Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us • Hacker News Board

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#151

Post by pekk » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:05 PM UTC

nkoren wrote: post #45

The Declaration of Independence states that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Gendered language aside, the idea of the founders was clearly that rights derive from one's innate humanity, and do not derive from government largess. This was the…

That ideal was gone at the time those words were written, when the founders had slaves.

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#152

Post by philwelch » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:06 PM UTC

jmadsen wrote: post #71

jmadsen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You, as a non-US citizen, are not protected by our constitution. Nor am I, a US citizen, protected from your government. I have no grounds to "raise outrage" at my government for spying on foreigners, much as I might disapprove. They don't break any laws when they do that. Moral rules, yes; disrespect to our friends and allies, yes; laws, no. When they spy on US citizens, they tear up our Constitution in doing so. Th…

I think a few of you don't understand my point, so perhaps I didn't explain it very well. The US government is on the verge of becoming a totalitarian regime. The US government is on the verge of throwing out the Constitution & just doing whatever the hell it wants from now on. The US government is on the verge of declaring that there is no such thing as a law, only some rules it has decided to enforce to its own ben…

> The US government is on the verge of becoming a totalitarian regime.

> The US government is on the verge of throwing out the Constitution & just doing whatever the hell it wants from now on.

> The US government is on the verge of declaring that there is no such thing as a law, only some rules it has decided to enforce to its own benefit

The US government is rampantly, and problematically, violating its constitution and its founding principles in a dozen different ways. But this much has always been true. Are we closer to a totalitarian regime than when we imprisoned all Americans of Japanese descent, or when we threw people in prison for speaking out against World War I, or when COINTELPRO and MKULTRA were going on?

The bulk of the system remains safely in place. A government on the verge of throwing out the constitution does not have a Supreme Court throwing out federal laws.

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#153

Post by kevin_p » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:06 PM UTC

znowi wrote: post #150

I see a lot of disillusion in Europe about the US. It's been going since the Iraq, but now it's a real wake up call. What's more alarming, it's slipping into anger and open opposition. This is not the change we've been anticipating. Americans are in a tricky situation now. Who do you elect at this point to make things right? Does it even work? I think we've reached a major milestone here. I'm both frightened and curi…

I think the article isn't really about elected representatives, it's about the attitudes of ordinary Americans. Like the author and many other pro-American Europeans, I've been pretty disillusioned by the recent reaction to PRISM. Like drone assassination before it, most Americans aren't saying "how dare our government do this" but "how dare our government do this TO US CITIZENS".

(I'm not talking about spying on political leaders, the military etc - everyone does that to everyone else. But it seems that most Americans think it's perfectly fine to invade the privacy of ordinary people on a massive scale, just as long as those people don't hold a US passport.)

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#154

Post by pekk » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:12 PM UTC

andrewcooke wrote: post #134

obviouslygreen wrote: post #50

This outrage at American reactions is terribly hypocritical. Yes, people -- regardless of nationality -- should be upset when they realize their privacy is being grossly violated without cause, by any government. However, people seem to think Americans should be more concerned about other people's rights than their own, when the real problem is the violation of everyone's rights. Despite this, all anyone is really in…

what you're missing (are you american?) is that most countries generally don't make the distinction between their own people and others. laws typically apply to everyone.

Do non-US foreign intelligence agencies have equal interest in everyone? They do not.

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#155

Post by andrewcooke » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:15 PM UTC

pekk wrote: post #154

andrewcooke wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what you're missing (are you american?) is that most countries generally don't make the distinction between their own people and others. laws typically apply to everyone.

Do non-US foreign intelligence agencies have equal interest in everyone? They do not.

sure, but when something happens like the recent GCHQ scandal in the uk, people don't get angry because "the english" are being tapped. they get angry because "people" are being tapped.

there's not the same enshrined "us v them" attitude that you see so often in american countries.

really, it's a thing. americans come off as extremely insular.

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#156

Post by foobarqux » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:20 PM UTC

tome wrote: post #84

nkoren wrote: post #45

The Declaration of Independence states that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Gendered language aside, the idea of the founders was clearly that rights derive from one's innate humanity, and do not derive from government largess. This was the…

> This ideal is all but gone. Doesn't slavery demonstrate that this ideal never even existed in the first place?

And Native Americans. They weren't people either.

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#157

Post by scarmig » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:25 PM UTC

ajuc wrote: post #101

jmadsen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You, as a non-US citizen, are not protected by our constitution. Nor am I, a US citizen, protected from your government. I have no grounds to "raise outrage" at my government for spying on foreigners, much as I might disapprove. They don't break any laws when they do that. Moral rules, yes; disrespect to our friends and allies, yes; laws, no. When they spy on US citizens, they tear up our Constitution in doing so. Th…

Yes you are protected in civilized countries nobody can read your letters without your consent, no matter your citizenship. It's criminal offence if they do.

True. But do any civilized countries exist?

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#158

Post by anoncow » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:25 PM UTC

furyg3 wrote: post #144

Goladus wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would, perhaps, be enlightening to quote the entire sentence from the US Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the c…

You are interpreting this precisely backwards. These "Rights" are unalienable. They are not to be given away, they are not to be taken away. Governments exist to secure these rights. To help protect these rights, the government may exist... but only by consent of the people being governed. It may be true that the Russian government does not give these rights to it's citizens, or that these citizens yield these rights…

I really hope President Obama reads this.

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#159

Post by anoncow » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:26 PM UTC

furyg3 wrote: post #144

Goladus wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would, perhaps, be enlightening to quote the entire sentence from the US Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the c…

You are interpreting this precisely backwards. These "Rights" are unalienable. They are not to be given away, they are not to be taken away. Governments exist to secure these rights. To help protect these rights, the government may exist... but only by consent of the people being governed. It may be true that the Russian government does not give these rights to it's citizens, or that these citizens yield these rights…

I really hope President Obama reads this.

Re: Why discussions on cyber snooping have been so painful for us

#160

Post by manmal » Sat, Jun 29, 2013, 4:28 PM UTC

jrokisky wrote: post #107

alan_cx wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Privacy? If only. We have no rights as human beings, let alone privacy. The worst part is that America claims to have rights over us, where ever we are. It is a disgusting abuse of humanity that American asserts that its laws apply to world citizens, while denying them even the few rights Americans think they have. Few countries stand up to the US, and if they dare, they get threatened. How vile is it to say to a cou…

I agree with you that many of the things that America has done are gross and contradict "American ideals", but I think you're underselling the power and influence of European nations. Why are they so easily bending to the will of such a belligerent turd?

Because fighting should be the last resort. If you are persevering enough, then diplomacy is enough to resolve most conflicts of interest. Way cheaper and nicer than warfare (and maybe more successful). The "problem" is, it's boring and compromises might come across as bending to the other's will (even though it's not).