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

Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

privacytools.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 161 posts

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#31

Post by jjcon »

ColanR wrote: post #17
jjcon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said ‘can be a reasonable apparatus‘ not ‘is an acceptable apparatus’ and I would argue there is a pretty big difference

That's a semantic difference that doesn't bear any relevance to what I'm saying. To "realize" that it can be reasonable is to accept the underlying premise - that surveillance is not necessarily (logic term there) unacceptable. I am specifically arguing that we do not (should not) accept a priori the premise that surveillance is not necessarily bad. To do so is to capitulate the entire argument against surveillance,…

I’m not sure moral puritanism is really that useful here. Surveillance isn’t going anywhere and it is demonstrably useful for national security. We are best off working to allow it to operate with ample checks and balances rather than closing our eyes and pretending it is superfluous.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#32

Post by HugeAcumen »

eivarv wrote: post #28
zionic wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't see many talk about is how much harm the belief that they harvest everything is, on top of just the actual deed itself. If I am an organization that is well known to be spying on everyone and anything, that means I can very convincingly fabricate evidence against my enemies. It goes beyond simple spying, they now have the ability to manufacture whatever truth they'd like.

Though not exactly what you're referring to, my impression is that people discuss the chilling effect [0] quite a bit. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect#Chilling_effec...

Some people do - though likely not as many as discuss Love Island.

I think the tech community in particular (with both the awareness and the means) has a duty to the public to make clear what is going on to those less tuned in.

So far, it has failed in that to a rather astonishing degree. Probably for exactly the reasons yourself and the OP describe.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#33

Post by crispyporkbites »

dsbleia wrote: post #30

I'm asking this question not to spark a contentious debate or be ridiculed. But I'm genuinely curious, as someone who has little experience with China and only lived in the US, is the US just as much of a surveillance state as China? We often hear a lot of 'information' (bordering propaganda), about China being an "authoritarian surveillance state". I don't mean to sound absurd, but is the US that much better in term…

The US is much better. Take for example internet surveillance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_and_surv...

China is in another league. They are using deep packet inspection to block services they don’t allow access to, they force some people to install apps on their phone that track them. The great firewall of China is far more visible and impactful than the real Great Wall of China.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#34

Post by boomboomsubban »

twblalock wrote: post #27
aborsy wrote: post #22

Surveillance pertains to asymmetric information, a situation where a few in the society (those in power) have access to the information of the rest of the society (those not in power, namely, the public) but not conversely. The asymmetry of the information gives those in power great advantage over public. The rich and powerful claim, we monitor you to protect you, and to better serve you. The scope and the characteri…

One way around this is to make surveillance records available to the public through due process like other public government records. This removes the asymmetry and it also makes surveillance less attractive in the first place, because those responsible for the surveillance would be forced to expose surveillance records about themselves.

>One way around this is to make surveillance records available to the public through due process like other public government records.

I'm fairly sure they already are. Any records of interest get some sort of classified label preventing their release until long past when they matter.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#35

Post by brobdingnagians »

aborsy wrote: post #22

Surveillance pertains to asymmetric information, a situation where a few in the society (those in power) have access to the information of the rest of the society (those not in power, namely, the public) but not conversely. The asymmetry of the information gives those in power great advantage over public. The rich and powerful claim, we monitor you to protect you, and to better serve you. The scope and the characteri…

There is also the implicit assumption of "superior goodness" of those in power, who will "benevolently assure our security". If anything, power corrupts. Trusting a certain small group to be ethically superior is insanity. If anything, history proves that, on average, those with more money are _less_ethical_. They often got the money by being that way, then convince everyone to give them more power.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#36

Post by tjohns »

3jckd wrote: post #3

The link is dead atm.

There's something odd going on. I'm getting an NXDOMAIN error. It looks like I get different results depending on which DNS server I try:

  $ dig @8.8.8.8 www.privacytools.io
  (No results.)
  
  $ dig @8.8.4.4 www.privacytools.io
  www.privacytools.io. 3158 IN A 135.181.7.217
  
  $ dig @75.75.75.75 www.privacytools.io
  (No result.)
  
  $ dig @1.1.1.1 www.privacytools.io
  www.privacytools.io. 1395 IN A 135.181.7.217

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#37

Post by jjcon »

dsbleia wrote: post #30

I'm asking this question not to spark a contentious debate or be ridiculed. But I'm genuinely curious, as someone who has little experience with China and only lived in the US, is the US just as much of a surveillance state as China? We often hear a lot of 'information' (bordering propaganda), about China being an "authoritarian surveillance state". I don't mean to sound absurd, but is the US that much better in term…

The US and EU countries have processes, checks and balances on those powers (though not always enough, I think they need more). These checks keep abuse low and keep mass surveillance limited to national security domains. This is in stark contrast to China where this power can be used/abused with almost no oversight or limitations.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#38

Post by bouchard »

> In Canada key disclosure is covered under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 11(c) which states "any person charged with an offence has the right not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;"[10] and protects the rights of individuals that are both citizens and non-citizens of Canada as long as they are physically present in Canada.[11]

>In a 2010 Quebec Court of Appeal case the court stated that a password compelled from an individual by law enforcement "is inadmissible and that renders the subsequent seizure of the data unreasonable. In short, even had the seizure been preceded by judicial authorization, the law will not allow an order to be joined compelling the respondent to self-incriminate."[12]

>In a 2019 Ontario court case (R v. Shergill), the defendant was initially ordered to provide the password to unlock his phone. However, the judge concluded that providing a password would be tantamount to self-incrimination by testifying against oneself. As a result, the defendant was not compelled to provide his password.

According to the Wikipedia article cited when "Canada" is clicked, key disclosure laws don't apply which is the opposite of what the site claims.

Or am I misunderstanding something here?

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#39

Post by [deleted] »

dsbleia wrote: post #30

I'm asking this question not to spark a contentious debate or be ridiculed. But I'm genuinely curious, as someone who has little experience with China and only lived in the US, is the US just as much of a surveillance state as China? We often hear a lot of 'information' (bordering propaganda), about China being an "authoritarian surveillance state". I don't mean to sound absurd, but is the US that much better in term…

[deleted]

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#40

Post by craigsmansion »

dsbleia wrote: post #30

I'm asking this question not to spark a contentious debate or be ridiculed. But I'm genuinely curious, as someone who has little experience with China and only lived in the US, is the US just as much of a surveillance state as China? We often hear a lot of 'information' (bordering propaganda), about China being an "authoritarian surveillance state". I don't mean to sound absurd, but is the US that much better in term…

> but is the US that much better in terms of authoritarianism or surveillance?

Who knows? The last guy who touched upon it had to hide in freedom-loving Russia afterwards.

The PRC has it easy. They don't have to hide their actions behind contortions of "national security", which makes it difficult to compare the extent and pervasiveness of US and PRC surveillance.

Post reply on HN