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

Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

computerweekly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 141 posts

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#131

Post by pseudalopex »

aestetix wrote: post #9

> “The Snowden files are largely technical, with lots of codewords and jargon that is hard to decipher. There are pages and pages of that which the public would not be interested in. There are also documents that relate to operational matters. Snowden said from the start he wanted us to report on issues related to mass surveillance, not operational matters. So we stuck to that.” Sorry, was the point of these revelati…

Snowden said the point was to let the public decide.

There were several lawsuits. Some activities were ruled illegal. More accountability would require prosecutions and political action. And there was enough evidence for them.

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#132

Post by garciasn »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #130
garciasn wrote: post #6

> Why was only 1% of the documents published, in the end? “The documents are not like the WikiLeaks ones from the US state department, which were written by diplomats and, for the most part, easily understandable,” said Ewen MacAskill. “The Snowden files are largely technical, with lots of codewords and jargon that is hard to decipher. There are pages and pages of that which the public would not be interested in. The…

Snowden was _trapped_ in Russia. He was on his way to a country with no extradition and his passport was revoked, it's worth looking up to know that he didn't chose Russia.

I said he resides there and it’s ironic; I didn’t say he chose it.

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#133

Post by Zigurd »

wubrr wrote: post #86
Zigurd wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a total of three comments, this guy (and it IS a guy, for sure) accumulated -9 karma and provided another data point that crackpottery is always interdisciplinary: 2 on vaccines, and one on FEMA conspiracy theories. Bravo. Take a bow.

Your only point is that people disagree/downvote his point? Literally just a textbook example of ad populum and nothing else?

Are you seriously claiming he's not a crackpot?

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#134

Post by pseudalopex »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #101
johannes1234321 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For that it's too late. The docetns are at British The Guardian and German Der Spiegel and the person extracting those initially sits in Russia and who knows who got copies or extracted them.

> Russian parliament’s defense and security committee publicly conceded that “Snowden did share intelligence” with his government. https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hpsci_snowden_r...

The deputy chairman claimed. Not the committee conceded. Whoever wrote conceded missed or wished to obscure the deputy chairman could have lied. Failing to get anything from Snowden would have embarrassed Russian security services. Or it could have been an assumption if the English translation is accurate.[1]

At least this claim could be probed. Most claims in the report relied on proven liars.

[1] https://www.npr.org/2016/06/29/483890378/during-tenure-in-ru...

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#135

Post by feoren »

riversflow wrote: post #126
feoren wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Overall I think the burden of proof is on the group who wants to go against the status quo That attitude definitely benefits those who like the status quo. I think the "burden of proof", if such a thing exists, is on the position with the least prior evidence. That something is the status quo is pretty weak evidence in its favor; I can point to many instances in human history where the status quo was pretty awful.…

Bullets don’t kill people, the guy pulling the trigger on the gun does. Spies don’t pull the trigger. I believe literally all those things you don’t believe about having something being completely separate from using it. A car can kill people just as easily as a gun. So what? It’s who used the object who is responsible for what it does and owning something doesn’t necessarily imply using it or even imply it at all. H…

> A car can kill people just as easily as a gun ... How do you justify that point of view?

Right, and we have some oversight and regulation about who can operate a car, what kind of (admittedly low) bars they need to pass, and when their license can be revoked. What oversight and regulation do we have on what the CIA and NSA are doing? Congressional, obviously, yet it hasn't prevented the many abuses of the past.

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#136

Post by mardifoufs »

saulpw wrote: post #21
garciasn wrote: post #6

> Why was only 1% of the documents published, in the end? “The documents are not like the WikiLeaks ones from the US state department, which were written by diplomats and, for the most part, easily understandable,” said Ewen MacAskill. “The Snowden files are largely technical, with lots of codewords and jargon that is hard to decipher. There are pages and pages of that which the public would not be interested in. The…

> a capable public can make this determination The public is not capable, either technically nor emotionally nor politically.

If that's how you perceive the public, that's an inherently anti democratic view imo. If they can't read documents that journalists have access to, how could they be given the power to decide who is leading them?

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#137

Post by Shawnj2 »

criddell wrote: post #30
garciasn wrote: post #6

> Why was only 1% of the documents published, in the end? “The documents are not like the WikiLeaks ones from the US state department, which were written by diplomats and, for the most part, easily understandable,” said Ewen MacAskill. “The Snowden files are largely technical, with lots of codewords and jargon that is hard to decipher. There are pages and pages of that which the public would not be interested in. The…

They came to an agreement with Snowden and should honor that. We might want to see the rest, but I think long term it’s better for leakers to know journalists are trustworthy.

Yep a huge reason (some) people don’t like Snowden is because he leaked extremely classified information. I’m sure he himself only wanted to give away information that exposed the NSA’s surveillance network and only actually distributing the documents he leaked that are relevant to that point is his goal

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#138

Post by subjectsigma »

wubrr wrote: post #107
subjectsigma wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can read their website and find out, they address some things you mentioned in the first few lines: https://www.nsa.gov/Cybersecurity/Overview/ Whether or not that justifies mass surveillance is a different question. I don’t think so. The NSA is a really, really big place. You could work there for a lifetime and not engage in illegal surveillance. I think getting rid of the bad parts shouldn’t require us to get r…

One of the big Snowden revelations was that NSA can literally do whatever they want without needing any kind of government or public approval. There is zero transparency and accountability.

I know you’re being facetious when you say “literally whatever they want” but that’s not true even in jest. Congress approves their budget, they have to justify it like every other part of the government. I think the NSA should have less power and more accountability, but they’re not dictators.

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#139

Post by believecty »

entropicdrifter wrote: post #50
criddell wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they probably agree with saulpw and referencing the COVID stuff is a funny way to make that point.

I'd love to believe that, but they made a new account just to make that comment. I'm guessing it's unironic.

On HN, you have to frequently make a new account. Accounts guilty of wrong-think quickly get shadowbanned.

Re: Why only 1% of the Snowden Archive will ever be published

#140

Post by entropicdrifter »

believecty wrote: post #139
entropicdrifter wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to believe that, but they made a new account just to make that comment. I'm guessing it's unironic.

On HN, you have to frequently make a new account. Accounts guilty of wrong-think quickly get shadowbanned.

>Accounts guilty of wrong-think quickly get shadowbanned.

Have you considered the possibility that you're being ignored because you're unpopular and the algorithms just make that more convenient?

Nah, you're right, everyone's out to get you

Post reply on HN