41–50 of 225 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not news to me. But it does seem like most people don't care. Or don't care enough. However, what could they do, even if they cared enough?
If people care enough, they can bring down governments... And in much worse conditions...
Wikipedia states that circa.com is a recently acquired property of the Sinclair Broadcast Group, who is known for mandating stations to carry canned editorials as news [0]. Google also shows this report as surfacing ~month ago [1]. I agree that what the government did is insane, but this is a pretty poor source. [0]: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/08/527462015/... [1]: https://encrypted.google.com/sea…
I don't have time to track down if she has anything on circa's issues specifically, but:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/03/17/ron-wydens-complaints-...
https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/05/03/i-con-the-record-trans...
https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/05/02/i-con-the-record-trans...
... etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should the people in power go to prison for doing illegal stuff just because they got caught? If they don't imprison themsleves, who's going to force them? What do they have to lose by not doing so themselves? These are the simple questions (with relatively simple answers) you need to ask. If they have nothing to lose, then why do you expect them to follow the law? Until you give them something to lose, why shoul…
You're exactly describing the reason why there is checks and balances. "People in power" is supposed to be a heterogenous group with different interests and formal functions. Your post suggests that it doesn't work properly in your country anymore. I wonder where exactly one could pinpoint the weak spots and systemic issues.
Your post seems to suggest that the default is it working, is that really true? Does it actually work anywhere?
I think the most dangerous thing is that what Snowden predicted actually happened by now. After all the revelations, nobody is interested anymore. There's this general fatigue and powerlessness that leads to a feeling of "well, yeah, everbody knows by now... what's the news here?" - even for me as a security expert and privacy proponent. The real danger is nobody cares anymore, as this enables all further constitutio…
I don't feel powerless. Balmer is bankrolling transparency and Project Sunshine is trying to increase our ability to interact with the federal government. Private industry has created databases like PolicyGuru dot net to help at the local level. Things are going to improve even if it takes a generation to get out the swamp monsters.
I think the most dangerous thing is that what Snowden predicted actually happened by now. After all the revelations, nobody is interested anymore. There's this general fatigue and powerlessness that leads to a feeling of "well, yeah, everbody knows by now... what's the news here?" - even for me as a security expert and privacy proponent. The real danger is nobody cares anymore, as this enables all further constitutio…
What do I do, as someone who cares? No, seriously. Should I throw a bit more money at the EFF? Start my own political party, or enter an existing one and try to steer it in my direction? Try to get employed by one of these organizations and then promote a better understanding of their mission internally? Move to another country where people care more (which?) Identifying the problem is a good first step, but what can…
Emphatically, yes. They're the ones challenging the NSA in court.
Does it solve every problem? Of course not. Is it part of the solution? As long as the judicial branch continues to function correctly overall, yes. Hell yes.
I think the most dangerous thing is that what Snowden predicted actually happened by now. After all the revelations, nobody is interested anymore. There's this general fatigue and powerlessness that leads to a feeling of "well, yeah, everbody knows by now... what's the news here?" - even for me as a security expert and privacy proponent. The real danger is nobody cares anymore, as this enables all further constitutio…
I care, but I don't have any faith in the factual truthfulness of the american government, the american media, or any public figure really. Not to single out america, it's just where I live. I'd be surprised if it were different anywhere else. It seems like it's just the way of things. Start out shiny, and slowly erode to decrepitude, to be pushed aside by the new shiny.
I many countries, you don't even get that and couldn't start your own news source with your preferred agenda even if you had the resources. Don't buy into the "we might as well live in ". My wife was born in one, the difference is a factor in my daily life.
So who's going to prison over these "illegal searches"? Oh, let me guess - nobody, because intelligence agencies seem to always be above the law?
Intelligence agencies often have judge Dredd mentality- "I never broke the law, I am the Law!"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should the people in power go to prison for doing illegal stuff just because they got caught? If they don't imprison themsleves, who's going to force them? What do they have to lose by not doing so themselves? These are the simple questions (with relatively simple answers) you need to ask. If they have nothing to lose, then why do you expect them to follow the law? Until you give them something to lose, why shoul…
You're exactly describing the reason why there is checks and balances. "People in power" is supposed to be a heterogenous group with different interests and formal functions. Your post suggests that it doesn't work properly in your country anymore. I wonder where exactly one could pinpoint the weak spots and systemic issues.
There's also the issue that the executive has all the real power. The courts and congress can send strongly worded letters, the executive has all the guns. This hasn't yet become a direct problem in the US, but it has in many other countries.
I think the most dangerous thing is that what Snowden predicted actually happened by now. After all the revelations, nobody is interested anymore. There's this general fatigue and powerlessness that leads to a feeling of "well, yeah, everbody knows by now... what's the news here?" - even for me as a security expert and privacy proponent. The real danger is nobody cares anymore, as this enables all further constitutio…
Don't you think that comments like this one reinforce the subjectively perceived feeling of powerlessness? Who are you benefiting by posting this? (I'm not saying this is the case here, but there are those people who want us to actually feel powerless, because it then translates into actual powerlessness.) I'm sure you can think of more constructive ways of commenting.
Your comment, on the other hand, reads a lot like arguing the power of positive thinking to deal with a broken leg. If we're going to talk about relative constructiveness of comment content, that seems to me like a good place to start!
This is a big problem, and it's frightening. The US government, in the extent to which it's leveraged a technologically advantageous position to develop its insight into the behavior of people within the US and without, has achieved a scale and a power unprecedented in recorded human history. It can destroy people, within the US and without, on a whim - even by accident! And never even notice or care, in the large, that it has done so. This is legitimately scary, and to feel a sense of powerlessness, in response to the perception of oneself alone before such power and with no effective recourse or means of defense, is in every sense a rational response.
I think it's worthy of people to express such perspectives, the better that others might say "Hey, I feel the same way. You're not alone." - or "I felt the same way at first, and here's what I'm doing to change that." - or say nothing at all, but at least realize that they are indeed not alone in recognizing the existence and scope of the problem, and need not feel quite so isolated in that recognition.
You seem instead to argue that these very rational perceptions be suppressed, or at least concealed in the public sphere, for fear that they'll inspire others to see the world likewise. Compared to the vast and overwhelming scope of the problem in which these perceptions originate, this seems like a rather petty cavil with which to castigate one's fellows.
Perhaps I have misapprehended you in some way, and you'll address the fashion in which I have done so. If I have not, then perhaps you'll explain your reasoning in sufficiently lucid fashion to reduce my frank bewilderment at the idea that a comment such as yours, in a thread such as this, could in any way be considered "constructive", rather than the converse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The real danger is nobody cares anymore, as this enables all further constitution violations and hollowing of citizen protection worldwide. The upside is that a society that doesn't care, eventually gets what it deserves.
That's an upside?