Panama Papers source issues statement • Hacker News Board

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#121

Post by nickpsecurity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 1:53 AM UTC

Nullabillity wrote: post #119

nickpsecurity wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As opposed to voting for who, exactly?" Early candidates running for the pacifist party, I guess, given I can't recall reading about anyone platforming against existence of intelligence gathering agency. Anyone who could or was running for office that believed America should be only major power post-Ww2 that didn't have spies. Enough votes that direction might have resulted in the dissolution of our intelligence age…

> Early candidates running for the pacifist party, I guess, given I can't recall reading about anyone platforming against existence of intelligence gathering agency. Anyone who could or was running for office that believed America should be only major power post-Ww2 that didn't have spies. Enough votes that direction might have resulted in the dissolution of our intelligence agencies that were forming. And probably t…

The forerunners were created in secret for use against enemies during the World War's under Presidents voted in. The people's voted-in Congress representatives that made them official with more authority. Then people kept voting-in even more that kept them over time with no major push to vote out intelligence agencies. Just reform their bad behaviors on occasion.

So, yes, they were voted in and maintained through the elected representatives. That's how a representational democracy works. There was also no pushback strong enough to affect an election and dissolve an intelligence agency. They'd be diminished or gone had that happened.

So, voters wanted the situation and it's here. They can make it go away but it's still here. So much for your hypothesis.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#122

Post by MichaelBurge » Sat, May 07, 2016, 1:55 AM UTC

Nullabillity wrote: post #119

nickpsecurity wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As opposed to voting for who, exactly?" Early candidates running for the pacifist party, I guess, given I can't recall reading about anyone platforming against existence of intelligence gathering agency. Anyone who could or was running for office that believed America should be only major power post-Ww2 that didn't have spies. Enough votes that direction might have resulted in the dissolution of our intelligence age…

> Early candidates running for the pacifist party, I guess, given I can't recall reading about anyone platforming against existence of intelligence gathering agency. Anyone who could or was running for office that believed America should be only major power post-Ww2 that didn't have spies. Enough votes that direction might have resulted in the dissolution of our intelligence agencies that were forming. And probably t…

I think Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul wants to rein them in. I actually gave Rand Paul some money for this T-shirt:

https://store.randpaul.com/index.php/the-nsa-knows-contest-w...

Rand Paul had to drop out for lack of interest.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#123

Post by Nullabillity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 1:56 AM UTC

MichaelBurge wrote: post #120

Nullabillity wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Red herring important in other discussions about NSA's bullshiting legal team but not here. NSA's beliefs != the laws. Snowden, as a trained spy, knew it was legal for them to spy on foreign nations. That's what we're talking about. So because it's done against "them" it's suddenly okay? That's trite xenophobic bullshit. Treason laws and classified information have no place in anything claiming to be a developed de…

Yes, we should spy on foreign countries and have an agency to protect ourselves from them. It's not abstract - China attacks us every day. I don't want Chinese hackers breaking into American companies and stealing their secrets, and trust the NSA to do their job on this. They should work with the FBI to inform companies of foreigners causing trouble with their systems. And they should develop secure protocols and enc…

As opposed to American hackers hacking American companies? Nationality has nothing to do with it, other than with jingoistic profiteers and/or morons who want a vaguely defined distant target to blame.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#124

Post by nickpsecurity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 2:00 AM UTC

Nullabillity wrote: post #117

nickpsecurity wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That's trite xenophobic bullshit." On the contrary, it just recognizes the fact that nations with competing interests exist. Many of which spy on us for similar reasons. You'd have to be xeno phile to justify doing no spying when even our allies are doing the opposite. "Treason laws and classified information have no place in anything claiming to be a developed democracy." The existence of them in many democracies f…

> On the contrary, it just recognizes the fact that nations with competing interests exist. Many of which spy on us for similar reasons. You'd have to be xenophile to justify doing no spying when even our allies are doing the opposite. Where does the line go for who is to be considered "other"? As someone living in Stockholm, why should I care more about companies in Gothenburg doing well than a company in Oslo? Or a…

"Where does the line go for who is to be considered "other"? As someone living in Stockholm, why should I care more about companies in Gothenburg doing well than a company in Oslo? Or am I an outsider as well, since I have a mother from Copenhagen?"

Your wishes don't matter at all. You're not a competing nation referred to in my comment.

"No, that just shows that they're not actual democracies either"

Or that you don't know what a representational democracy is or think they all think like you. Look up KSI where you live to find something even less transparent than our NSA. (shocking really)

"Okay, this is getting far into Poe's law territory."

Nah, it's just a prerequisite for existence of a thing you're pretending to know about. Successful democracy and active citizenry go hand-in-hand. Without it, problems emerge.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#125

Post by nickpsecurity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 2:03 AM UTC

MichaelBurge wrote: post #122

Nullabillity wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Early candidates running for the pacifist party, I guess, given I can't recall reading about anyone platforming against existence of intelligence gathering agency. Anyone who could or was running for office that believed America should be only major power post-Ww2 that didn't have spies. Enough votes that direction might have resulted in the dissolution of our intelligence agencies that were forming. And probably t…

I think Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul wants to rein them in. I actually gave Rand Paul some money for this T-shirt: https://store.randpaul.com/index.php/the-nsa-knows-contest-w... Rand Paul had to drop out for lack of interest.

Apathetic democracy in action. I dropped much of my activism for the same reason. Even when in their perspective, getting Americans to act on protecting their rights is like slogging uphill through molasses.

Nice shirt, though. :)

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#126

Post by MichaelBurge » Sat, May 07, 2016, 2:03 AM UTC

Nullabillity wrote: post #123

MichaelBurge wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we should spy on foreign countries and have an agency to protect ourselves from them. It's not abstract - China attacks us every day. I don't want Chinese hackers breaking into American companies and stealing their secrets, and trust the NSA to do their job on this. They should work with the FBI to inform companies of foreigners causing trouble with their systems. And they should develop secure protocols and enc…

As opposed to American hackers hacking American companies? Nationality has nothing to do with it, other than with jingoistic profiteers and/or morons who want a vaguely defined distant target to blame.

That's outside the scope of NSA's mandate. The NSA should not be using their resources to target American hackers or companies.

We should deal with such hackers too, using agencies like the FBI. I guess the NSA could provide some technical advice, but no more than that.

No evidence on American hackers should be classified or secret, unless they target government or military(and even then, the only thing that should be supressed from the public court record is the actual classified records that they stole, or details about the vulnerability they used). However, evidence the NSA gathers on foreigners and techniques they use could be classified.

The President should not intervene with diplomats if an American hacker hacks an American company.

I think these make the two situations very different in practice.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#127

Post by Nullabillity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 2:04 AM UTC

nickpsecurity wrote: post #121

Nullabillity wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Early candidates running for the pacifist party, I guess, given I can't recall reading about anyone platforming against existence of intelligence gathering agency. Anyone who could or was running for office that believed America should be only major power post-Ww2 that didn't have spies. Enough votes that direction might have resulted in the dissolution of our intelligence agencies that were forming. And probably t…

The forerunners were created in secret for use against enemies during the World War's under Presidents voted in. The people's voted-in Congress representatives that made them official with more authority. Then people kept voting-in even more that kept them over time with no major push to vote out intelligence agencies. Just reform their bad behaviors on occasion. So, yes, they were voted in and maintained through the…

Representative "democracy" means that you can't say that the people wanted a specific policy, only that they considered some person (and their ELECTION platform, which has just about nothing to do with how they'd actually behave in office) the least awful of the given options.

As you said yourself, it was created in secret as a reactionary policy (because those always work out great!), so there was no possible oversight or popular approval.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#128

Post by nickpsecurity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 2:06 AM UTC

Nullabillity wrote: post #123

MichaelBurge wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we should spy on foreign countries and have an agency to protect ourselves from them. It's not abstract - China attacks us every day. I don't want Chinese hackers breaking into American companies and stealing their secrets, and trust the NSA to do their job on this. They should work with the FBI to inform companies of foreigners causing trouble with their systems. And they should develop secure protocols and enc…

As opposed to American hackers hacking American companies? Nationality has nothing to do with it, other than with jingoistic profiteers and/or morons who want a vaguely defined distant target to blame.

Law enforcement deals with that. NSA is part of the military-intelligence complex. We keep the two separate.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#129

Post by nickpsecurity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 2:08 AM UTC

Nullabillity wrote: post #127

nickpsecurity wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The forerunners were created in secret for use against enemies during the World War's under Presidents voted in. The people's voted-in Congress representatives that made them official with more authority. Then people kept voting-in even more that kept them over time with no major push to vote out intelligence agencies. Just reform their bad behaviors on occasion. So, yes, they were voted in and maintained through the…

Representative "democracy" means that you can't say that the people wanted a specific policy, only that they considered some person (and their ELECTION platform, which has just about nothing to do with how they'd actually behave in office) the least awful of the given options. As you said yourself, it was created in secret as a reactionary policy (because those always work out great!), so there was no possible oversi…

People knew about spying. Mostly supported it. Never voted against a politician that did in significant scale. That's direct democracy reinforcing representational democracy. QED.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#130

Post by Nullabillity » Sat, May 07, 2016, 2:24 AM UTC

nickpsecurity wrote: post #124

Nullabillity wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the contrary, it just recognizes the fact that nations with competing interests exist. Many of which spy on us for similar reasons. You'd have to be xenophile to justify doing no spying when even our allies are doing the opposite. Where does the line go for who is to be considered "other"? As someone living in Stockholm, why should I care more about companies in Gothenburg doing well than a company in Oslo? Or a…

"Where does the line go for who is to be considered "other"? As someone living in Stockholm, why should I care more about companies in Gothenburg doing well than a company in Oslo? Or am I an outsider as well, since I have a mother from Copenhagen?" Your wishes don't matter at all. You're not a competing nation referred to in my comment. "No, that just shows that they're not actual democracies either" Or that you don…

> Your wishes don't matter at all. You're not a competing nation referred to in my comment.

The point was that nations and citizenship are entirely arbitrary dividers.

> Or that you don't know what a representational democracy is or think they all think like you. Look up KSI where you live to find something even less transparent than our NSA. (shocking really)

If it doesn't live up to the definition of democracy (rule by the people), then it's by definition not a democracy.

NSA, FRA, KSI, whatever, this is about principles, not specific cases. It makes sense to say NSA on forums, since they're a name people recognise, and they're the ones capable of doing the most damage.