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

Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 243 posts

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#201

Post by randcraw »

user_7832 wrote: post #112
randcraw wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work for several of the US intel agencies. I can say with great confidence that we never have acted gainfully on preventing a major event using intel and we never will. The catalyst for acting boldly to prevent or defend a major event is much mor political than informational. No intel will ever play a big role in deciding whether a country lives or dies. But we most certainly WILL abuse individual civil rig…

> The catalyst for acting boldly to prevent or defend a major event is much mor political than informational. Could you explain what you mean by this? On a tangential note, have you considered talking/explaining this with politicians/academics studying this field? Or is it more of something that's already known to those familiar with the field?

The most relevant example I know is the Zimmerman telegram in 1917 which British intelligence decrypted and passed along to Pres Wilson. It detailed plans Germany had made to invade the US with Mexico's help. Wilson released it to newspapers in March as support for his decision to declare war on Germany in April. However the primary justification for war wasn't the telegram, but the public decision by Bismark to fully resume uboat attacks on merchant ships in the Atlantic.

So even as damning and revealing as the Zimmerman telegram was, ultimately it was Germany's bold resumption of the torpedoing of US oceangoing traffic that catalyzed US public opinion into ending 3 years of American neutrality and joining the fight in WWI. Thus even when intel is most damning, the role of intel will always be subservient to publicly motivating events like lost lives, as in the much ballyhooed sinking of the Lusitania 2 years before (1915).

Wikipedia has a couple of outstanding articles on the topic:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimmermann_Telegram

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_entry_into_World_Wa...

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#202

Post by soraminazuki »

twoodfin wrote: post #158
soraminazuki wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Constitution grants the president unlimited spying powers? That's news to me. Whether the FISA vote can fix all the problems isn't the point. The problem is that current surveillance practices looks illegal to begin with.

Intercepting communications between US persons and foreign non-citizens isn’t “unlimited spying powers” and is not illegal. Do you disagree?

We're running in circles now.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40100565

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#203

Post by Gud »

theoldlove wrote: post #191
Gud wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how it works in the USA, not necessarily how it works. Other forms of governing exists. A big step forward for the USA would be a vast reduction of federal power over the states.

The US federal government is already pretty weak compared to other countries. The federal government looks pretty bad at the moment, but I’m not sure further weakening it will help the country.

Compared to wich countries,

The US is a massive country, with the populace far removed from the decision making. I believe this is the core problem.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#204

Post by int_19h »

beau_g wrote: post #187
fardo wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a tension between the common belief that “when private citizens are able to vote privately, it protects their ability to vote their conscience, rather than allowing some third party to explicitly buy votes or bully someone into voting in line with someone else”, and the belief that somehow this doesn’t apply to congress members. Additionally, on hard philosophical and policy qurstions, some bits of negotiatio…

Elected officials should not vote their conscience, they should vote according to the wishes of their constituents

Then what is the point of even having them and not just voting for everything directly?

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#205

Post by int_19h »

lumb63 wrote: post #161
jedberg wrote: post #32

What's most interesting is that this wasn't on party lines. The yes/no mix is very mixed party-wise. https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1...

What’s most interesting is this is incredibly unpopular amongst voters of both parties.

Representative democracy in US is neither representative nor really a democracy.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#206

Post by dartos »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #193
dartos wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first past the post system is encoding a two party system into law. If it makes to hard enough for a third party to take hold, there might as well not be one. Not everything is spelled in ink.

That's not "encoded into the law". The outcomes of the law are not the same as the law itself.

Practically speaking, they are.

The effect of a law is at least as important as the literal words on the page.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#207

Post by int_19h »

theoldlove wrote: post #191
Gud wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how it works in the USA, not necessarily how it works. Other forms of governing exists. A big step forward for the USA would be a vast reduction of federal power over the states.

The US federal government is already pretty weak compared to other countries. The federal government looks pretty bad at the moment, but I’m not sure further weakening it will help the country.

The US federal government is very strong compared to many countries, just limited in where that power can be applied... in theory. In practice, the insanity that is a precedent-based judicial system over time means that it's all just a disorganized mess where on one hand the Feds can straight up prevent you from boarding a plane, ever, without any semblance of due process (this is not normally a power you'll find in other countries), and yet can't regulate many mundane things like firearms.

However, there is a very solid case for a weak federal government, and it is simply that US is a country that's way too big for any coherent national policy on most matters that we've currently pushed there. It's such a vicious fight because it's half the country trying to bludgeon the other half into submission, motivated by the knowledge that, if you yield, the other guy will pick up this huge club and do the same to you. This will continue until the country breaks down unless we dial it down to state level and accept the fact that other states may have laws and lifestyle that is despicable or horrifying to us in some ways. Either that, or we might as well just break the whole thing apart now and not wait for it to happen in a more violent manner.

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#208

Post by int_19h »

cryptonector wrote: post #159
pessimizer wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other countries don't institutionalize the two-party system by law. Because it would be insane and antidemocratic to create a complicated network of laws that would have to be eliminated state by state in order to ordain that an entire country must be ruled by two intimately-linked private clubs in turn.

The two-party system isn't so heavily institutionalized "by law". The law generally gives advantages to parties that pull in more than x% of the vote, and it so happens that the first-past-the-post system of electing representatives makes it very difficult for a third party to take root.

Except our law is nothing like that. You can have a party take 45% of each district across the whole country and end up with zero seats in the House (because the other party took 55% of each).

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#209

Post by int_19h »

unethical_ban wrote: post #72
hammock wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed that’s interesting. Really makes you think about all these crackpots talking about a uniparty, deep state vs the people, etc

Really makes you think about whether there are some things that can still transcend partisan showmanship, like national security. I still am a believer in digital freedom, I'm old enough to have seen the changes in the Internet, and it is a much more malevolent and fucked up force than it was even 15 years ago. Maybe, just maybe, the government needs the power to spy on international targets with oversight.

When didn't they ever claim that sky will fall if they don't have all the surveillance they already do, and then some for good measure?

Re: Senate passes reauthorization of key US surveillance program after midnight

#210

Post by int_19h »

hellcow wrote: post #35
njarboe wrote: post #12

Here is a link to how the senators voted[1]. [1] https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1... Unfortunately both my senators voted for it. I did call their offices Thursday to no avail.

I'm really disappointed that even in CA (which is pushing for better privacy rights with CCPA), one of our senators voted for this.

Look up Dianne Feinstein's track record on these matters.
Post reply on HN