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

161–170 of 276 posts

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

#161

Post by monocasa »

BobbyJo wrote: post #155
monocasa wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What special steps should they take because he is an American citizen? The due process afforded in the constitution. With, you know, trials and juries and such. > 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? I would say that an operation…

Due process is subject to feasibility on American soil as well. Mass shooters seem to get very few days in court.

It's illegal to assassinate even mass shooters in the US. It's only legal to kill them in defense during an active situation.

And just going to through out there that Anwar al-Awlaki isn't accused of taking up arms, just publishing political speech that the US government didn't approve of.

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

#162

Post by Banana699 »

kshacker wrote: post #48
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…

I am reading "a peoples history of United States" by Howard zinn. It highlights US in a very negative light so with that caveat out of the way, it appears we are continuously ashamed of things we did just a century back. Always. Maybe in a hundred years we will also talk about the current era as dark times (as long as we are the top dog or maybe number 2). But at that point we will have something else to be ashamed o…

I have trouble seeing how this is relevant. We're talking about USA's criminal decisions in the middle east here, which was ongoing as recently as 5 or 3 years ago.

And the "other countries are genocidal maniacs as well" caveat only works if the person who is pointing out that the USA is a genocidal maniac is fond of another country, but there is no mention of any country to praise in this thread, just condemnation of USA's actions against individuals. All countries are genocidal maniacs, but only one controls the US military.

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

#163

Post by lizardactivist »

The CIA is a US state-sponsored terrorist organisation. Every one of those people should be on trial for war crimes.

The only consolation is that many of those people, the so-called "jackals", will eventually be taken out by their own. The diplomatic disasters they could cause should their conscience ever make them talk is too great of a risk -- all loose ends are eventually dealt with.

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

#164

Post by darawk »

ivalm wrote: post #140
darawk wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty similar to the appeals process for being killed by the terrorist that the CIA chose not to assassinate.

How many Americans died from terrorism? How many foreigners died from anti-terrorism drone strikes?

These are actually easy things to look up. 910-2,200 civilians killed by drone strikes[1]. More than that were killed on 9/11 alone [2].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_from_U.S._...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

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

#165

Post by Jochim »

the_optimist wrote: post #89
CamperBob2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. That's not what he did, though. If you think it's a good idea to allow a former POTUS to retroactively and implicitly declassify information he is caught with after leaving office, or to issue a sweeping declaration that any documents he takes out of the Oval Office are automatically declassified, I suspect you won't be as blasé when someone of the opposing political party does it.

You invented 'retroactive.' I suppose you are blasé about this because it applies to someone of an opposing political party.

How exactly was retroactive 'invented' here?

If they were already declassified then there wouldn't have been a raid.

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

#166

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

mandmandam wrote: post #139
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The numbers are impossible to pin down, given the lack of clear reporting on the ground in places like Pakistan and Yemen.

Ha, it almost seems like you're saying that since the US doesn't keep good track of how many civilians they've murdered with "signature strikes", no one can claim that "lots of innocent people are dying". Even when many reports and groups say that lots of innocent people are dying, including the article you're quoting. That would by psychotic though, so I'm surely misinterpreting what your actual point is. Care to cl…

Quantify how many "lots" are. The parent said the CIA killed "lots" of the wrong people. That is really the only word I take issue with.

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

#167

Post by skyyler »

phkahler wrote: post #78
the_only_law wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

>> I doubt anything will happen. Well not with that attitude. ;-)

How do you propose to change this attitude in a time when people who organise groups to change this attitude always end up mysteriously killing themselves?

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

#168

Post by AnimalMuppet »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #42
CamperBob2 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, yes, poorly phrased. We don't know if he's guilty beyond reasonable doubt, and probably won't, because presidents and former presidents are immune to prosecution in this country. It's always possible the he had legitimate reasons for storing SC information outside a SCIF. No one can think of any, including his own legal team, but hey, ex-President, right?

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?

Perhaps - when he was president. He wasn't president when Mar A Lago was searched, though.

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

#169

Post by nonethewiser »

capableweb wrote: post #26
lupire wrote: post #5

Metadata is data. There is no "just" metadata. Metadata is a relative classification of one piece of data compared to another piece of data, not an absolute classification.

It's all data, that's true. But I think the distinction the various three-letter agencies make is between "metadata" and "content" for most data they process. So in terms of a phone call, an actual voice recording would be "content" while when the call was made and between which two numbers would be "metadata". With "content" + "metadata" they could verify that the target is actually who they think it is, based on vo…

You can think of it that way. But then you must admit that metadata is content also. Of metametadata.

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

#170

Post by bombcar »

Banana699 wrote: post #149
salawat wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think that false positives requiring the staging/deployment of a multi-million dollar weapon system don't cost money?

It's not about how much absolute money is spent per each false positive, it's about how much you can get away with wasting. If a decision maker in the CIA is not punished for each brain fart, why would they avoid mistakes ? You get the behaviour that you reinforce and tolerate.

Exactly. A false positive likely results in more money because you need to buy more equipment to replace what you just used, and even more to do it "right this time".
Post reply on HN