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

Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 172 posts

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#151

Post by twoodfin »

adammil wrote: post #147
twoodfin wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't seen any evidence of programs that are prima facie unconstitutional. You may wish that the Fourth Amendment required a warrant to search any of your communications, but that's not how the courts have interpreted it. Nations have been opening messages that crossed their borders for centuries. That's not to say each and every instance of these programs has always been scrupulously constitutional, but we never…

They are opening messages that don't cross borders.

Deliberately? Which program does that?

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#152

Post by CamperBob2 »

twoodfin wrote: post #44
syncerr wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The implication is that it's unconstitutional. And a violation on such scale...

I haven't seen any evidence of programs that are prima facie unconstitutional. You may wish that the Fourth Amendment required a warrant to search any of your communications, but that's not how the courts have interpreted it. Nations have been opening messages that crossed their borders for centuries. That's not to say each and every instance of these programs has always been scrupulously constitutional, but we never…

If America's founders had wanted the government to conduct secret tribunals, they would have made provision for such in the Constitution.

Instead, their intentions clearly were in the other direction.

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#153

Post by obstacle1 »

twoodfin wrote: post #37
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're being pedantic. No knock, no warrant, no redress when they murder you or a loved one for your family = police state, plain and simple.

I hope pg is reading these comments and is pleased that hn has become one more of the innumerable discussion boards where calling the U.S. a "police state, plain and simple" has become part of the everyday discourse. Yuck. I know there has always been a strain of the paranoid (sometimes well-earned) in hacker culture, but presumably it wasn't what this site was built to highlight.

Paranoid? I'm sorry, have you removed your head from the sand at any point in the past year? You've mentioned in previous posts that you're thankful for particular amendments to your constitution. Your government is currently engaging in a systematic and aggressive teardown of said constitution. Without consulting anyone outside of the state apparatus. And which arm of the state is largely carrying out these attacks? The repressive arm. Police and military.

Perhaps if you come up for air (and sun, it's good for you) you'll see that discussion about police states is both relevant and extremely important at this time. Many people don't want to dive head-first off the cliff with you.

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#154

Post by twoodfin »

samstave wrote: post #143
twoodfin wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of morbid curiosity, when do you think the U.S. became a police state? Decade-level precision is fine.

I would love to give you the long version of this, but here is the answer to your question: The US became a police state as soon as the CIA did its coup of the executive branch. Now, when this actually occurred is debatable - but my opinion is that they succeeded 100% once GHW Bush took the VP spot as Reagan's handler. This coup was a LONG time in the making -- and goes all the way back to Prescott, but ever since 19…

Intriguing. So why did GHWB lose his reelection campaign? Did he do something to upset his superiors or was losing just a smokescreen to better orchestrate things from behind the scenes?

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#155

Post by rdl »

mpyne wrote: post #142
wonderyak wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of us are calling for changes, many people thought electing Obama would facilitate this change. I think these people are the most upset of all; the man ran on a campaign of change ... There is a general concensus among people across the political parties that things are broken. Congress is not good, the President is not doing a good job and problems are mounting. The majority realizes that the system is broken (…

The election of Obama did facilitate a lot of change within NSA. It simply wasn't the type of change you all thought it would be, but it is an improvement in most respects compared to 2007's DoJ and DoD.

How so? At most he required they get explicit legislative authorization, which they did, rather than potentially being more easily struck down by the courts. Pretty much continued doing the same things as far as I can tell.

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#156

Post by penguindev »

twoodfin wrote: post #121
samstave wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, calling out the US on the fact that it actually is a police state is sober. If you do not recognize what the true nature of the US is at this point, then you may be in denial about it. While you might say that things are "not that bad" - just because you hav some relative "comfort" (so long as you're not against the State) - does not mean that the actual architecture of the system is not that of a police state.

Just out of morbid curiosity, when do you think the U.S. became a police state? Decade-level precision is fine.

Perhaps a better question is, in what decades did the US start being a bully to others, including its own citizens.

It probably started with Latin American countries (CIA coups, Smedley Butler), vietnam, Iran (Shaw), Afghanistan (when the CIA radicalized them to fight the russians), etc. Ike warned of the MIC, and he was right. Now we're turning the lens inward, as the empire is totally insolvent.

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#157

Post by mpyne »

rdl wrote: post #155
mpyne wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The election of Obama did facilitate a lot of change within NSA. It simply wasn't the type of change you all thought it would be, but it is an improvement in most respects compared to 2007's DoJ and DoD.

How so? At most he required they get explicit legislative authorization, which they did, rather than potentially being more easily struck down by the courts. Pretty much continued doing the same things as far as I can tell.

A significant paring down of the "watch lists" used by NSA (and TSA too, it seems), the revocation of the previous definition of 'torture', scrapping some of the surveillance programs of no useful intelligence value, stuff like that.

Certainly there is more that can be done, but I think if this whole affair is indicative of the reaction to be expected then I'm not surprised people avoided making oversight of these programs a loud and noisy public debate.

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#158

Post by markkat »

spodek wrote: post #5

"Can we call it a police state now?" I saw the question on Reddit after a different revelation last month. I feel like we're going to ask that question more and more. I can only hope more and more of us are inspired, as Snowden was by Levinson (Lavabit's CEO) and many of us have been by both of them, and we act to protect ourselves and constrain our governments from overreaching to where they can't help repeating the…

IMO we are currently in a surveillance state. I wrote my rationale on this on this 2 months ago: http://hubski.com/pub?id=88146

In short, the difference between a surveillance state and a police state is a matter of nature, but they have capabilities in common.

I think a police state will likely follow.

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#159

Post by rdl »

mpyne wrote: post #157
rdl wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? At most he required they get explicit legislative authorization, which they did, rather than potentially being more easily struck down by the courts. Pretty much continued doing the same things as far as I can tell.

A significant paring down of the "watch lists" used by NSA (and TSA too, it seems), the revocation of the previous definition of 'torture', scrapping some of the surveillance programs of no useful intelligence value, stuff like that. Certainly there is more that can be done, but I think if this whole affair is indicative of the reaction to be expected then I'm not surprised people avoided making oversight of these pr…

Ah. Those are things meaningful to those suffering directly but not to those designing security systems, which is what particularly concerns me.

I still think a Gingrich or Tea Party level congressional revolution in 2014, bipartisan, focused on "re-establishing effective oversight of the military/intelligence apparatus", should have reasonable odds of going through. There are enough districts which don't financially benefit from this (and a lot which are going to be hurt by it, like Silicon Valley and Redmond), that a number of junior congressmen could probably get elected on it (assuming they're not otherwise psycho).

Re: Email service used by Snowden shuts down, warns against using US-based companies

#160

Post by samstave »

twoodfin wrote: post #154
samstave wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to give you the long version of this, but here is the answer to your question: The US became a police state as soon as the CIA did its coup of the executive branch. Now, when this actually occurred is debatable - but my opinion is that they succeeded 100% once GHW Bush took the VP spot as Reagan's handler. This coup was a LONG time in the making -- and goes all the way back to Prescott, but ever since 19…

Intriguing. So why did GHWB lose his reelection campaign? Did he do something to upset his superiors or was losing just a smokescreen to better orchestrate things from behind the scenes?

The illusion of hoice must continue. While I cannot say that GHW Bush wanted to lose the election, I can say that it didn't mater.

Clinton was brought into the CIA fold after his complicity to allowing CIA drug importation to Mena Arkansas.

Here is a brief clip where Clinton does not deny any of the allegations of the trafficking - he simply attempts to deny any awareness of it.

Watch the Mena Connection....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDMktUYvC7k

---

There is a lot more to it as well.

Post reply on HN