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

The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 179 posts

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#41

Post by wat10000 »

kasey_junk wrote: post #26
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #13

Everyone who's not terribly worried about privacy always uses the line 'if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about', but my line of thinking is not 'do i trust the government' it's 'do I have faith in all future forms of government who will have access to this data' Given how fast and lose I've seen the DODGE folks play with the data they have, absolutely not . I still shudder over the fact t…

Does anyone ever actually use that line? Most people will argue that the trade off in privacy is worth it for security. That is, if you frame your argument such that you believe people don’t understand the trade off it allows you to not engage with the fact they just disagree with your conclusion.

Constantly. Most people have a hard time dealing with tradeoffs and think in absolutes. It goes along with "if you're not a criminal, you have nothing to fear from police," another disturbingly common sentiment.

Some prominent examples:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-22832263

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DSVJmOajGDe/

https://thestandard.nz/if-you-have-nothing-to-hide-you-have-...

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#43

Post by alwa »

snowwrestler wrote: post #34

The warnings are nice but he could just say what it is. Members of Congress have immunity for what they say on the floor of their chamber in session, classification or no.

Immunity from prosecution, maybe, but not immunity from consequence. I can’t imagine congressional leadership would think of it as a good look—and isn’t the “need to know” based on the congressperson’s role? For example don’t they brief only congresspeople in specific roles on specific matters, like the so-called “Gang of Eight” on intelligence matters? [0]

It feels a little like keeping the filibuster around: maybe technically it’s within their power to change the norm, but once unilaterally spilling secrets becomes The Done Thing, it’s hard to imagine it wouldn’t spin out into a free-for-all.

For all the mud that gets slung around, I think congresspeople really don’t get there without some kind of patriotic instinct, some kind of interest in the United States’ ongoing functioning. And I certainly can’t imagine they’d keep getting access to new secrets after pulling something like that, one way or the other…

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_Eight_(intelligence)

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#44

Post by Zigurd »

kasey_junk wrote: post #26
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #13

Everyone who's not terribly worried about privacy always uses the line 'if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about', but my line of thinking is not 'do i trust the government' it's 'do I have faith in all future forms of government who will have access to this data' Given how fast and lose I've seen the DODGE folks play with the data they have, absolutely not . I still shudder over the fact t…

Does anyone ever actually use that line? Most people will argue that the trade off in privacy is worth it for security. That is, if you frame your argument such that you believe people don’t understand the trade off it allows you to not engage with the fact they just disagree with your conclusion.

Have you ever sat on a jury in a criminal case? A frighteningly high percentage of people will swallow every lie a cop tells, even when thoroughly discredited in cross-examination. There's no shortage of people to guard the concentration camps.

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#45

Post by blueone »

newsclues wrote: post #40
blueone wrote: post #38

I’ve stayed private for most of my adult life. Network wide dns, vpns, alternative personas online for different purposes, etc. Nonetheless, my personal data has been exposed numerous times. Once in a while, I’d get into a conversation with a friend or a stranger I met at some random function, and they’d ask how to stay private online and protect their data. I used to go in depth about how to do it, with excitement.…

As someone that worked in an illegal industry (urban pharmaceuticals), you need to appear normal and hide your crimes. If you just hide your crimes, you stick out and become a target. Plausible deniability is harder than just total protection.

Yes.

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#46

Post by briffle »

quesera wrote: post #22
briffle wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen what happens with garbage-in/garbage-out in databases, so this kind of stuff terrifies me. I often think of a case where we had a person listed twice in our database, with same address, birthday, etc, only thing different was gender, and last 2 digits of SSN were transposed.. After we 'fixed' the issue a few times, they BOTH showed up to our office. Both Named Leslie, born on same day, a few small towns a…

That's funny as a human, amazing as a developer, and terrifying as a data processor. All at the same time. I'll bet that pair has stories to tell.

They both showed up in person, because that was NOT the first time that had happened.

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#47

Post by arealaccount »

kasey_junk wrote: post #26
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #13

Everyone who's not terribly worried about privacy always uses the line 'if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about', but my line of thinking is not 'do i trust the government' it's 'do I have faith in all future forms of government who will have access to this data' Given how fast and lose I've seen the DODGE folks play with the data they have, absolutely not . I still shudder over the fact t…

Does anyone ever actually use that line? Most people will argue that the trade off in privacy is worth it for security. That is, if you frame your argument such that you believe people don’t understand the trade off it allows you to not engage with the fact they just disagree with your conclusion.

Yes all the time and it’s not worth debating them as they are not about to say anything interesting.

Usually just make a quip about having curtains then move onto discussing just how moist the turkey is this year

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#48

Post by EGreg »

alpple wrote: post #17
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #13

Everyone who's not terribly worried about privacy always uses the line 'if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about', but my line of thinking is not 'do i trust the government' it's 'do I have faith in all future forms of government who will have access to this data' Given how fast and lose I've seen the DODGE folks play with the data they have, absolutely not . I still shudder over the fact t…

if you're not doing anything wrong, a government that is doing something wrong may not like it

This, exactly.

And governments are always doing something wrong...

Re: The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing

#49

Post by anigbrowl »

The whole concept of 'secret interpretations of law' is anathema to me. Secret information makes sense, there are lots of reasons a government might legitimately want to maintain a veil of obscurity. Secret interpretations of law are a manifestation of tyranny.

I like Ron Wyden but he should just employ his Congressional privilege here and read it out.

Post reply on HN