Edward Snowden: Permanent Record • Hacker News Board

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#311

Post by dredmorbius » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:02 PM UTC

wannabcodr wrote: post #186

Anyone have a link to steal and read the book for free? I don’t support his cause but wouldn’t mind reading the book. Yes I’m admitting to intent to pirating Ed Snowden’s book. It’s not like I’d be stealing sensitive military secrets and selling them to Omidyar for a pledge up to $250MM. How many Russian speaking people were in his orbit in Hawaii from 2011-2013? How many of them had the operational capacity to pull…

There are few popular books which don't end up at either your local public library, or on Library Genesis, within a few weeks, these days.

I'm a fan of authors being compensated. I'm an even bigger fan of information being a public good. These are not mutually exclusive propositions.

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#312

Post by Aunche » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:02 PM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #170

outside1234 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are kidding right? The whole cold war?

During the Cold War, the US government did a lot of things which were extraordinarily harmful to US Citizens and contributed nothing to fighting Soviet totalitarianism. Soviet totalitarianism was certainly a threat, but US repsonses to Soviet totalitarianism were often counterproductive. There's a strong argument to be made that the US government did more harm to US citizens during the Cold War than the Soviets ever…

> contributed nothing to fighting Soviet totalitarianism

I wouldn't say nothing. At the very least, they made sure that Russia wasn't planning to fire any nukes at us.

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#313

Post by vl » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:04 PM UTC

mnm1 wrote: post #73

apexalpha wrote: post #53

I can't speak for the US but this man has shifted so much of the political debate in my country and I think also in the EU in general. If you talked about the massive surveillance from governments people tossed you aside as a paranoid lunatic. After Snowden no one could ignore you anymore and privacy is an aspect in any public debate.

That's great to hear. Unfortunately, his actions haven't really done anything in the US. I wish I could say otherwise, but I haven't seen a single thing change. Privacy still isn't an issue that's on most people's radar. The government still does what it did before and likely a lot more. I have a ton of respect for Snowden, but he severely overestimated how much Americans care about privacy, spying, surveillance, or…

>That's great to hear. Unfortunately, his actions haven't really done anything in the US.

At the very least it produced some dissonance between democratic establishment and their support base. Bill and Hilary continue to tour the country and I attended their road show in Seattle. Crowed cheered at every statement until they got to, and I quote, “Snowden is a traitor”, which produced very confused and subdued cheer. It was very fun to watch.

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#314

Post by rtikulit » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:06 PM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #213

mindslight wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The threat isn't corporations In a thread about surveillance, why are you drawing a dichotomy between different surveillers and basically giving one a pass? They're both prongs of the same threat! On the collection side, every bit vacuumed up commercially is available for use by the government. And on the use side, there is little difference between a government proper and corporations that have achieved enough pow…

Corporate surveillance is only a problem because it will sooner or later feed in to government surveillance. If I could wave a wand and stop that happening I'd be fine with corporate surveillance; I'm annoyed but not threatened by the idea that someone will study my every movement trying to sell me things I want. I'm threatened if the extremely arbitrary government decides that I'm an undesirable for some reason. > c…

Surveillance by corporations is also used for: - creating, maintaining and exploiting information asymmetry - manipulating markets, fostering rent-seeking - finding new ways of externalizing costs that escape easy detection - polluting honest policy debate - manipulating the democratic decision-making process - avoiding responsibility for malfeasance - etc, etc, etc, etc, etc and yet more etc

On the large scale, I do not want these entities to have access to weapons-grade behavioural models. On the small scale, I do not want them to have compromising information about individual behaviour. They will use whatever leverage they gain to enrich themselves far beyond their utility.

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#315

Post by loup-vaillant » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:06 PM UTC

throw0101a wrote: post #299

Miner49er wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think Assange put himself at as much risk as he did to promote himself? He spent 7 years locked in an embassy (to great detriment to his health and was arguably worse then jail), is now in jail, and is facing at least life in prison, if not the death penalty. You really think he did all that just to promote himself and for some attention?

> He spent 7 years locked in an embassy ... To avoid criminal charges for things unrelated to his political/journalistic exploits. Plenty of people run when faced with possible jail time, e.g., Roman Polanski.

As far as I know the case was closed then reopened after some embarrassing US document leaked, and without any new relevant element. As far as I know, the Sweden authorities had the possibility to interrogate Assange without extraditing him, yet for some reason did not use that possibility.

Finding reliable sources with all relevant details is a hassle, so take it with a grain of salt. Nevertheless, I believe at this point that this unrelated affair is more an attempt at character assassination than a real thing. (I do recall that he reportedly didn't used protection, which would qualify him as a major jerk. Legislations seem to disagree on whether this was a crime or not, though.)

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#316

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:11 PM UTC

godelski wrote: post #262

make3 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe he is a hero and did the right thing, but I think there is no way the US could do anything but try to put in prison someone who illegally made state secrets public. That would have set the precedent that anyone with secret bad looking intelligence about the US would be safe to come out with it. Turns out I'm sure that there is a lot of intelligence that looks quite bad for the US.

There are in fact whistleblower laws. The big question at hand is how it was handled. Snowden claimed to go to his superiors first, which checks off an important box. So the question is if he did that or not. I believe he was also supposed to attempt to report to Congress before he can legally go to the media. It's definitely a gray area and if you believe it is right probably depends on how much you trust the govern…

[deleted]

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#317

Post by make3 » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:12 PM UTC

godelski wrote: post #262

make3 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe he is a hero and did the right thing, but I think there is no way the US could do anything but try to put in prison someone who illegally made state secrets public. That would have set the precedent that anyone with secret bad looking intelligence about the US would be safe to come out with it. Turns out I'm sure that there is a lot of intelligence that looks quite bad for the US.

There are in fact whistleblower laws. The big question at hand is how it was handled. Snowden claimed to go to his superiors first, which checks off an important box. So the question is if he did that or not. I believe he was also supposed to attempt to report to Congress before he can legally go to the media. It's definitely a gray area and if you believe it is right probably depends on how much you trust the govern…

I believe he did the right thing, I probably should have made that more clear. I also understand why the government still can't possibly treat him in anyways but as a traitor

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#318

Post by iandinwoodie » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:14 PM UTC

faet wrote: post #93

iandinwoodie wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens to the other 90%? Is this typical for book authors?

It is very typical. Assuming Print on Demand w/ amazon. He's not doing that but we'll just assume to keep it easy. And list price of $24 Amazon takes $5 to print Amazon takes $9.60 royalty That leaves $9.40 or 40% available. Of that Macmillan takes their cut to cover editing, covers, advertising, etc. And what is left is probably $2.40 for each sale. For Self published folks (going eBooks this time). Assuming you lis…

That's insane. Thank you for the detailed insight.

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#319

Post by jonfw » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

ptero wrote: post #129

kareemm wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don't think that limiting the photography or the means of the data collection is the solution. The law is going to have to apply post-mining.

In my opinion, we need to start treating data about users as intellectual property. Generally speaking, you don't have to worry about intellectual property when you're doing something personal. I can say "Just do it" all I want. In the same vein, I can make casual observations about random people on the street without having to worry about violating their privacy (that guy has cool shoes!). But if I start to use "just do it" in my business marketing materials, I'll be in trouble. Similarly, if I start keeping a database of somebody's shoes every time I see them so I can try to sell them something, that should be illegal.

Re: Edward Snowden: Permanent Record

#320

Post by hfdehfddhs » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

navigatesol wrote: post #107

hfdehfddhs wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" safe-haven to run to if SHTF" If S * is hitting the fan, aren't you assuming said expat lives in, to use El Jefe's words, a "S * country"? By conservation of mass, the S * comes from somewhere. Instead, most expats live in W. Europe, Canada, or Japan/Korea. Pretty safe. " tax avoiding leeches in Silicon Valley don't feel obligated to contribute to the societies from which they extract their wealth" Well, no. Ppl ar…

> and that provides nothing in return. As others have mentioned, your American passport does provide you with services. But if you truly believe it's worthless, why maintain citizenship? To save the fee to renounce citizenship, even though it will save potentially tens of thousands of dollars annually? Doesn't make sense to me. No, it's a safety measure. And I think people are lucky to have it, at the low cost of som…

"why maintain citizenship"

In fact I live in the US but haven't applied for US citizenship for this, among other, reasons("passport" being woefully misused word in this context). Anyway, that is a very poor advice since: 1. Most people have one citizenship, including expats (most return). 2. Giving up your US citizenship implies very many more things than not paying taxes. Look up ex-pat type laws.

"American passport does provide you with services" Well the passport surely doesn't. The citizenship might, but I've been an expat all of my life (started bouncing around the world at the tender age of three weeks). I've never used, no one in my family has every used, an no one I know has ever used our rich, Western countries' services [0]

I have used the services of the local police very many times.

"No, it's a safety measure"

The Special Forces aren't on a razor's edge ready to jump and come get you. That's BS from Hollywood. You get in trouble abroad, and yes, you can ask for the local consulate to send someone to see you in jail. That's, in the vast majority of cases, about it. But I try to avoid jail myself.

[0] We're not British. Apparently, Brits get into so much trouble abroad that the Brits have come up with a simple solution: charge the drunk louts for consular services!

EDIT: To be clear, when I move to another country, I take pains to declare that I'm no longer a resident lest I continue being eligible for that country's services.