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

Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 62 posts

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#41

Post by dllthomas »

northwest wrote: post #38
dllthomas wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Call me naive, but I would be surprised to learn that these systems are being used to overtly control the electoral process. So the way out of this mess is to talk to your friends and family and make sure they understand the issues and what is at stake, and make sure they do the same. Elect politicians who will do better - Obama promised and didn't deliver, but the issue only seemed to matter to a sliver of what were…

> Elect politicians who will do better How? The 2-party system will simply not allow it. They have the monopoly over the 2 "choices" we're given each time. They will continue to give us "choices" that they can control. Remember how one of the earlier whistle blowers revealed that Obama had been under surveillance earlier? People who are under surveillance are controllable. If they are allowed to access power, it's re…

The parties have a monopoly over the choices, but the parties aren't the NSA. They have much more of an interest in getting our votes and our donations than they have in letting other people spy. Unseating the current party machines enough to make a meaningful difference on this issue is likely to be hard, but I maintain that it's most likely more doable than violent revolution (and significantly less bloody, if we start soon).

I certainly don't pretend it's easy - but convincing people is the way it will happen.

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#42

Post by d23 »

ihsw wrote: post #27
nkassis wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this will probably initiate a huge debate but I'm not personally convinced that what Bradley Manning released and what Snowden released is equivalent in scope. In the case of Snowden the documents seem much more targeted to exposing the problem he's trying to bring light on. While Manning made a much broad stroke release of tons of documents probably not even knowing the content of all those documents which to…

Any person that looks at the two situations and compares them objectively would come to the same conclusion -- one was reckless and negligent while the other was intentional and targeted. At the risk of diminishing Manning's plight, I'm sure whistleblowers like Snowden are exactly the kind that Wikileaks wants supporting them. Also, it stands to reason that Manning's plight itself may have inspired Snowden.

I can never get pro-manning people to answer one simple question: what was he blowing the whistle on?

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#43

Post by Zigurd »

dllthomas wrote: post #29
northwest wrote: post #18

Also: What does everybody expect from "the debate"? Is there a way we can get out of this mess? I currently don't see any, besides the one with massive loss. Please, anybody, correct me.

Call me naive, but I would be surprised to learn that these systems are being used to overtly control the electoral process. So the way out of this mess is to talk to your friends and family and make sure they understand the issues and what is at stake, and make sure they do the same. Elect politicians who will do better - Obama promised and didn't deliver, but the issue only seemed to matter to a sliver of what were…

An ex-president told us that won't work. Maybe we should listen and realize the problem is very serious.

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#46

Post by samstave »

readme wrote: post #34
northwest wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neat. > Defending Our Nation. Securing Our Future. ...I read that as... Defending Our Own Money. Securing Our Own Power.

NSA surveillance foiled this potential terrorist and he is now incarcerated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najibullah_Zazi He was going to bomb NYC subways. Please, if you're going to participate in this so called "surveillance debate", stick to facts and refrain from hyperbole.

If you're going to participate in the "surveillance debate" don't be so stupidly myopic to argue only the ridiculous point that this keeps anyone safe from "terrorists".

If the NSA can literally look into any electronic conversation between anyone, then why haven't they stopped a single drug cartel? Any premeditated murder? Why hasn't a single banister been brought to justice over their internal emails detailing deliberate mortgage fraud? Why weren't they able to prove Bernie Madoff was swindling billions for years and there were many warnings? What about all the illegal insider trading of pretty much every congress person?

Oh that's right, because this system has absolutely nothing to do with bringing criminals to "justice" or keeping you safe.

This is digital enslavement and every single person who approves of this bullshit is complicit.

Trying to say that trillions of dollars in stolen money from people (if the funds taken from taxes are used to build a digital prison around you, those funds were stolen from you) to prevent some singular supposed attack is justified is farking insane!

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#47

Post by samstave »

d23 wrote: post #42
ihsw wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any person that looks at the two situations and compares them objectively would come to the same conclusion -- one was reckless and negligent while the other was intentional and targeted. At the risk of diminishing Manning's plight, I'm sure whistleblowers like Snowden are exactly the kind that Wikileaks wants supporting them. Also, it stands to reason that Manning's plight itself may have inspired Snowden.

I can never get pro-manning people to answer one simple question: what was he blowing the whistle on?

Unchecked, indiscriminate killing of civilians in Iraq. Proving that the military was over there operating outside the spirit of what we as a supposed free democratic and just society stand for.

Pretty damn simple.

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#48

Post by northwest »

samstave wrote: post #46
readme wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NSA surveillance foiled this potential terrorist and he is now incarcerated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najibullah_Zazi He was going to bomb NYC subways. Please, if you're going to participate in this so called "surveillance debate", stick to facts and refrain from hyperbole.

If you're going to participate in the "surveillance debate" don't be so stupidly myopic to argue only the ridiculous point that this keeps anyone safe from "terrorists". If the NSA can literally look into any electronic conversation between anyone, then why haven't they stopped a single drug cartel? Any premeditated murder? Why hasn't a single banister been brought to justice over their internal emails detailing deli…

You made some very good points, here.

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#49

Post by revelation »

readme wrote: post #34
northwest wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neat. > Defending Our Nation. Securing Our Future. ...I read that as... Defending Our Own Money. Securing Our Own Power.

NSA surveillance foiled this potential terrorist and he is now incarcerated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najibullah_Zazi He was going to bomb NYC subways. Please, if you're going to participate in this so called "surveillance debate", stick to facts and refrain from hyperbole.

He wanted to build a bomb from acetone peroxide and detonate it in the subway. His only success in this grand plan would have been blowing himself up in his apartment as he closes the lid on his explosives, the friction between the lid and TCAP residue instantly detonating the mixture.

(As always, their stupidity is our best protection, not the NSA)

Re: Give Snowden his due: He made a surveillance debate possible

#50

Post by ghshephard »

ihsw wrote: post #27
nkassis wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this will probably initiate a huge debate but I'm not personally convinced that what Bradley Manning released and what Snowden released is equivalent in scope. In the case of Snowden the documents seem much more targeted to exposing the problem he's trying to bring light on. While Manning made a much broad stroke release of tons of documents probably not even knowing the content of all those documents which to…

Any person that looks at the two situations and compares them objectively would come to the same conclusion -- one was reckless and negligent while the other was intentional and targeted. At the risk of diminishing Manning's plight, I'm sure whistleblowers like Snowden are exactly the kind that Wikileaks wants supporting them. Also, it stands to reason that Manning's plight itself may have inspired Snowden.

I'm wondering if Manning's failure was going to Assange at WikiLeaks instead of Glen Greenwald at The Guardian?

If there was a single thing that Snowden did better, it was showing good judgement in who he turned over his evidence to.

Post reply on HN