Reform Government Surveillance • Hacker News Board

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#61

Post by neilk » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:16 AM UTC

pg wrote: post #40

teamgb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not once does the name "Edward Snowden" appear anywhere on the web-page or open letter! These companies are simply grand-standing to further their own ambition. They don't care what happens to Snowden, they deny even his very existence.

They may not all care what happens to Snowden, but I think it's unfair to say they're merely showing off. I think these companies are acting on pretty high principle. They have little to gain by issuing such a statement, except the goodwill of people like us, but since they're all participating, such goodwill is evenly distributed and no one of them derives an advantage from it. Whereas they all depend on good relati…

They have a lot to gain. Many analysts are saying that surveillance, or the perception of complicity with it, is going to lose international customers and have other negative effects on business partnerships.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/how-nsa-mass-surveilla...

I agree that for the most part, geeks at these companies are as opposed to surveillance as people outside - probably even more so. However, usually, it's business impact that turns private opinion into official corporate policy.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#62

Post by tareqak » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:16 AM UTC

A website is a good start, but a live press conference attended by all the CEOs and members of mainstream media would be far, far better.

For most people, if it doesn't happen on TV, it doesn't happen at all.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#63

Post by ma2rten » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:17 AM UTC

pg wrote: post #19

Among other things, this is the tipping point for how Snowden will be viewed. If all these powerful companies agree, in an unprecedented show of unanimity, that this is an important problem, then Snowden is ipso facto a hero for bringing it to our attention. The curious thing is, I feel the linkage works in the other direction too. If Snowden had been caught and was now having his brains scrambled by solitary confine…

Maybe, I am naive, but I'd like to believe that if Snowden had been captured, he would become a martyr and people would be on the streets now. Eventually the movement would grow strong enough that the big companies would join in.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#64

Post by ma2rten » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:17 AM UTC

pg wrote: post #19

Among other things, this is the tipping point for how Snowden will be viewed. If all these powerful companies agree, in an unprecedented show of unanimity, that this is an important problem, then Snowden is ipso facto a hero for bringing it to our attention. The curious thing is, I feel the linkage works in the other direction too. If Snowden had been caught and was now having his brains scrambled by solitary confine…

Maybe, I am naive, but I'd like to believe that if Snowden had been captured, he would become a martyr and people would be on the streets now. Eventually the movement would grow strong enough that the big companies would join in.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#65

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:17 AM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#66

Post by nfoz » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:23 AM UTC

I guess it's nice when companies are politically active on behalf of things that serve both my interests and theirs. But I wish the U.S. government was responsive to the demands of its actual citizens and not these private entities, whose views regarding privacy law are so often antagonistic to my own.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#67

Post by kevinalexbrown » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:26 AM UTC

Regardless of your opinion on the leaks, this marks something really interesting in the course of history.

Communications is one of the few services that governments co-opt indirectly. Lockheed Martin knows it's building war jets. But here, the signatories didn't set out to build government surveillance engines, it was required of them after it became clear how useful they could be. Their response could set the tone for future actions in years to come.

It's interesting that other communications groups (e.g. cellphone co's) have not reacted in the same way, Qwest aside. You don't have to believe that each CEO is doing this on principle if you're cynically inclined, but it seems clear at least that many of their employees are in favor of it. I'm curious if it's a internet/tech/silicon valley thing, or something else.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#68

Post by dnr » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:27 AM UTC

TruthElixirX wrote: post #49

pacala wrote: post #15

This is getting ridiculous. The ad empires built on stalking every single breath of every single human want to take governments to task on the topic of stalking. What about cleaning up your own house first? 1. Limiting Corporations’ Authority to Collect Users’ Information Corporations should codify sensible limitations on their ability to collect and disclose user data that balance their need for the data in limited…

>What about cleaning up your own house first? These corporations, to my knowledge, have never used their data to: * Spy on love interests * Kill people abroad unilaterally * Construct court cases against people * Imprison people for victimless crimes (or any crime for that matter) * Add me to no-fly lists * Forcibly extract money from me to make me pay for their programs

I remember reading stories a few years ago about how facebook employees used to spy on love interests. I'm sure there are better access controls in place these days, though.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#69

Post by pavs » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:28 AM UTC

lambda wrote: post #47

ekianjo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On Internet you have the choice of which service to use, that's the key difference. You don't want Google ? Use DuckDuckGo. You don't want Microsoft ? Use Linux systems. And so on. The issue with the government is that you are tracked by default, on your mobile phone and on your online activity. You cannot opt out .

You have very little choice to avoid Google Analytics (or one of a handful of other major analytics companies). Almost every site on the internet uses it. None of them reveal in an obvious way if they do, or give you any choice (or they just pop up a generic "we use cookies, if you continue using this site you agree"). Or beyond that, there's all the sharing buttons, Google Web Fonts, hosted JavaScript libraries, and…

>You have very little choice to avoid Google Analytics.

https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout Its been around for a looooong time.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#70

Post by pavs » Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 6:29 AM UTC

molecule wrote: post #21

pacala wrote: post #15

This is getting ridiculous. The ad empires built on stalking every single breath of every single human want to take governments to task on the topic of stalking. What about cleaning up your own house first? 1. Limiting Corporations’ Authority to Collect Users’ Information Corporations should codify sensible limitations on their ability to collect and disclose user data that balance their need for the data in limited…

(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){ (i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o), m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m) })(window,document,'script','//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga'); ga('create', 'UA-46280830-1', 'reformgovernmentsurveillance.com'); ga('send', 'pageview');

https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout