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

Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

blog.cryptographyengineering.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 244 posts

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#11

Post by bayesian_horse »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #10
raxxorrax wrote: post #2

Isn't the practice of the NSA just plainly treason? And why would it not be?

No, it isn't plainly treason. This is the definition of treason: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. Did the NSA levy war against the US? Did the NSA give aid & comfort to the…

Particularly it has been ruled that "treason" as per the US constitution or laws is impossible unless war has been declared on a foreign nation.

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#12

Post by maze-le »

raxxorrax wrote: post #2

Isn't the practice of the NSA just plainly treason? And why would it not be?

Do you really want to think and judge people/institutions in these terms (traitor/non-traitor etc.)? I doubt this is in any way helpful to find a political solution. I know that this is being done with Snowden -- but lets not resort to this level of (hyperbole) accusation -- else the sanke pit is open to everyone to be define the other side as "traitor" in one way or another.

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#13

Post by luckylion »

mistermann wrote: post #6

Snowden's revelations proved once again that conspiracies are all false, because it is literally impossible for large numbers of people to keep their mouth shut. Exactly as we're told on forums, exactly as we're told on TV. This is how you know Epstein is also innocent and why it won't be investigated, because we know people cannot keep silent about committing crimes, therefore we know no crimes were committed.

> Snowden's revelations proved once again that conspiracies are all false, because it is literally impossible for large numbers of people to keep their mouth shut.

That's both a good point and not so much. In the end, they didn't keep their mouths shut, Snowden spilled the beans and uncovered the large conspiracy. It's a good point with regard to "that would require a large conspiracy, and those don't work" not being a good argument against theories: there might be a large conspiracy that just hasn't failed yet.

And who knows how many more years or decades the large conspiracy would have worked just fine if Snowden hadn't leaked.

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#15

Post by bayesian_horse »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #3
raxxorrax wrote: post #2

Isn't the practice of the NSA just plainly treason? And why would it not be?

Hypothetically, a benevolent NSA would primarily develop cryptographic security tools for the populace.

In fact, there is no clear indication that they did not act in what they perceived as the interest of the US and its citizens.

Many would disagree with that perception, and I also believe that amount of surveillance to have been wrong and counterproductive, but there hasn't been any evidence or significant hints into possible corrupt motivations.

One mustn't forget that all of this was put into motion after the 9/11 attacks, and both the Bush and Obama administrations where still working under (somewhat irrational) pressure from citizens afraid of a repeat performance.

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#16

Post by Craighead »

raxxorrax wrote: post #9
em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hypothetically, a benevolent NSA would primarily develop cryptographic security tools for the populace.

True. But besides their interest in acquiring exploits, I think their data collection seriously collides with peoples amendment rights against arbitrary state surveillance. I know there are some judges and institutions that enabled this madness, but I think they might be guilty as well. These judges should be accountable to the public in theory. I am not saying the everyone working at the NSA is a criminal. But maybe…

You must not understand how cyber war works.

The US has judges and legislation to enable the NSA.

Russia, China, Iran, NK, and many other authoritarian states seek to use their power to attack America 24x7 and do so without any oversight.

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#17

Post by raxxorrax »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #10
raxxorrax wrote: post #2

Isn't the practice of the NSA just plainly treason? And why would it not be?

No, it isn't plainly treason. This is the definition of treason: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. Did the NSA levy war against the US? Did the NSA give aid & comfort to the…

Alright, it doesn't fit here then. But isn't the behavior treasonous towards the constitution that forbids arbitrary data collection. I think their defense here is that nobody actively looks at the data. I think this is bullshit.

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#18

Post by bayesian_horse »

raxxorrax wrote: post #2

Isn't the practice of the NSA just plainly treason? And why would it not be?

It's quite common to confuse breaking laws with treason, but that just isn't the same.

Accusations of treason at every corner hinder rational democratic discourse.

Re: Looking Back at the Snowden Revelations

#19

Post by raxxorrax »

bayesian_horse wrote: post #11
freddie_mercury wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn't plainly treason. This is the definition of treason: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. Did the NSA levy war against the US? Did the NSA give aid & comfort to the…

Particularly it has been ruled that "treason" as per the US constitution or laws is impossible unless war has been declared on a foreign nation.

Makes sense. So that means Snowden cannot be a traitor either or are there exceptions?
Post reply on HN