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

61–70 of 161 posts

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#61

Post by autisticcurio »

swader999 wrote: post #9
mindslight wrote: post #7

This is treason, plain and simple. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort Foreign spy agencies, even of friendly countries, are our enemies due to their continual mission of attacking us with surveillance. But rather than working to defend the people against these attacks, NSA has chosen to conspire with the attac…

How else will we get around laws against domestic spying?

Firstly you were born on a patch of land that imposes its own laws on you. Did you sign a contract to say you would adhere to those laws? This is all about power and control over less powerful innocent people being treated like sleepy idiots. So to answer your question, out smart them to win, and then you will find they play dirty and illegally, against the spirit of the law they claim to uphold. 5 Eyes best demonstrates this by circumventing domestic laws, they dont have the intelligence to win the argument in their own courts. This also tells you that you can out smart them so get thinking, this is an intelligence game.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#62

Post by jorblumesea »

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…

Many of those that lead intelligence agencies are not rich and powerful but middle class bureaucrats. Many who hold top secret clearances aren't billionaires. That information isn't fed to society's wealthy but in defense of the state, which benefits the rich but also the public.

There are many uses of intelligence and not all of it benefits the rich and powerful. To pretend that the intelligence world exists solely to provide tips to the well connected is ridiculous. It's not that it doesn't, it's just not that black and white.

The world is far more nuanced compared to your abstracted sweeping examples.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#63

Post by twblalock »

pdonis wrote: post #54
twblalock wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 would agree that a person ought to be able to see whatever surveillance records exist on themselves . However, allowing any member of the public to see all surveillance records, on anyone , strikes me as just compounding the problem--now my private information isn't just seen by th…

> now my private information isn't just seen by the government, it's seen by everybody.

Right, but that's why no reasonable congressman would want your information, because that would also make his/hers available just like yours. The result would be that sensitive personal information would be very unlikely to be collected.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#64

Post by matz1 »

pdonis wrote: post #54
twblalock wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 would agree that a person ought to be able to see whatever surveillance records exist on themselves . However, allowing any member of the public to see all surveillance records, on anyone , strikes me as just compounding the problem--now my private information isn't just seen by th…

Information want to be free. Sooner or latter the information will leak. Especially as technology getting more advance, its getting easier and easier to do surveillance, soon everyone can do that. The sooner we adapt with the life where all surveillance records is public the better. Beside it level the playing field, everyone has the same information.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#65

Post by t-writescode »

casraso wrote: post #44
jjcon wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What is a specific example of such a process, check, and/or balance that the united states has that china does not?

Theoretically, the 4th Amendment, but there's so many exceptions to it lately that it only theoretically counts, with a good lawyer.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#66

Post by pdonis »

matz1 wrote: post #64
pdonis wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One way around this is to make surveillance records available to the public through due process like other public government records. I would agree that a person ought to be able to see whatever surveillance records exist on themselves . However, allowing any member of the public to see all surveillance records, on anyone , strikes me as just compounding the problem--now my private information isn't just seen by th…

Information want to be free. Sooner or latter the information will leak. Especially as technology getting more advance, its getting easier and easier to do surveillance, soon everyone can do that. The sooner we adapt with the life where all surveillance records is public the better. Beside it level the playing field, everyone has the same information.

> Information want to be free.

You're welcome to let all of your private information out for everyone to see if that's what you believe. But people like me who do not want to do that should not be forced to.

> The sooner we adapt with the life where all surveillance records is public the better.

I strongly disagree.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#67

Post by pdonis »

twblalock wrote: post #63
pdonis wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One way around this is to make surveillance records available to the public through due process like other public government records. I would agree that a person ought to be able to see whatever surveillance records exist on themselves . However, allowing any member of the public to see all surveillance records, on anyone , strikes me as just compounding the problem--now my private information isn't just seen by th…

> now my private information isn't just seen by the government, it's seen by everybody. Right, but that's why no reasonable congressman would want your information, because that would also make his/hers available just like yours. The result would be that sensitive personal information would be very unlikely to be collected.

> The result would be that sensitive personal information would be very unlikely to be collected.

I don't think so; I think the result would be that people who had the power would simply bend the rules behind the scenes to make sure any information they didn't want revealed wasn't revealed, much as they do now.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#68

Post by matz1 »

pdonis wrote: post #66
matz1 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Information want to be free. Sooner or latter the information will leak. Especially as technology getting more advance, its getting easier and easier to do surveillance, soon everyone can do that. The sooner we adapt with the life where all surveillance records is public the better. Beside it level the playing field, everyone has the same information.

> Information want to be free. You're welcome to let all of your private information out for everyone to see if that's what you believe. But people like me who do not want to do that should not be forced to. > The sooner we adapt with the life where all surveillance records is public the better. I strongly disagree.

>You're welcome to let all of your private information out for everyone to see if that's what you believe

I don't necessarily want to, I'm just being realistic and pragmatic.

>But people like me who do not want to do that should not be forced to.

No one is forced to but the inconvenience and the cost of keeping thing private will go up and up.

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#69

Post by [deleted] »

eivarv wrote: post #24

The Norwegian parliament recently passed a bill that implements bulk metadata collection here as well. I tried debating with ministers, writing op-eds, and even organizing petitions (over 1000 security, privacy and tech professionals in a couple of days) before the vote. While every informed person I know thinks it's a bad idea, and every organization consulted massively criticized it as mass surveillance, a huge maj…

[deleted]

Re: Global Mass Surveillance – The Fourteen Eyes

#70

Post by 3647e7ee7ru »

nicholasjarnold wrote: post #49
eivarv wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Yes, and this so-called Chilling Effect can have a potentially very negative impact on the ability of a democratic society to thrive and possibly to even survive. Democracies require (open, honest) debate. If we self-censor then we hold back on fully-expressing views or positions during debate. This is one of the fundamental issues that I have with this proliferation of population-scale mass-surveillance (domesticall…

I'll start caring about chilling effects on speech again when local governments quit encouraging the police to just let riots wear themselves out, damage and deaths be damned. Until that happens I don't really care if the federal government is engaging in these tactics as long as belligerantly violent groups are actually charged and receive jail time.
Post reply on HN