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

EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 47 posts

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#31

Post by rprospero »

nathan_long wrote: post #9
cbc0201 wrote: post #3

First, your "Take Action" link doesn't work. Second, I don't really care if "NSA's Supercomputers" are scanning my emails, text messages and even my phone calls. They're not really interested in my activities. Third, I'll let you in on a little secret, Its not just overseas communication! If it keeps safe, what do I care!

Suppose that someday you run for office, or lobby for a cause, or run a prominent company. Suppose that you OR someone you love has something in their past they wouldn't want shared, OR which could be misconstrued in the press. Suddenly, you learn that unless you drop out of the race, or stop lobbying, or withdraw from a business venture, you or someone you love will be publicly shamed, fairly or not. Or worse than s…

Here's the thing I've never understood about the "framed and locked-up" argument. If the government was going to go to frame me for being a terrorist, why would they need the giant wiretapping facility? All they need to do is hire a couple of interns to write a whole bunch of "Death to America!" emails and just tell the courts that I wrote them. They'd declare national security issues on why my lawyers can't see the network traces that "prove" that these emails came from my computer.

I guess I'm just saying that the government has been able to frame me a lock me up for over a hundred years. I don't see what this changes about that?

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#32

Post by chimeracoder »

malandrew wrote: post #30
chimeracoder wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Feinstein supports the extension. Her office can be reached at (202) 224-3841. Don't let this stop you (or anyone) from calling, but it's going to take a lot to get Feinstein to switch her stance on this.

Out of curiosity, why? Is Feinstein one of the main proponents of the extension or something?

Feinstein has always been one of the best friends of the law enforcement lobby. Which has made her one of the most disappointing senators on issues of privacy, drug policy, etc.

It's especially disappointing given how out of line her beliefs are with certain areas of California, but that's what often happens when a massively diverse state elects a single representative democratically.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#34

Post by crusso »

jeremyarussell wrote: post #27
mtgx wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New account and first comment here, just to post that NSA can look at your e-mails if they want? I wonder if you're just someone working at NSA and FBI, and who's pushing for these laws. We know that they use "persona management" software to be part of the public conversation.

I find myself agreeing with you, this guy is too much. (Also did you notice how he think's we are all liberals?)

Don't see that in the near-illegible text. Was it edited out?

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#35

Post by Karunamon »

Karunamon wrote: post #12
jalanco wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to pile on, but this comment reminds me of Eric Schmidt's comment that "if you don't have anything to hide, you have nothing to fear". There are at least a couple of things wrong with this sentiment: (1) if you really believe that, then you would have no problem with a group of strangers searching your house, your bank records, safety deposit boxes, all your digital assets, etc. And by "etc" I mean also…

>if you really believe that, then you would have no problem with a group of strangers searching your house etc etc Your point made here is nothing but a pure combination of reduction to the absurd and the slippery slope fallacy...

PS: Thanks for the downvote disagreement guys.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#36

Post by mcantelon »

crusso wrote: post #33
mcantelon wrote: post #28

Who's pushing for this? Where does support for this come from?

It comes from voters who are too apathetic or ignorant to understand the value of basic Liberty. Any other finger-pointing is pretty meaningless.

>It comes from voters who are too apathetic or ignorant to understand the value of basic Liberty.

No it doesn't. Voters aren't complaining to government about this stuff. Someone else is pushing for this. These sorts of ideas don't come from nowhere.

>Any other finger-pointing is pretty meaningless.

No it isn't. If we know who's pushing for this we can possibly persuade them to stop. Politicians aren't going to stop if someone is donating to their campaigns and there isn't a massive public outcry, but a special interest pushing for this might be easier to reach (or, if they can't be reached, they can be exposed, increasing the chance of the kind of public outrage that politicians might actually react to).

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#37

Post by mhurron »

rprospero wrote: post #31
nathan_long wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose that someday you run for office, or lobby for a cause, or run a prominent company. Suppose that you OR someone you love has something in their past they wouldn't want shared, OR which could be misconstrued in the press. Suddenly, you learn that unless you drop out of the race, or stop lobbying, or withdraw from a business venture, you or someone you love will be publicly shamed, fairly or not. Or worse than s…

Here's the thing I've never understood about the "framed and locked-up" argument. If the government was going to go to frame me for being a terrorist, why would they need the giant wiretapping facility? All they need to do is hire a couple of interns to write a whole bunch of "Death to America!" emails and just tell the courts that I wrote them. They'd declare national security issues on why my lawyers can't see the…

It's more palatable to the people if they can hang you with your own words. No one is going to care if they can 'prove' they saved the people from a danger.

On top of that, the people will be more willing to accept any 'proof' they intercepted when they know the government is intercepting everything.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#38

Post by nathan_long »

rprospero wrote: post #31
nathan_long wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose that someday you run for office, or lobby for a cause, or run a prominent company. Suppose that you OR someone you love has something in their past they wouldn't want shared, OR which could be misconstrued in the press. Suddenly, you learn that unless you drop out of the race, or stop lobbying, or withdraw from a business venture, you or someone you love will be publicly shamed, fairly or not. Or worse than s…

Here's the thing I've never understood about the "framed and locked-up" argument. If the government was going to go to frame me for being a terrorist, why would they need the giant wiretapping facility? All they need to do is hire a couple of interns to write a whole bunch of "Death to America!" emails and just tell the courts that I wrote them. They'd declare national security issues on why my lawyers can't see the…

A lie is much more convincing if it's constructed on a kernel of truth.
Post reply on HN