Live data from Hacker News

Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

blog.wikimedia.org

11–20 of 117 posts

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#11
Seems like it's trendy to hate the NSA. It gets conflated with an anti-authoritarian mindset. I wish smart people would gain some perspective - I got some by reading Bamford's books and a new one by Fred Kaplan - Dark Territories, about NSAs painful move to cyber. Some key points:

* All the great powers have NSA equivalents. Meaning they play offence and defense in crypto, RF, and cyber. We (USA) can impose restrictions on our NSA but not on anyone else's. Our exploit-riddled networks are a playground for American, Russian and Chinese cyber warriors - and probably many others.

* In cyber, offense and defense become the same. Kaplan's book covers this. So a smart country seeks cyber-superiority. The more we hamper NSA, the more we empower foreign cyber-warriors.

* The focus has moved from RF to cyber. Giant antennas are far less important and giant datacenters are the new stars. Vacuuming up packets is less alarming when you understand we've been vacuuming up radio and telephone signals for decades. When comsats were important, NSA was vacuuming up their downlinks. When international telegrams were punched on paper tape, NSA's predecessors picked up the tape each day.

* The US has tried going "NSA-less". It happened in 1929 under the slogan "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail". That noble slogan led to the US operating at a disadvantage in the lead up to WWII. It doesn't pay to fly blind.

* Fear of an overreaching state is always justified; however we should focus that fear more on how NSA shares data than how it acquires it. For instance fusion centers: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/04/why-fusion-centers-mat...

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#12
post #11

Seems like it's trendy to hate the NSA. It gets conflated with an anti-authoritarian mindset. I wish smart people would gain some perspective - I got some by reading Bamford's books and a new one by Fred Kaplan - Dark Territories, about NSAs painful move to cyber. Some key points: * All the great powers have NSA equivalents. Meaning they play offence and defense in crypto, RF, and cyber. We (USA) can impose restricti…

Trendy or not trendy, your argument boils down to "we should trade liberty for security in this global surveillance arms race".

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#13
post #11

Seems like it's trendy to hate the NSA. It gets conflated with an anti-authoritarian mindset. I wish smart people would gain some perspective - I got some by reading Bamford's books and a new one by Fred Kaplan - Dark Territories, about NSAs painful move to cyber. Some key points: * All the great powers have NSA equivalents. Meaning they play offence and defense in crypto, RF, and cyber. We (USA) can impose restricti…

It's like saying peace is trendy and we should not try to go weaponless.

That makes no sense.

We all want peace. We all know that peace is not there yet and that without weapons the other countries would take advantage of it.

Yet we all know that the weapon oriented society the US has become is a major issue.

It's not contradictory, just being honest with yourself.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#14
post #11

Seems like it's trendy to hate the NSA. It gets conflated with an anti-authoritarian mindset. I wish smart people would gain some perspective - I got some by reading Bamford's books and a new one by Fred Kaplan - Dark Territories, about NSAs painful move to cyber. Some key points: * All the great powers have NSA equivalents. Meaning they play offence and defense in crypto, RF, and cyber. We (USA) can impose restricti…

Your argument is in the same vein as why us has the largest military force. I don't think it's irrational, but I would say it does not address the new security threats.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#15
post #4

Great article, thanks for doing what you do ;)

you mean making huge profits from donations? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12...

Come on, FB makes way more money on an user by building social echo chamber and ads...

Wiki give user knowledge, probably one of the highest quality sources...

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#16
post #3

what is there to surveil about wikimedia? aren't all articles public and even IP of non registered users? this seem like something to justify showing those donation requests in your face, despite Wikipedia drowning in money https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12...

As a regular donor, I'd like to address your concerns.

I gave them the donations. They are gifts. They can spend them on hookers and blow, I don't care. I donate because I appreciate their service. I appreciate it enough to where I'd kinda like them to be making mad loot.

I will continue to donate. I don't give gifts with strings. Gifts with strings are payments. My donation was a gift. Hell, I don't even write it off.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#17
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you mean making huge profits from donations? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12...

They provide a valuable service, it's better to see them thrive than be close to failure.

they don't provide anything, they use outdated software provided by volunteer, their content is managed by volunteers for free and pretty much only expenses they have to run Wikipedia are servers but they still have 300 people in payroll

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#18
post #8
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you mean making huge profits from donations? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12...

Did you read that article? Their reserve of 1.5 years of operational funding seems prudent. That $MM donation stream is a pittance considering their scale - orders of magnitude larger than most VC-funded startups.

i read they have 300 employees who create zero content on Wikipedia which is created by volunteers for free

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#19
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you mean making huge profits from donations? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12...

Come on, FB makes way more money on an user by building social echo chamber and ads... Wiki give user knowledge, probably one of the highest quality sources...

FB is not asking me for donations and FB pay to people working for them unlike Wikipedia parasiting on work of volunteers pretending to be non profit organization so 300 people can enjoy doing nothing for good salary

Re: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

#20
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They provide a valuable service, it's better to see them thrive than be close to failure.

they don't provide anything, they use outdated software provided by volunteer, their content is managed by volunteers for free and pretty much only expenses they have to run Wikipedia are servers but they still have 300 people in payroll

It must be real tough to run a smear job here.
Post reply on HN