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

Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 147 posts

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#41

Post by Teever »

andy_ppp wrote: post #37
fspm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Primary reason that I don't buy into elaborate conspiracy theories right here.

Also, I think watching the Trump presidency be leaked against en mass goes some way to showing how difficult it is to keep anything nefarious hidden.

This ignores the fact that we live in a time like no other where there is nearly ubiquitous and instantaneous digital communication infrastructure available in many regions which is accessible to all but the poorest of citizens.

It is very possible that epic conspiracies were easier to complete in the past as the ability to leak and disseminate information to a wide audience was far more difficult.

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#43

Post by jcranmer »

harry8 wrote: post #30
abnry wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He makes a case but two things: (1) Weiner obviously has an axe to grind in his polemic, and (2) we hear much more about the CIA's failures than its successes. But definitely during the cold war the russians smoked us in espionage.

Pick the team that finishes last in any sporting tournament and you hear more about their failures than their successes. The usual response is "Well what successes?" So it would seem to be with the CIA. The USA is hugely and massively successful and the CIA hides its disaster laden, failure after failure after horrendous outcome in secrecy. What success did the CIA have, ever? List their failures is so easy, I'll sta…

> What success did the CIA have, ever?

* Operation Ivy Bells (joint with USN and NSA, according to Wikipedia)

* Stuxnet, possibly (unclear who was responsible for it, although it's generally thought to be joint US-Israeli effort)

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#44

Post by arwhatever »

calinet6 wrote: post #21

The older I get, the more I realize: pretty much every organization everywhere is highly flawed in some (usually many) ways. This has been an extremely useful observation in my career and life, and I have found exactly zero exceptions.

The entire premise of The Wire, according to Wikipedia.

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#45

Post by mistermann »

fspm wrote: post #27
calinet6 wrote: post #21

The older I get, the more I realize: pretty much every organization everywhere is highly flawed in some (usually many) ways. This has been an extremely useful observation in my career and life, and I have found exactly zero exceptions.

Primary reason that I don't buy into elaborate conspiracy theories right here.

Snowden's leaks didn't reveal somewhat of a conspiracy? Was that behavior not both secret and unconstitutional?

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#46

Post by mistermann »

jcranmer wrote: post #43
harry8 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pick the team that finishes last in any sporting tournament and you hear more about their failures than their successes. The usual response is "Well what successes?" So it would seem to be with the CIA. The USA is hugely and massively successful and the CIA hides its disaster laden, failure after failure after horrendous outcome in secrecy. What success did the CIA have, ever? List their failures is so easy, I'll sta…

> What success did the CIA have, ever? * Operation Ivy Bells (joint with USN and NSA, according to Wikipedia) * Stuxnet, possibly (unclear who was responsible for it, although it's generally thought to be joint US-Israeli effort)

The ones we've never heard about, which would be the highest form of success?

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#47

Post by kwhitefoot »

rl3 wrote: post #11
boznz wrote: post #3

I worked as a technician for GCHQ twenty years ago and heard some good stories in the London Office at Palmer Street (loose lips guys!) it was so obvious that wearing the right tie or being a Freemason would get you further than any degree in this circle. But lets face it, it's the same at the top levels of all civil service they are all really just job clubs for people with Latin and History degrees.

> ... or being a Freemason would get you further than any degree in this circle. That's rather disturbing. This is why storing everything on everyone is a terrible idea. Insiders with loyalties that may lie with a particular Old Boys' club, with access to the most intimate details of people's lives. Strict rules with regard to access control are meaningless if the people abusing the system are either sufficiently hig…

> This is why storing everything on everyone is a terrible idea.

Perhaps we need to embrace the Panopticon instead of resisting it.

Really store everything on everyone and make it _available_ to _everyone_ instead of the privileged few.

Make only one rule on access control: it is forbidden to refuse access.

Edit: on -> one

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#48

Post by Sunset »

kwhitefoot wrote: post #47
rl3 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... or being a Freemason would get you further than any degree in this circle. That's rather disturbing. This is why storing everything on everyone is a terrible idea. Insiders with loyalties that may lie with a particular Old Boys' club, with access to the most intimate details of people's lives. Strict rules with regard to access control are meaningless if the people abusing the system are either sufficiently hig…

> This is why storing everything on everyone is a terrible idea. Perhaps we need to embrace the Panopticon instead of resisting it. Really store everything on everyone and make it _available_ to _everyone_ instead of the privileged few. Make only one rule on access control: it is forbidden to refuse access. Edit: on -> one

If we ever come to live in such a dystopian society I'm going to use our new found peeping power to mark political enemies and remove them all in a night of the long knives stile ordeal then overthrow the government and burn everything to the ground.

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#49

Post by cassowary »

mistermann wrote: post #45
fspm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Primary reason that I don't buy into elaborate conspiracy theories right here.

Snowden's leaks didn't reveal somewhat of a conspiracy? Was that behavior not both secret and unconstitutional?

conspiracy secret + unconstitutional

i think to reach the level of a conspiracy theory, you need a lot of people doing something outrageous. for instance, if you have the army, the navy and fbi and the russian kgb (or whatever they're called nowadays) in cahoots without a single leak for twenty-five years, that's improbable.

i tend not to buy conspiracy theories because they usually need a leak which doesn't exist. for instance, my brother is a 911 truther. in his opinion, a civil engineer saying "that's impossible" establishes it as a conspiracy. in mine, the fact that no-one from the pentagon has said "haha, and we cut up that plane and put it in the building, it was amazing, look come here check out my emails" when he was drunk establishes it as the real deal.

Re: Bugger: Maybe spies aren't very good at their jobs (2013)

#50

Post by Sunset »

nyolfen wrote: post #28
jstrate wrote: post #18

Silly article, the revelations of Edward Snowden shouldn't really tell anyone much about the capability of spies, nothing we didn't already know. If you're interested in a good book about the technical history of the CIA check out 'The Wizards of Langley'. It gives a pretty accurate history of the technical ability of spies throughout the years, and the bureaucracy which limited them. https://www.amazon.com/Wizards-L…

>Silly article, the revelations of Edward Snowden shouldn't really tell anyone much about the capability of spies i absolutely loathe when people say things like this. people would nearly without exception treat you like a lunatic if you talked about the kinds of capabilities revealed by snowden prior to 2013. making references to ECHELON made plenty of people write me off as a paranoid crank. the ex post facto 'ever…

If the technology exists to do nefarious-thing-X, one must assume that governments are already using X despite whatever moral or political arguments they give you that they would never do it.
Post reply on HN