William Binney: 80% of audio calls are recorded and stored in the US • Hacker News Board

Re: William Binney: 80% of audio calls are recorded and stored in the US

#131

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 3:15 PM UTC

GHFigs wrote: post #110

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but it is at least debatable that NSA is really that thorough in its actual practices and really that generally blatant in disregarding the civil rights of Americans or even of people in other countries. At this point in the debate it has been observed on a number of occasions that ranking officials at the NSA are dishonest. They have made comments both sworn, and in general press releases / statements (on the recor…

At this point in the debate it has been observed on a number of occasions that ranking officials at the NSA are dishonest. They have made comments both sworn, and in general press releases / statements (on the record) that have later been proven false; and we have reason to believe those officials knew they were making false or misleading statements at the time. So in short, the NSA, and the intelligence community in…

Is William Binney a ranking NSA official? Has Binney been caught lying about the NSA? I didn't think I needed to specify Alexander and Clapper.

Re: William Binney: 80% of audio calls are recorded and stored in the US

#132

Post by nitrogen » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 4:44 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #129

nitrogen wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course an indictment is going to make the indicted sound like scum. It's not exactly an unbiased document. The pertinent questions in the Nacchio case are P(insider trading), P(getting caught), and P(getting caught | rejected NSA).

I don't see any pertinent question other than P(insider trading), which sure looks a lot like '1'.

P(insider trading | telecom CEO) is what I meant. Iff Nacchio was singled out for illegal but commonplace behavior, then it matters less to me what he did and more why he was the only one prosecuted. But if every insider trade has equal likelihood of getting caught, regardless of refusing NSA taps, then Nacchio is far less interesting.

Re: William Binney: 80% of audio calls are recorded and stored in the US

#133

Post by tptacek » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 5:39 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #132

tptacek wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see any pertinent question other than P(insider trading), which sure looks a lot like '1'.

P(insider trading | telecom CEO) is what I meant. Iff Nacchio was singled out for illegal but commonplace behavior, then it matters less to me what he did and more why he was the only one prosecuted. But if every insider trade has equal likelihood of getting caught, regardless of refusing NSA taps, then Nacchio is far less interesting.

I don't know if every inside trader has an equal likelihood of being caught, but Nacchio's case appears to have been particularly brazen. The facts I presented aren't disputed: he sold over one hundred million dollars of stock in a time period where the future of his company was very much in doubt, taking advantage of information his company didn't share with common investors.

Re: William Binney: 80% of audio calls are recorded and stored in the US

#134

Post by mandalar12 » Sat, Jul 12, 2014, 6:02 PM UTC

opendais wrote: post #120

nitrogen wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent comment is saying that those things wouldn't be created in the first place if the environment were already hostile to them. You can hide your present to some extent, but not erase the past.

Yes. I'm aware the parent comment wants to try to ignore reality and pretend you can nuke the publicly posted information on the internet in the event of a fascist government. That isn't how the internet or public communication works. The Nazis were able to identify the people they sent to concentration camps because of past associations, even once it became clear what they were doing because people don't live in a v…

I am not ignoring the reality: public or semi-public posts (facebook) are not going anywhere and should be considered public information.

Reading my previous post you can surely infer that I disagree with the mass spying but not that I am (or not) gay. This is not a coincidence: I don't hide this political view and accept to be vocal about it publically because I believe discussing it helps protecting the democracy I live in today. If I am to be accused of having that opinion later on, then so be it because that was an accepted risk.

On the other hand I don't accept that my privacy can be used against me, be it related to my sexuality or the opinions I chose to keep for myself or only share with close friends privately.

Overall I am not denying that the information can be found elsewhere or that the Nazis used past associations (I have no opinion about that) but the key point is that you should be able to dissociate between your public life and your private life.

I am well aware of the public traces I leave on forums and "social media" but I don't know to which extend my private conversations are infiltrated and I am much less careful when I write them. So I am not sure what extreme (or not so extreme) opinion I once formulated and was stored somewhere. That could be used against me by the next fascist government. There are two ways to avoid that: the first is that it is never stored in the first place, the second is that I never formulate such an opinion. I want the option that is compatible with a democracy.

Re: William Binney: 80% of audio calls are recorded and stored in the US

#135

Post by dm2 » Sun, Jul 13, 2014, 1:04 AM UTC

joelhaus wrote: post #119

dm2 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that use to be true, it isn't anymore. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_summary_of_the_Patriot_... https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130917/13395324556/court... https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/government-confi...

Read your links, but found nothing contradictory with what I said... and I certainly found nothing to substantiate the claims of the post I replied to. What exactly used to be true that is no longer true?

There's also this: http://rt.com/news/172284-nsa-stores-calls-audio/