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

Interview with Edward Snowden

spiegel.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 168 posts

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#41

Post by slg »

skybrian wrote: post #29
slg wrote: post #18

>The class of which I am a part of, the global technological community, was for the longest time apolitical. We have this history of thinking: "We're going to make the world better." I think a lot of people in the tech community need to come to grips with the fact that you can't be apolitical in a democratic country. Refusing to engage in politics is an abdication of your role in a democratic society. You certainly h…

If there is something specific you would like people to do, please do go ahead and advocate for it. What organizations do you support, and why? Not this content-free guilt-mongering, it doesn't help anyone.

>If there is something specific you would like people to do, please do go ahead and advocate for it.

Become involved. I think the minimum you should do is to vote in every election in your municipality. One of the main causes of the problems in our current system is the atrocious voter turnout rate. You can even just submit your entire ballot blank. Politicians can't see who voted for what, but they can see if you show up to the polls. They see which demographics vote, what issues those demographics care about, and they adjust their platform accordingly. This is one of the primary reasons that people say there aren't any politicians who represent their values. We need to break that feedback loop.

>What organizations do you support, and why?

HN is not the place for that discussion.

>Not this content-free guilt-mongering, it doesn't help anyone.

I am simply trying to get people to give up this notion that political neutrality is a virtue or something to be proud of. Refusing to participate in politics doesn't make politics go away. If this comment gets one person to reconsider that stance, I would consider that helping.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#42

Post by dilippkumar »

jonahbenton wrote: post #37
marricks wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was kind of surprising at first then I realized it’s because he already thought deeply about everything he’s been asked. After careful deliberation he made a moral choice to leak information at great risk to himself. This makes him not only good to talk through the technical implications of his choices but also moral ones.

Please consider alternative narratives. He acted selfishly, not morally. Like a startup founder he wanted to disrupt an existing infrastructure, with a one-sided view of the trajectory his impact would have on the domain. Any collateral damage would be easy to hide in the personal narrative memory hole. Deep thoughts and intellectual defenses are not so hard to construct, should not be uncritically accepted with sign…

> Please consider alternative narratives.

No.

> He acted selfishly, not morally.

No, he acted morally.

> Deep thoughts and intellectual defenses are not so hard to construct, should not be uncritically accepted with significant corroborating evidence, and should certainly not be taken in any way to imply morality, as shown by the growing list of deep thinkers who supported and participated in Jeffrey Epstein's schemes.

No. It's simple. Snowden = Good. Stop trying to "muh Russians!" this.

> With Snowden we have very little corroboration, so best reserve judgement.

No. His documents appear sufficiently authentic to be acted upon. I, and people I know, are not reserving our judgements.

> And if he does wind up dying as many other Russian actors have...

We all will know exactly what sort of people run our government.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#43

Post by hencq »

ma2rten wrote: post #28
tptacek wrote: post #22

This is a terrible title, which would be better as "Interview with Edward Snowden". "You can be sure I was pushed" is an aside, and has little of the connotation the title has (that Snowden truly believes he's at risk of being assassinated); rather, it's a tossed-off comment about the fact that he's not suicidal, despite reports that he's been depressed.

I totally agree that it is a terrible title. Der Spiegel does very high quality reporting, but I got the impression that German journalist like to use sensationalist quotes as the title even more than English speaking ones do. That said, I genuinely got the impression that Snowden is concerned that he might get assassinated and that his history of depression might be used covered it up.

There's nothing wrong with the title. It's a direct quote from the interview. Also, the article literally has "Interview with Edward Snowden" above it with a picture of him. Just because it entices you to read doesn't automatically make it clickbait. I do think that the subtitle "Interview with Edward Snowden" would be a much better title for the HN submission. The current title without any context (picture + sub title) doesn't provide any information if it just appears in a list of text links.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#44

Post by jdsully »

jonahbenton wrote: post #37
marricks wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was kind of surprising at first then I realized it’s because he already thought deeply about everything he’s been asked. After careful deliberation he made a moral choice to leak information at great risk to himself. This makes him not only good to talk through the technical implications of his choices but also moral ones.

Please consider alternative narratives. He acted selfishly, not morally. Like a startup founder he wanted to disrupt an existing infrastructure, with a one-sided view of the trajectory his impact would have on the domain. Any collateral damage would be easy to hide in the personal narrative memory hole. Deep thoughts and intellectual defenses are not so hard to construct, should not be uncritically accepted with sign…

Can you point out the “collateral damage”? I can’t think of any. He did damage the mass surveillance system but that was intentional.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#45

Post by tptacek »

hencq wrote: post #43
ma2rten wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree that it is a terrible title. Der Spiegel does very high quality reporting, but I got the impression that German journalist like to use sensationalist quotes as the title even more than English speaking ones do. That said, I genuinely got the impression that Snowden is concerned that he might get assassinated and that his history of depression might be used covered it up.

There's nothing wrong with the title. It's a direct quote from the interview. Also, the article literally has "Interview with Edward Snowden" above it with a picture of him. Just because it entices you to read doesn't automatically make it clickbait. I do think that the subtitle "Interview with Edward Snowden" would be a much better title for the HN submission. The current title without any context (picture + sub tit…

"Terrible title for HN" captures more precisely what I meant to say, thanks. I don't so much care how publications choose to tease articles in their own pages.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#46

Post by Udik »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #24
wolco wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? People killing others in secret to avoid information getting out but framing it differently.

The really dumb title for this submission is distracting from the better parts of the interview. That quote wasn't Snowden implying he thinks he's in imminent danger of being murdered; he was just rebutting people saying that he was suicidal. The interview itself has zero relationship to the whole Epstein thing (of which I find many of the details to be scandalous).

> That quote wasn't Snowden implying he thinks he's in imminent danger of being murdered

Probably not, but it's pretty clear he believes that secret services killing someone and making the death appear a suicide is a common occurrence. And I doubt he doesn't have the Epstein case in mind, as the most recent example.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#47

Post by ccvannorman »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #33

> Let's assume you could simply poke an icon and all the hidden activity would stop, would you do that? > DER SPIEGEL: Of course. That I think is the crux of the issue - our consent is not real.

This is the most concise way to explain to pedestrians (who are now largely aware of tracking) the crux of the issue. Who in their right mind wouldn't poke the icon?

Hope this becomes a thing, I'll certainly be spreading it.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#48

Post by [deleted] »

lowdose wrote: post #26

Is Snowden publishing a book at the same time there is some confusion about voting in Russian elections? I'm a big fan of Snowden and don't want to insinuate malice. Is this just a mere coincidence? https://www.newsweek.com/russia-novosibirsk-sergey-boyko-nav...

[deleted]

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#49

Post by insickness »

slg wrote: post #18

>The class of which I am a part of, the global technological community, was for the longest time apolitical. We have this history of thinking: "We're going to make the world better." I think a lot of people in the tech community need to come to grips with the fact that you can't be apolitical in a democratic country. Refusing to engage in politics is an abdication of your role in a democratic society. You certainly h…

> most people on HN can agree on is climate change.

There are many aspects of the climate change issue where disagreement is reasonable. Does industrial progress need to be sacrificed to prevent climate change? How much governmental intervention is helpful? How accurate are predictions of what is coming? What is the most efficient way to prevent climate change and how effective will those actions be? There is no correct path forward. To say you think we can all agree on climate change implies that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#50

Post by josho »

jonahbenton wrote: post #37
marricks wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was kind of surprising at first then I realized it’s because he already thought deeply about everything he’s been asked. After careful deliberation he made a moral choice to leak information at great risk to himself. This makes him not only good to talk through the technical implications of his choices but also moral ones.

Please consider alternative narratives. He acted selfishly, not morally. Like a startup founder he wanted to disrupt an existing infrastructure, with a one-sided view of the trajectory his impact would have on the domain. Any collateral damage would be easy to hide in the personal narrative memory hole. Deep thoughts and intellectual defenses are not so hard to construct, should not be uncritically accepted with sign…

> He acted selfishly

Risking imprisonment isn’t exactly what I’d call a selfish act. How do you see his action as selfish. He’s lost so much.

And what corroboration do you feel is necessary. Snowden simply leaked documents. The government hasn’t contradicted that.

Post reply on HN