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

PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

tutanota.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 251 posts

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#141

Post by devenblake »

aww_dang wrote: post #131
ianbutler wrote: post #5

No one should be surprised by this. This program was simply another extension of the US's march towards authoritarianism. Much like the patriot act and our secret warrants, founded on a dubious premise that over the last 20 years have largely borne no fruit in terms of protecting our freedoms and safety but have instead eroded them. This is a system designed to protect the larger system from any civs who may be getti…

If you liked "post 9/11" you're going to love "new normal".

If wearing a mask stopped the government from being able to listen in on my phone calls I'd wear it in the shower. This new normal means I don't have to put on deodorant and I can get away with shaving every other day, I love it.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#142

Post by hashtagmarkup »

bigbubba wrote: post #67
hashtagmarkup wrote: post #51

You can't prove that would-be terrorists weren't dissuaded by the knowledge that PRISM existed. What is the point of terrorizing a country that is already terrorizing its own citizens through unwarranted prying mass surveillance?

> You can't prove that would-be terrorists weren't dissuaded by the knowledge that PRISM existed. This is the tiger repelling rock theory of anti-terrorism. I have a rock that repels tigers. There haven't been any tiger attacks when I'm around, so it must work.

> I have a rock that repels tigers. There haven't been any tiger attacks when I'm around, so it must work.

Behind the scenes, the man with the rock is using it to kill every single kitten he sees when he's alone. He can't prove how useful the rock is without admitting to all the senseless murder of innocent bystanders.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#143

Post by remus »

conistonwater wrote: post #33
daveevad wrote: post #26

The title is misleading, it appears to me, since the claim "did not prevent a single terrorist attack" isn't backed up with even a grammatically correct sentence. > a judge ruled beginning of September 2020 that not [one single terrorist attack had been stopped with the help of the NSA's phone surveillance program (sic) If you trail the linked articles you end up with this 9th circuit opinion: > The panel wrote that…

If I understood correctly(?), the claim is that PRISM data was used in only one case, and in that case it was later judged to be irrelevant, therefore PRISM data was never used to help secure a single conviction. But I'm not sure this is right, I found the article pretty confusing on the subject of what actually happened, so I'm not sure. Personally I agree with Imnimo's comment that this is just an overly confusing…

> PRISM data was never used to help secure a single conviction.

I think it's worth noting that this is also fairly normal for signals intelligence of all types. If you want to use intelligence as evidence in a trial then you have to make that evidence available for scrutiny by the defense which is something intelligence agencies almost never want to do.

As I understand it (obviously Im not very informed here!) you'd normally use intelligence to identify suspects, then gather further evidence with which to secure a prosecution so you don't have to rely on the original intelligence in court. I believe GCHQ in the UK have in the past gone so far as to abandon a strong cases that hinged on intelligence data so as to not reveal the source of the intelligence.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#144

Post by lawnchair_larry »

ianbutler wrote: post #5

No one should be surprised by this. This program was simply another extension of the US's march towards authoritarianism. Much like the patriot act and our secret warrants, founded on a dubious premise that over the last 20 years have largely borne no fruit in terms of protecting our freedoms and safety but have instead eroded them. This is a system designed to protect the larger system from any civs who may be getti…

It has nothing to do with that whatsoever. Who specifically do you think is concerned about civilians being a little too rebellious?

As usual, the truth is far less interesting. But, it has nothing to do with civilian unrest or authoritarianism at all. You are probably mistaking incompetence for malice.

Then again, most people still misunderstand what PRISM actually was.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#146

Post by bigbubba »

devenblake wrote: post #141
aww_dang wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you liked "post 9/11" you're going to love "new normal".

If wearing a mask stopped the government from being able to listen in on my phone calls I'd wear it in the shower. This new normal means I don't have to put on deodorant and I can get away with shaving every other day, I love it.

You could easily live like a slob before 'new normal', if that's really the lifestyle you desired.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#147

Post by tobr »

MarcellusDrum wrote: post #44
ianbutler wrote: post #5

No one should be surprised by this. This program was simply another extension of the US's march towards authoritarianism. Much like the patriot act and our secret warrants, founded on a dubious premise that over the last 20 years have largely borne no fruit in terms of protecting our freedoms and safety but have instead eroded them. This is a system designed to protect the larger system from any civs who may be getti…

The "Patriot Act" is so maliciously named its more funny than sad. Reminds me of George Carlin's show about changing words to make them softer.[1] An good example he used to show this is the condition the fighters get from shock in combat. In WW1, it was called Shell Shock, a terrifying name. The same condition in WW1 was called Battle Fatigue, a nicer name. In the Korean War, the name changed to Operational Exhausti…

> The "Patriot Act" is so maliciously named its more funny than sad.

> Reminds me of George Carlin's show about changing words to make them softer.[1]

“Patriot” isn’t exactly a soft word, though? I never understood why this brand of nationalism is so completely embraced and unquestioned in every fraction of the American political spectrum. It’s not like nationalism is unproblematic.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#148

Post by Dirlewanger »

devenblake wrote: post #141
aww_dang wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you liked "post 9/11" you're going to love "new normal".

If wearing a mask stopped the government from being able to listen in on my phone calls I'd wear it in the shower. This new normal means I don't have to put on deodorant and I can get away with shaving every other day, I love it.

At a recent happy hour, a friend-of-a-friend who is into all government conspiracy theories (including thinking Covid is a hoax) was there. It got kind of heated, and one question I asked him was "If the government is so hellbent on instituting surveillance technology everywhere, why would they also advocate for you to wear a mask, which hinders current face recognition capabilities?" Unsurprisingly, he didn't have an answer.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#149

Post by slg »

ianbutler wrote: post #5

No one should be surprised by this. This program was simply another extension of the US's march towards authoritarianism. Much like the patriot act and our secret warrants, founded on a dubious premise that over the last 20 years have largely borne no fruit in terms of protecting our freedoms and safety but have instead eroded them. This is a system designed to protect the larger system from any civs who may be getti…

>largely borne no fruit in terms of protecting our freedoms and safety but have instead eroded them.

If we actually want to convince people that this needs change, we need to hold both sides of the debate to the same standard. We searched for any concrete evidence of these measures adding safety, found none, and then concluded it didn't add safety. The next step is to look for concrete examples of how this erodes freedom for a normal American citizen. Otherwise you are arguing one theoretical with another and most people will tune out.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#150

Post by lawnchair_larry »

The submitted title is subtly editorialized to the point of being incorrect. The article only says that the phone surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack. It does not say that PRISM did not prevent a single terrorist attack. These are very different claims.

Even where the article does use PRISM, it uses it incorrectly. PRISM is not the program that involved storing telecommunications metadata. The article claims that was one part of PRISM. This contradicts all public reporting on the two programs.

Post reply on HN