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

U.S. surveillance laws have proven ineffective at countering terrorism

theprivacyissue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–135 of 135 posts

Re: U.S. surveillance laws have proven ineffective at countering terrorism

#131

Post by colejohnson66 »

papito wrote: post #33
president wrote: post #14

I'm not sure what the alternative is. Without some form of surveillance, you're never going to catch terrorists or other bad actors. You do, however, need to make sure there are strong checks and balances in place to ensure that people don't use it for nefarious purposes or for personal gain.

NSA is combing through voice phone data, and that's totally useless. As depicted in Jack Ryan (communication via an online game), the bad actors will find rather elegant ways to bypass at. I can embed standard EXIF metadata into an image and send it to someone's facebook wall. You think NSA is looking at that? It's not that hard.

Doesn’t Facebook strip EXIF data?

Re: U.S. surveillance laws have proven ineffective at countering terrorism

#132

Post by colejohnson66 »

pinkfoot wrote: post #28

I remind readers that the Novichok assasins were identified via CCTV sureillance monitored by Government authorities.

And I remind readers that Russia warned us about the Boston Bombers and we ignored them. One success does not equal success at all things.

Re: U.S. surveillance laws have proven ineffective at countering terrorism

#133

Post by pinkfoot »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #132
pinkfoot wrote: post #28

I remind readers that the Novichok assasins were identified via CCTV sureillance monitored by Government authorities.

And I remind readers that Russia warned us about the Boston Bombers and we ignored them. One success does not equal success at all things.

touché

Re: U.S. surveillance laws have proven ineffective at countering terrorism

#134

Post by ninly »

dmix wrote: post #81
ninly wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/03/26/two-reasons/

TBH after reading that it still sounds like JP Morgan or Roosevelt is a safe attribution choice there. The particular structure of the sentence combined with "commonly used by" or "made popular by", etc is sufficient IMO. Quote sourcing is always a bit vague. Or maybe just saying "as the commonly used phrase goes" is better.

I don't entirely disagree, but I feel like quotations are so often used in discourse without any context, and with a problematic sort of "pure" attribution to the genius of the person quoted. Quotations from Einstein or Lincoln are frequent examples of this, even where the quote is not misattributed.

Of course, blatant misattribution is also so dang common that it seems better to me in general to cite some kind of context or whatever. Plus (for me, a prior editor) use of quote marks typically implies verbatim, citable quotation, so that's a factor whether the attribution is "safe", as you suggest.

Not to criticize anything here at all; I just wanted to throw in some of that sweet sweet context!

Re: U.S. surveillance laws have proven ineffective at countering terrorism

#135

Post by remarkEon »

jlgaddis wrote: post #126
remarkEon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t have the time right now to do this, but someone with it (and probably more technical experience than me in that field) should write up a no BS guise to what these popular VPN services really are offering. It’s been hard, over the last couple months especially it seems, to wade through all the new products these companies are constantly dropping in this space.

Tom Scott recently made an video [0] you might be interested in. It's well worth the seven and a half minutes to watch it, IMO. > I tried to write a more honest VPN commercial. The sponsor wasn't happy about it. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVDQEoe6ZWY

Thanks for this
Post reply on HN