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

Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 293 posts

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#101

Post by flatiron »

quest88 wrote: post #89
Melting_Harps wrote: post #86

Short term solution: Well VPNs for all, Ghostery [1] was running a deal on their paid version with a VPN built into their add-on [1]. Long term: The State is making their panopticon ambitions overt now in the public eye, thus spurring on the need to re-design the Internet entirely to avoid this. Anyone know what Starlink is offering in terms of privacy? Details are sparse for the most part right now, but given their…

Don't use VPN services: https://gist.github.com/joepie91/5a9909939e6ce7d09e29

I use it for P2P and I work from home so I don’t want to be on any “naughty” P2P lists may employer might check on their VPN log (since they distribute media). That’s another use case of the VPN.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#102

Post by kitotik »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #86

Short term solution: Well VPNs for all, Ghostery [1] was running a deal on their paid version with a VPN built into their add-on [1]. Long term: The State is making their panopticon ambitions overt now in the public eye, thus spurring on the need to re-design the Internet entirely to avoid this. Anyone know what Starlink is offering in terms of privacy? Details are sparse for the most part right now, but given their…

Sadly I think more of a scorched earth approach is required.

The web as we know it and the handful of corporations that dominate it are known to be compromised and no amount of work arounds will change that.

The real answer is the complete boycott of the major providers, more independent ISPs, E2EE, and embracing alternative protocols.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#103

Post by u801e »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #12

Wyden is probably one of the few senators, who is consistent on this issue. Everyone else, at best, pays lip service or repeats talking points about terrorism and the need to protect America from the ever present danger.

Given the issues in terms of lives lost and economic damage due to the pandemic, the outcome of a terrorist attack doesn't really seem that bad. I would hope that the public would see through the farce of the security apparatus and let the patriot act expire and get rid of organizations like the TSA.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#104

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

kolbe wrote: post #100
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #12

Wyden is probably one of the few senators, who is consistent on this issue. Everyone else, at best, pays lip service or repeats talking points about terrorism and the need to protect America from the ever present danger.

It's really hard for me to tell on these issues what is real. I feel like they just have a certain number of senators who are allowed to look moral, but the end result always needs to be that surveillance wins. My gut says that Wyden just happens to have drawn the long straw in a sick game to make the Seante look more moral than it is, but if he needed to vote for it to pass for some reason, he would. This loss is ki…

Maybe. That said, he was one of the few people, who actually made Clapper lie in front the of the entire world. Reportedly, this lie was a breaking point for Snowden who saw the exchange between Clapper and Wyden[0].

While I would be willing to accept your suggestion that is basically just Kabuki theatre, it seems even more cynical than I am willing to contemplate now.

I am saying this, because Wyden visibly pushed Clapper ( apparently knowing that he was lying ).

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwiUVUJmGjs

edit: Come to think of it, if Wyden was a genuine threat, I am sure security apparatus would have tried to take him down by now. But no dead hookers, no unsavory hobbies, no character assassination.. your suggestion makes more sense than I initially thought it had.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#105

Post by np_tedious »

toofy wrote: post #79
kitotik wrote: post #19

Once again the lack of media coverage on this is appalling. Rand Paul has introduced an amendment that goes up for vote tomorrow that would disallow this surveillance on American citizens, which of course is not expected to pass. McConnell is drafting language to prevent this from being used on “federal election candidates” which of course is expected to pass.

> McConnell is drafting language to prevent this from being used on “federal election candidates” which of course is expected to pass. So privacy for those in positions of power but not for us plebes.

Do they have to be viable candidates? I don't mind being in a permanent state of casual campaigning

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#106

Post by Spooky23 »

ueu33hyrdd wrote: post #90
kitotik wrote: post #19

Once again the lack of media coverage on this is appalling. Rand Paul has introduced an amendment that goes up for vote tomorrow that would disallow this surveillance on American citizens, which of course is not expected to pass. McConnell is drafting language to prevent this from being used on “federal election candidates” which of course is expected to pass.

I don't get the hostility towards requiring a warrant to spy on election candidates. Even if the goal is similar protections for everybody, it's obvious that measures designed to prevent parties from abusing the surveillance apparatus for political ends is a good thing. It's difficult to imagine a better tool for ensuring one side gets muck raked harder than the other.

For one, we have a POTUS that may have benefited knowingly or unknowingly by means of a foreign intelligence influence campaign. This gives those entities a free pass to influence campaigns or to hide other types of spying relating to an incumbent who is running for re-election. Seems like a bad time to make such a change in the law.

There’s also the whole equal protection under law issue — a core tenant of American law is that everyone is nominally the same. Declaring a vague category of citizen out of bounds of the law is absurd.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#107

Post by stormbrew »

ueu33hyrdd wrote: post #90
kitotik wrote: post #19

Once again the lack of media coverage on this is appalling. Rand Paul has introduced an amendment that goes up for vote tomorrow that would disallow this surveillance on American citizens, which of course is not expected to pass. McConnell is drafting language to prevent this from being used on “federal election candidates” which of course is expected to pass.

I don't get the hostility towards requiring a warrant to spy on election candidates. Even if the goal is similar protections for everybody, it's obvious that measures designed to prevent parties from abusing the surveillance apparatus for political ends is a good thing. It's difficult to imagine a better tool for ensuring one side gets muck raked harder than the other.

Aside from the blatantly obvious issue of equal protection of the law, if the people who would have to pass a broader law are already protected by one that is narrowly focused on them, they're less incentivized to pass the broader law. Letting the narrow law pass creates a barrier to passing the broader law.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#108

Post by Spooky23 »

kitotik wrote: post #19

Once again the lack of media coverage on this is appalling. Rand Paul has introduced an amendment that goes up for vote tomorrow that would disallow this surveillance on American citizens, which of course is not expected to pass. McConnell is drafting language to prevent this from being used on “federal election candidates” which of course is expected to pass.

And where is Bernie Sanders?

It passed by one vote. He missed it.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#109

Post by Spooky23 »

mc32 wrote: post #38
kitotik wrote: post #19

Once again the lack of media coverage on this is appalling. Rand Paul has introduced an amendment that goes up for vote tomorrow that would disallow this surveillance on American citizens, which of course is not expected to pass. McConnell is drafting language to prevent this from being used on “federal election candidates” which of course is expected to pass.

Wait, so it could be used to surveil state candidates Willy nilly? No warrant required?

This is a part of the Patriot Act and has been around for a long time. The vote was to add the warrant requirement.

Re: Senate narrowly rejects plan to require a warrant for Americans’ browsing data

#110

Post by cle »

throwlaplace wrote: post #63

'Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds' -Robert Oppenheimer we did this to ourselves. we built these tools that are now at the disposal of people with malicious intentions. in another thread about surveillance of WFH employees everyone is aghast that managers would use such tools. again: we did this to ourselves. you can shift the blame any number of times around the loop of responsibilities it's not my faul…

How will finding someone to blame make the problem any better?

Finding fault isn’t useful here. Our mental energy is better spent finding ways to fix the process and/or technologies.

Post reply on HN