If the connection is this bad, why waste your bandwidth on video? I turned it off because I did not find the echoing effects tolerable to listen to.
Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
11–20 of 62 posts
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#12Does anyone have a link to the transcript? The echo is really hard to ignore in the video.
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#13If the connection is this bad, why waste your bandwidth on video? I turned it off because I did not find the echoing effects tolerable to listen to.
I'm not sure it's bandwidth and not just that they're not muting their microphones while he talks. Either way, the experience is terrible.
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#14There were a few gems in the interview...
"We need public oversight ... some way for trusted public figures to advocate for us. We need a watchdog that watches Congress, because if we're not informed, we can't consent to these (government) policies."
A somewhat ok paraphrasing is here: http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/10/tech/web/edward-snowden-sxsw/
One remark stuck with me "....the NSA surveillance was setting fire to the future of the Internet". Absolutely!
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I feel pretty ashamed of the HN community today, and I'm going to take the day off from it today. There were like 10 submissions and none of them were upvoted too much.
In all honesty, it wasn't a great interview and didn't raise any points that most of us here on HN didn't know already. Snowden didn't speak all that much and what he did say wasn't incredibly insightful if you're a technology professional. His main gripe is that secure tools are too hard to use, and real security will need to come from the Googles and Apples of the world, but it's not in their best interest given th…
>So basically it was a plea to the next generation of the "next big thing" to think about doing security in a way that actually secures information.
So basically, another entity ready to be co-opted by its aligning self interests with the State?
It's like we never collectively learned anything from the cyhperpunks:
"They think they can always find someone to protect them. No, you can't. You've got to protect yourself."
Society doesn't want to hear that… The same society that wants to elect people to solve their problems time and time again… and you know what? Maybe what society gets is what it deserves time and time again… but it doesn't seem to stop individuals that do achieve what they seek, despite it all, and at the end of the day that's what it always seems to come down to, and the steps snowden took to even conduct the interview (that is intolerable to listen to for the echo) is a prime example.
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#16If the connection is this bad, why waste your bandwidth on video? I turned it off because I did not find the echoing effects tolerable to listen to.
I'm not sure it's bandwidth and not just that they're not muting their microphones while he talks. Either way, the experience is terrible.
Seriously. Manually mute your mic. This applies to everybody who uses hangouts or conferences with anything, ever.
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#17The Streisand effect is in full force here. I only knew about this interview because Congressman Pompeo asked conference organizers to rescind their invitation to him on the grounds that Snowden is a "traitor"[0]. I can't watch this right now, but I'm looking forward to seeing it later tonight. [0] http://www.opb.org/news/article/npr-sxsw-snowden-speech-has-...
Using the t word while trying to censor people that disagree with you politically is infuriatingly unpatriotic.
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#18The Streisand effect is in full force here. I only knew about this interview because Congressman Pompeo asked conference organizers to rescind their invitation to him on the grounds that Snowden is a "traitor"[0]. I can't watch this right now, but I'm looking forward to seeing it later tonight. [0] http://www.opb.org/news/article/npr-sxsw-snowden-speech-has-...
Not exactly the Streisand effect since it's also the only reason many people have ever heard of Pompeo, which was probably the point.
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#19The Streisand effect is in full force here. I only knew about this interview because Congressman Pompeo asked conference organizers to rescind their invitation to him on the grounds that Snowden is a "traitor"[0]. I can't watch this right now, but I'm looking forward to seeing it later tonight. [0] http://www.opb.org/news/article/npr-sxsw-snowden-speech-has-...
Do you really think his goal was to get them to rescind their invitation? I don't think I'm typically cynical on such matters but I have little doubt that his goal was to get publicity for asking for this invitation to be rescinded. I suspect he got exactly what he wanted here -- go on record against Snowden and get liberals attacking him. That can only help him fend off potential threats in a primary later this year...
Re: Edward Snowden SXSW live stream
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
In all honesty, it wasn't a great interview and didn't raise any points that most of us here on HN didn't know already. Snowden didn't speak all that much and what he did say wasn't incredibly insightful if you're a technology professional. His main gripe is that secure tools are too hard to use, and real security will need to come from the Googles and Apples of the world, but it's not in their best interest given th…
> So basically it was a plea to the next generation of the "next big thing" to think about doing security in a way that actually secures information. So basically, another entity ready to be co-opted by its aligning self interests with the State? It's like we never collectively learned anything from the cyhperpunks: "They think they can always find someone to protect them. No, you can't. You've got to protect yoursel…
No; his point was that companies like Google and Facebook will never be truly secure because true security is at odds with their business model. They're advertising companies, so they need to look at your communications to serve you ads. On a private level, that's fine, because you implicitly choose to submit to this surveillance in exchange for the service, and if Google oversteps their bounds, there is legal recourse.
What he was asking for was for the next Google or Facebook, which will likely not be based on an advertising-centric business model, to take privacy seriously and do things in such a way that it can't be turned over to the government en masse. He didn't seem against surveillance as a concept; there is a place for targeted surveillance and he wants to use the technology to force individual surveillance to be the only viable option.