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

Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

soundcloud.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 196 posts

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#111

Post by PavlovsCat »

krapp wrote: post #106
PavlovsCat wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, murdered by sending out drones in random directions without any targeting info. These things and their programming just pop out of thin air, after all. And then they track just by scent, for weeks even. Or is this a reason to bring down the entire US? For someone in the third world who may have little to lose and becomes witness to such senseless slaughter? Maybe. But then again I'm not quite sure what you're eve…

No, murdered by sending out drones in random directions without any targeting info. These things and their programming just pop out of thin air, after all. And then they track just by scent, for weeks even. I'm pretty sure that's not how drones work. They're not autonomous, self-aware predators that can smell a Muslim from a mile away, and make their own decisions about when and how and who to kill. I'm pretty sure t…

I was being sarcastic.

I'm pretty sure there's always a pilot with a joystick watching a camera and pulling a trigger.

Just like there is always a president near the top signing the order, in some shape or other. And: people collecting intelligence about whoever they are asked to collect intelligence about, because that's just the "requirements handed down to them". Which was the point I hid under my sarcasm.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#112

Post by PavlovsCat »

embolism wrote: post #107
PavlovsCat wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, murdered by sending out drones in random directions without any targeting info. These things and their programming just pop out of thin air, after all. And then they track just by scent, for weeks even. Or is this a reason to bring down the entire US? For someone in the third world who may have little to lose and becomes witness to such senseless slaughter? Maybe. But then again I'm not quite sure what you're eve…

I'm pointing out that espionage is a part of real world statecraft and that it's naïve to just rail against the NSA for doing it. I do believe that there should be consequences for a lot of these actions. I'd just rather people were discussing what we actually know and how things could realistically be improved (by individuals, corporations, and 'the government) than just jeering like an angry mob.

You asked for evidence, I gave you evidence.

I'm not sure what you mean by "real world statecraft", but when I hear that I have to think of Larkin's "This Be The Verse":

fools in old-style hats and coats, / Who half the time were soppy-stern / And half at one another's throats.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#113

Post by griffordson »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #38

I have a trick I feel would make a confrontation like this better. Always speak under the assumption that the other person is 'good'. That means not calling them a liar. Instead, ask the questions that you feel would expose the inconsistency. That way they show everyone the point you're trying to make. Also it prevents personal animosity from obscuring the real content you might discover. Furthermore, it allows a 3rd…

According to one of the students involved[1], the confrontation wasn't premeditated so they probably weren't really considering how it might look to outside observers.

But there is value in making NSA employees feel bad about what their organization is doing and whether they are personally accountable for it. In fact, this seems like a spontaneous incident of "Haunting" officials from Gene Sharp's list of 198 methods of nonviolent action. I hope others learn from this example and make the jobs of all NSA recruiters difficult everywhere they go.

This incident reminded me of the scene from Good Will Hunting where Will explains why he might not want to work for the NSA after all[2]. Everyone who works for the NSA should be asking themselves that question every single day.

[1] http://mobandmultitude.com/2013/07/02/the-nsa-comes-recruiti...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#114

Post by krapp »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #111
krapp wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, murdered by sending out drones in random directions without any targeting info. These things and their programming just pop out of thin air, after all. And then they track just by scent, for weeks even. I'm pretty sure that's not how drones work. They're not autonomous, self-aware predators that can smell a Muslim from a mile away, and make their own decisions about when and how and who to kill. I'm pretty sure t…

I was being sarcastic. I'm pretty sure there's always a pilot with a joystick watching a camera and pulling a trigger. Just like there is always a president near the top signing the order, in some shape or other. And: people collecting intelligence about whoever they are asked to collect intelligence about, because that's just the "requirements handed down to them". Which was the point I hid under my sarcasm.

It's getting hard to tell lately. My mistake.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#115

Post by wissler »

angersock wrote: post #41
DanBC wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people just don't care. They want a job with other smart people and neat technology where they can do math in peace and quiet. See also "You don't need to worry if you don't have anything to hide" etc.

Truly it is a wonderful thing that the most anti-social and introverted people get to deploy technology affecting the common man.

Associating "introverted" with "immoral"?

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#116

Post by DannyBee »

robbiemitchell wrote: post #68
DannyBee wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, what? The purpose of a trial is to determine guilt or innocence beyond a reasonable doubt. If they admit they are guilty, are not insane, etc, please explain what end this serves again? Let's ignore the edge cases of being committing violations of unjust laws, malum prohibitum crimes, and stick with something like: Client accused of murdering 40 year old woman Client admits to you he murdered 40 year old w…

Yes, the purpose of the trial itself is to determine guilt or innocence. I'm suggesting that the purpose of a legal system like ours is to ensure everyone's right to a fair trial in the first place; more generally, our goal is to ensure that innocent people are not put in jail. Defense lawyers make sure that guilt, if determined, is done legally and that sentencing is arrived at fairly. If a defendant wants to skip t…

No, actually, the purpose of our legal system is to have some fair form of crime and punishment system.

A fair trial is not a purpose, it's a means to an end (punishing people fairly). It is not even a necessary component. The only reason it exists at all is because of our inability to objectively determine guilt in most cases. The rest are tacked on (IE determinations of what crime has been committed. Even this would be solved if you could objectively determine what occurred)

However, again, if the defendant admits guilt (even if not in public), but still wants a trial, can you explain how the system is served by a fair trial on guilt or innocence for him, rather than a fair sentencing hearing?

In that case, the guilt or innocence is not in question. The same is true when they only admit guilt to a defense attorney. Defending the client, and trying to get them off during the trial stage, does not serve the ends of the system. It may, depending on how formulated, serve some of the means, but that's kind of irrelevant.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#117

Post by embolism »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #112
embolism wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pointing out that espionage is a part of real world statecraft and that it's naïve to just rail against the NSA for doing it. I do believe that there should be consequences for a lot of these actions. I'd just rather people were discussing what we actually know and how things could realistically be improved (by individuals, corporations, and 'the government) than just jeering like an angry mob.

You asked for evidence, I gave you evidence. I'm not sure what you mean by "real world statecraft", but when I hear that I have to think of Larkin's "This Be The Verse": fools in old-style hats and coats, / Who half the time were soppy-stern / And half at one another's throats.

you don't seem very constructive - which is my point

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#118

Post by gojomo »

rhizome wrote: post #74
gojomo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quitting in disgust is one signal a person can send. But what if that makes the problem worse rather than better, by removing from the agency those people most able to sense and push-back against secret abuses?

Since things usually have to get worse before they get better, the situation you describe would merely accelerate the disease that causes the NSA to be a problem for us all.

That's one theory of change. Unfortunately, the oppressiveness of domestic surveillance could get a lot worse before it gets better. There might even be a point of no return, where the system decays into something like North Korea, rather than bouncing back to a better state.

I doubt the NSA/FBI/DoD/etc are going away anytime soon, so a simplistic strategy of "try to deny them good people, force them to get worse so they eventually collapse" is unlikely to result in either marginal improvements in their behavior, or their wholesale replacement by better institutions. This 'talent boycott' could just mean more acrimony, abuse, and even violence without ultimate remedy.

Some diseases don't get worse before they get better. They get worse before they get fatal.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#119

Post by ihsw »

c0ur7n3y wrote: post #6

I have to imagine their recruiting is going to suffer greatly due to the recent revelations. Very few smart people are going to want to join an organization that spies on their fellow citizens. Plus, the NSA is going to have to be even more skeptical of anyone they do recruit.

> I have to imagine their recruiting is going to suffer greatly due to the recent revelations.

On the contrary, it might improve. The Snowden sympathisers won't waste their time applying and the Snowden opponents will rush to the NSA's assistance.

> Very few smart people are going to want to join an organization that spies on their fellow citizens.

Smart people may realize that we're on the edge of an abyss with little way out, and that abyss involves complete control over everybody's lives -- this appeals to some people. What you can control cannot hurt you, and I think that feeling resonates with everybody that has a sense of self-preservation.

Re: Students Question the NSA at Recruiting Session [audio]

#120

Post by [deleted] »

nugget wrote: post #25

As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and fait…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN