paid it off as soon as possible, living basically within my means, and because of this my credit score is terrible. i can't get a phone contract, a mortgage is out of the question. i automatically fall to the bottom of the list when trying to rent an apartment. don't know what went on at the places i applied to for employment that reques…

have you requested your credit history? you should be able to access that for free and that might give you some insight.

https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0155-free-credit-repor...

and yeah, it's fucking awful and i detest the whole thing.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#642

Post by kyledrake » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:28 PM UTC

kyledrake wrote: post #475

floatrock wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot on. The top comment in this thread is paranoia about whether this site is a hostile name collection honeypot (I think if it is, so is commenting on this thread, hello nsa). One way of combatting such paranoia is to establish trust. This site accepts donations, but nowhere does it say WHO is running it. It has neat ACLU, Amnesty International, and HRW logos at the bottom, but anyone can put graphics on a page. It…

I just asked a few people on the "supporters" list who said they had "nothing to do with it", after trying to figure out more about it's core and see if I could get added to the list myself (my opinions on the NSA dragnet crap are well documented, I do not live in fear of them: http://blog.neocities.org/making-the-web-fun-again.html ). I'm starting to think they just got a list of people they believed might support t…

Update: This has indeed been validated by multiple sources to me as a real thing. The two people I asked about this told me they forgot that they signed up for it (sigh). How's your morning going?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#643

Post by mixmastamyk » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:34 PM UTC

strictnein wrote: post #607

mixmastamyk wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch the Frontline special "The US of Secrets," to find out what happens to those who complained loudly enough.

Yes, I'll watch a multipart documentary to try and suss out the point you want me to learn. Snowden complained loudly about a test answer. That's it.

You're very sure for someone who doesn't appear to have done much research on the subject.

The point in that riveting doc was simple, those that complained too loudly lost everything, thankfully not their lives.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#644

Post by metaphorm » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:36 PM UTC

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...

what does socialism have to do with this? maybe you meant to say "a mode of thought I would expect in totalitarian police states..."

it's true that some totalitarian police states have, nominally if not really in practice, also been socialist. however, there have been just as many fascist, capitalist, monarchist, and theocratic totalitarian police states as well.

so I ask again...what does socialism have to do with this?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#645

Post by lettergram » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:38 PM UTC

allendoerfer wrote: post #352

lettergram wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I really like the idea of the small state. Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Children have rights and when parents do not protect these rights, the state has to. There is a hierarchy of rights. The right of the child to be healthy is greater than the right of the parent to ignore scientific evidence.

I strongly agree with that in general, I just think it might be enforced differently. For example, you lose social security benefits if you do heroine, but heroine isn't illegal.

In the case of children I agree for like polio, but perhaps not flu. Either way it's hard to judge and the major point of libertarians is that the state should decide. For example, a west Nile vaccine makes sense for almost everywhere. Besides the bay area which has no mosquitos.

I'm sure Gary Johnson would agree to some extent, and he has already changed his mind when presented with evidence.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#646

Post by metaphorm » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:46 PM UTC

Inlinked wrote: post #512

To pardon Snowden seems like a very popular opinion around here. Can anyone help me change my opinion on this matter? The way I currently see it: - Snowden indiscriminately hovered up so many documents, it was impossible to vet all of them. - The vast majority of these documents do not constitute whistleblowing, but are standard operating procedure for the NSA. The US expects the NSA to do this. - Leaking standard-op…

> What's missing for me?

facts. you mis-stated several things about the story. I don't have time to do your research for you. there's a lot about it on the internet already. begin by educating yourself about the facts and then make your judgments.

> high-school diploma Snowden.

vicious cheap shot and ad hominem. why did you say that? do you only respect people with piece of paper signed by a university dean?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#647

Post by zeveb » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:47 PM UTC

aidenn0 wrote: post #467

jokoon wrote: post #267

I'm still genuinely curious about what the intelligence community thinks of him, if it's bad, what are the arguments against him. I've heard Mike Baker on the Joe Rogan experience say that he did not trust Snowden one bit. In the intelligence world, it's common to be very cautions about leaks since foreign actors like Russia can really benefit politically from such scandal. It can be difficult to really know all the…

From what I've gathered, the intelligence community thinks bad things about him; their view is "fix it from the inside." Public leaks can be incredibly damaging to our operational advantages against various adversaries, and it's often non-obvious which data will be most helpful to them. The main reason I stand behind him is the matter of the director of the NSA lying to congress under oath. We don't even have the ill…

> The main reason I stand behind him is the matter of the director of the NSA lying to congress under oath.

Did he? Everything I've read is that he used true words, but didn't explain what those true words actually meant.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#648

Post by newman8r » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:48 PM UTC

icecold12741 wrote: post #483

felice_landry wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

should you be on a list just for mentioning the anarchist cookbook? Personally I think being targeted for being curious what the anarchist cookbook is is a bit much - I think every other high schooler in my generation downloaded the thing for kicks - most of it is utter bullshit anyway. But yeah - clearly most people have their own definition of when it's justifiable to spy on people vs what's not so it does create difficulties.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#649

Post by ArkyBeagle » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:50 PM UTC

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #388

clarkmoody wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Noam Chomsky talks a lot about "Manufacturing Consent" (he wrote a book with this title). He says that in a democratic society you can't use force to control people, so you have to control them by controlling attitudes an opinions instead. It works well, and the people of the United States are heavily controlled by the elite, who in this case are the corporations and the media companies they control. https://www.yout…

"The elites" are sure changed out a lot.

It's worthwhile thinking of advertising as a persuasion technology ( because that's what it is by definition ) and adjusting your expectations accordingly. A wise man once told me "If yer at a poker game and you don't know who the sucker is, you're it." Or, if you prefer, "Learn or be sold to."

Re: Pardon Snowden

#650

Post by zeveb » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 7:51 PM UTC

colemickens wrote: post #498

kpwagner wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My conservative friends, not in the intelligence community, really don't like him. They try to be civil, but I can almost hear them hiss when I mention "Snowden". It's odd to me. They don't mind digital surveillance at all. They think it's good if it makes everyone safer. Throwing in my two cents, what interests me on the Snowden topic, is his character. While I'm glad Snowden took the initiative and risk, I don't be…

I really wish I could understand the people that are: 1. "patriotic" but don't respect those who stand up for ideals in the Constitution 2. "anti-government" or "anti-authority" but don't respect those who stand up to challenge the blind power grabs by the government and say things like "fix it from within" (when they would never, ever say the same thing about the IRS, for example) 3. "libertarian" but again, don't a…

> 1. "patriotic" but don't respect those who stand up for ideals in the Constitution

Perhaps we think that we are standing up for those ideals? Perhaps we believe that the Constitution actually does set up a government and grant it certain powers, and that it's perfectly constitutional for that government to use those powers?

> 2. "anti-government" or "anti-authority" but don't respect those who stand up to challenge the blind power grabs by the government and say things like "fix it from within" (when they would never, ever say the same thing about the IRS, for example)

Because national security is an issue. You simply don't reveal your military strengths and weaknesses to potential adversaries; that's like going into a dodgy bar and announcing, 'BTW, in case of a fight, I have a bruised right rib.'

> 3. "libertarian" but again, don't actually seem to care about liberties other than the Second Amendmend and finding ways to defund public services so they can pay less taxes.

I care deeply about my liberties. I just don't believe that anything Snowden alleges constitutes an infringement upon those liberties.