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

End the N.S.A. Dragnet, Now

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–176 of 176 posts

Re: End the N.S.A. Dragnet, Now

#171

Post by reginaldjcooper »

kenjackson wrote: post #46
dalek_cannes wrote: post #32

Surveillance. It always starts with a desire to be safe. And that comes from fear. It seems Americans today are afraid of more things than ever: pedophiles, guns, terrorists, lawsuits. Some news reports are ridiculous by foreign standards: teachers not being allowed to shake hands with students out of fear of sexual harassment allegations, boys suspended from school for drawing guns, bystanders not administering firs…

I think that the idea of surveillance is to increase safety with only a marginal decrease in freedom. Additionally, one could argue that as our freedom grows the opportunities for surveillance increase. That is, if you use the same means of communication as available in 1776 you'll have just as much freedom as they did. But in 2013 you have much more freedom to communicate over various mediums. Your freedom has incre…

The scanner isn't effective enough to warrant the additional delay and invasion of privacy, it's just that the former head of Homeland Security is now a lobbyist for that company. Has TSA caught a single terrorist yet?

The idea of NSA surveillance is not to increase safety with only a marginal decrease in freedom. Otherwise they wouldn't have unconstitutionally fingered targets for the DEA to parallel construct evidence for.

Thanks for a false dichotomy between scanners and nothing, by the way. If there were an airport near me that did metal detectors again (and another on the return leg) I'd use that exclusively. Anyone able to get a truly dangerous weapon through a metal detector without being nailed by the FBI or CIA first could easily get one through the full-body scanner also. So yes I would prefer to not support an unethical jerk and I would prefer to have my privacy back.

Re: End the N.S.A. Dragnet, Now

#172

Post by summerdown2 »

I think one of the complications is we have become used to historically unusual levels of security. Far fewer babies die in childbirth these days. Cars have airbags. Medical care is fast and reliable.

Not unreasonably, people expect their governments to provide the same level of predictability. And, not unreasonably, the majority of those politicians who want to preserve their jobs go along with it.

So what can be done about it? If this was a flawless AI keeping us all safe like in Iain Bank's culture universe, I think we'd be all happy. The problem comes when it's not clear if those charged with curating this information have other agendas.

I think this is a historically unique time, when we have the chance to put in safeguards and oversight while we can still see the cameras and the window of debate is still available.

But in order to do that, I think the debate has to be reframed not as security vs liberty but as structured oversight vs tyranny.

Re: End the N.S.A. Dragnet, Now

#173

Post by tokenizer »

javert wrote: post #144
tokenizer wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. We can definitly have unrestricted free markets with community owned syndicates and still be able to create tailored products and respond to demans. IMO, we need to start talking about workplace democracy if we're going to continue to entertain the idea of corporate controlled society, so that the common person can at least get their vote back (indirectly, by choosing who leads the company which bribes offici…

IMO, we need to stop having people control one another. There is no self-interested reason to do it, from anyone's point of view.

I definitely agree with you. I subscribe to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism.

That said, many, many, people believe that most people are not competent, and need to be taken care of/controlled/limited.

Arguments I usually have to fight against are: What to do about crime. What to do about "evil" people. What to do about property rights. What to do about control in decisions.

Re: End the N.S.A. Dragnet, Now

#174

Post by javert »

tokenizer wrote: post #173
javert wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, we need to stop having people control one another. There is no self-interested reason to do it, from anyone's point of view.

I definitely agree with you. I subscribe to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism . That said, many, many, people believe that most people are not competent, and need to be taken care of/controlled/limited. Arguments I usually have to fight against are: What to do about crime. What to do about "evil" people. What to do about property rights. What to do about control in decisions.

I think "libertarian socialism" is a worse than worthless contradiction.

There is a simple solution to all the problems you mention, which is to have a government that uses retaliatory force, but not initiatory force.

America had one for about a century, and now there is the intellectual machinery needed to go back to that system and to define and defend it much more vigorously. Unfortunately, a majority of "advocates for freedom" are mucking around with things like "libertarian socialism" and "anarcho-capitalism" which are contradictions in terms and won't work.

Re: End the N.S.A. Dragnet, Now

#175

Post by tokenizer »

javert wrote: post #174
tokenizer wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely agree with you. I subscribe to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism . That said, many, many, people believe that most people are not competent, and need to be taken care of/controlled/limited. Arguments I usually have to fight against are: What to do about crime. What to do about "evil" people. What to do about property rights. What to do about control in decisions.

I think "libertarian socialism" is a worse than worthless contradiction. There is a simple solution to all the problems you mention, which is to have a government that uses retaliatory force, but not initiatory force. America had one for about a century, and now there is the intellectual machinery needed to go back to that system and to define and defend it much more vigorously. Unfortunately, a majority of "advocate…

> I think "libertarian socialism" is a worse than worthless contradiction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

Re: End the N.S.A. Dragnet, Now

#176

Post by javert »

tokenizer wrote: post #175
javert wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "libertarian socialism" is a worse than worthless contradiction. There is a simple solution to all the problems you mention, which is to have a government that uses retaliatory force, but not initiatory force. America had one for about a century, and now there is the intellectual machinery needed to go back to that system and to define and defend it much more vigorously. Unfortunately, a majority of "advocate…

> I think "libertarian socialism" is a worse than worthless contradiction. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

Well, most libertarians are subjectivists. There is no possibility of objective knowledge of reality. You're showing your true colors.

Unfortunately for you (until or unless you stop fighting the truth), objective knowledge is possible.

Post reply on HN