31–40 of 62 posts
1. Did he really have the US Constitution as a backdrop? Is he Saul Goodman? 2. It's a shame no-one asked him about his opinions on Russia's recent actions. I know it isn't anything to do with the revelations he exposed, but seeking asylum in Russia makes him part of the broader political game.
There 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 th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "and get liberals attacking him" If there is one thing I don't understand about this entire issue, it is how partisan politics are actually playing out. Normally I just look at what people in my extended family think, but all of the Republicans/conservatives in my extended family think that all of this NSA stuff is A Big Deal (tm) and think Snowden a patriotic hero (presumably because they think that it paints the…
>>but all of the Republicans/conservatives in my extended family think that all of this NSA stuff is A Big Deal(tm) and think Snowden a patriotic hero (presumably because they think that it paints the Obama administration in a bad light, which they are always all for.) I'm glad there are republicans/conservatives that are against what NSA is doing because it supports my wild theory[1] about what would happen if thing…
He absolutely does. He could also pardon snowden. He could also fire clapper or even just not appoint him to the panel investigating the whole issue.
He took an Oath after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "and get liberals attacking him" If there is one thing I don't understand about this entire issue, it is how partisan politics are actually playing out. Normally I just look at what people in my extended family think, but all of the Republicans/conservatives in my extended family think that all of this NSA stuff is A Big Deal (tm) and think Snowden a patriotic hero (presumably because they think that it paints the…
>>but all of the Republicans/conservatives in my extended family think that all of this NSA stuff is A Big Deal(tm) and think Snowden a patriotic hero (presumably because they think that it paints the Obama administration in a bad light, which they are always all for.) I'm glad there are republicans/conservatives that are against what NSA is doing because it supports my wild theory[1] about what would happen if thing…
I'm sure you're right about the genesis of many NSA programs predating January, 2009, but as a practical matter, President Obama has the absolute authority to stop any of these programs as soon as he would like. It literally is as simple as asking General Alexander to the Oval Office, requesting a list of all current programs with a more or less detailed summary of their goals and methods, then ordering the General to end those programs the President finds unacceptable. Were General Alexander for some bizarre reason to refuse a direct order from his Commander in Chief, he could be fired immediately and his deputy given the same order.
For some reason, some people seem unwilling to accept that we do not live in a parliamentary system: The President has powers that cannot be suspended or absorbed by Congress, no matter how many laws they pass. There are certainly avenues for oversight, as well as budgetary, judicial and other checks on those powers, but the execution of national security policy is up to the guy in the White House. You're not just electing a speech-maker and bill-signer, you're electing an executive. Vote accordingly.
1. Did he really have the US Constitution as a backdrop? Is he Saul Goodman? 2. It's a shame no-one asked him about his opinions on Russia's recent actions. I know it isn't anything to do with the revelations he exposed, but seeking asylum in Russia makes him part of the broader political game.
There's a right time and right place to publicly criticize a country's actions, and I think it comes after you no longer depend on that country for political asylum
1. Did he really have the US Constitution as a backdrop? Is he Saul Goodman? 2. It's a shame no-one asked him about his opinions on Russia's recent actions. I know it isn't anything to do with the revelations he exposed, but seeking asylum in Russia makes him part of the broader political game.
It was a very interesting interview. Combined with the Aaron Schwartz documentary and a cross to Assange it's been quite an intense couple of days!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know it gets more fundamental than the business model. Everything about a company supports its business model; not the other way around.
What about the formation of any corporation? To whom does the potential corporation submit itself to? And what benefits does it receive upon incorporation even well before any business model can be in sight or capital gained?
This was a talk targeted at technologists. All technologists can do is try to make it harder for governments to collect data on the entire population at once by using secure crypto schemes. If they want YOU, they can still get you, because one man vs. a government is never going to end in the man's favor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
1. Did he really have the US Constitution as a backdrop? Is he Saul Goodman? 2. It's a shame no-one asked him about his opinions on Russia's recent actions. I know it isn't anything to do with the revelations he exposed, but seeking asylum in Russia makes him part of the broader political game.