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

The Criminal N.S.A.

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 116 posts

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#11

Post by mpyne »

"Let’s turn to Prism: the streamlined, electronic seizure of communications from Internet companies." OK, good so far, PRISM does indeed streamline and automate the process...

"... Prism is further proof that the agency is collecting vast amounts of e-mails and other messages — including communications to, from and between Americans."

??? PRISM was the one thing I stopped being worried about as soon as I figured out what it was. The government has always been able to subpoena a third-party for records pursuant to an actual investigation, and even Google seemed to be satisfied with the idea that specific PRISM requests have been legal (even if they forced NSA to get a real warrant first).

Other things may indicate NSA is hoovering emails like a Mob boss hoovering blow but PRISM isn't one of them. PRISM has to be turned on to acquire data, unlike other NSA SIGINT this one's not actually magic.

I'm kind of disappointed by the opinion piece because if they only took efforts to be factual they would probably be able to make a much more persuasive case (e.g. by bringing up Carnivore or 641A-style data interception instead of a system that queries specific individual users one-at-a-time).

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#12

Post by ferdo »

tkahn6 wrote: post #3
trevelyan wrote: post #2

The public is not acquiescing in surveillance. It is simply rare for the mainstream media to report on this critically (or at all -- note the lack of front-page coverage of this story in the New York Times), an appalling development given the extension of this surveillance apparatus to targeting journalists. With that in mind, it is worth noting that the two authors of this piece are NOT professional journalists, alt…

> - note the lack of front-page coverage of this story in the New York Times 1. As of right now, the story is linked to on the front page in the Opinion box since this is an opinion piece and not a news piece. If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy. 2. The story of the NSA surveillance was front page on the NY Times when it broke and for about a week or two after. 3. The Mainstre…

> If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy.

All "news" is someone's, or a group of someones, opinion. There's no such thing as objective journalism.

> chicken little reddit-level bullshit

It's only been a couple of weeks since people became aware that the largest spy agency in the world is spying on pretty much anything they can get a bead on.

Perhaps cutting people some slack until 24/7 surveillance becomes the New Normal might be in order?

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#13

Post by mpyne »

e3pi wrote: post #10

"...The two programs violate both the letter and the spirit of federal law." "We may never know all the details of the mass surveillance programs, but we know this: The administration has justified them through abuse of language, intentional evasion of statutory protections, secret, unreviewable investigative procedures and constitutional arguments that make a mockery of the government’s professed concern with protec…

The whole thing as implemented now definitely needs better accountability and oversight to call it a program that befits the public service. But I don't know about the rudder being gone (or what you mean by that exactly).

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#14

Post by [deleted] »

mpyne wrote: post #13
e3pi wrote: post #10

"...The two programs violate both the letter and the spirit of federal law." "We may never know all the details of the mass surveillance programs, but we know this: The administration has justified them through abuse of language, intentional evasion of statutory protections, secret, unreviewable investigative procedures and constitutional arguments that make a mockery of the government’s professed concern with protec…

The whole thing as implemented now definitely needs better accountability and oversight to call it a program that befits the public service. But I don't know about the rudder being gone (or what you mean by that exactly).

[deleted]

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#15

Post by hobs »

ferdo wrote: post #12
tkahn6 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - note the lack of front-page coverage of this story in the New York Times 1. As of right now, the story is linked to on the front page in the Opinion box since this is an opinion piece and not a news piece. If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy. 2. The story of the NSA surveillance was front page on the NY Times when it broke and for about a week or two after. 3. The Mainstre…

> If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy. All "news" is someone's, or a group of someones, opinion. There's no such thing as objective journalism. > chicken little reddit-level bullshit It's only been a couple of weeks since people became aware that the largest spy agency in the world is spying on pretty much anything they can get a bead on. Perhaps cutting people some slack unti…

In my opinion, there is about a 30 minute wait on the I9, and now in sports news, in my opinion the raiders beat the muskrats last night.... etc.

There is definitely such a thing as reporting the facts, and just because there are levels of opinion doesn't mean that all outlets of journalism are somehow comparable. Fox News != Anyone with credibility.

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#16

Post by e3pi »

mpyne wrote: post #13
e3pi wrote: post #10

"...The two programs violate both the letter and the spirit of federal law." "We may never know all the details of the mass surveillance programs, but we know this: The administration has justified them through abuse of language, intentional evasion of statutory protections, secret, unreviewable investigative procedures and constitutional arguments that make a mockery of the government’s professed concern with protec…

The whole thing as implemented now definitely needs better accountability and oversight to call it a program that befits the public service. But I don't know about the rudder being gone (or what you mean by that exactly).

Well gudgeon-ed and pintel-ed teak rudder:

Respect for civilization's eye's covered verdigris bronze lady holding up scales.

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#17

Post by dllthomas »

ferdo wrote: post #12
tkahn6 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - note the lack of front-page coverage of this story in the New York Times 1. As of right now, the story is linked to on the front page in the Opinion box since this is an opinion piece and not a news piece. If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy. 2. The story of the NSA surveillance was front page on the NY Times when it broke and for about a week or two after. 3. The Mainstre…

> If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy. All "news" is someone's, or a group of someones, opinion. There's no such thing as objective journalism. > chicken little reddit-level bullshit It's only been a couple of weeks since people became aware that the largest spy agency in the world is spying on pretty much anything they can get a bead on. Perhaps cutting people some slack unti…

Just because they're all grey doesn't mean there aren't significant differences in the shade.

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#18

Post by dllthomas »

anigbrowl wrote: post #6
andrewljohnson wrote: post #5

Is it possible for Americans to file a class action suit over a top secret government surveillance program? I feel like we all have standing at least.

The courts would rightly reject it as a political matter.

When I object to the government breaking the law against me, it's not "a political matter" - indeed, usually the courts are the appropriate venue.

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#19

Post by tkahn6 »

jacoblyles wrote: post #9
tkahn6 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - note the lack of front-page coverage of this story in the New York Times 1. As of right now, the story is linked to on the front page in the Opinion box since this is an opinion piece and not a news piece. If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy. 2. The story of the NSA surveillance was front page on the NY Times when it broke and for about a week or two after. 3. The Mainstre…

The Times puts plenty of opinion on the front page. It just does so obliquely. I can't forget their headline for the IRS scandal: "I.R.S. Scandal Gives G.O.P. Issue to Seize On", as if the politicization of the government's taxing power were only regretful to the extent that it might slow down the Democratic Party's policy agenda.

As if that was the only headline or angle the NY Times displayed on the front page about that story as that story evolved.

C'mon man.

Re: The Criminal N.S.A.

#20

Post by trevelyan »

anigbrowl wrote: post #4
tkahn6 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - note the lack of front-page coverage of this story in the New York Times 1. As of right now, the story is linked to on the front page in the Opinion box since this is an opinion piece and not a news piece. If you want opinion as news, I refer you to Fox News or Buzzfeed or Upworthy. 2. The story of the NSA surveillance was front page on the NY Times when it broke and for about a week or two after. 3. The Mainstre…

Thank you for that interjection of sanity.

If you need a sanity check, visit the Internet Archive:

http://web.archive.org/web/*/nytimes.com

The last time this story was front page news for the NYT was June 23, when they reported on Hong Kong officials letting Snowden go. On June 22 they reported on Snowden being officially charged. And prior to that on June 20, when there was a story about the "complex reality" of Silicon Valley. All of these stories are sympathetic in tone and focus to the administration. Is anyone really going to characterize them as hard-hitting investigative reporting on the substance of the allegations?

There is no lack of investigative reporting that could be done on this story (most obvious question: did Congress intend to authorize warrantless dragnet surveillance), some of which is happening elsewhere, making it hardly a paranoid leap to point out that NYT coverage has been muted and uncritical at best.

Post reply on HN