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

“We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

darknetlive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 276 posts

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#111

Post by googlryas »

jaywalk wrote: post #97
googlryas wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article, it seems like he was collateral damage and not the intended target - the drone strike was targeting Ibrahim al-Banna. That sucks, very much a wrong place wrong time, but I would say that a fairly effective strategy for not being collateral damage is to not hang out with internationally wanted terrorists.

I don't know why the parent poster linked to his son, but this is probably who he was thinking of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki A US citizen who was executed by a drone strike ordered by Obama himself.

I don't really see the problem with this either. It seems like they would have liked to capture him, but it was infeasible. The guy essentially declared war on the US with his actions. What special steps should they take because he is an American citizen?

A little different, but imagine if an American decided to go fight for Germany during WWII. Should he receive any special consideration above what native-born German soldiers got, before Americans start shooting towards him?

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#112

Post by donatj »

ALittleLight wrote: post #95
donatj wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies don't kill me. It's the government I'm worried about, and the governments of the world have literally no intentions on respecting your privacy.

But companies collect your data and sell it to the government.

Governments don't need to bother - they collect it directly.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#113

Post by sha256sum »

the_only_law wrote: post #58
kibwen wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As an American I'm ashamed that my government has done things like this and I fully support those responsible for these programs to be tried as war criminals. Same and seconded. That includes presidents too; take every living president and have them stand for these crimes. There's no reason that being president should be carte blanche for murder.

The has CIA tortured US citizens, destroyed the evidence and got away with it, I doubt anything will happen.

>I doubt anything will happen

The last president who seemingly took issue with these powers was conveniently assassinated. His successor (and the successor's allies) wasted no time in appeasing those powers by beginning lots of wars that killed and destroyed the lives of many people. I too doubt anything will happen.

At the risk of starting a Chomsky flame war and for anyone curious about what happened in those wars, and why nothing will happen: read "Manufacturing Consent".

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#114

Post by RHSeeger »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #57
the_lonely_road wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a false equivalence though and not what the alternative option is here. The government was killing its enemies 100 years before the word digital was invented and will continue to do so as long as government exist. They will use every technology invented in the pursuit of doing so. Blaming metadata signature based approaches is no different than blaming their use of satellites, metallurgy, hell the wheel is a b…

In 2010, an American citizen was killed in a drone strike by the US military, without a trial or any attempt to make an arrest. This was the first time in history that a US civilian was killed by the US military. Before 2010, we were doing just fine without executing citizens on suspect legal grounds. Edit: Edited to state that this was not fire of combatants in a combat zone.

> Before 2010, we were doing just fine without executing citizens on suspect legal grounds.

Well, no; we just weren't doing it using the military. Or at least weren't doing it using the military in a way that we got caught. The US government (and, I expect, nearly every government since the dawn of governments) has been killing people outside of "the battlefield" forever.

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#115

Post by User23 »

r2_pilot wrote: post #107
Consultant32452 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware that Trump could have tweeted a copy of every top secret document the government has and it would have been perfectly legal?

This is not a true statement. The AEC has its own Restricted Data classification which is not under the purview of the president to declassify. There are other cases of classification but this is one that is not easily debatable.

> The AEC has its own Restricted Data classification which is not under the purview of the president to declassify.

They can certainly say that, but since the executive power is constitutionally vested in the president in Article II, it can't be true barring a constitutional amendment. I believe there are court cases already establishing that Congress does not have the authority to limit the President's power to classify and declassify[1]. In this particular case a constitutional argument isn't even necessary since Trump's conduct appears to be protected by the Presidential Records Act.

Of course this is Trump we're talking about, so half the country will happily shred the constitution to "get" him, including many federal employees.

[1] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/518/

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#116

Post by RHSeeger »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #105
buildbot wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kent state does not count? It has happened probably a lot, it is just hard to find good records about now and they actually tell people. Pre-1900s, you just are not hearing about it probably. I don't buy the military getting less moral recently.

State national guard units are not the US military. A dead giveaway is that if something happened on US soil, it is not a US military operation.

Clearly not true.

First item on this list: https://www.military.com/military-life/6-times-military-was-...

> 1863: The New York City Draft Riots > the governor [...] had to call in U.S. Marines.

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#117

Post by mandmandam »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #99
mikece wrote: post #8

"Signature strikes" -- the target has a signature (movement, data, use of a satellite phone or specific cellular number, entourage, etc) that matches that of an HVT (high value taget) that is authorized for termination by drone strike. The CIA has killed lots of the wrong people because "signature strikes" don't require second source intelligence to verify who the target is (eg: is the person using the satellite phon…

> The CIA has killed lots of the wrong people because "signature strikes" Please cite a source for this claim.

You can find this yourself so easily that your question qualifies as sealioning.

But here you go anyway: https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/05/obamas-most-dangerous-d...

> “Signature strikes have resulted in large numbers of bystander casualties in Pakistan and Yemen,” Jameel Jaffer, a deputy legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union, told Foreign Policy.

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#118

Post by engineer_22 »

phkahler wrote: post #77
lupire wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Signatures" aren't necessarily better or worse than other sources. Other sources can be mistakes or intentional lies. What matters is the quality of the totality of the evidence, and how well convinced we are of what the accuracy based on past experience; and how much the deciders knew about last inaccuracies, when deciding to continue a practice. Statistical decision making is very slippery stuff.

>> "Signatures" aren't necessarily better or worse than other sources. Right, they are almost always worse than first-hand information, and they are almost always better than low-grade intelligence obtained under pressure/influence (like the WMDs in Iraq). That is no justification.

>> Right, they are almost always worse than first-hand information,

You're probably right about this, in a sense, but it beckons a pretty interesting question: provide an example when "signatures" are better than first-hand information.

Counter example: If your job is to find enemy subs, then sonar feedback off the hull of a Akula Class nuclear attack sub may be better than direct visual observation of the sub

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#119

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

engineer_22 wrote: post #106
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is likely the most upsetting part. As flawed as US judicial system is, it is a system that still has to move within certain known parameters. The fact that judicial system stops applying the moment 'the government' decides it doesn't apply is in itself a big problem that effectively undermines basic trust in the system. I don't want to say that it started with Bush, because each president had their sins, but war…

-> some basic rules have to be followed if only to ensure citizenry that they are followed. I guess one of those rules could be: Don't travel overseas to participate in a war against the US government. Yes, I understand, this is a hard rule to follow, especially if you're of the rebellious bent, but comfort requires compromise.

Well, I am hardly a rebel. The rule you list is not a rule at all.

I am surprised that I even have to point it out, but you do not stop being an American by traveling outside the country. Hell, you do not stop being an American even if you send money to sanctioned entities.

There is a reason there is a process for those, who deviate from societal norms. It ensures people en masse do not take matters into their own hands. That process does not, or at least should not, include current regime deciding you get deaded behind closed doors. Deviation from it historically yielded very poor results.

If you are not sure why that is a bad idea, and a bad omen, for a republic supposedly governed by law, I am genuinely not sure I can help. I am just sad that some people explicitly believe this.

Re: “We kill people based on metadata” and other metadata things

#120

Post by forgetfulness »

nickff wrote: post #81
hammock wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is assassination we are talking about, not ad serving

Uncertainty is (unfortunately) everywhere; for example, what probability is “beyond a reasonable doubt”? There are many who take issue with that question, but the answers I’ve seen range between 0.1% and 5%, with no general consensus.

What's the appeal process for being assassinated by the CIA like?
Post reply on HN