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

Reform Government Surveillance

reformgovernmentsurveillance.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 223 posts

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#171

Post by raverbashing »

dnr wrote: post #68
TruthElixirX wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

It's one thing, even if still completely unacceptable, for an employee to spy using one media.

Another one is for someone to "throw the net" and get information on several fronts (possibly including: credit report, bank info, emails, etc)

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#172

Post by teamgb »

veidr wrote: post #132
hooande wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing more reviled by people who were born during the cold war than a criminal who defects first to china and then to russia. No amount of tech industry pr can facilitate a comeback from that. Almost half of the people in this country will always see Snowden as a traitor. Government surveillance has become a political wedge issue, similar to abortion. No one likes it or encourages it but people have strong…

> There is nothing more reviled by people who were born during the cold war than a criminal who defects first to china and then to russia. I was born during the Cold War and I don't see it that way. In fact, I think you have it precisely backwards. I remember being alive when the USSR and East Germany were going concerns, and those countries seemed so horrible -- the USA really was on what any sane person (by my defi…

> And to my Cold War-shaped mind, it is impossible to think of him as anything other than a whistleblower that this country badly, badly needed.

Imagine this was 1980 and the issue at hand was apartheid.

Jelly-fish CEOs print an open letter in newspapers, asking governments to improve race relations because unhappy black folk don't want to buy their products.

Not once is Nelson Mandela mentioned in the letter, so out of the public eye, his years in prison continue.

Are we supposed to be impressed with this?

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#173

Post by f3llowtraveler »

Why doesn't this web page mention Snowden at all? For example, the fact that he was right, and is a hero, and deserves to have all charges dropped?

Weren't all these people collaborating with authorities at the expense of our liberties -- and aren't they still?

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#174

Post by hobs »

tptacek wrote: post #161
couchand wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the same "surveillance apparatus [that] saw America through the Cold War." It's simply not comparable to even just fifteen years ago. The changes in technology and the self-satisfied attitude of the spooks have changed the game entirely. Half of the people in this country are deluding themselves just like you.

It is ahistorical and (perversely) wishful to suggest that communications surveillance in the 1950s was less onerous to the civilian population than it is today. During the heyday of the Cold War, no police force needed a court order to wiretap a phone; the notion of wiretap authorization dates back to, what, 1968? Today, we have rumors and gossip about NSA analysts "training" on Obama's comms in the early '00s. Duri…

I know you have a background in this, and I understand the intelligence agencies COULD have monitored anyone they wanted to in the past, but they couldn't automate it to create the scope of surveillance now in place.

A phone tap in the 1950s would require recording and someone listening to it, would it not? How many people could the NSA employ to listen to conversations? Millions?

Either way, just because they have been doing disgusting things for so long does not make it something we should stop getting upset about.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#175

Post by teamgb »

coffeemug wrote: post #145
hooande wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing more reviled by people who were born during the cold war than a criminal who defects first to china and then to russia. No amount of tech industry pr can facilitate a comeback from that. Almost half of the people in this country will always see Snowden as a traitor. Government surveillance has become a political wedge issue, similar to abortion. No one likes it or encourages it but people have strong…

There is nothing more reviled by people who were born during the cold war than a criminal who defects first to china and then to russia. I am a Russian American and I see this the other way around. The fact that Snowden had to escape to Russia (of all places!) to maintain his freedom is an indictment of the sorry state of affairs in the U.S. Traditionally the U.S. has been a beacon of hope for political prisoners and…

It seems odd because Russia always gets demonized in the media. It's always the same: mafia, corruption, hackers... I can't remember the last time a positive story was published in the English speaking press.

The Thai government have just dissolved parliament and called new elections due to protests. Can you imagine that happening in many so-called "democratic" Western states? You can't even get a crack-smoking mayor to resign these days!

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#176

Post by tptacek »

hobs wrote: post #174
tptacek wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is ahistorical and (perversely) wishful to suggest that communications surveillance in the 1950s was less onerous to the civilian population than it is today. During the heyday of the Cold War, no police force needed a court order to wiretap a phone; the notion of wiretap authorization dates back to, what, 1968? Today, we have rumors and gossip about NSA analysts "training" on Obama's comms in the early '00s. Duri…

I know you have a background in this, and I understand the intelligence agencies COULD have monitored anyone they wanted to in the past, but they couldn't automate it to create the scope of surveillance now in place. A phone tap in the 1950s would require recording and someone listening to it, would it not? How many people could the NSA employ to listen to conversations? Millions? Either way, just because they have b…

I agree! There's nothing in the "Reform Internet Surveillance" platform that I disagree with at all, including the need for such a platform.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#177

Post by bippi »

I like the idea, but these were the principles they were supposed to be following in the first place but weren't. What makes anyone think that any amount of laws passed will be respected?

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#178

Post by allworknoplay »

sklivvz1971 wrote: post #122

Honestly this makes me a little upset. While I am happy that these corporations are taking a stand against surveillance, I am not convinced of their intentions: * This summer's hailstorm was about NSA but also about them . This site obviously ignores this and shows these corps as innocent victims, which they are not. * It's clearly too little! "Governments should reform themselves". How should they do that? There are…

It's really the lack of prescriptions, threats, petitioning, or any other real call to action that surprises me. They could say any number of things, but instead they list some vague principles and some quotes. How about:

* we will aggressively develop and support cryptographic methods that will keep you out of peoples' business

* here are some specific legislative demands

* here's a petition users can sign

* we're making direct appeals to our users to call you all and will keep them apprised of your progress

hell, even

* here's a count of the number of people who have shared something stupid across our many social media

So many things they could be doing...

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#179

Post by rdl »

ggreer wrote: post #60
teamgb wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crux of the issue for Snowden is whether he is viewed by the public as a whistle-blower or traitor. These companies have staked out a position, off the back of his endeavors, yet lack the courage and conviction to fully support him. It makes me cringe to see Larry Page, Marissa Mayer et al posting weasel words on a web-site, as though they are champions of the people. In the week that Nelson Mandela passed away,…

These companies want the conversation to be about surveillance, not Snowden. Had Snowden been mentioned in the letter, it would have set off a distracting debate. They probably appreciate what he did, but publicly thanking Snowden isn't going to help them achieve their goals.

Snowden is also not the only whistleblower. To some extent, the more-limited actions by Binney, Wiebe, and Drake were even more amazing because they were without precedent (at NSA); Snowden went far beyond them, but had their example in mind.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#180

Post by rdl »

adventured wrote: post #55
molecule wrote: post #17

It seems peculiar that Apple is a signatory: > Sincerely, > AOL, Apple, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Twitter, Yahoo and their logo appears in the listing @ the end of the page, but their logo isn't in the beginning of the page, and they don't provide a quote from their CEO nor legal counsel, per the other signing companies. Last-minute change of heart, lukewarm support...?

I was hoping to see Amazon.com signed on to this as well, given their substantial position in cloud computing, and their likely future influence being even greater.

If you saw Palantir on the list, things would be pretty amazing :)
Post reply on HN