Live data from Hacker News

NSA Owns Everything (2015)

blog.thinkst.com

231–240 of 265 posts

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm increasingly close to doing an AMA where I just let HN ask me any conspiracy related question right before I burn this account... I figure it would get lost in the sauce though... Any specifics you are most curious about?

I'd hope HN wouldn't clean it out... How dire? Where to look? Timeline? I wish there was a wiki build on a trust network where I could control the weights.

If we had one of those we wouldn't need a CIA or NSA. Such a system couldn't very well be less correct than they've been for their entire existences.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#232
post #148
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Him being there makes Russia look more tolerant than his home country.. Which is already a Pretty big bonus.

At this point is there a compelling heuristic we can use to determine if Snowden is an idealistic whistleblower or simply a Russian intelligence asset? The facts seem to support both interpretations.

This sounds like some sort of nutty conspiracy theory.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#233
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like frustration at the inability to change the beliefs of people. People will often behave irrationally, and yes there is nothing we can do about that. They have done this forever, and likely will continue to do that forever. You can only have a rational argument with them if they care to find the truth, and most people most of the time do not. On the other hand, many people come to Hacker News explicitl…

> seeing this kind of low value dismissal is disappointing > I would have ignored it out of hand Those two next to each other is kind of amusing.

"low value dismissal" is the antecedent of the pronoun "it". On HN we routinely ignore low value dismissals. You know this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/leaders

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just this week a 20GB dump of private Intel source was dumped with backdoors included. > That's the sort of thing that's going to happen again with the newly published Intel backdoors. This is not even remotely true. You have to read more than just the headlines. > Anyone on WiFi AC or up are backdoored right now by NSA. All of them are compromised, no doubt in my mind. All the LTE. All the x86 hardware on the mark…

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/19/the-nsa-was-hacked-snowd... there is proof that NSA has been mass hacking WiFi since at least 2005. that batch of Snowden leaks came out one week after the Shadowbroker's first leak. NSA programs SECONDDATE and BADDECISION were used to mass hack into WiFi routers in Iraq in 2005-2007. note the slides say NSA breached the WiFi routers of EVERY INTERNET CAFE IN IRAQ. that is the Coll…

Interesting article, but I think you're way over drawing your conclusions.

> how much would you bet that NSA is NOT bulk hacking WiFi routers of ENTIRE US CITIES FROM THE AIR?

I would bet very good money that they are not doing this. If SECONDDATE has been around since 2005, and they are bulk installing it on millions of routers in the US, where are the people coming out saying "I found some NSA shit on my router"? Is there a _single_ example to support this?

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#235
post #5

The basic premise is false. > "Why did we never see it coming?" Many people saw it coming. I was warning about the possibility of dragnet surveillance, the existence of ECHELON, the use of the American security apparatus to steal trade secrets, the surveillance of non-American politicians, et al... For many, many years before Snowden. And I'm just some rando on the internet who follows the mainstream news! We were ca…

I first heard about this as a kid in 1999. I didn't even have internet back then (only got it in year 2000), and my country had just been bombed by NATO (your regular bombing campaign sprinkled with bombing civilians, as is tradition) and was lead by Slobodan fucking Milošević (a colossal piece of shit), so all kinds of conspiracies were flying around, everything was disinformation, and I didn't put much weight on this story even though my parents discussed it with friends several times during the next decade, which is why I remember it.

My parents' friend who had lived in New Zealand for a decade at that point came to the country to bury his father and was over at our house for dinner. He's an electrical engineer and used to work for a telco in New Zealand. He had heard about this ECHELON thing from multiple colleagues and found it plausible enough to talk about. He was told that all internet and phone traffic was being recorded realtime. Mind you, this was pre-9/11, so no 'terrorist threats'. The world ran on shitty computers and expensive storage and voice in any form (even compressed telephony) was considered bulky at the time. And this is 15 years prior to the machine learning boom, voice transcription was really bad, I still doubt it was used at that point, even though he mentioned it.

But he had witnessed an expansion of fiber and datacenter capacity sometime in 1997-99 and it seemed plausible to him (a real serious and professional guy).

Imagine my surprise when it turned out to be true. I mean, the story slowly became less and less far fetched over the following decade, but was still a total surprise when Snowden blew the whistle.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#236

In terms of your experts being wrong, reality is, you likely didn't want your experts to tell you about this stuff at all. If you added state actors to a threat model even after Snowden, there were corporate managers in random companies who would shut down the conversation, end the conference call, or leave the room and you'd find out indirectly that someone somewhere had found problem with your contract and it was b…

If you walk into any of these things in real life: tread very carefully.

> I just sometimes ask myself if people in previous centuries thought and lived as superficially as today. Or if, piece by piece, as times fade, their bad aspects retreat to the background and their goodness shines especially bright? At any rate I think that the individual, regardless of outcome, has to be vigilant, and especially when it is made hard for them. You also believe that this can never be levelled upwards, as desirable as that seems. When there is levelling, it always happens downwards. But here, too, there is a brilliant opportunity offered by fate to prove ourselves. Maybe one should not underestimate that, either.

-- Sophie Scholl

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a conspiracy theory is not 'something that has been proven to not be true' Snowden's leak is a good example of something that proved a lot of conspiracy theories to be true

You are missing the point. The theory that the NSA was hovering up everything in sight was just a theory. We did not have proof one way or the other, and quite a bit of circumstantial evidence to conclude that it was in fact happening. At that stage it was 'just a theory', with little support. That some people then went a step further and mislabeled it is mostly their problem, they should have realized that the stand…

I think you're the one missing the point, which is that you're misusing the term 'conspiracy theory'.

The NSA engaged in a conspiracy, which was to "hoover up everything in sight". There was a theory (which was largely dismissed) that the NSA was in fact doing this.

It was therefore a conspiracy theory that the NSA was doing what it was doing. That is the point: please use the phrase correctly.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you walk into any of these things in real life: tread very carefully.

> I just sometimes ask myself if people in previous centuries thought and lived as superficially as today. Or if, piece by piece, as times fade, their bad aspects retreat to the background and their goodness shines especially bright? At any rate I think that the individual, regardless of outcome, has to be vigilant, and especially when it is made hard for them. You also believe that this can never be levelled upwards…

Great quote and great person. And how her life ended is a good indicator that what I wrote isn't nonsense. But I actually meant it in a more present day technical and less all-out fascism way. Still, the principles remain the same.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#239
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are missing the point. The theory that the NSA was hovering up everything in sight was just a theory. We did not have proof one way or the other, and quite a bit of circumstantial evidence to conclude that it was in fact happening. At that stage it was 'just a theory', with little support. That some people then went a step further and mislabeled it is mostly their problem, they should have realized that the stand…

I think you're the one missing the point, which is that you're misusing the term 'conspiracy theory'. The NSA engaged in a conspiracy, which was to "hoover up everything in sight". There was a theory (which was largely dismissed) that the NSA was in fact doing this. It was therefore a conspiracy theory that the NSA was doing what it was doing. That is the point: please use the phrase correctly.

If I combine apples and sauce I don't necessarily get applesauce. It is a clever linguistic trick but you are not helping by making such a disingenuous argument. Juxtaposition of terms in frequently used combinations can have a different meaning than terms used separately.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just sometimes ask myself if people in previous centuries thought and lived as superficially as today. Or if, piece by piece, as times fade, their bad aspects retreat to the background and their goodness shines especially bright? At any rate I think that the individual, regardless of outcome, has to be vigilant, and especially when it is made hard for them. You also believe that this can never be levelled upwards…

Great quote and great person. And how her life ended is a good indicator that what I wrote isn't nonsense. But I actually meant it in a more present day technical and less all-out fascism way. Still, the principles remain the same.

She was arguably a bit careless in the moment that lead to them getting caught, and since pushing that stack of fliers wasn't really useful for their greater aims, that kinda proves your point as well. The idea of the White Rose not getting caught, so rather shortly before the end of the Nazi regime, and Sophie Scholl writing more letters, or even books, is fit to make me cry with homesickness. It's an unspeakable loss.

But otherwise, if you read the interrogation transcripts, I don't think she regretted anything. She knew what she was doing and why she did it, and she knew she did well. IMO her life ended so much better than that of people who just give in to pressure against their conscience. It's not like those are immortal, and then they have to spend the rest of their time with who they became, too. Some find a way back, most don't. As Shakespeare wrote, the coward dies a thousand deaths -- Sophie Scholl died but one, and it was rather majestic, if you squint just right.

I still wish she would never had a chance to prove her greatness in this particular manner and had survived instead, so don't take this as me negating your point.

Post reply on HN