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

A Story of Surveillance (2007)

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 23 posts

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#11

Post by _delirium »

youngerdryas wrote: post #10
_delirium wrote: post #7

When it comes to damage-reduction, I think the most immediate step going forward that can be done on the side of the private sector is to stop collecting, as much as possible, extensive profiles on people, especially profiles that are, or easily can be, tied to their real identity. For those of us who aren't doing so ourselves, we can pressure companies not to do so, either those we work for, or those we interact wit…

>I think the most immediate step going forward that can be done on the side of the private sector is to stop collecting, as much as possible, extensive profiles on people, especially profiles that are, or easily can be, tied to their real identity. So Google and Facebook should commit Seppuku?

Google has been making large profits since long before Google+ even existed. There's probably some incremental value in having real-name profiles tied to data, but there's very large incremental harm as well, such that adding such functionality is net-negative for society. A large number of Googlers have made a similar argument, which is why the real-name policy was so controversial; the argument was already pretty strong before the NSA revelations, and is only stronger now.

Facebook is a trickier case. Their business model may simply be incompatible with a non-surveillance society.

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#12

Post by jpdoctor »

_delirium wrote: post #7

When it comes to damage-reduction, I think the most immediate step going forward that can be done on the side of the private sector is to stop collecting, as much as possible, extensive profiles on people, especially profiles that are, or easily can be, tied to their real identity. For those of us who aren't doing so ourselves, we can pressure companies not to do so, either those we work for, or those we interact wit…

I think a better approach would be client-side: Something like a browser extension for identity rotation, for one example. I also suspect Tor-for-the-masses has a larger chance of becoming a reality. Presumably, VCs are now wringing their hands over the money to be made in the newfound software industry of identity obfuscation.

I'm sure all of this has the NSA folks whining and moaning, to which I'd have to point out: You made your bed.

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#14

Post by maxerickson »

_delirium wrote: post #7

When it comes to damage-reduction, I think the most immediate step going forward that can be done on the side of the private sector is to stop collecting, as much as possible, extensive profiles on people, especially profiles that are, or easily can be, tied to their real identity. For those of us who aren't doing so ourselves, we can pressure companies not to do so, either those we work for, or those we interact wit…

It's anyway all a side issue. A tidy personal history and limited data collection provide some flimsy bulwark against petty tyranny. They don't do anything against arbitrary tyranny.

The solution to tyranny is to build robust and open societies and to spread those values. Not open societies in the sense of transparency, open societies in the sense that people are not attacked for who they are or for the choices they make (transparency is often a useful tool, it just isn't in itself any sort of sensible goal).

And I don't mean that simple personal steps are futile, I just think there is a larger picture to consider (and direct energy towards!).

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#15

Post by wmeredith »

INTPenis wrote: post #3
reirob wrote: post #2

I would be interested to see if Mr. Klein achieved something in his fight against NSA's surveillance program. It was back in 2007 and now we have 2013. Five years gone.

I'd say it's more likely his life is destroyed, I would love to know how he's making a living today. Either way, he's not the one who was supposed to have "achieved something" in that battle, we were, the people should have reacted. They didn't, and they won't this time either. Sorry but we're just too complacent with all our luxuries and comforts.

He was already retired when the article was written.

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#16

Post by mtgx »

waterphone wrote: post #8
_wp3r wrote: post #4

I am still pretty confused about how this community seems to not have known these programs existed. It has been widely reported almost since inception. Not to mention the broad record of previous land line recording programs.

I'm getting tired of seeing comments like this everywhere, which serve little use. Yes, it's been going on for a long time. Yes, many people have been aware of such programs as small bits have been leaked over the years. Yes, many of us have been angry about it for a long time. The difference this time is not specifically the new information but the fact that it hasn't successfully been buried in the news after a day…

Same here. Not only do such comments serve no useful purpose, but they are actually negatively impacting the "cause" to change things, because such comments are basically saying "relax people, this is old news...".

NO! Now is not the time to relax, and it really doesn't matter if it's 1 week old news or 10 year old news. If it's that old, it's much more important to finally have the debate about privacy, which Congress and the nation as a whole mostly skipped over it because of the fear or terrorists.

It's about time that discussion started again, to see if things like the Patriot Act and FISA are first of all, constitutional, and second of all, if all the privacy breaching is worth it to Americans, and only if there is real proof that it works not based on feeling and security theatre.

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#17

Post by physicslover »

_delirium wrote: post #11
youngerdryas wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think the most immediate step going forward that can be done on the side of the private sector is to stop collecting, as much as possible, extensive profiles on people, especially profiles that are, or easily can be, tied to their real identity. So Google and Facebook should commit Seppuku?

Google has been making large profits since long before Google+ even existed. There's probably some incremental value in having real-name profiles tied to data, but there's very large incremental harm as well, such that adding such functionality is net-negative for society. A large number of Googlers have made a similar argument, which is why the real-name policy was so controversial; the argument was already pretty s…

I think the original idea of elimination of the collection of all private or personal information by all companies is a bit extreme.

From what we have learned, these programs are quite broad involving everyone from banking institutions to ISPs and telecoms.

Should banks do their business without knowing anything a about you, same for credit reporting agencies?

Maybe, but that would be quite a shift from the way things are done today.

Also, I thought it was common knowledge that some type of digital surveillance has been going on for some time.

My recollection is that the FBI was able to gain access to ISPs and use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore_(software) to track emails.

If an individual is concerned with privacy they should probably take matters into their own hands and use encryption, cash, bitcoin and other tools to protect their identity and leave as little private information online as possible.

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#18

Post by aqme28 »

_wp3r wrote: post #4

I am still pretty confused about how this community seems to not have known these programs existed. It has been widely reported almost since inception. Not to mention the broad record of previous land line recording programs.

There's a huge difference between something considered to be true by a handful of specialized people, and something provably known to be true by the public at large.

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#19

Post by llamataboot »

reirob wrote: post #2

I would be interested to see if Mr. Klein achieved something in his fight against NSA's surveillance program. It was back in 2007 and now we have 2013. Five years gone.

The lawsuit he helped inspire is still in the courts, and the EFF is still fighting the governments assertions that such lawsuits cannot be brought because of state secrets

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/12/government-seeks-...

Re: A Story of Surveillance (2007)

#20

Post by _wp3r »

waterphone wrote: post #8
_wp3r wrote: post #4

I am still pretty confused about how this community seems to not have known these programs existed. It has been widely reported almost since inception. Not to mention the broad record of previous land line recording programs.

I'm getting tired of seeing comments like this everywhere, which serve little use. Yes, it's been going on for a long time. Yes, many people have been aware of such programs as small bits have been leaked over the years. Yes, many of us have been angry about it for a long time. The difference this time is not specifically the new information but the fact that it hasn't successfully been buried in the news after a day…

Sorry for being snarky.

Let me rephrase.

What is different about the story this year, that makes people and the news all the sudden pay attention?

Post reply on HN