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

NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 231 posts

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#171

Post by jmilloy »

I feel we are taking our eyes off the ball.

Domestic spying violates constitutional rights. More to the point, I don't want to support an institution with programs that violate my privacy, no matter what benefits such programs provide.

But isn't international spying is different? Honestly, I don't mind supporting an institution with an external espionage programs. Isn't in my best interest? Does it harm me? What are the concrete repercussions of spying on foreign officials? Are these officials really going to renege on international alliances because they have a chip on their shoulder? If they have anything to hide, it's by definition counter to US interests; if our allies are making plans behind our backs, I want our government to find out. (And to be totally honest, if our government is making secret plans behind our allies backs, I would want our allies to find out, as well.)

I'll repeat this, because it is a real question, and the answer could have a real effect on my opinion: What are the concrete repercussions of spying on foreign officials?

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#172

Post by loceng »

ihsw wrote: post #159
belorn wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The surveillance service began their history by monitoring enemy armies, knowing what the troop movements were and locating potential weaknesses. Their purpose was to help the military in defending the nation. They later grow to encompass international commerce, as that too related to national defense. Knowing where, how, and who are able to transport material in and out of countries is paramount in successful wars b…

The next step is bloodless, and the Stasi had it right. > By the 1970s, the Stasi had decided that methods of overt persecution which had been employed up to that time, such as arrest and torture, were too crude and obvious. It was realised that psychological harassment was far less likely to be recognised for what it was, so its victims, and their supporters, were less likely to be provoked into active resistance, g…

Or people paid to post scripted material, human bots - which I believe there has been evidence leaked at some point that this happens - can't remember where or when or other details unfortunately.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#173

Post by 00rion »

ihsw wrote: post #159
belorn wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The surveillance service began their history by monitoring enemy armies, knowing what the troop movements were and locating potential weaknesses. Their purpose was to help the military in defending the nation. They later grow to encompass international commerce, as that too related to national defense. Knowing where, how, and who are able to transport material in and out of countries is paramount in successful wars b…

The next step is bloodless, and the Stasi had it right. > By the 1970s, the Stasi had decided that methods of overt persecution which had been employed up to that time, such as arrest and torture, were too crude and obvious. It was realised that psychological harassment was far less likely to be recognised for what it was, so its victims, and their supporters, were less likely to be provoked into active resistance, g…

I'm curious to know what can be done to subvert this form of control both online and in the real world. Zersetzung sounds incredibly frightening and you're 100% correct that that's the direction we're going.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#174

Post by Zigurd »

w_t_payne wrote: post #157
junto wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes sense as to why Obama flip-flopped on reigning in the NSA. Blackmail.

Hope not. Possible, though.

100% of every possibility regarding NSA surveillance has gone from "That's possible, but surely they wouldn't" to "Wow, they did, and did it bigger than anyone imagined."

Why wouldn't that include suppression of political initiatives that could interfere with the NSA's mission?

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#175

Post by angersock »

sfjailbird wrote: post #124
grey-area wrote: post #115

This has some interesting implications: What would this information be useful for? Why was the NSA collecting this information and at whose request? Is the same being done to US politicians? The most useful applications of this I can think of are betraying allies, manipulating negotiations with rival trade blocs, economic espionage, and of course protecting the power of the agencies who perform this surveillance and…

In the 1970s it was well known that the CIA worked to pave the way for American business interests overseas, through everything from espionage to blackmail, murder and military interventions. I assume the NSA works much the same way today (but God knows what all the domestic spying is used for).

Hell, we did that going back a hundred years for the Banana Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Wars). This is sadly not news.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#176

Post by Zigurd »

grey-area wrote: post #128
sfjailbird wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 1970s it was well known that the CIA worked to pave the way for American business interests overseas, through everything from espionage to blackmail, murder and military interventions. I assume the NSA works much the same way today (but God knows what all the domestic spying is used for).

In the 1970s it was well known that the CIA worked to pave the way for American business interests overseas, through everything from espionage to blackmail, murder and military interventions. I don't think this is the way countries should conduct themselves, particularly not ones which trumpet their freedom and liberty. Either the US can employ cynical realpolitik while making hypocritical statements about fighting f…

That's what I found remarkable about the Wikileaks embassy cables: Just how much of "diplomacy" amounts to leaning on our supposed friends in the world to accept our screwed up intellectual property laws and to otherwise compromise their standards for some pretty low, non-strategic commercial interests. At best it seems like diplomacy amounts to MPAA "spam" influence and at worst it is the spear-point of economic espionage.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#177

Post by Zigurd »

sdoering wrote: post #94
mpyne wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care about Merkel's privacy . But I do care about the fact that she cares about her privacy, and that Germans care about the privacy of their elected Chancellor. Both of those feed into the relationship between Germany and the USA, and that relationship is important enough that the NSA should not put it at risk (or be allowed to be able to put it at risk).

Being a German I only care for Mrs. Merkels privacy because that was the first (and only) moment, when she got upset. Having her 80 million citizens spied upon by the NSA was no reason to issue a statement. Or to do her job and protect the German people from harm, as it is stated clearly in our constitution as the job of our leaders. On the contrary. Before anything was really on the table, they declared the topic cl…

I don't think you will find the path away from pervasive surveillance in the G10 nations. They all have their own well-equipped secret police.

At some point though, some head of state will calculate that the only way to win is to not play the game, and make policy that defends against all surveillance, because the value of their own surveillance is low enough to do without.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#178

Post by sillysaurus2 »

FBT wrote: post #166
jessaustin wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can imagine a scenario in which even rock solid evidence of that sort wouldn't lead to real reform. "Hello Senator thanks so much for meeting with us today. We understand you're considering co-sponsoring that new 'privacy' bill. We just wanted to take a few minutes of your time to emphasize some points that we feel have some bearing on the bill in question. "I have here in front of me a few hard copies of some of y…

For all that the US government has done some really nasty stuff, I don't believe they are really evil people. They are doing what they think is best for their country, based on their ideas of what is best. No one is rubbing their hands together and cackling over the evil laws that they past. Given this, congress has passed some pretty nasty stuff. But they were doing it for all the best reasons. They are honorable pe…

They are honorable people, who likely wouldn't fold to blackmail, if they thought that they were being blackmailed into doing something bad for the US. I respect them that much, at least.

I'm curious to know your age. I used to feel as you do, but as people get older they tend to get more cynical. In particular, the idea that Americans are intrinsically honorable died an abrupt death in my mind after studying some of our history. Blackmail is one of the most basic tools in politics, and it's just that: a tool. Framing an effective tool as evil is beside the point, because an effective tool is always going to end up being used. And indeed we see that it's been used astonishingly often since WWII (and certainly before that as well). The most obvious example is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover but there are many more.

For what it's worth, the founding fathers probably wouldn't want you to assume our government are honorable people who wouldn't fold to blackmail. They would encourage you to assume the worst, and then be pleasantly surprised if your expectations were proven wrong. Thus far, the evidence has been pretty grim.

Snowden seems to share your ideals and belief system (e.g. belief in honor for honor's sake and "people will do what's right, not merely what's lucrative") yet he was so offended by what he ultimately discovered at the NSA that he fled the country and left his life behind in order to expose it. In other words, he did what he thought was best for his country based on his ideas of what is best, and his ideals seem to be pretty close to yours.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#179

Post by moocowduckquack »

adventured wrote: post #129
belorn wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The surveillance service began their history by monitoring enemy armies, knowing what the troop movements were and locating potential weaknesses. Their purpose was to help the military in defending the nation. They later grow to encompass international commerce, as that too related to national defense. Knowing where, how, and who are able to transport material in and out of countries is paramount in successful wars b…

Virtual behavior modification and prediction. Inducing an entire culture to gradually change how it behaves, and its beliefs, through a mixture of opportunism on real events, simulated events, and trial balloons. Some of that isn't new, but the ability to use vast computing resources to map behavior prediction of 300 million people to an accurate degree, is. They no longer need your friends, family and neighbors to r…

I wonder who is playing the role of Hari Seldon.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#180

Post by moocowduckquack »

ceejayoz wrote: post #63
conductor wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we are not at war with everyone, and those countries involved (like Germany, France and Italy) are our partners, economical and military partners. I can accept doing SIGINT on non-friendly countries and organizations but is it correct to spy on your own people and partner countries?

Germany and France do it to us. They're likely just not as talented at it. One way nation states stay allies is knowing, at least to some level, that the public statements match the private. http://www.france24.com/en/20131024-nsa-france-spying-squarc...

If you haven't head about them doing it, then that surely means that they must be even more talented at it.
Post reply on HN