Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email • Hacker News Board

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#21

Post by protomyth » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 4:16 PM UTC

RevRal wrote: post #18

protomyth wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people will protest what they know about. Regardless of your opinion on the people taking part in the tea party protests, there are a lot of people taking time off work or away from other activities to go to rallies. The economy is the front and center issues right now, and I really don't know what has to happen for online privacy to get a stage. I am more concerned about the organizations that were so vocal…

Some technical understanding of this issue is prerequisite to understanding how the negative consequences outweigh the positive. Most of the tea-bagging protesters are protesting stuff that is way over their head, but they don't need a good technical understanding of since the issues are dumbed down to terms which fit their competence. I'm afraid this issue has been dumbed down as well. "If you have nothing to hide,…

I really don't believe anything anybody says when they use phrases like "tea-bagging", "tree hugger",or "pinko". I have lived in rural areas most of my life, and I don't think any of the current discussion is over these people's heads. I think it is a comfortable way of dismissing and diminishing people. It makes you feel superior. This has happened since the beginning of the country (ignorant colonists) through the ages (anti-war protestors, suffrage).

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#22

Post by btilly » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 4:18 PM UTC

What is the real difference between this and what China was trying to do to gmail? The government wants to get access to private emails of people they don't like without having to demonstrate real evidence that the person has done anything wrong.

The biggest difference to my eyes is that the one targets "human rights activists who would like to bring down the government" while the other targets "terrorists".

Yeah, yeah. There is the whole "we're just going to take the emails". However China only went down that route after Western companies got leery of handing emails over due to the negative publicity that was incurred when Yahoo did so a few years back.

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#23

Post by protomyth » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 4:19 PM UTC

roc wrote: post #14

protomyth wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people will protest what they know about. Regardless of your opinion on the people taking part in the tea party protests, there are a lot of people taking time off work or away from other activities to go to rallies. The economy is the front and center issues right now, and I really don't know what has to happen for online privacy to get a stage. I am more concerned about the organizations that were so vocal…

> " I am more concerned about the organizations that were so vocal during the last administration, since they seem to be out to lunch now. " Which organizations and how has their message or activity changed? Last I checked the EFF and ACLU were rolling right along with their press releases, briefs and lawsuits. > " I really don't know what has to happen for online privacy to get a stage " How about this? Why is this…

The press is my biggest concern.

"Why is this not enough?" - this is a little higher Maslow's hierarchy then worries about jobs. Plus, the fourth estate has totally failed the people by not going after this. I am still amazed with a 24-hour news cycle how little is covered.

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#24

Post by protomyth » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 4:22 PM UTC

CWuestefeld wrote: post #13

I can't help but notice the irony in the current top of the HN current story page. 2. Obama administration wants warrantless access rights to most US email (cnet.com) 3. Thousands of webcam images have been found in the school district being sued (philly.com) It's pretty clear to me that even the most well-intentioned government powers eventually wind up being used in the most sinister and disturbing ways. Edit: for…

The webcam story blowing up is probably a good answer to roc's question about "Why is this not enough?". If they find something that sends some rage into the community, then I would expect this to bubble up again.

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#25

Post by RevRal » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 4:30 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #21

RevRal wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some technical understanding of this issue is prerequisite to understanding how the negative consequences outweigh the positive. Most of the tea-bagging protesters are protesting stuff that is way over their head, but they don't need a good technical understanding of since the issues are dumbed down to terms which fit their competence. I'm afraid this issue has been dumbed down as well. "If you have nothing to hide,…

I really don't believe anything anybody says when they use phrases like "tea-bagging", "tree hugger",or "pinko". I have lived in rural areas most of my life, and I don't think any of the current discussion is over these people's heads. I think it is a comfortable way of dismissing and diminishing people. It makes you feel superior. This has happened since the beginning of the country (ignorant colonists) through the…

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Just to be clear I wasn't actually disagreeing with you. Just adding to what you said.

So you don't like the phrase "tea-bagging" and you don't like someone seemingly decreasing a group of people's relative value. I'm on your side.

Saying "tea-bagging" was lazy. Forgive me. As for the second cause for offense (perhaps too strong a word), well someone has to be qualified to make decisions. That's why we're a republic and not a democracy, because a mob (a group of people) can be ignorant.

And keep in mind that I was talking about technical understanding, not intelligence.

Anyway, I don't really have time for this right now, which is part of the reason I wasn't too careful choosing my words before. And this post will probably turn out to be not-so-fleshed out too, which I don't really care about right now.

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#26

Post by yummyfajitas » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 4:31 PM UTC

ytilibitapmoc wrote: post #2

If only the silence meant that people were sharpening their pitchforks. Unfortunately, this is the USA -- we would rather die by a thousand paper-cuts than stand up and say "No!"...

Obama selected Joe "I wrote the Patriot Act" Biden as his VP. This is the same Joe Biden who tried to ban Turing machines because they could be used to encrypt files that the government would be unable to crack.

Plenty of people knew this, but voted for Obama anyway.

For many people, "the government is violating privacy rights" is not a genuine policy position. It's just a club to beat their political opponents with.

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#27

Post by kunley » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 4:54 PM UTC

ytilibitapmoc wrote: post #2

If only the silence meant that people were sharpening their pitchforks. Unfortunately, this is the USA -- we would rather die by a thousand paper-cuts than stand up and say "No!"...

On the contrary, living in Europe I see you in the US as a great example of society which dares to stand up and say "No!". By comparison, you are exceptionally well-educated, conscious and actively taking care of your rights.

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#28

Post by jdrock » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 5:01 PM UTC

"For its part, the Justice Department has taken a legalistic approach: a 17-page brief it filed last month acknowledges that federal law requires search warrants for messages in "electronic storage" that are less than 181 days old. But, Assistant U.S. Attorney Pegeen Rhyne writes in a government brief, the Yahoo Mail messages don't meet that definition.

"Previously opened e-mail is not in 'electronic storage,'" Rhyne wrote in a motion filed last month"

Am I missing something here? How is web-based email not in electronic storage? Where is it then?

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#29

Post by weaksauce » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 5:02 PM UTC

roc wrote: post #12

ytilibitapmoc wrote: post #2

If only the silence meant that people were sharpening their pitchforks. Unfortunately, this is the USA -- we would rather die by a thousand paper-cuts than stand up and say "No!"...

Particularly when those cuts are delivered by people wrapped in the flag, promising safety. It seems we have healthier debate over the government's ability to pass blanket public-space no-smoking laws, than the executive's new-found legal ability to ignore the constitution, the judicial and the legislative at its whim. You can get tens of thousands to protest the deficit, or health care reform, or gay rights - but th…

It's the whole "I'm not doing anything wrong, why should I care if they are watching me" standpoint that most people have. The problem of course is that the people watching you are the ones who decide what's wrong. Of course there is the famous other quote: "If I have nothing to hide then why do you need to watch me?" or something like that.

Re: Obama administration wanted warrantless access rights to most US email

#30

Post by protomyth » Fri, Apr 16, 2010, 5:24 PM UTC

RevRal wrote: post #25

protomyth wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't believe anything anybody says when they use phrases like "tea-bagging", "tree hugger",or "pinko". I have lived in rural areas most of my life, and I don't think any of the current discussion is over these people's heads. I think it is a comfortable way of dismissing and diminishing people. It makes you feel superior. This has happened since the beginning of the country (ignorant colonists) through the…

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Just to be clear I wasn't actually disagreeing with you. Just adding to what you said. So you don't like the phrase "tea-bagging" and you don't like someone seemingly decreasing a group of people's relative value. I'm on your side. Saying "tea-bagging" was lazy. Forgive me. As for the second cause for offense (perhaps too strong a word), well someone has to be qualified to make decisio…

I tend to get a little touchy about this type of "word" stuff.... Your right, mobs are often ignorant, but some of the key moments in our history of civil rights were described by one side as mobs.

I am not sure technical understanding is really the necessary item. I think it comes down to understanding the implications on your daily life. I know I get caught up in explaining the technical workings of things, but the best explanations to a general audience are almost always the little stories about what this will do in real life (tech example: technical specifications vs an Apple product introduction).

I guess I am in "the technical understanding makes it much easier to see all the implications, but I think understanding just the implications is good enough" camp. I am not sure this is a good thing, but with all the stuff in life, it might have to do.

Taking an example, I think the whole school webcam spying story is ripe for this type of thing. Really, I think the technical understanding is well above the heads of most people (including some tech writers I see). But, the implications won't be lost on any father of a teenage daughter. I expect that with our current media's prejudice towards the juicy, if the student who was suspended at the start of this was female and not male, well...