Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn • Hacker News Board

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#151

Post by ta0967 » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:46 PM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #90

borgia wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The U.S. is getting scarier by the day, folks. It really is. The facade of democracy is very quickly being peeled back to reveal something utterly terrifying. The response from the people has been the most disappointing and depressing thing though. The random sampling in NYC, of all places in the US, by Oliver's show was a brutal reminder of the mindset of the average person there.

Ignoring the republic/democratic state distinction, the US's democratic status has always been weak due to FPTP (ditto with the UK). It is essentially a system designed to keep the majority from even running and to keep the minority opinion silent. If the US (or UK) cared at all about democracy like they always claim they'd move to something better (e.g. Open list, party list, full on proportional representation, or…

Essentially bribery and corruption exist in the West, they're just completely legal and out in the open.

You can't bribe an officer of the USA govt, it's called facilitation payment and it's legal.

This is made even more funny by the fact that the USA law prohibits foreigners from engaging in that same behavior with other foreigners, in foreign countries. Foreigners have been convicted and indicted in USA for providing facilitation payments, in third countries, to third country citizens.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#152

Post by sesutton » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:46 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #48

jnorthrop wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do not downvote marcoperaza's post because you disagree with it. That goes against the spirit and intent of this site. Make your own argument to counter instead.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 PG said: > I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness. It's a bit weird to impose your own (admittedly popular) purpose of the vote buttons, claiming that your view is the true spirit and intent of the site, when t…

Voting systems like HN inevitably lead to an echo chamber when used to signal agreement or disagreement. HN already largely is one, but its a shame to see that this is officially endorsed.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#153

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:46 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #122

AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all NSA operations occur within server farms, cubicles, and offices. They have agents, they have listening posts, they have people with assets in dangerous countries. I have no idea if that information was in Snowden's massive data dump, but that's the point; no one does. He dumped a shitload of data and it's doubtful if even he knows everything that's in there.

He claims to be familiar with the contents of every document, even if he hasn't read them all. >> would it be "too far" to release the entire list of CIA field agents and their covers around the world to two journalists at a foreign newspaper because of that one group of agents? It absolutely would be and would potentially put shitloads of lives at risk. Snowden basically did the same thing with the NSA information.…

[deleted]

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#154

Post by AnkhMorporkian » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:46 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #122

AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all NSA operations occur within server farms, cubicles, and offices. They have agents, they have listening posts, they have people with assets in dangerous countries. I have no idea if that information was in Snowden's massive data dump, but that's the point; no one does. He dumped a shitload of data and it's doubtful if even he knows everything that's in there.

He claims to be familiar with the contents of every document, even if he hasn't read them all. >> would it be "too far" to release the entire list of CIA field agents and their covers around the world to two journalists at a foreign newspaper because of that one group of agents? It absolutely would be and would potentially put shitloads of lives at risk. Snowden basically did the same thing with the NSA information.…

I sincerely doubt his claim that he's familiar with the content of all the documents, given the sheer volume, but even if we take his assertion at face value some of the releases have clearly exceeded the scope of constitutional abuses. For instance, data monitoring in Europe, South America, Asia, etc. have a firm basis in law and are basically the entire reason the NSA exists. You may view it as unethical or immoral, but they clearly aren't unconstitutional.

It's fine to disagree with this, but it's an arguable point and it's stuff like that most of us Snowden non-supporters take issue with, not PRISM or XKEYSCORE which are clearly unconstitutional.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#155

Post by ics » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:48 PM UTC

hristov wrote: post #87

hullo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you'd done the same thing with a bust of your mother 10 years ago, they'd have covered it up as well. Try the same thing (with Snowden, or your mother) in France or China, and see what happens. Just because they parks department is doing their job doesn't mean democracy is ebbing.

I don't think so. If it is something unauthorized they probably would have removed it in due time. I.e., they would have taken a couple of days to hire professionals to do it. Now they immediately cover it up so that no-one can see it while they arrange for its removal. Why? Obviously they do not want anyone to look at it before it is removed. But why not? It is certainly not offensive in any way. It may prove to be…

They have to wait for someone to move it (maybe someone within the Parks department, they have the equipment at least) but it's worth pointing out that a job in NYC Parks as highly bureaucratic it is desirable. Many employees are professionals (seriously, you have no idea if the guy throwing the tarp happens to have a masters in landscape architecture, or the next guy, or...) and park officers must be designated as special patrolmen by the NYPD. The very first rule of being an "Urban Park Ranger" is: "Under supervision, perform patrols of park facilities as part of a highly visible uniformed division. Ensure the safety and enjoyment of park users and the protection of park property." It's great that we can all discuss the merits of this from our own viewpoints– I fully support the artists here– but it is precisely the job of Parks employees to assist in the removal of any form of unauthorized modifications to the park. Simplest reason? Parks has no idea how the statue was made or how it was installed. What happens if it falls on someone? Or someone climbs it and a piece breaks off? We take it in good faith that this thing is just a harmless statement of expression– Parks employees most certainly should not.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#156

Post by Lawtonfogle » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:49 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #141

cryoshon wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't really a legitimate debate, there's the PR department of statism and fearfulness and then the reality-seeking people who decry government power-grabbing and anti-liberalism. Dragnet surveillance is totalitarianism. I guess there are apologists for totalitarianism, but why, if we are a democracy, do we listen to those who actively advocate for tyranny? EDIT: Haven't heard any objection to my points yet, pr…

Comments like this reinforce my point. You are basically framing this entire debate as good versus evil. That is not going to change anyone's minds and it serves no real purpose outside of rallying your own side. There is a middle ground between our government can read everything and our government can read nothing. I don't know where that line is, but the only way we find that line is through open debate. Except no…

Middle ground does not always exist. For example, take the plans to set up decentralized networks outside of the government's control. There have been discussions on how to allow the government to still be able to fight certain forms of illegal data exchange (terrorism and child abuse) while banning it from being at all involved in the others (drugs). But there is no middle ground solution. Any network that comprises itself enough to allow the government in to monitor and combat certain data will weaken its ability to prevent the government from being able to do the same elsewhere.

As it stands, giving the government the power to read any one particular thing will result in it being abused to read other things that were never intended. And with a history filled with governments always overstepping their bounds, the only real solution is to create something that cannot be read, as any limit that depends upon 'please don't' is only a temporary patch.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#157

Post by Semiapies » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:50 PM UTC

Smoofer wrote: post #49

Semiapies wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never seen a plausible argument what Snowden did that went "too far" that boiled down to more than "he did anything at all". At most, you get a side order of " mumble mumble national security mumble mumble he should have done it 'differently' mumble mumble he went to RUSSIA for sanctuary! mumble mumble

I haven't seen many good arguments against Snowden either - but your comment here is a huge strawman. Just because you feel strongly about what Snowden did doesn't mean everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant/dumb.

I didn't say anyone was ignorant or dumb. I said they're not providing a worthwhile argument, but resorting to generalities and vague ominous implications.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#158

Post by ta0967 » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:50 PM UTC

genericuser wrote: post #131

borgia wrote: post #3

It has already been covered over with tarp and the letting removed[1]. It's a wonderful piece of work with excellent sentiment behind it. Unfortunately it doesn't suit the government and mainstream media narrative, so I'm sure the act of its erection will be decried as liberal terrorism and vandalism, the piece taken down and Snowden-related news once again brushed over. [1] http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brookl…

I like part of Ruth Goldstein's, one of the park conservancy founders, response in that article. While I am fairly confident that asking and trying to go through legitimate channels to get the bust put up would not of worked, what she said makes me think there are at least people who would consider it, although probably not high enough in power structures to actually get it done. “The park is such a symbol of America…

not have worked, "founding principles".

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#159

Post by borgia » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:53 PM UTC

happyscrappy wrote: post #137

Someone1234 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring the republic/democratic state distinction, the US's democratic status has always been weak due to FPTP (ditto with the UK). It is essentially a system designed to keep the majority from even running and to keep the minority opinion silent. If the US (or UK) cared at all about democracy like they always claim they'd move to something better (e.g. Open list, party list, full on proportional representation, or…

The National Front will be part of the government in France. Is that what we should strive for?

>The National Front will be part of the government in France. Is that what we should strive for?

Yes. People should be free to elect whoever they want to represent them. I'm not a National Front supporter, but they clearly have support and why should they be withheld from running in a free election simply because others dislike their campaign platform?

The idea of "Only X parties that conform to Y beliefs should be able to run/hold government" is a very dangerous one.

I would rather see a world full of governments made up of mixed up groups of representatives than that which the US currently has - two sides of the same coin being flipped every 4 years with a very small number of families establishing themselves as political dynasties.

There's ~350m people in the US. There is no way the diversity of views in that 350m people is represented in the two parties that hold power there. Similarly, there are 350m people and yet those who hold the office of President are, and have been for decades, close relatives of former Presidents. 2016 is just around the corner and it's looking like the US may well have another Clinton or Bush in office. How the hell is that right?

A nation's power structure should be free to change as the people want it to. The government is supposed to represent and serve the people, not the other way around.

We're seeing former outlying political entities in Europe experiencing a large increase in support - UKIP in the UK, Syriza in Greece, Sinn Fein in Ireland, the separatists in Spain, etc. - because a hell of a lot of people feel the ruling entities there are no longer representing the people and are demanding change.

That is something that should be welcomed and embraced. A nation should be free to make its own choices and deal with the consequences, not be shackled to approved political ideologies.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#160

Post by Lawtonfogle » Mon, Apr 06, 2015, 7:54 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #125

rosser wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it would be shameful of me to cover up your political speech when it's inflicted upon my property without my permission? Look, I emphatically believe in what Snowden did (though I may have some quibbles with his methods, his reasons were exemplary). I don't think that justifies what amounts to glorified — if tastefully done, and in keeping with the aesthetics of the monument — vandalism. This is a war memorial . H…

That monument, if anything, belongs to the city and thus its people. As for political speech I am quite okay with the rule that you can put up any bust that you have made for your own money, as a private citizen, so long as it is of that quality. I doubt the rule would be abused much.

You can be well assured some religious group is going to use this to put up some religious symbol, after which some non-religious group is going to put up another demonic thinking chair.