This guy is such a fame hog. Do you really need a full page face shot on the cover of your book? C'mon dawg.
As a side note, I wonder if he feels obligated to keep the stubble goatee since it's part of 'his look.'
Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
121–130 of 459 posts
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Canada, Italy, Germany, Norway, New Zealand, France, UK, etc... etc.... do as well without the silly system the US has in place.
> Canada...do as well without the silly system the US has in place Perhaps you're forgetting about the evacuation of Lebanese Canadians in 2006, "Citizens of Convenience" and the associated changes in Canadian citizenship laws. It's not without controversy.
Canada does not require its citizens abroad to file taxes.
I'm sure there are other controversies and things going on, but that's what we were talking about.
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#123We were called "paranoid lunatics" even when we started speaking about ECHELON in the '90ies. Same with the clipper chip. Same with TPM/DRM/ME. Same with Internet centralization. It's worth asking why the general public keeps trusting authorities and distrusts techies, even those among us with a career in security.
[deleted]
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#124I'm going to 'recycle' an older comment of mine, pertaining to the comments about the book. The original comment can be found here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20583363 I was annoyed that someone called Ed Snowden a 'Traitor'. Hopefully it gets a bit more recognition in this thread __________________________________ For me he made the Great Game of Privacy a lot fairer. You should read the excellent entry on…
At a fundamental level, I trust the moral compass of the average person more than I trust the moral compass of government which has incentives to do the wrong thing.
The most basic tool of law enforcement investigation is the average citizen calling the police when they see someone doing something wrong. Unethical laws are more difficult to enforce, because the average citizen doesn't call the police when they see someone breaking an unethical law. Most people don't call the police when they see someone smoking marijuana, for example, because the average person has a moral compass which tells them that putting someone in jail for smoking marijuana is reprehensible. Historically, whenever the law has been wrong, many people have been saved by people refusing to report them: the underground railroad, hiding of Jews in Nazi Germany, gays under anti-sodomy laws, etc.
In contrast, I believe that when someone is actually doing something wrong, people call the police on them. If I witness a murder, rape, child abuse, etc., I would absolutely call the police. And while there are certainly high profile cases of people standing by and letting bad things happen, I trust people to do the right thing most of the time.
Pervasive surveillance bypasses witnesses as the basic tool of law enforcement, which takes the power out of the hands of the average person. This might allow law enforcement to catch more bad guys, and if that were the only concern, violating our privacy might make sense. But the flipside is that it allows law enforcement to put more people in jail who aren't bad guys--people who smoke weed, teenagers who sext, etc. As long as there are unethical laws, privacy is the fundamental tool which allows average people to trust their own moral compasses and not call the police on people who are breaking unethical laws.
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it even safe to buy yubikeys on Amazon given the counterfeit problem?
Guess there could be two attack vectors, one that is easier to avoid and the other not so much. The first one being a targeted attack. Then any ordering of Yubikeys can leave to vulnerable as the supply chain can be intercepted (because they see it's you and switch out the key to a counterfeit one). This can be solved by going to a in-person store and buying it there. Then there is no risk of you being personally tar…
>Not sure how you could avoid this vector.
While this is a theoretical problem anywhere, it's a practical problem when ordering from Amazon far more often than anywhere else. Going to a reputable physical store likely shields you from the second scenario nearly as well as the first. Also, in the case of Yubico at least, you can order directly from their website, which presumably minimizes the number of hands the product has to go through, thus minimizing opportunities for a counterfeit to be swapped in.
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
The key difference is that you can decide not to buy corporate products you do not want, but have to comply with the laws. I am a lot less concerned about stupid things done by a majority for convenience (and I can choose whether to do participate or not) than about the law that forces the same stupidity down my throat. My 2c.
The problem is that you can't always opt out of someone else's decisions. Example: Doorbell Cams taking video of you walking by, uploading it to a corporate database, identifying you using photo recognition algorithms and your location using the home's address, and using that information to sell you things.
> using that information to sell you things.
The horror.
The threat isn't corporations. The threat is when the government goes rogue as governments tend to do unpredictably from time to time. The threat materialises in the government using private corporation data to target arbitrary minorities (although usually the educated, wealthy, foreign and free-spirited).
People seem to think that because it "could never happen here" they can just ignore the possibility. Then it turns out that that sometimes it can.
Privacy isn't just about the world as it stands today. Privacy is an acknowledgement that the present and the future are linked and that the future may be profoundly different from today. People aggressively selling you things is more harassment.
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
It costs about $400 per year in time and money to file a tax return, so a multi thousand $ lifetime exemption seems ballpark good price.
> $400 per year in time and money to file a tax return That number seems pretty high unless you have very complicated income (in which case you likely have a lot of money too) Also worth mentioning is that Foreign Income is taxed differently, so while you technically still have to pay taxes, I believe for most people who work mostly in a foreign country don't have to pay very much.
> complicated
Yes, like, say, having an accountant that can read and understand your taxes where you live in Italy and then use that information to file US taxes. And of course they'll need to understand the tax treaty between the two countries so you don't end up paying extra. Of course it's complicated and a huge pain in the ass! And that's with a relatively normal, stable, well-established country with a lot of US citizens living in it.
I should add: $400 is also a bigger deal when you live somewhere and don't earn as much as a software developer in the US.
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#128I'm going to 'recycle' an older comment of mine, pertaining to the comments about the book. The original comment can be found here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20583363 I was annoyed that someone called Ed Snowden a 'Traitor'. Hopefully it gets a bit more recognition in this thread __________________________________ For me he made the Great Game of Privacy a lot fairer. You should read the excellent entry on…
Honestly, saying that the NSA has done maybe one useful thing in its entire existence and that everything it does could be replaced by "simple detective work" just shows you to be incredibly uninformed and ignorant about what the job of the NSA actually is.
So inform us. Present evidence for your opinion or keep your opinion to yourself.
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
The key difference is that you can decide not to buy corporate products you do not want, but have to comply with the laws. I am a lot less concerned about stupid things done by a majority for convenience (and I can choose whether to do participate or not) than about the law that forces the same stupidity down my throat. My 2c.
The problem is that you can't always opt out of someone else's decisions. Example: Doorbell Cams taking video of you walking by, uploading it to a corporate database, identifying you using photo recognition algorithms and your location using the home's address, and using that information to sell you things.
Fair. But even this (at least in the US) is the flip side of the laws that in public areas I can take any photos that I want. And I generally like this setup -- I can snap pictures of friends and kids without worrying about proving my right to take those photos).
This should not be taken for granted -- in the UK I was twice (very politely) asked to leave because I was taking a picture and apparently a gov't building was in the background (and you need a permission to photograph those!!) and the second time because a school volleyball competition was played in the background. This is stupid because if I did it with a phone instead of a DSLR no one would notice.
Maybe some limits on commercial photography in public spaces makes sense, but I would not go as far as putting strong limits on it altogether. My 2c.
Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, it is a bit annoying, and I can imagine it is beyond a bit annoying if you are making income somewhere that doesn't have a treaty with the U.S. I thankfully don't get double-taxed here in Canada, but I'm pretty sure it's possible to have a marginal tax rate greater than 100% between U.S. Federal income taxes and some other systems.
> I thankfully don't get double-taxed here in Canada I bet many of your fellow Canadian taxpayers (of which I am one) are not so thankful for this arrangement. Then again, I fall strictly in the "citizenship is a privilege, not a right" camp.
> I bet many of your fellow Canadian taxpayers (of which I am one) are not so thankful for this arrangement.
Well, I pay absolutely all Canadian taxes to the full extent, and I can't make use of TFSAs; what do my fellow Canadians have any right to complain about?
> Then again, I fall strictly in the "citizenship is a privilege, not a right" camp.
Well, I am a citizen, and I've lived in Canada my whole life.