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

Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 243 posts

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#111

Post by twoodfin »

soraminazuki wrote: post #106
twoodfin wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not complicated: If you run a telegraph wire between El Paso and Juárez, the executive has the Constitutional authority to tap it to intercept communication to or from a non-citizen not in the United States, warrant-free. Congress can regulate the process that must be followed, the documentation that must be made, even require judicial review at the program level to ensure it doesn’t also record traffic that…

Where do I even start? Let's first reiterate that even when it's technically legal to screw over non-citizens, it doesn't make it right. That's not the standard expected of a free nation. But let's ignore that for a moment and move on to the next point. Your example is still hoovering up communications from citizens who are supposed to be protected by due process of law. En masse. How does this not run afoul of the l…

OK, you want FISA to be stricter. But way up thread, someone made the point that it’s FISA itself that puts any meaningful balancing constraints at all on the Constitutional power of the executive. This includes the FISA court—made up of real, lifetime-tenured federal judges of the same robes you would like approving warrants—that is there by law to be watching out for just your parade of horribles.

The poster was roundly criticized for being correct.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#112

Post by user_7832 »

randcraw wrote: post #85
verdverm wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware the alternative is less oversight? FISA protects Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveilla...

I used to work for several of the US intel agencies. I can say with great confidence that we never have acted gainfully on preventing a major event using intel and we never will. The catalyst for acting boldly to prevent or defend a major event is much mor political than informational. No intel will ever play a big role in deciding whether a country lives or dies. But we most certainly WILL abuse individual civil rig…

> The catalyst for acting boldly to prevent or defend a major event is much mor political than informational.

Could you explain what you mean by this? On a tangential note, have you considered talking/explaining this with politicians/academics studying this field? Or is it more of something that's already known to those familiar with the field?

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#113

Post by ein0p »

Zancarius wrote: post #107
ein0p wrote: post #68

Only one thing can make these people work past midnight: abusing the American public. “Representation”, my ass. None of them represents me or anyone I know.

Agreed, but the cynical side of me thinks that they are representing their constituents. It's just that neither you nor me are their constituents. They pay lip service only during an election year. I'm politically very conservative. I hate every single one of the Republicans. They claim to want smaller government and less intrusion and then vote for... bigger government, more intrusion, and endless wars. I still vote…

I struggle to nail down my political affiliation because there’s literally just one party. They quibble over materially irrelevant hot button issues to create the illusion of choice, but all the bullshit that robs me and my kids or strips us of our rights is _always_ “bipartisan”, passed without reading in the dead of the night. And yeah the only two choices in our upcoming “elections” here are a guy with profound dementia who shakes hands with invisible people, and a narcissist moron con man who writes at a fourth grade level and capitalizes nouns for no reason. And neither side considers this to be a problem. I’m beginning to think this is some kind of a joke and the ruling class is just trying to see how far they can take it before people revolt.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#114

Post by user_7832 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #86
xyst wrote: post #84

This was going to pass regardless of the outcry. The unnecessary drama of stalling until after midnight is all theater. We need a significant change in leadership for all those that voted this in. If I recall correctly, this bill also includes an expansion of surveillance performed by federal law enforcement agencies and NSA.

> This was going to pass regardless of the outcry There was a real moment in the House where it might not have, at least without a warrant requirement. My Congresswoman was one of the attack dogs on this issue. She thought they would get an outpouring of support. She didn’t. The call sheets registered basically zero calls in support, and several lobbying against. So she caved. (This is a pattern I saw play out in New…

> There was a real moment in the House where it might not have, at least without a warrant requirement. My Congresswoman was one of the attack dogs on this issue. She thought they would get an outpouring of support. She didn’t. The call sheets registered basically zero calls in support, and several lobbying against. So she caved. (This is a pattern I saw play out in New York years earlier in another privacy battle.)

What's odd/interesting to me is that there's been little chatter of late regarding this. I spend an unhealthy amount of time on HN/Reddit/X and save for a few mild posts (as opposed to alarmist or clickbaity) on the topic, I barely see anything. During the net neutrality thing back when Ajit Pai was around I remember there was massive support. And I don't think I've ever heard of the NY privacy thing you mention. I wonder why it's so.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#115

Post by golergka »

ryandrake wrote: post #22
dexwiz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both sides are mostly rich or put there by the rich. A few populist reps get outsized airtime, but that isn’t the majority of people running the show.

There are a lot more similarities between "both sides" than that. They make a big show out of arguing over a small number of things they disagree on. But for many important things, they don't significantly differ. The two parties do not significantly differ on indefinite detention of American citizens on US soil. The two parties do not significantly differ on domestic spying, dragnet-style data collection and warrant…

Many of these points are just common sense. Does America really need a major party that's insane on one of the important issues?

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#116

Post by mdhb »

AmVess wrote: post #105
borkt wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FISA has been in existence since 1978. It did not prevent 9/11, so honestly your comment undersells how worthless the program has been in light of the constitutional freedoms we willingly cede in reauthorizing it. The fact is though it remains law and the officials we elected feel the value is worth it. I hope its being done solely based on the benefits it provides us as a whole and is not being used for self-serving…

These laws aren't about protecting America and its citizens, but rather as means to control them.

People just toss comments like this around as though they were facts when in fact it’s completely paranoid made up q-anon level nonsense.

These laws work a very specific way and have very specific controls in place to prevent shit like you describe from happening which you could go and read up on if you wanted to but it’s much easier to fear monger amongst one another because it plays to your ego that somebody who is important enough to be under surveillance by an intelligence agency.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#117

Post by hangsi »

srj wrote: post #101

I find you can get a good idea of what's going on from reading between the lines of Wyden's statements. As a member of the intelligence committee he cannot directly disclose the operational details, but you can look at where he's concerned. From the CNN article on this: >> Another amendment at issue was from Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, a member of the Intelligence Committee. His amendment, which was co-spons…

"Beautiful. Unethical. Dangerous."

So says Morgan Freeman's character Lucius Fox in 2008 in The Dark Knight[0].

The rest of the tech imagined in that scene is plausible today too, considering the density of WiFi/5G and research demonstrating the potential for its use as passive radar [1]. That paper metions a cooperative base station, but I am wondering if there is any value gained in knowing exactly what the traffic is (such as some of the intelligence community does) in modelling how the waves propagate and performing an even more passive observation.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRELLH86Edo

[1] Samczyński et al. 2021 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=966...

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#118

Post by soraminazuki »

twoodfin wrote: post #111
soraminazuki wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do I even start? Let's first reiterate that even when it's technically legal to screw over non-citizens, it doesn't make it right. That's not the standard expected of a free nation. But let's ignore that for a moment and move on to the next point. Your example is still hoovering up communications from citizens who are supposed to be protected by due process of law. En masse. How does this not run afoul of the l…

OK, you want FISA to be stricter. But way up thread, someone made the point that it’s FISA itself that puts any meaningful balancing constraints at all on the Constitutional power of the executive. This includes the FISA court—made up of real, lifetime-tenured federal judges of the same robes you would like approving warrants—that is there by law to be watching out for just your parade of horribles. The poster was ro…

No, FISA should not be a thing. Wiretap warrants should be reasonably scoped and acquired on an individual basis. There shouldn't be a secret court issuing do-whatever-you-want warrants.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#119

Post by twoodfin »

soraminazuki wrote: post #118
twoodfin wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, you want FISA to be stricter. But way up thread, someone made the point that it’s FISA itself that puts any meaningful balancing constraints at all on the Constitutional power of the executive. This includes the FISA court—made up of real, lifetime-tenured federal judges of the same robes you would like approving warrants—that is there by law to be watching out for just your parade of horribles. The poster was ro…

No, FISA should not be a thing. Wiretap warrants should be reasonably scoped and acquired on an individual basis. There shouldn't be a secret court issuing do-whatever-you-want warrants.

To get that you have two choices: Do your best to persuade your fellow citizens to elect a President who will choose to forego this part of his Constitutional powers—or get a Constitutional amendment passed.

What I keep trying to explain is that this FISA vote can’t address your concerns one way or the other. If you disagree, I wish you’d explain how.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#120

Post by soraminazuki »

mdhb wrote: post #116
AmVess wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These laws aren't about protecting America and its citizens, but rather as means to control them.

People just toss comments like this around as though they were facts when in fact it’s completely paranoid made up q-anon level nonsense. These laws work a very specific way and have very specific controls in place to prevent shit like you describe from happening which you could go and read up on if you wanted to but it’s much easier to fear monger amongst one another because it plays to your ego that somebody who is…

"Completely paranoid made up q-anon level nonsense" from the New York Times, The Guardian, Washington Post, Associated Press, and many others? I think not.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/13/world/middleeast/book-rev...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/20/gchq-targete...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2013/08/24...

https://apnews.com/article/b25197d5b11740b2b29681bbc521a45f

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/05/fbi-misused-fore...

Post reply on HN