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

Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

news.trust.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 417 posts

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#361

Post by sireat »

crdb wrote: post #271
CodeMage wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." -- John Rogers

Responding with an ad hominem - whether at the author of the quote or the poster of it by association - is both an ineffective response (the appeal to emotion signals an inability to argue rationally) and lowers the quality of discussion (by taking it away from the point, into emotional territory). Constant appeals to emotion and resorting to a wide array of fallacies allows for strongmen to build tribes which follow…

The Dr. Ferris talk to Mr. Reardon is one of those quotes that rings so true when you read Rand's work for the first time as a teenager.

Anecdotally I too had this "They Live" sunglasses moment.

You are reading Atlas Shrugged and you think this book is the Truth this is IT. Those other silly teenagers getting into religion or socialism or drugs or music they are so deluded.

https://xkcd.com/610/

This is why the John Rogers quip was particularly apt here.

Again the Rand quote is a good/truthful axiom/premise. The problem comes when someone impressionable treats the whole book as the bible.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#362

Post by forgetsusername »

CodeMage wrote: post #211
dEnigma wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which reminds me of this great passage in Atlas Shrugged : “Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough…

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." -- John Rogers

John Rogers? The guy who wrote Catwoman? Why do you hold his opinion of literature in such high regard?

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#363

Post by Magnets »

mtgx wrote: post #191
cJ0th wrote: post #117

Anyone remembers this? > Barack Obama: NSA is not rifling through ordinary people's emails. US president is confident intelligence services have 'struck appropriate balance', he tells journalists in Berlin edit: link fixed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/19/barack-obama-n...

Yup. So that's a complete lie now (not that I actually believed him when he said it then). When you searching through everyone's emails, then you're invading everyone's privacy.

I guess they are using the same justification as GCHQ; they use tools to scan everything and a human doesn't actually read ("rifle through") the majority of material.

Is it still an invasion of privacy if a machine reads my emails? Google read my emails to check for spam.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#364

Post by maxymoos »

Magnets wrote: post #363
mtgx wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. So that's a complete lie now (not that I actually believed him when he said it then). When you searching through everyone's emails, then you're invading everyone's privacy.

I guess they are using the same justification as GCHQ; they use tools to scan everything and a human doesn't actually read ("rifle through") the majority of material. Is it still an invasion of privacy if a machine reads my emails? Google read my emails to check for spam.

To me, the main difference is that you know about Google's automatic parsing of your emails upfront and it can therefore be a factor in your subscribing/unsubscribing decision.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#365

Post by coldtea »

crdb wrote: post #344
coldtea wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your whole post starts from an assumption on what the parent meant (that he assumed you support Ayn Rand and that he suggested Heinlein specifically to address that) and then proceeds with irrelevant references to various fallacies. First, obviously one can suggest a book that they think "demolishes" Ayn Rand's (or any other author's) views, regardless of whether they think that the person they suggest it to supports…

> one can suggest a book Yes, one can. My complaint here was that it was not relevant to what was being discussed. It's similar to a discussion on the latest Postgres being hijacked by yet another languages war. > In life, as opposed to pure math, we often need, and do, judgement calls based on incomplete data, calls that don't actually follow with 100% logical certainty, but are nevertheless quite clear from the gen…

>This is irrelevant to the discussion, except as an ad hominem.

It is irrelevant to the original theme of the post, but it is quite relevant to the subthread that started with two quotes from and about Rand, and you coming to criticize the poster of the second quote. We're way too into that subthread for it to be irrelevant.

>What is the appropriate tone for responding? I believe I was sufficiently polite and civil, and fair in presenting my position. Please help me improve my communication style by pointing out how this was not the case.

That would be relevant if I had accused you that your tone was bad. What I say is completely different: that your tone made me think that you are a pro-Rand person (concerned with objectivity, overuse of logical fallacies, defensive of Rand, etc).

>It predates the internet.

Yes, but most people one meets online discovered it on the internet, often as part of a whole related culture (skeptics, etc.) and use it as a blunt instrument. The laundry list of fallacies wasn't that popular before the internet anyway, not even in philosophical and logician's discourses.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#366

Post by throwawayReply »

Tepix wrote: post #360
zmanian wrote: post #87

Secret URL for deleting your Yahoo account. https://edit.yahoo.com/config/delete_user

Consider setting up your own mail server. Decentralization is the most effective way of fighting this. Rent a cheap, dedicated server (a VPS provides poor privacy protection), encrypt the root partition and install sovereign ( https://github.com/sovereign/sovereign ).

And (sadly) watch as all your outgoing mail is refused from most mail providers.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#367

Post by 1024core »

adventured wrote: post #307
1024core wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, technically he's right because the NSA isn't rifling through your emails, Yahoo is.

It's pretty obvious you're wrong in that assessment: "The company complied with a classified U.S. government demand, scanning hundreds of millions of Yahoo Mail accounts at the behest of the National Security Agency or FBI, said three former employees and a fourth person apprised of the events." Your theory is that Yahoo scanned hundreds of millions of accounts for the NSA, but the NSA isn't doing / hasn't done anyth…

It was just a flippant remark, but think about it: the story claims that Yahoo greps through emails at NSA's direction. So the NSA isn't grepping through the emails; Yahoo is. Sure, Yahoo then maybe turns around and gives all the results to NSA, which then proceeds to do whatever it wants with it.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#368

Post by yAnonymous »

DubiousPusher wrote: post #11

I think the attitude here that most tech companies are rolling over and just complying without a single ethical consideration is misplaced. The government has been doing an excellent job of basically extorting these companies into compliance. They threaten the full weight of the US government's wraith and then tie every order up with classifications and gag orders. You aren't legally allowed to talk to other companie…

>You can't take your case to the public without being held in contempt.

1. Report the letter stolen.

2. Publish it anonymously from a public hotspot with a throwaway phone.

It's not even particularly risky.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#369

Post by arca_vorago »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #177
tw04 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they've already "made an example" of the only company to truly stand in their way. Look at Qwest - you talk to the average citizen and their takeaway was that justice was served | A corrupt CEO ran the company into the ground and went to prison. Hurrah! Don't pay attention to the fact he denied installing what he considered unconstitutional wire taps for the NSA resulting in the government pulling almost a bill…

The Joseph Nacchio story is very complicated and not the best example of the point you are making, sadly. Qwest was undeniably naughty with the books on his watch and they had a case. I agree it sucks, just saying he's not the best example.

Thats the entire point he is making. Blackmail and other forms of influence and control are their modus operandi, they used knowledge of his illegality (which they had most likely got unconstitutionally) to try to bend him their way, and the prosecution was vengeance for defiance.

If anyone wants to have a serious discussion of the control structure, lets start with Milners Kindergarten and the round table groups. Even the NSA has a shadowboss.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#370

Post by Inlinked »

cJ0th wrote: post #117

Anyone remembers this? > Barack Obama: NSA is not rifling through ordinary people's emails. US president is confident intelligence services have 'struck appropriate balance', he tells journalists in Berlin edit: link fixed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/19/barack-obama-n...

The way I read this story the NSA is really not rifling through ordinary people's email. They are specifically looking for a certain string. It is highly unlikely that ordinary people's emails contain this string.

A story like https://www.wired.com/2010/05/kuok/ is a relevant case here.

> Using a Yahoo e-mail address and a different name, Kuok also allegedly contacted an Arizona company this year that had posted on eBay a KG-175 TACLANE — an NSA designed encryption device used to communicate with classified military computer networks, such as the Defense Department’s SIPRNet.

> Kuok repeatedly expressed fears that he might be dealing with an NSA, CIA or FBI agent, but continued to negotiate with the undercover officer, even cautioning him to avoid referencing the items by model number in e-mail, because “your country has this system to analyze” e-mail for keywords.

What if the string was something like "KG-175 TACLANE"? How many ordinary people would have this string in an e-mail? What is wrong with getting a warrant to read through e-mails containing such a string?

This news is definitely news to me. It is just not shocking or unexpected or contrary to what Barack Obama has been saying.

Post reply on HN