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

Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 146 posts

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#11

Post by yetanotherHNacc »

not_that_noob wrote: post #2

Why was the title changed? Here's the operative paragraph from the article below - there is a document that indicates the NSA is spying on porn visits of ordinary Americans to use against them in intimidation for exercising their rights to free speech. It doesn't get any worse than this. "It should also trouble Americans that the N.S.A. could head down a similar path in this country. Indeed, there is some indication,…

There was a similar incident that comes to mind, BlueCoat hardware deployed by Assad's government in Syria.

It was found that Assad was having traffic monitored through BlueCoat proxies installed at the ISP level. Logs were leaked showing monitoring of religious, sexual, political content.

Of course many are now dead, countless others imprisoned. Much thanks to BlueCoat and salesmen who assisted Assad's government in procuring the hardware.

Sidenote: This topic, and others around it have gotten several accounts of mine here ghosted. Best stick to discussing how your start-up wants to sell traffic monitoring hardware and SaaS via independent sales agents to whoever has cash.

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#12

Post by MatthewMcDonald »

not_that_noob wrote: post #9
MatthewMcDonald wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN's Guidelines say to use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The article clearly states the NSA is cataloging porn visits of ordinary Americans exercising their rights to free speech. How was the title not appropriate?

>How was the title not appropriate?

I'm not arguing that what you submitted as the title is not an accurate summary of the article; HN guidelines are that you're supposed to submit the original title of the article, and only submit a new title if the article's original title is appropriate.

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#13

Post by dang »

not_that_noob wrote: post #2

Why was the title changed? Here's the operative paragraph from the article below - there is a document that indicates the NSA is spying on porn visits of ordinary Americans to use against them in intimidation for exercising their rights to free speech. It doesn't get any worse than this. "It should also trouble Americans that the N.S.A. could head down a similar path in this country. Indeed, there is some indication,…

The title you submitted (which was not the original title at all) was a classic case of editorializing: cherry-picking one thing you think is important about the article. HN doesn't allow that. HN titles are pointers to stories, not little op-eds, and need to neutrally reflect the story's content as a whole.

HN readers can make up their own minds about what parts of an article are important. It's not the submitter's prerogative to do that for everybody. Being first to submit a story confers no authority over it. If you want to say what you think is important about an article, that's fine, but do so in the comments, so your view is on a level playing field with everyone else's.

HN's value hierarchy starts with respect for the content and for the reader; submitters are somewhat down on the list. Sorry, but it does apply to all of us qua submitter.

I'm not disagreeing about the detail you singled out. Arguably, the article buries the lede. The place to point that out, however, is not in the title but in the comments, where there is ample opportunity to discuss the details and where the submitter is on the same footing as everyone else.

Edit: this discussion always comes up in the context of a title where people agree with the submitter's rewrite and disagree with moderators' reversion to the original. But that's not a good basis for assessing the rule. Instead, you should consider the far more common case of all the rewritten titles you disagree with, either because they're flat-out wrong or because the author's and your opinions differ. Imagine what HN would be like if it that were routinely ok. The front page would mostly be spin. HN would be more tendentious and have more kibitzing about titles than it does now. Those effects would be compounded everywhere else. It would be a very different place. The more experience I have with HN, the more I feel that pg's decision to have it always focus neutrally on content is one of the wisest design choices he made.

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#14

Post by rgkjrengkjreng »

yetanotherHNacc wrote: post #11
not_that_noob wrote: post #2

Why was the title changed? Here's the operative paragraph from the article below - there is a document that indicates the NSA is spying on porn visits of ordinary Americans to use against them in intimidation for exercising their rights to free speech. It doesn't get any worse than this. "It should also trouble Americans that the N.S.A. could head down a similar path in this country. Indeed, there is some indication,…

There was a similar incident that comes to mind, BlueCoat hardware deployed by Assad's government in Syria. It was found that Assad was having traffic monitored through BlueCoat proxies installed at the ISP level. Logs were leaked showing monitoring of religious, sexual, political content. Of course many are now dead, countless others imprisoned. Much thanks to BlueCoat and salesmen who assisted Assad's government in…

I've noticed this as well.

Similarly, reddit will completely shut down any threads that start to become too activist on the grounds of "witch hunting." It's amazing how we've already systematically nerfed the internet as a tool for bringing about political change.

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#15

Post by [deleted] »

lwhalen wrote: post #10
not_that_noob wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article clearly states the NSA is cataloging porn visits of ordinary Americans exercising their rights to free speech. How was the title not appropriate?

The given title was not appropriate because it did not fit the HN rule of "Use the original title"

[deleted]

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#16

Post by alan_cx »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #8
cryoshon wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, if not fixing it by working within the system, then what is the next step?

Those working within the system should follow Snowden's example, IMHO. Force the government to either stop these practices altogether, or reveal their true cost to the American way of life.

Why should any insider do that?

Snowden did it, and look what happened. Nothing. Sad truth is, the majority don't care. If they did, then it would be reflected in voting, and things would change. But no. Mean while, Snowden is a wanted man in exile.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like this one little bit, but it seems I'm in a minority.

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#17

Post by sfk »

cryoshon wrote: post #5
CamperBob2 wrote: post #3

Instead of being buried at the end of the article, Bamford's penultimate paragraph In Moscow, Mr. Snowden told me that the document reminded him of the F.B.I.’s overreach during the days of J. Edgar Hoover, when the bureau abused its powers to monitor and harass political activists. “It’s much like how the F.B.I. tried to use Martin Luther King’s infidelity to talk him into killing himself,” he said. “We said those k…

Okay, if not fixing it by working within the system, then what is the next step?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monday_demonstrations_in_East_G...

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#18

Post by dragonwriter »

alan_cx wrote: post #16
CamperBob2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those working within the system should follow Snowden's example, IMHO. Force the government to either stop these practices altogether, or reveal their true cost to the American way of life.

Why should any insider do that? Snowden did it, and look what happened. Nothing. Sad truth is, the majority don't care. If they did, then it would be reflected in voting, and things would change. But no. Mean while, Snowden is a wanted man in exile. Don't get me wrong, I don't like this one little bit, but it seems I'm in a minority.

> Snowden did it, and look what happened. Nothing.

"Nothing" understates the impact. Sure, no one insider's revelations alone will suffice to radically change the situation, but, to borrow a Medieval adaptation of a classical aphorism, gutta cavet lapidem, non vi, sed saepe cadendo.

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#19

Post by johnchristopher »

alan_cx wrote: post #16
CamperBob2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those working within the system should follow Snowden's example, IMHO. Force the government to either stop these practices altogether, or reveal their true cost to the American way of life.

Why should any insider do that? Snowden did it, and look what happened. Nothing. Sad truth is, the majority don't care. If they did, then it would be reflected in voting, and things would change. But no. Mean while, Snowden is a wanted man in exile. Don't get me wrong, I don't like this one little bit, but it seems I'm in a minority.

Because it's going to take years and many more Manning and Snowden to fix things. It's not going to happen over one leak, one scandal or one occupation movement. There are no magic wands or easy solutions that would allow us to fold it over the weekend and be home in time to catch up some TV shows on Netflix. Let's remember that it took years for the Vietnam anti-war movement or the peace talks in Ireland to gain traction and it still was a messy road.

edit: grammar&typo

Re: Israel’s N.S.A. Scandal

#20

Post by a3n »

alan_cx wrote: post #16
CamperBob2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those working within the system should follow Snowden's example, IMHO. Force the government to either stop these practices altogether, or reveal their true cost to the American way of life.

Why should any insider do that? Snowden did it, and look what happened. Nothing. Sad truth is, the majority don't care. If they did, then it would be reflected in voting, and things would change. But no. Mean while, Snowden is a wanted man in exile. Don't get me wrong, I don't like this one little bit, but it seems I'm in a minority.

The difference is that we on the outside now know, cannot claim ignorance, and are therefore responsible.
Post reply on HN