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

New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

spiegel.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 295 posts

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#201

Post by [deleted] »

krapp wrote: post #36
pa7ch wrote: post #30

Looking at the comments in support of the NSA here makes me suspect an astroturfing campaign is happening. Edit: I should add that my suspicion came from noticing that the vast majority of the comments when this was first posted seemed aligned in favor of the NSA's mission. It wasn't the presence of pro-NSA comments that was interesting but rather that these opinions were the overwhelming majority. This is, of course…

You're probably right. No need to consider the arguments made by people who don't agree entirely with a particular point of view, or even discuss it at all. They're obviously just shills. Edit: Much of the 'pro NSA' comments I see here seem merely to suggest that not everything the NSA does is evil, and not every disclosure is necessarily useful. As often happens in threads like these, any such comments are dismissed…

[deleted]

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#202

Post by AnthonyMouse »

diminoten wrote: post #182
zipwitch wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unimportant, because they neither provide useful intel nor prevent terror attacks. Or very important, because they have lots of blackmail material?

How would you know if they provide useful intel or prevent terror attacks?

Do you have an actual answer to that question? Because it seems like a bad plan to spend trillions of dollars on something if you can't even show that it works.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#203

Post by serf »

diminoten wrote: post #158
rhizome wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you don't have to be rude about it.

I think your attitude deserves the response I gave, if not something much harsher. You kill intellectual debate.

As a casual reader of the NSA/GCHQ/Snowden threads on HM I have mentally check-marked nearly every comment of yours within this thread as a different form of documented tactic of subversion used by forum plants.

You sling personal insults, you point out trivial errors and falsehoods in statements by others which have nothing to do with the given point, you attempt to diminish reputations, and whatever other tactics available at the particular avenue in order to derail the original point/argument, while pushing pro US government talking points and stereotypical 'save-the-children' rhetoric.

I don't know who you are, but I have recently begun ignoring your posts, attempting to derive wisdom only from the replies directed towards your usually greyed/dead comments, but I hope that people who read my reply to you will take the chance to read your past comments and attempt to pick up on any potential biases before considering your opinion on things.

And even if I am completely wrong about your stake in this game, the hostility that you inject into these discussions is uncalled for, and adds nothing but scorn and hurt feelings, quelling the debate and discussion of the topics at hand; what I believe is your very objective.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#204

Post by diminoten »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #202
diminoten wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you know if they provide useful intel or prevent terror attacks?

Do you have an actual answer to that question? Because it seems like a bad plan to spend trillions of dollars on something if you can't even show that it works.

Show to who? You?

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#205

Post by hueving »

alextgordon wrote: post #176
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the USA has no enemies, there are no threats. I am interested in how you came to this conclusion.

I'd be interested to know who you think is a threat! The US has two borders. One with Canada, one with Mexico. Neither of these countries are likely to invade. The US has the largest naval force in the world. I believe the Coastguard is also the 13th largest. Again, nothing to fear. Of the countries that are "enemies", most would quite like to improve relations, for instance Cuba and Iran. Iran in particular has exte…

>most would quite like to improve relations, for instance Cuba and Iran.

The ones that don't like to improve the relations generally get hung up on unstable countries developing atomic bombs.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#206

Post by diminoten »

serf wrote: post #203
diminoten wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your attitude deserves the response I gave, if not something much harsher. You kill intellectual debate.

As a casual reader of the NSA/GCHQ/Snowden threads on HM I have mentally check-marked nearly every comment of yours within this thread as a different form of documented tactic of subversion used by forum plants. You sling personal insults, you point out trivial errors and falsehoods in statements by others which have nothing to do with the given point, you attempt to diminish reputations, and whatever other tactics a…

Oh no, an Internet person doesn't like me.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#207

Post by harry8 »

krapp wrote: post #83
elwin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try looking at the comments from a different angle. Instead of grouping them into "pro-NSA" and "anti-NSA" categories, try checking for technical ignorance. Look for ideas about cyberwarfare based on bad analogies with real warfare. Look for a mindset that puts winning an arms race first and never considers ethical implications. Look for vague statements about protecting or harming America that don't explain whether…

To be fair, I doubt many people (including myself) with an opinion either way actually know what they're talking about. The expert pool for knowledge about high-level classified government hacking is probably pretty small, even on Hacker News. It's politics, and politics hits people in the lizard brain and short-circuits their ability to think rationally.

One the other hand there aren't many opinions on it on hacker news that are more clueless than those of elected officials and various powerful lawyers. But I think the one where you just trust those caught out being grossly incompetent (even if you have zero ethics) really has been one of them.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#208

Post by maximilian2 »

karmacondon wrote: post #188
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #86

Here's a story for you. I'm not a party to any of this. I've done nothing wrong, I've never been suspected of doing anything wrong, and I don't know anyone who has done anything wrong. I don't even mean that in the sense of "I pissed off the wrong people but technically haven't been charged." I mean that I am a vanilla, average, 9-5 working man of no interest to anybody. My geographical location is an accident of my…

This agency gathered information on you, attempted to friend you on linkedin and infected your family's computer. I don't think any of those actions warrant accusations of inhumanity. I can understand that it's disturbing to feel that you're being stalked, or even just monitored. But it doesn't sound like anyone took action to intervene in your private affairs or intentionally lead you to feel threatened. It's legal…

>Infecting a computer with a virus... As long as they did not harm, the morality of even infecting a computer is questionable.

This is bullshit. Even if a virus doesn't intentionally harm, it does anyway harm.

Connections will become very slow, because high priority is given to uploading stuff from one's computer to nsa. User will get inexpicable blue screens or exotic error messages that nobody can help to fix: asking for help in forums will just bring annoying answers of "experts" suggesting to upgrade Windows/Flash/HW/programs versions. Installation or execution of some programs will be prevented, making computer usage a pain.

Infecting a computer is legally and morally a crime.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#209

Post by DanBC »

diminoten wrote: post #157
smtddr wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipula... EDIT: Added firstlook url per reply, originally pointed to https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140224/17054826340/new-s... ...not really sure I see a substantial difference between the 2 articles, but there you go.

Why link to the blogspam and not the firstlook.org article it's sourced from? Oh right, because it doesn't support what you're saying. Got it.

Are you saying that GCHQ don't do it?

Or that GCHQ does do it, but because they're GCHQ and not NSA that it's irrelevant?

Because now you have evidence that GCHQ does it you should allow the possibility that NSA does it. The reason you don't have evidence that NSA does it might be because NSA is a secret organistion.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#210

Post by diminoten »

DanBC wrote: post #209
diminoten wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why link to the blogspam and not the firstlook.org article it's sourced from? Oh right, because it doesn't support what you're saying. Got it.

Are you saying that GCHQ don't do it? Or that GCHQ does do it, but because they're GCHQ and not NSA that it's irrelevant? Because now you have evidence that GCHQ does it you should allow the possibility that NSA does it. The reason you don't have evidence that NSA does it might be because NSA is a secret organistion.

So Snowden decided to leak the GCHQ presentation, but chose not to show any of the evidence he had that the NSA does it?
Post reply on HN