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

About the Reuters article

guardian.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 81 posts

Re: About the Reuters article

#21

Post by maxerickson »

nitrogen wrote: post #14
brown9-2 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A license to operate a newspaper? This sounds far fetched as there are no limited resources like airwaves being occupied.

There are business licenses, code inspections, and changing zoning requirements. Not quite the same as a spectrum license, but there are still many ways for a government to exert pressure on a newspaper.

Surely there is some crank website documenting all the newspapers that have been driven out of business by federal pressure.

The major newspapers play silly access games, but just throwing out speculation that they are getting pressured is pointless.

Re: About the Reuters article

#22

Post by onebaddude »

seferphier wrote: post #16
mikemoka wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

solitary confinement could trigger it as well probably, it depends on how things have been set up. Obama should have handled this in a totally different way, he should have treated him as a partner for having shed light upon a corrupted practice of the NSA, and should have asked the people heading the NSA to resign. This would have been a checkmate against any other US antagonist in my opinion, but I admit that is de…

that would make obama score points in the public, but it is his second term as president already. this would also encourage more whistleblower activity that may get out of hand.

There is no such thing as "too much" whistle blowing.

Re: About the Reuters article

#23

Post by notdrunkatall »

onebaddude wrote: post #22
seferphier wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that would make obama score points in the public, but it is his second term as president already. this would also encourage more whistleblower activity that may get out of hand.

There is no such thing as "too much" whistle blowing.

That depends on which side of the whistle you find yourself.

Re: About the Reuters article

#24

Post by Amadou »

brown9-2 wrote: post #12

Greenwald was criticized for saying that the USG "should be on it's knees begging every day", a clearly inflammatory thing to say. To act like the criticism is the result of some grand government conspiracy is a bit much. There are plenty of people outraged by the substance of what has been leaked who also don't like the idea of a) great harm coming to the country or government or legit intelligence operations, or b)…

30 year old person stuck in a Russian airport who has appointed himself the ultimate arbiter of what is leakworthy and what is not, what programs are legal and good and which are illegal and evil.

Snowden didn't do that, the USG appointed him to that role by not doing an adequate job of it themselves. Snowden is merely a symptom, not a cause.

Re: About the Reuters article

#25

Post by Amadou »

tzs wrote: post #19
mtgx wrote: post #4

I thought Reuters had an "angle" almost immediately, since I saw the words fugitive and spy next to Snowden's name in the summary at the top.

They said former spy contractor, which is accurate. Fugitive is accurate. So, how exactly do you infer an angle from this?

It is all about word choice. It would be just as true to say asylum seeking exiled whistle-blower. Both descriptions are totally accurate, neither description is neutral.

Re: About the Reuters article

#26

Post by jnbiche »

gnosis wrote: post #17
brown9-2 wrote: post #12

Greenwald was criticized for saying that the USG "should be on it's knees begging every day", a clearly inflammatory thing to say. To act like the criticism is the result of some grand government conspiracy is a bit much. There are plenty of people outraged by the substance of what has been leaked who also don't like the idea of a) great harm coming to the country or government or legit intelligence operations, or b)…

"There are plenty of people outraged by the substance of what has been leaked who also don't like the idea of ... a 30 year old person stuck in a Russian airport who has appointed himself the ultimate arbiter of what is leakworthy and what is not, what programs are legal and good and which are illegal and evil." Of course such determinations should be left to the professionals, our Supreme Leader, the oh-so-popular C…

I only wish HN were set up differently so I could somehow transfer all my points to you for that comment.

Re: About the Reuters article

#27

Post by mtgx »

mikemoka wrote: post #9
reneherse wrote: post #6

Slightly off topic: The article mentions a "dead man's switch" set up by Snowden prior to making his disclosures. If he is assassinated, apparently all the documents will be publicly released. Greenwald also mentioned that the totality of what Snowden controls is "enough information to cause more damage to the US government in a minute alone than anyone else has ever had in the history of the United States." Let's as…

solitary confinement could trigger it as well probably, it depends on how things have been set up. Obama should have handled this in a totally different way, he should have treated him as a partner for having shed light upon a corrupted practice of the NSA, and should have asked the people heading the NSA to resign. This would have been a checkmate against any other US antagonist in my opinion, but I admit that is de…

The problem is Obama completely agreed with what the NSA was doing, and most likely even ordered everything to be done that way (that's why he so viciously defended the FISA Amendments Act last year, and why he tried to get lawsuits dismissed).

However, I agree that is what he should do anyway. Clapper and Alexander should get fired immediately, and so should Holder - but he's been bailing out Holder so many times, I'm starting to think it's a lost cause that he'd ever stop protecting him. If there was a video of Holder shooting a man in head, he'd probably still pardon him.

I disagree with your last part, though, that it would prevent other whistleblowers from coming out. Why would it? It would prove Snowden did a good thing, and more would come out later to fix the system (which is exactly what should happen).

Re: About the Reuters article

#28

Post by gyardley »

gnosis wrote: post #17
brown9-2 wrote: post #12

Greenwald was criticized for saying that the USG "should be on it's knees begging every day", a clearly inflammatory thing to say. To act like the criticism is the result of some grand government conspiracy is a bit much. There are plenty of people outraged by the substance of what has been leaked who also don't like the idea of a) great harm coming to the country or government or legit intelligence operations, or b)…

"There are plenty of people outraged by the substance of what has been leaked who also don't like the idea of ... a 30 year old person stuck in a Russian airport who has appointed himself the ultimate arbiter of what is leakworthy and what is not, what programs are legal and good and which are illegal and evil." Of course such determinations should be left to the professionals, our Supreme Leader, the oh-so-popular C…

It's perfectly possible to dislike the government and vigilantes simultaneously.

Re: About the Reuters article

#29

Post by tptacek »

Did Greenwald just say that Snowden has documents that could cause grievous harm the United States, and that he may have set up a dead man's switch that would cause them to be published should any harm come to Snowden?

Three possibilities I can see:

(1) Greenwald really can't think even one move ahead and see that he's just published a reason for any number of US adversaries to kill his source.

(2) Greenwald understands the implications of what he's published but is, owing to his own incentives, fine with the idea of his source being killed

(3) Greenwald doesn't believe what he's saying and isn't meant to be taken seriously.

Cards on the table: that guy could be reporting that water is wet and I'd still have him in bucket (3). Although now you kind of hope the freakshow government in North Korea is smart enough to bucket him the same way.

Re: About the Reuters article

#30

Post by lectrick »

reneherse wrote: post #6

Slightly off topic: The article mentions a "dead man's switch" set up by Snowden prior to making his disclosures. If he is assassinated, apparently all the documents will be publicly released. Greenwald also mentioned that the totality of what Snowden controls is "enough information to cause more damage to the US government in a minute alone than anyone else has ever had in the history of the United States." Let's as…

> "enough information to cause more damage to the US government in a minute alone than anyone else has ever had in the history of the United States."

I don't see how this is not analogous to a longstanding marriage with a hidden affair. Would you reveal the affair thereby destroying the marriage (but gaining a greater measure of truth)? Or would you leave it in secret?

I don't believe that a thing based partly on secrets the revelation of which might bring about the end of that thing, is a sustainable thing, nor a healthy thing, nor a long-term-good thing.

Post reply on HN