Controversial article that made me think:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-do...
'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
31–40 of 158 posts
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#32Folks, take a step back and take a look what is going on here. When you were a child, would any of you have believed that one day in the early 21st century, you would wake up in a world where your own government spies on each and every single citizen, plus whoever is connected to them in another country, where they send agents to newspapers to oppress the freedom of the press? I mean, isn't this almost surreal? Like…
> would any of you have believed Yes, honestly. For more than 20 years, the basic message of the cipherpunks and related communities has been that the NSA spends tens of billions of dollars to spy on everything "foreign" that it can possibly get its hands on, and its foreign adversaries are doing the same, so you'd better use PGP (or more) if you want any chance of keeping your communications secret from the governme…
In regards to your first paragraph, its a question I keep wondering. What was different about these leaks then all the previous? Why NOW are people caring?
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#33Of course, remember that the Guardian was perfectly fine with the government harassing journalists as long as it was not them: http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/20/despite-its-battle-with-th...
Reporters are not immune from the law, despite the rhetoric coming from the Murdoch press. The police investigations into the News Of The World and The Sun are about clearly criminal behaviour: bribing police officers, harassment, phone and email hacking, theft and perjury. There was very little 'public interest' in any of that illegal activity.
Most of the Leverson suggestions were about correcting a power imbalance between normal members of the public and the media/government elite. Making it easier for ordinary people to seek reparations from a newspaper is not 'government harassment'. Requiring papers to print retractions after being proven wrong in a court of law is hardly the same as the prime minister personally ordering the destruction of computers, confiscation of equipment and detention of journalists to prevent reporting about an issue.
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> would any of you have believed Yes, honestly. For more than 20 years, the basic message of the cipherpunks and related communities has been that the NSA spends tens of billions of dollars to spy on everything "foreign" that it can possibly get its hands on, and its foreign adversaries are doing the same, so you'd better use PGP (or more) if you want any chance of keeping your communications secret from the governme…
In regards to your first paragraph, its a question I keep wondering. What was different about these leaks then all the previous? Why NOW are people caring?
I believe it's because of the reporting on the topic. The Snowden case has been high drama, with its recent crescendo with Miranda's detention. If the media hadn't reported on it like it had...
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#35If you think there is nothing that can be done you should take a look at Gene Sharp's theory of nonviolent resistance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp
" If subjects do not obey, rulers have no power."
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't really see a solution, and I'm assuming that nobody else does really. Citizens and foreigners (like me) have equally little power over what their governments do, just a mild decision between two parties come election time. The general population seems to be apathetic about it all, I don't think I know a single person who has any opinion other than the tired "nothing to hide" line.
Sounds like we need a campaign against the "Nothing to hide" line. You could probably point out to them that there are so many laws now, they probably broke 10 of them before they left for work in the morning.
The path that seems to have worked best for me is to start with the argument that you can't have a democracy if the incumbent can spy on the opposing candidates to help dig dirt and that this data can and will be used for non-terrorist uses. The typical response is that they trust that they wont use it for non terrorist uses, to which I reply with the sharing of data between NSA and the DEA to arrest people as well as now the Miranda case.
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
> would any of you have believed Yes, honestly. For more than 20 years, the basic message of the cipherpunks and related communities has been that the NSA spends tens of billions of dollars to spy on everything "foreign" that it can possibly get its hands on, and its foreign adversaries are doing the same, so you'd better use PGP (or more) if you want any chance of keeping your communications secret from the governme…
In regards to your first paragraph, its a question I keep wondering. What was different about these leaks then all the previous? Why NOW are people caring?
Seriously - my take is that it is on PowerPoint.
I mean just having "Super secret spy details" on Powerpoint means its not being handled by "our top people". George Smiley is not carefully placing a glass board under his cipher paper before taking a micro-copy.
This is spying on everyone, passed around like candy at the middle-managers meeting
Its the sheer mundane, ordinariness that has driven it home for me - they are so used to this, so utterly unashamed they put it on Powerpoint. FFS
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#38When articles like this are submitted to HN, can we have a discussion on what us as individuals can actually do (if anything)? I'd rather drop 100 comments on general FEELING towards the news, for 1 or 2 comments suggesting 'Let's create a campaign site' or 'There is nothing we can do, lets just sit here in silence' Edit: For what it's worth my ONLY suggestion is that a campaign site similar to that for SOPA, etc. is…
I don't really see a solution, and I'm assuming that nobody else does really. Citizens and foreigners (like me) have equally little power over what their governments do, just a mild decision between two parties come election time. The general population seems to be apathetic about it all, I don't think I know a single person who has any opinion other than the tired "nothing to hide" line.
> I don't really see a solution, and I'm assuming that nobody else does really
Bullshit.
There's plenty ordinary people can do. Look at the results here:
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/24/19658896-hou...
That's close enough that the right application of pressure, work and money would have made a difference. Perhaps in the Senate it would take other numbers, but no one said it'd be easy.
Indeed, it's not. It'll take hard work, time, and money.
Comments like yours are a complete and total waste of time - they accomplish nothing other than to suck energy out of people who might otherwise do something. I helped to get a law changed - every so slightly - in Italy, which is not an easy place to do politics. Tons of people basically laughed at me for even trying, but here it is: http://www.governo.it/Notizie/Presidenza/dettaglio.asp?d=690... - it's imperfect, but it's progress, at least.
I'm not much of a fan of political articles like these on this site, but this poster at least has the right idea. Instead of hyperbolic, sophomoric babbling about how the US is "a terrorist state" he's asking "what can we DO?". That's the right first step.
In terms of the 'nothing to hide' line, turn the thing on its head: if Snowden had that kind of access, think how many other people there are who could be paid to spy for the Chinese, Russians, or simply competing US companies. What if politicians lean on them to spy on ... [insert some movement the individual identifies with]. With very little oversight, it seems. You can't trust people when there are no checks and balances.
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> would any of you have believed Yes, honestly. For more than 20 years, the basic message of the cipherpunks and related communities has been that the NSA spends tens of billions of dollars to spy on everything "foreign" that it can possibly get its hands on, and its foreign adversaries are doing the same, so you'd better use PGP (or more) if you want any chance of keeping your communications secret from the governme…
In regards to your first paragraph, its a question I keep wondering. What was different about these leaks then all the previous? Why NOW are people caring?
It's too soon to tell whether this time will be different -- that depends on whether Congress or the executive branch actually changes something in the end. So far it isn't different.
From the perspective of the U.S. and U.K., the Chinese and Israelies and French are undoubtedly doing their best to spy on as much of the Internet as they possibly can, and they're probably pretty successful at it, so why would we unilaterally disarm?
Re: 'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do
#40Controversial article that made me think: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-do...
Straw man. Nobody argues he's above the law. They argue because:
- The law is to detain suspected terrorists, nobody thinks the UK believed he is a terrorist, so they were abusing the law;
- If, as the UK government now says, they just wanted any electronic devices he had so they could see what he was carrying, that would have taken less than an hour to confiscate them and ask for whatever passwords Miranda had, not the close to nine hours they held him.
Nobody is above the law. I am sure the reason Miranda was travelling from Berlin back to Rio and not Greenwald was that Greenwald knew he would be detained and thought perhaps Miranda would not. But just like Miranda is not above the law, neither is the UK government. If they misuse a law to harass and intimidate then they should be held to account.
There's always some jackass journalist who thinks they should take the other side, no matter how contrary to the facts, to get some attention. I am just surprised it's at outfits like The Telegraph and Reuters.