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

Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

firstlook.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 89 posts

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#11

Post by tehwebguy »

LLWM wrote: post #7
logicallee wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if we were serious about the social benefit to having a failsafe black box that we can sometimes under extraordinary conditions retrieve intelligence from, then companies should be required to operate these programs (send data to that black box) without benefit, and over their protests, by law. they shouldn't be paid for it. it should be a burden. It should be like taxes - companies should hate the burden, and try to…

By the same reasoning, criminals literally pay the police to lock them up or shoot at them. Isn't that crazy????? No, that's how taxes work. You don't get to pick and choose which government functions to pay for.

These examples are missing the point.

A clearer example than the server / tip is jury duty. It's not profitable for almost anyone with a job but for the most part we are forced to participate.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#14

Post by logicallee »

tehwebguy wrote: post #11
LLWM wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the same reasoning, criminals literally pay the police to lock them up or shoot at them. Isn't that crazy????? No, that's how taxes work. You don't get to pick and choose which government functions to pay for.

These examples are missing the point. A clearer example than the server / tip is jury duty. It's not profitable for almost anyone with a job but for the most part we are forced to participate.

Yes, that's a good analogy. Most adults can see why being tried by a jury of your peers is an amazing difference between a modern democracy and fascism, so we "force" each other (ourselves) to participate, even though it isn't profitable, and we create a great public good as a result (a fairer system of laws, even if it isn't perfect. it's hard to want an alternative to a jury of your peers if you are being tried for some crime by the state.)

So in the analogy, the companies that are spying for the NSA are like the people participating in jury duty - and (if we agree that there is a social good toward having the black box of intelligence available under extraordinary circumstances) should be "forced" to (or compensated extremely minimally for it), like jury duty.

Being paid a windfall profit to do so would be as though people went out of their way to participate in jury duty, for personal profit. Obviously that would be a horrendous set of incentives for society. (i.e. creating legal cases just so people can participate in jury duty.)

having it be a chore and "forced" on people (by the social contract) and to a minimal extent, is much better.

(this is just assuming there is some social good to having this stuff be available at all, under extraordinary circumstances.)

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#15

Post by happyscrappy »

>Baker at one point told intelligence committee lawmakers that The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald was simply on a campaign to “cause the greatest possible diplomatic damage to the United States and its intelligence capabilities.”

The problem with liars is that sometimes they tell the truth.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#18

Post by AnkhMorporkian »

cies wrote: post #16

How again is "lobbying" different from "legalized corruption"? [serious]

Lobbying isn't an inherently dirty thing. It started (and largely remains) a way for people with knowledge of a field outside the politician's bailiwick to inform them of pros/cons to an issue they may not be aware of.

Corruption has indeed seeped into the process, but I would prefer experts in a field (on both sides) to inform politicians than have them be clueless on the issues in question. The EFF, the ACLU? Lobbyists. Good lobbyists, but lobbyists nonetheless.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#19

Post by us0r »

rtpg wrote: post #3

The problem with most of these examples is that all of these "NSA contractors" are just giant multi-billion dollar revenue companies. I'm sure MSFT is an NSA contractor on one level, but most people would find it weird to classify Microsoft as "A NSA contractor". This is just a consequence of powerful people happening to have a lot of money to invest and thus becoming board members for companies in domains in which t…

SAIC, CSC, CACI, Booz, Leidos? These are multi-billion dollar government welfare recipients.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#20

Post by akshatpradhan »

AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #18
cies wrote: post #16

How again is "lobbying" different from "legalized corruption"? [serious]

Lobbying isn't an inherently dirty thing. It started (and largely remains) a way for people with knowledge of a field outside the politician's bailiwick to inform them of pros/cons to an issue they may not be aware of. Corruption has indeed seeped into the process, but I would prefer experts in a field (on both sides) to inform politicians than have them be clueless on the issues in question. The EFF, the ACLU? Lobby…

Right now, lobbying IS a dirty thing. How can we clean it up?
Post reply on HN