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

Reform Government Surveillance

reformgovernmentsurveillance.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 223 posts

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#111

Post by grey-area »

pacala wrote: post #46
TWAndrews wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also the stark differences in the consequences of misuse. Google can use my information to serve me diabolically targeted ads. The government can put me in jail. It's not that I trust Google more, it's that they have vastly less power to harm me even if their intentions are bad.

The difference is quite subtle, if any. I'm not even sure why you are afraid of government stalking. After all, government is prevented by the rule of law from arbitrarily throw you in jail. For every reason you are afraid of government, you should be afraid of corporation X. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that corporation X will not collude with the government to do you harm 10 years from now. These corporations…

After all, government is prevented by the rule of law from arbitrarily throw you in jail

In the uk and the us at least this is no longer true. I they call you a terrorist (with or without proof) the normal laws don't apply. They are also collecting everything we do and storing it for as long as technically possible, quite soon that will be forever.

Government agencies are the bigger problem at the present moment in time, not corporations.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#112

Post by grey-area »

Zigurd wrote: post #16

How about instead of asking the government to make this problem go away, as if it could, you offer products that thwart surveillance? I'll write you a check to cover the value of those "One weird trick to lose belly fat" ads.

What makes you think government couldn't make this problem go away?

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#114

Post by zymhan »

anoncowherd wrote: post #110
zymhan wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who checks the checkers and balances the balancers? The Appeals Courts, the Supreme Court, the executive (can pardon), and the people's ability to riot in the streets until we get our way. We certainly aren't hopeless, we just have to try a little harder.

>> The Appeals Courts, the Supreme Court, the executive (can pardon) So basically you're saying the watchers watch themselves? But this is exactly the problem I was pointing out. It's just not going to work, ever, and the US is excellent proof of that. Started with a minimal government and a strong constitution, but then.. an Empire happened. >> We certainly aren't hopeless, we just have to try a little harder. Not t…

> So basically you're saying the watchers watch themselves?

No, because judges don't hear appeals to their decisions. Of course if you think the entire system is broken, then there's not much I can do to convince you.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#115

Post by adventured »

bowlofpetunias wrote: post #88
pg wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may not all care what happens to Snowden, but I think it's unfair to say they're merely showing off. I think these companies are acting on pretty high principle. They have little to gain by issuing such a statement, except the goodwill of people like us, but since they're all participating, such goodwill is evenly distributed and no one of them derives an advantage from it. Whereas they all depend on good relati…

> I think these companies are acting on pretty high principle. These are the same companies that stand shoulder to shoulder with the same US government when it comes to putting immense pressure on foreign governments to give up their civil rights protections when it comes to privacy. I can only guess as to their motives, but "high principle" definitely isn't one of them.

I wasn't aware that Twitter was working with the US Government to put immense pressure on foreign governments to give up their civil rights protections on privacy.

Can you cite examples?

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#116

Post by hooande »

pg wrote: post #19

Among other things, this is the tipping point for how Snowden will be viewed. If all these powerful companies agree, in an unprecedented show of unanimity, that this is an important problem, then Snowden is ipso facto a hero for bringing it to our attention. The curious thing is, I feel the linkage works in the other direction too. If Snowden had been caught and was now having his brains scrambled by solitary confine…

There is nothing more reviled by people who were born during the cold war than a criminal who defects first to china and then to russia. No amount of tech industry pr can facilitate a comeback from that. Almost half of the people in this country will always see Snowden as a traitor.

Government surveillance has become a political wedge issue, similar to abortion. No one likes it or encourages it but people have strong emotions on both sides. Snowden is deserving of credit, he may have helped to spark another enduring and polarizing american social debate. It's unfortunate that he won't be around for the resulting legal process.

It's worth noting that the modern surveillance state didn't begin when Edward Snowden stepped in front of a camera for the first time. Where were these responsible tech giants five or ten years ago? When everyone in the country was flipping the heck out over 9/11, some of these companies went along with the crowd and gave the government access to everything. Their points are very valid, more government transparency and accountability is always good. But courage is about doing the thing when it's hard, not when it's easy. It's good to see movement in the right direction but it would have been nice if things had gotten to this point sooner. Then maybe Snowden would still be sleeping in his own bed.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#117

Post by derefr »

friism wrote: post #39
pg wrote: post #19

Among other things, this is the tipping point for how Snowden will be viewed. If all these powerful companies agree, in an unprecedented show of unanimity, that this is an important problem, then Snowden is ipso facto a hero for bringing it to our attention. The curious thing is, I feel the linkage works in the other direction too. If Snowden had been caught and was now having his brains scrambled by solitary confine…

I feel the same way, and have also been hoping for internet companies to put a stake in the ground. On the other hand, it frustrates me that the tipping point for how Snowden's legacy will be viewed is action by a set of corporations, and not action by elected officials, the media, or an informed public...

In a funny way (funny because we're usually seeing strictly the opposite happen) corporations can represent public interests in a way that none of those other groups do. Corporations are, after all, nothing more than solutions to the Collective Action Problem.

You take a disenfranchised minority, pull it all together to collaborate, give it some money... and now you've got an enfranchised minority (usually called a Political Action Committee.) Make that source of money self-sustaining, though, and you've got the definition of a (perhaps not-for-profit) corporation.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#118

Post by A1kmm »

Point 4 (in particular, the part about allowing data transfer overseas) could be construed to mean letting big companies work around the privacy laws of one country by copying private data to another country with weaker privacy laws.

I think that sneaking points like this in weakens the effect of the whole thing.

Re: Reform Government Surveillance

#120

Post by asuffield »

hooande wrote: post #116
pg wrote: post #19

Among other things, this is the tipping point for how Snowden will be viewed. If all these powerful companies agree, in an unprecedented show of unanimity, that this is an important problem, then Snowden is ipso facto a hero for bringing it to our attention. The curious thing is, I feel the linkage works in the other direction too. If Snowden had been caught and was now having his brains scrambled by solitary confine…

There is nothing more reviled by people who were born during the cold war than a criminal who defects first to china and then to russia. No amount of tech industry pr can facilitate a comeback from that. Almost half of the people in this country will always see Snowden as a traitor. Government surveillance has become a political wedge issue, similar to abortion. No one likes it or encourages it but people have strong…

Two of them didn't exist ten years ago, and half of them would have been entirely unaware of the surveillance problem because they were too small to be targets. It's looking increasingly like Google didn't know until Snowden told them - they were just straight-up compromised by a hostile attacker breaking into their networks. So I can't blame most of them for not doing anything sooner.
Post reply on HN