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

Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#41

Post by tootie »

nimbius wrote: post #28
tootie wrote: post #9

I don't think that's much of a revelation. Every time national security information falls into the hands of a news org, the government will ask them not to publish it. Sometimes appealing to them on civic grounds that it will weaken security or probably threatening legal action. The NY Times famously sat on the warrantless wiretapping story for nearly a year because they were lead to believe it could compromise ongoi…

>In the US or UK media orgs generally has very little to fear in terms of actual punishment, but they do have to make a very real calculus over whether they're serving the public interest. not true. media organizations that do not report in accordance with and to the governments favour may lose preferential access to press conferences as retaliation. their parent companies, viacom, CBS, and Warner for example, may lo…

I didn't say "television news" I said "reputable media". And no, none of them have any legal obligation whatsoever to do anything really (aside from slander/libel). What they do and don't publish is weighed against their mission and their reputation. If the mission is "spread outrage and generate ad revenue" they'll publish whatever sounds sexy. I (full disclosure) work for a non-profit newsroom that has a genuine mission to serve public interest and if we were ever perceived not to be, we'd be abandoned by our donors and disappear. But even orgs that have genuine principles guiding them can still make mistakes.

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#42

Post by sillystuff »

carapace wrote: post #25
qikInNdOutReply wrote: post #2

I wish we could have a honest discussions about the pro and cons of the panopticon the internet has become. Not just the usual "Might makes right" glue moral flaws to the person putting questions to power oppossed by fierce "liberty at all cost aka anarchism". It seems pretty obvious that the individual can not be trusted with the power modern technology hands to it, but then again, i find the three letter agencies t…

I think the panopticon is unavoidable (I'll expand below) so the question is how to harness it to get a humane techno-totalitarian system? People have pointed out that "humane totalitarian" is an oxymoron, and I agree, but I think it's the challenge we face. It seems to me that we can and should ensure that the people in power are themselves subject to the panopticon. Literally politicians should be 24/7 live streami…

Police are, in theory, already subject to the same physical tracking by automatic license plate readers as the rest of the population. But, police are able to get a pass from other cops when they employ counter-measures to defeat the tracking, so the reality is that the tracking does not apply to them. E.g., cops foiling automatic license plate readers[1] using methods that would cause non-police to be ticketed.

And, if somehow you manage to prevent abuse like the above, laws will be passed that grant exceptions for the powerful and their enforcers[2][3]. Many of the existing laws in this category recognize that privacy is essential for personal security and safety-- but only grant that security and safety to the privileged few.

We need to enshrine a strong right to privacy in law-- attacking surveillance head on (in the US, this means a constitutional amendment, or it will be [more] vulnerable to laws/courts granting exceptions). While sympathetic, I don't think that trying to reign in surveillance through making it equitable (on paper), are going to succeed.

[1] https://www.insideedition.com/21559-investigation-finds-poli...

[2] https://www.ocregister.com/2009/11/12/special-license-plates...

[3] https://www.menendez.senate.gov/newsroom/press/menendez-book...

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#43

Post by klabb3 »

KerrAvon wrote: post #8

Two things can be true: - the NSA and/or other three letter agencies are/were out of control - Snowden did enormous damage to US and allies with his indiscriminate distribution of classified information https://centerforsecuritypolicy.org/snowden-is-a-traitor-and...

> - Snowden did enormous damage to US and allies with his indiscriminate distribution of classified information

That would be something like "telling the police about your abusive husband hurts your family". Yes, it did hurt intelligence agencies and their beneficiaries. That is not the same as "the US". The victims of the indiscriminate surveillance were largely American and are much more plentiful than the perpetrators.

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#44

Post by Kranar »

tootie wrote: post #41
nimbius wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In the US or UK media orgs generally has very little to fear in terms of actual punishment, but they do have to make a very real calculus over whether they're serving the public interest. not true. media organizations that do not report in accordance with and to the governments favour may lose preferential access to press conferences as retaliation. their parent companies, viacom, CBS, and Warner for example, may lo…

I didn't say "television news" I said "reputable media". And no, none of them have any legal obligation whatsoever to do anything really (aside from slander/libel). What they do and don't publish is weighed against their mission and their reputation. If the mission is "spread outrage and generate ad revenue" they'll publish whatever sounds sexy. I (full disclosure) work for a non-profit newsroom that has a genuine mi…

You never said "reputable media" you said "news organizations". Specifically you said that news organizations have some kind of real calculus about the public interest when deciding whether to publish a story and what OP is saying is that said calculus is fairly superficial compared to the very real calculus of losing out on profits due to lack of access.

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#45

Post by cestith »

LatteLazy wrote: post #31
KerrAvon wrote: post #8

Two things can be true: - the NSA and/or other three letter agencies are/were out of control - Snowden did enormous damage to US and allies with his indiscriminate distribution of classified information https://centerforsecuritypolicy.org/snowden-is-a-traitor-and...

He was extremely careful in the docs he permitted to be released. Anyone telling you otherwise is lying to you.

He also should have had some help from the news agency in them asking him for his opinion and using some of their own judgment about which parts of it to publishin case he accidentally shared anything in such a large group of documents. That probably also happened.

I think it's telling that multiple administrations have failed to come forward and promise him a fair trial, let alone any sort of deal, commutation, or pardon.

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#46

Post by bigfudge »

robertlagrant wrote: post #29
causi wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems pretty obvious that the individual can not be trusted with the power modern technology hands to it Hard disagree. Modern technology is mishandled most intensely by large organizations. When it's misused by individuals it's usually based on information freely given. An individual might send your employer an insensitive tweet you made ten years ago but an organization can do anything from unmasking an anonymou…

> Modern technology is mishandled most intensely by large organizations Of course. There are more individuals in larger organizations :)

I think you are just making a joke, which is fine, but I would reassert the point I think the OP was making that there is a qualitative difference in the nature of the abuses committed by individuals and firms.

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#47

Post by lioeters »

KerrAvon wrote: post #8

Two things can be true: - the NSA and/or other three letter agencies are/were out of control - Snowden did enormous damage to US and allies with his indiscriminate distribution of classified information https://centerforsecuritypolicy.org/snowden-is-a-traitor-and...

All I'm hearing is, "Reporting the crime did enormous damage to the criminals." It’s the world’s smallest violin, and it’s playing just for you.

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#49

Post by zahllos »

It is pretty ironic the other nations in the five eyes were outraged at contractors. The UK at least certainly does not have a leg to stand on: there are plenty of defence contractors that routinely work with and for GCHQ, and big government contractors are just as much a part of the UK industry as they are the US.

Pot, meet kettle.

Re: Snowden: US asked British spy agency to stop Guardian publishing revelations

#50

Post by wnevets »

jjulius wrote: post #38
wnevets wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His twitter account prior to February 24, 2022

There's a tweet from him on February 11th that says the media's gross for pushing for a war. Beyond that, all he does is suggest we should be demanding more evidence for claims of an impending war that Biden and the intelligence community were pushing. He's even talked about the invasion as recently in June in a way that suggests he doesn't think it's invented[1] by media. Do you actually have a specific example of S…

That is because he deleted a lot of his tweets. For example

> Now that the promised invasion has failed to materialize, maybe we could take another look at the story that was breaking when the White House was suddenly overcome with a mysterious and inexplicable desire to change the news cycle: [1]

> So... if nobody shows up for the invasion Biden scheduled for tomorrow morning at 3AM, I'm not saying your journalistic credibility was instrumentalized as part of one of those disinformation campaigns you like to write about, but you should at least consider the possibility. [2]

edit: browsing archive.org for deleted tweets isn't a great experience, anyone know of a an easier way?

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220216175036/https://twitter.c...

[2] https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1493641714363478016

Post reply on HN