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

Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

people-press.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–96 of 96 posts

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#91

Post by wavefunction »

NikaJessenia wrote: post #55
GHFigs wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Poor people are stupid" isn't an experience, it's a prejudice.

I'm with you on that. But, for once, this guy wasn't insulting poor people. He was insulting average people. The average person has free time but finds it very very hard to use it for something socially beneficial. This is partially their fault but certainly not wholly their fault.

Are you saying I have a habit of insulting poor people?

I've been a poor person. Shit, I'm poor now, with no real assets. I do love reading your assumptions though. Tell me more about me.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#92

Post by tptacek »

dragonwriter wrote: post #90
tptacek wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could there ever be an adversarial process for foreign intelligence surveillance? Can you explain how that could ever work?

> How could there ever be an adversarial process for foreign intelligence surveillance? I didn't say their could be. Pointing out that the status quo structure doesn't provide a meaningful check doesn't mean that there is an easy framework that does provide a meaningful check while enabling the same scope of powers in "the right" kind of cases.

If I read your preceding comment and then this one, I'm left with the conclusion that you think either that there should be no foreign surveillance of any sort, or that any attempt to check the authority of our intelligence services is pointless.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#93

Post by dragonwriter »

tptacek wrote: post #92
dragonwriter wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How could there ever be an adversarial process for foreign intelligence surveillance? I didn't say their could be. Pointing out that the status quo structure doesn't provide a meaningful check doesn't mean that there is an easy framework that does provide a meaningful check while enabling the same scope of powers in "the right" kind of cases.

If I read your preceding comment and then this one, I'm left with the conclusion that you think either that there should be no foreign surveillance of any sort, or that any attempt to check the authority of our intelligence services is pointless.

Which illustrates why it is probably better to address what is said rather than what else you think a person might think in addition to what is said.

EDIT: To amplify: I've explicitly laid out why the existing FISC system is not a meaningful check, and I have explicitly declined to take a position on whether it would be possible to reform the system in a way which would retain its essential character as a judicial oversight system while fixing the problems that prevent it from being meaningful oversight. We haven't addressed any other (e.g., non-judicial) checks, existing or potential, nor have I commented at all on what should exist. So your inference that I must believe certain things about what should exist, or that I have a particular belief about what checks are possible on foreign surveillance, is unwarranted.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#94

Post by malandrew »

tptacek wrote: post #11
marknutter wrote: post #8

That's because a majority of Americans don't believe they have anything to hide, or that the stuff they do want to hide is probably so mundane to the average government official that they assume they wouldn't care. I'm guessing the way the survey question is posed has a lot to do with the outcome. Take out the word "terrorism" and I'm sure support would drop. Add the phrase "personal information" and I'm sure it woul…

I get the sense that this doesn't surprise you. My question is: why would it surprise anyone? It's not just that most Americans don't believe they have anything to hide from NSA. It's that they don't have anything to hide from NSA. I'm not invoking the fallacious "nothing to hide" argument; I have stuff I need to keep hidden. But most people really don't , and especially not from NSA.

92% of Patriot Act arrests were for drug-related offenses. 7% were for fraud. A mere 0.8% were for terrorist related activities. (n = 1755)

[0] http://nymag.com/news/9-11/10th-anniversary/patriot-act/

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#95

Post by baddox »

tptacek wrote: post #86
baddox wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For starters: the NSA can't convict anyone; it doesn't have that power. That's true (right now anyway), but I don't buy the idea that government agencies (or even branches) are distinct enough that we shouldn't be worried. Similarly, I wouldn't approve of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service employing a network of domestic assassins, and the fact that they are currently not legally permitted to carry out…

If you think the NSA is going to sprout (say) a drug enforcement arm, why are you so worried about telephony metadata? Clearly, there's no law constraining NSA at all; were I you, I'd be more concerned about them disappearing me for making public arguments against them.

I am more concerned about them disappearing people for making public arguments against them, although I suspect I would be nowhere near significant enough for anyone to notice.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#96

Post by tptacek »

baddox wrote: post #95
tptacek wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think the NSA is going to sprout (say) a drug enforcement arm, why are you so worried about telephony metadata? Clearly, there's no law constraining NSA at all; were I you, I'd be more concerned about them disappearing me for making public arguments against them.

I am more concerned about them disappearing people for making public arguments against them, although I suspect I would be nowhere near significant enough for anyone to notice.

I'm always interested in people who think like this. If the NSA --- or for that matter any other part of the USG --- was "disappearing" people, what does it matter what FISA says, or how much metadata they're collecting? Clearly no law we have has any impact on them at all.
Post reply on HN