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

House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

freedomworks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 47 posts

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#21

Post by mc32 »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #6
bkurtz13 wrote: post #2

I really want to believe this could become reality. But the past surrounding this issue, as well as seemingly widespread apathy about our loss of civil liberties, leaves me cynical. Nearly every time I fly, I hear someone in the security line (which to me resembles a cattle chute) remarking that they're in fact glad for the inconvenience, as they somehow feel safer. Nearly every family member or friend with whom I di…

People value 'feeling safer' far more than 'being safer' or 'having rights'. This is the classical problem of not appreciating what you have until it's gone.

Is that surprising in any way? Not saying it's right kr desirable but we've understood this phenomenon to exist in many contexts.

We buy expensive wines over better cheaper ones for the sake of feeling better. It's a life of interpreted experience not cold logic. Life would be too complicated to think of the actuality of everything.

It's got commonality with say a concept like pervasive direct democracy. Imagine having to make a decision a d vote on every single government act., even if only local. Most people would become exhausted of the process of this indefinite mobilization mindset.

So feeling more secure is easier than actually being statistically more secure. Peace of mind is important.

Look at insurance. You could probably run numbers and find other ways to minimize loss in the event of something catastrophic, but most of us just buy into external public insurance policies.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#22

Post by twoodfin »

exelius wrote: post #15
twoodfin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly every family member or friend with whom I discuss Edward Snowden's revelations and the vast injustice of what the NSA is doing couldn't care less. It's possible they don't believe the Snowden revelations represent a loss of civil liberties. I actually find this to be a pretty rational belief: There's much talk about NSA data harvesting efforts as a "machinery of totalitarianism", but precious little (any?) evi…

I think that most people don't fully appreciate the complex relationship between the government and the governed. What we've had in the past and are missing now is oversight. This comes in multiple forms: congressional oversight, regulatory oversight, judicial oversight, etc. Ultimately, if those methods failed, we always had the media to provide oversight - which is why until the last 20 years or so, freedom of the…

I don't buy the idea that oversight is profoundly lacking. The FISA court has ruled on many of these programs, Congressional intelligence committees and the leadership have been briefed (funding has to come from somewhere!), and as I said, we have an election every four years to pick a guy or gal who can call the head of the NSA or CIA into the Oval and demand whatever changes they'd like. That's one of the reasons elections matter.

Anyway, this is way off topic from the Patriot Act, which of course happens more or less in full public view.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#23

Post by amyjess »

jgroszko wrote: post #14
twoodfin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly every family member or friend with whom I discuss Edward Snowden's revelations and the vast injustice of what the NSA is doing couldn't care less. It's possible they don't believe the Snowden revelations represent a loss of civil liberties. I actually find this to be a pretty rational belief: There's much talk about NSA data harvesting efforts as a "machinery of totalitarianism", but precious little (any?) evi…

It's weird public discourse has gone from "Na, the NSA couldn't possibly be that widespread and invasive" to "Na, they're not doing anything bad with it..." It's like some collective denial of what the next step could be, apparently we have a lot more faith in government than a lot of people let on...

Oh, everyone assumed the government knows anything anyway, long before Snowden.

I remember after the Boston Bombings, people were complaining, saying things like "How could the government be so incompetent as to not stop this before it happened? They monitor everything on the Internet, so they should have known!". This was before Snowden.

Years before that, I remember people were casually talking about Room 641A. This would be about 2005 or so.

Everyone assumed the government snarfs all Internet data long before Snowden, and almost nobody cared.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#24

Post by dragonwriter »

ck2 wrote: post #13

Careful what you wish for. Instead of one big target bill with a set of laws allowing unconstitutional activity by the government, they will replace it with a ton of tiny laws buried in other bills that are impossible to target as a group. Actually now that I think about it, Congress barely passes any bills anyway anymore so that would be tricky for them, but since many of them are there for decades, they have plenty…

> Term limits really would make sense.

Term limits empower the influential actors that aren't directly accountable (lobbyists, professional staff, etc.) because the people that are directly accountable don't have the experience (unless gained through those other avenues) to be effective, and don't have a future in the institution (except as influencers in those other avenues). They don't actually address the problems you point too.

Lots of state governments have legislative term limits, and many times have much more of the same kind of problem you seem concerned about.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#25

Post by jgroszko »

twoodfin wrote: post #19
jgroszko wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird public discourse has gone from "Na, the NSA couldn't possibly be that widespread and invasive" to "Na, they're not doing anything bad with it..." It's like some collective denial of what the next step could be, apparently we have a lot more faith in government than a lot of people let on...

I don't remember that Pollyanna public discourse. What would you consider the most shocking Snowden disclosure? None that I'm aware of were that surprising. It was an open secret at the phone companies that TLA folk of one sort or another have been (only sometimes with direct cooperation) plugging mysterious gear into the network for decades. Really astounding that their methods are now targeted at Gmail and Facebook…

The firmware exploits that were being talked about a few weeks ago are probably the most surprising to me. But IIRC a lot of the stuff that Snowden revealed was previously considered the realm of tin foil hat conspiracy theory.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#26

Post by jgroszko »

amyjess wrote: post #23
jgroszko wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird public discourse has gone from "Na, the NSA couldn't possibly be that widespread and invasive" to "Na, they're not doing anything bad with it..." It's like some collective denial of what the next step could be, apparently we have a lot more faith in government than a lot of people let on...

Oh, everyone assumed the government knows anything anyway, long before Snowden. I remember after the Boston Bombings, people were complaining, saying things like "How could the government be so incompetent as to not stop this before it happened? They monitor everything on the Internet, so they should have known!". This was before Snowden. Years before that, I remember people were casually talking about Room 641A. Thi…

Perhaps I'm conflating indifference with dismissal as conspiracy theory.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#27

Post by A_COMPUTER »

twoodfin wrote: post #19
jgroszko wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird public discourse has gone from "Na, the NSA couldn't possibly be that widespread and invasive" to "Na, they're not doing anything bad with it..." It's like some collective denial of what the next step could be, apparently we have a lot more faith in government than a lot of people let on...

I don't remember that Pollyanna public discourse. What would you consider the most shocking Snowden disclosure? None that I'm aware of were that surprising. It was an open secret at the phone companies that TLA folk of one sort or another have been (only sometimes with direct cooperation) plugging mysterious gear into the network for decades. Really astounding that their methods are now targeted at Gmail and Facebook…

There is a huge difference between "carnivore", a box the FBI could put on a single network somewhere, and room 641A, six rooms hooked directly into AT&T backbones sniffing all data. There is also a huge difference between passive monitoring at specific points with some sort of criminal investigation, and actively infiltrating US companies and breaking their security to be able to monitor its traffic unimpeded.

It's funny how I was a conspiracy nut when I told people this stuff was happening, and now I have people gaslighting me that everybody knew it was happening all along.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#28

Post by refurb »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #20
happyscrappy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the line about collection on foreign enemies for WMD's is some sort of loophole The view that the NSA should do no spying at all is a minority absurdist viewpoint that is easily discarded.

No it isn't. The NSA doesn't have to exist at all. It didn't used to. Its questionable that they do anything positive. The discussion is very much worthwhile.

The US has been spying on communications since it's inception. It may not have been called the "NSA", but the activities have always happened.

Re: House Introduces Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act

#30

Post by cmdkeen »

exelius wrote: post #15
twoodfin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly every family member or friend with whom I discuss Edward Snowden's revelations and the vast injustice of what the NSA is doing couldn't care less. It's possible they don't believe the Snowden revelations represent a loss of civil liberties. I actually find this to be a pretty rational belief: There's much talk about NSA data harvesting efforts as a "machinery of totalitarianism", but precious little (any?) evi…

I think that most people don't fully appreciate the complex relationship between the government and the governed. What we've had in the past and are missing now is oversight. This comes in multiple forms: congressional oversight, regulatory oversight, judicial oversight, etc. Ultimately, if those methods failed, we always had the media to provide oversight - which is why until the last 20 years or so, freedom of the…

After Hoover died it became clear the level of actual corruption and control he had over Presidential elections, and how the FBI had been suborned to serve his personal and political beliefs. So there was a secret police period, except it was years ago and it didn't result in a totalitarian system. That did include the mass interception of mail and telephone calls, without the pesky need for warrants.

What has happened is a relatively short period of time in which technically inclined Americans had access to a mass communication medium which was extremely difficult to intercept. Apart from that period of time it has always been the case that if the Government wanted to get you it could and would intercept your communications. The general public have probably just always operated on the assumption that their lives just aren't important enough to become the centre of attention.

Post reply on HN