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

NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 60 posts

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#21

Post by coenhyde »

brown9-2 wrote: post #5

Yes. Does the NSA routinely intercept American citizens’ emails? No. Does the NSA intercept Americans’ cell phone conversations? No. It's worth noting that "intercept" has a very specific meaning here, which the Congressman asking the question nor the reporter may not have realized. From http://theweek.com/article/index/245228/the-fbi-collects-all... A few definitions: to "collect" means to gather and store; to "anal…

Not excusing the collection of private information, I would be interested in knowing the extent of the analysis done with the data.

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#23

Post by dnm »

I'm not sure I understand how this relates to the Guardian article. My understanding of that is that there's an NSL ordering Verizon to give electronic records of the calls to the NSA. The NSA isn't collecting, intercepting or monitoring anything. They're being handed the data by VZ. What's the relevance?

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#24

Post by samstave »

snarfy wrote: post #18
brown9-2 wrote: post #5

Yes. Does the NSA routinely intercept American citizens’ emails? No. Does the NSA intercept Americans’ cell phone conversations? No. It's worth noting that "intercept" has a very specific meaning here, which the Congressman asking the question nor the reporter may not have realized. From http://theweek.com/article/index/245228/the-fbi-collects-all... A few definitions: to "collect" means to gather and store; to "anal…

Good catch, and it's important to understand when dealing with the law that every single word has a specific legal interpretation. This is where Clinton's famous "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is" came from. Re-read those questions and realize every single word in each sentence has a few pages of legalize that defines it. 'NSA', 'intercept', 'Americans', etc. Each word.

Where can one look up the actual legal definition for any given word?

Have you heard the claim that your name in all caps is different than your name as you would write it? What is your opinion on that claim?

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#25

Post by EthanHeilman »

chris_mahan wrote: post #15
brown9-2 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case, and using these definitions, it appears no "interception" happens because there is not a computer or human listening to the actual phone calls. Verizon is sending the call "metadata".

per the definition given above: "to "intercept" means that a computer or human actually listens to or records calls." if a computer records a call, it's intercepted, no?

Verizon is sending them call metadata not actual calls.

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#26

Post by brown9-2 »

chris_mahan wrote: post #15
brown9-2 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case, and using these definitions, it appears no "interception" happens because there is not a computer or human listening to the actual phone calls. Verizon is sending the call "metadata".

per the definition given above: "to "intercept" means that a computer or human actually listens to or records calls." if a computer records a call, it's intercepted, no?

are you referring to what the Wired article stated?

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#27

Post by sliverstorm »

samstave wrote: post #24
snarfy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good catch, and it's important to understand when dealing with the law that every single word has a specific legal interpretation. This is where Clinton's famous "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is" came from. Re-read those questions and realize every single word in each sentence has a few pages of legalize that defines it. 'NSA', 'intercept', 'Americans', etc. Each word.

Where can one look up the actual legal definition for any given word? Have you heard the claim that your name in all caps is different than your name as you would write it? What is your opinion on that claim?

That claim sounds bogus to me. I've seen hosts of legal documents using all caps for everything (ostensibly for readability?).

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#28

Post by Torgo »

samstave wrote: post #24
snarfy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good catch, and it's important to understand when dealing with the law that every single word has a specific legal interpretation. This is where Clinton's famous "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is" came from. Re-read those questions and realize every single word in each sentence has a few pages of legalize that defines it. 'NSA', 'intercept', 'Americans', etc. Each word.

Where can one look up the actual legal definition for any given word? Have you heard the claim that your name in all caps is different than your name as you would write it? What is your opinion on that claim?

IANAL but it's highly dependent on context, and in many cases it's a matter of simply being extremely precise. For example, if I say "I'm not reading your email" note that I didn't say, for instance, that I'm not _collecting_ your email. Also, I didn't say I won't read it later. I also never said nobody else is reading your email right now.

It is interesting to compare this to a different thread about fallacies. If you're seeking the truth it's good to interpret someone's statements charitably. However when somebody in government says something, it's better to interpret it as cynically as possible, because that's where the unconstrained power forms.

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#29

Post by darkarmani »

brown9-2 wrote: post #5

Yes. Does the NSA routinely intercept American citizens’ emails? No. Does the NSA intercept Americans’ cell phone conversations? No. It's worth noting that "intercept" has a very specific meaning here, which the Congressman asking the question nor the reporter may not have realized. From http://theweek.com/article/index/245228/the-fbi-collects-all... A few definitions: to "collect" means to gather and store; to "anal…

I was going to correct you because i thought the reporter was James Bamford, but it's not. Bamford knows what he is talking about.

Re: NSA Chief Denies Domestic Spying Story (2012)

#30

Post by Alex3917 »

samstave wrote: post #24
snarfy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good catch, and it's important to understand when dealing with the law that every single word has a specific legal interpretation. This is where Clinton's famous "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is" came from. Re-read those questions and realize every single word in each sentence has a few pages of legalize that defines it. 'NSA', 'intercept', 'Americans', etc. Each word.

Where can one look up the actual legal definition for any given word? Have you heard the claim that your name in all caps is different than your name as you would write it? What is your opinion on that claim?

"Where can one look up the actual legal definition for any given word?"

Words don't have universal legal definitions. However, at the start of a law there is usually a list of terms and how they are defined for the purposes of that law. So if want to know whether or not you can be prosecuted for X, you need to look up how the relevant terms are defined in the laws for X.

In the case of emails and phone records, in many cases the NSA isn't intercepting that information. Rather, the ISPs/telcos are intercepting it and sending the data to the NSA.

Post reply on HN