Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn • Hacker News Board

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#321

Post by GhotiFish » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 2:46 AM UTC

happyscrappy wrote: post #272

Lerc wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their point about the image of the bust remains. The fact that they covered the bust with a tarp itself creates an image with a message. Consider the mentality of obscuring the bust with something that is even uglier. It is not a statement on the aesthetics of the work. It is literally saying "You may not look upon this unsanctioned idea"

So your theory is that they covered it up so no one will talk about Snowden? That doesn't make sense.

no. His theory is that the artists wanted to create this very scene.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#322

Post by logn » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 2:47 AM UTC

slg wrote: post #116

hristov wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so. If it is something unauthorized they probably would have removed it in due time. I.e., they would have taken a couple of days to hire professionals to do it. Now they immediately cover it up so that no-one can see it while they arrange for its removal. Why? Obviously they do not want anyone to look at it before it is removed. But why not? It is certainly not offensive in any way. It may prove to be…

I think you are looking at the situation from our little tech bubble. Regardless of all of our opinions on the situation, it is still very political. This guy is actively wanted by our government for possible treason charges. If you believe those charges have merit, then erecting a statue in his honor could easily be classified as offensive. This is part of the problem with our side of the debate. We take it as a for…

I listen to lots of progressive as well as libertarian radio/media, and they all support Snowden. He's not just a tech bubble sensation.

I might have agreed with you that erecting a statue does nothing. But that it was promptly covered with a tarp is more revealing than I would have expected.

The Weather Underground protested by blowing up a statue. This is pretty classy.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#323

Post by Semiapies » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 2:48 AM UTC

tedunangst wrote: post #254

tessierashpool wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snowden's a hero and deserves his place on that memorial. This whole deal with the people putting up a statue of a hero and the government tearing it down? Not what America's supposed to be about. Combine that with the fact that most of the senators who voted for the Patriot Act probably read 1984, and didn't object to the obvious propaganda in the name Patriot Act? Not what America's supposed to be about either.

Shouldn't the American way involve a vote or some other involvement of the democratic process at some point? Is America now all about individuals just doing whatever they want, and if somebody doesn't like it, too bad?

How do we have a democratic process about such matters when they're secret?

We've tried the "trust our elected officials" approach. We got mass surveillance. Next idea?

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#324

Post by Dylan16807 » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 2:59 AM UTC

cdbajorin wrote: post #314

Dylan16807 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you could be one of those better conversational partners instead of implying that he's lying? Also I think you have something to learn about human nature if you don't believe people will bluff on a political opinion without being able to give a coherent argument.

I don't really understand how you read that from my comment. I didn't imply he was lying. I was demonstrating how easy it is to straw man. It's clearly very easy to dismiss opinions you may disagree with by twisting them into something else. "You're stupid because I can mock you" doesn't give any validity to your arguments.

>These aren't arguments that people actually make.

That looks like an implication of lying to me.

I already explained how it's not a straw man, it's not meant to represent an actual argument.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#325

Post by ics » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 3:28 AM UTC

brenschluss wrote: post #319

ics wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not inventing them; it is their (Parks and Rec) responsibility to handle contingencies that could cause them or their users trouble. You don't know what chance it [the sculpture causing harm] is because you know absolutely nothing about it except what the article has told you. But they're responsible for it and what it does under "normal conditions". The tornado example is funny because though it would probably…

People like you are why NYC is dying. I mean, my god, imagine the dangers inherent in public art! Those venemous subway buskers! The risk inherent in street performances! DIY music venues! Why don't we have all the boring squares move into a city and just smother it with uninventiveness masked as safety concerns? I bet you didn't like the phreaking scene, either, because it went against someone's risk assessment, too…

I was born here in the '90s so I'm pretty sure I missed the whole phreaking scene, but your statement is a strawman regardless. I am advocating for this sort of public intervention. I support it 100%. Do I have to repeat that again? 100%. But reality will catch up with your ideals, and it's someone's job to take concerns that aren't yours and apply them in the best interest of the public [as determined by an imperfect, slow, and but at least somewhat democratic process]. Sometimes they fuck it up by overstepping their bounds and acting in ways they are not authorized to. This is not one of those times. This is the domain of Parks and Recreation, and they are doing exactly what they are supposed to do, for completely boring but sensible reasons. I have even more respect for the artists for knowing this in advance and planning for it. It is an act of defiance. Your act of defiance does not trump everyone else's way of life. I look forward to them (hopefully) releasing their 3D model for all of us digital yuppies to go and 3D print on our fancy printers while paying higher and higher rent so we can continue to live and work in our fucking city, you know? I just happen to like our parks, respect the people working in them, and find the whole blame game distasteful. They put up some art, it got taken away, political or not it's absolutely no surprise.

In summary: It's their job. You want to give change what they do? Great! We've got a process for that, and it happens every third Monday of the month (Community Board 2 @ Brooklyn Law School). When Parks and Rec starts browsing our emails for dick pics, maybe then people can "take to the streets" with their coup. The Memorial would be a fitting location.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#326

Post by rtpg » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 3:31 AM UTC

tessierashpool wrote: post #190

genericuser wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like part of Ruth Goldstein's, one of the park conservancy founders, response in that article. While I am fairly confident that asking and trying to go through legitimate channels to get the bust put up would not of worked, what she said makes me think there are at least people who would consider it, although probably not high enough in power structures to actually get it done. “The park is such a symbol of America…

“The park is such a symbol of American liberty; that’s what it’s all about, the founding principals of it,” she said. “It (the bust) is almost appropriate but inappropriate to do it (put up illegally).” As if the establishment of American liberty didn't involve breaking any laws in the first place.

yes, not being able to put up a statue in public property is basically on the same level as centuries of persecution, seizing of private property, taxation without representation, and company.

Imagine if McDonald's just decided to put up giant golden arches in the park. There's a reason the procedures exist.

I do think this is a clever and interesting thing to do, and I hope this ends with the statue staying somehow. But I really don't see the point in comparing this with the establishment of the nation.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#327

Post by avn2109 » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 3:44 AM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #179

ics wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said in another response: it's a political statement made with public art. As far as Parks and Rec is concerned, it's big heavy piece of vandalism, the integrity of which they know nothing about. To put this in a programmer's perspective: imagine if artists wanting to make political statements suddenly started littering your linux kernel with binary blobs which caused your boot screen to flash an image of Snowde…

Depending on what you mean by "otherwise trusted", I would either not care or freak out worrying that I got something other than the Snowden blob. Just displaying an image would be easy to verify with a disassembler. And it's misleading to use 'binary blob' as an analogy to a simple statue. Most binary blobs are effectively impossible to examine fully.

>> "...easy to verify with a disassembler."

Have to laugh at this, because only on HN is the use of a disassembler considered "easy."

True story, I program computers for a living, and I have literally no idea how to verify anything at all with a disassembler. Or even approximately how one works.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#328

Post by rtpg » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 3:51 AM UTC

Semiapies wrote: post #34

toomuchtodo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NSA went too far by violating the constitutional rights of US citizens, both on US soil and abroad. I'm unaware of how you can go "too far" when directing sunlight on corruption and illegal activities perpetrated by an arm of your own government.

I've never seen a plausible argument what Snowden did that went "too far" that boiled down to more than "he did anything at all". At most, you get a side order of " mumble mumble national security mumble mumble he should have done it 'differently' mumble mumble he went to RUSSIA for sanctuary! mumble mumble

I think the real argument against what Snowden did was that he gave journalists way too much information on certain topics, relative to what one could argue are "legitimate" operations of the NSA. The fact that the NSA is spying on foreign leaders seems pretty straightforward, and basically in their job description.

I think this argument holds a lot less strongly than it did with what Manning released (notably the cables that listed "infrastructure weak points" that would basically be a list of high-value targets for anyone looking to do pain to the allies of the US. Things like schools and pipelines). But it's a question of where you think the line lies in "legitimate" surveillance.

But if you don't think it makes sense for the NSA to be spying on Chinese research institutions, for example (if only to keep tabs on Chinese military research), then I don't know if you have any task that the NSA could do given its mission statement. Obviously a balanced position, but I think most people in the US believe some spying infrastructure is necessary.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#329

Post by dragontamer » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 4:14 AM UTC

cheald wrote: post #305

dragontamer wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wild speculations aside, you might want to consider the revelations on their own merits rather than a ham-fisted smear against the source. The fact remains that they have been confirmed as true and are therefore not some kind of black propaganda. Fair enough. I'm more interested in the political implications anyway. So what do we do about Swatters? Metadata collection seems to be the only useful tool against them.

Swattings still happen on a regular basis despite pervasive metadata collection. Is your argument that we're not collecting enough to stop them?

> Swattings still happen on a regular basis despite pervasive metadata collection. Is your argument that we're not collecting enough to stop them?

Actually, I don't believe that the local police are taking advantage of their resources. I think better organization needs to be done around the metadata that is collected so that it is better distributed between the police officers in the case of a swatting incident.

But actually _having_ metadata is a necessary first step to beginning any swatting investigation. Or do you not think that the first step is figuring out the phone number that the Swatter called from?

Next: I'm not entirely sure that Swatting will ever be stopped. Nonetheless, I'd like to punish those who are swatting, and I think that if they are removed from society... that is one step towards fixing the problem.

If a swatter gets caught and his criminal record is updated such that everyone knows he is a swatter, then society will benefit from it overall.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#330

Post by rosser » Tue, Apr 07, 2015, 4:30 AM UTC

dragontamer wrote: post #296

nbouscal wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since 1979, out of 33,949 requests submitted, the FISA court has denied 12 of them, 4 of which were later partially granted after being resubmitted. You're correct in saying that it's good that this number is documented, but it also makes it extremely clear that the FISA court cannot be meaningfully said to constitute independent oversight.

Or it makes it clear that the NSA is in fact, following the law. Which as far as I'm aware, none of what has been revealed by Snowden has been shown to be illegal. Correct me if I'm wrong of course.

Irrespective of whether or not you're wrong, when the law is practically a blank check, staying within its bounds isn't much of an accomplishment.