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

PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

tutanota.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 251 posts

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#211

Post by java-man »

bumby wrote: post #179
bigbubba wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be right that this motivates the 'euphemism treadmill', but if so I think that's misguided. It's my personal belief that the stigma follows the condition itself (particularly when untreated), not the name given to the condition. When I was a kid my friends and I all knew that you had to step light around some people's fathers because they were Vietnam vets with hair triggers that would go ballistic for seem…

To be clear, I don't think the nomenclature is the sole driver of social stigma, just a contributor. As an analogy, I doubt anybody thinks the social stigma around trisomy-21 is solely attributable to previous politically incorrect terminology but continued use of those former terms doesn't help alleviate that stigma.

I am amazed how civil and illuminating this particular discussion thread is. Thank you all!

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#212

Post by michannne »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #107
dx87 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good point. While we don't know the details, it's entirely possible that it didn't stop any terrorist attacks because the intel gathered allowed the USA to remove the conditions that would have allowed an attack to be planned in the first place. Ideally, that's how it would happen, just like it's better for an organizations IT department to proactively prevent networking problems than trying to mitigate issu…

These are similar kinds of non-falsifiable claims that many authoritarian or the like use. * The stock is down 25% this year with our $100M/yr CEO, but think of how bad it would have been without them * We need tough on crime policies because unreported crimes are on the rise * Tough on crime policies deterred all the decline in crimerate * The king is good because we didnt get invaded since he sat on the throne

There's no need to qualify that with "many authoritarian or the like use". There's no way to know whether or not PRISM has had any impact. Even if the program were to stop today, if everything remained the same, you could still argue that the effects of the program were so great that they've essentially collapsed the US-targeted terrorist attack industry, possibly forever.

The only real discussion that can take place is whether or not the potential safety afforded by the surveillance is worth the real erosion of freedoms. Those in favor of the surveillance are winning that discussion where it matters, whether its through emotional appeal, fearmongering, corruption or whatever. Its a totally opinionated case at this point, which even the ballot box wouldn't help as you'd just be shifting the onus of persuasion from the military leaders to the American people, who definitely don't know enough of what's happening overseas to make a reasonably informed decision.

Its the most complex issue voters would be straddled with, everything pales in comparison.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#213

Post by ShamelessC »

djsumdog wrote: post #190
ShamelessC wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have a response for you because you're probably dug in, but anyone reading this please consider that it's riddled with misinformation.

Could you consider maybe you're believing the misinformation? I never finished my video on Portland, but I do have one up on CHAZ, and I use to live and have friends in that area. I suggest you watch it: https://battlepenguin.video/videos/watch/9f81cd38-3ee9-4f26-...

Sorry but I don't think engaging with you will result in the interesting conversation that HN strives to achieve. I'm not trying to dismiss you outright, and I'm sure there are a few incidents that match your theories but that you are extrapolating to a trend that doesn't exist but has been reinforced by Fox News etc.

Anyway, best of luck. Thanks for being civil.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#214

Post by hashtagmarkup »

jagged-chisel wrote: post #4

You'd think if it had stopped any attacks, the program's proponents would be shouting it from the rooftops. But no- nothing. Not even attempts to lie ("oh, we stopped several attacks, but we can't tell you anything about them...") PRISM is a phenomenal waste of trust and money.

> Not even attempts to lie ("oh, we stopped several attacks, but we can't tell you anything about them...")

What if that wasn't a lie? If they truly couldn't tell you "anything" about them, they couldn't even acknowledge they existed. Whether or not a government should be allowed to keep such secrets is another matter.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#215

Post by textgel »

minerjoe wrote: post #202
textgel wrote: post #110

But we were told it would save lives and was for saving the world? That means it's completely impossible for such things to be a lie doesn't it? As long as you say something is for saving the world or doing good and accuse all others who might raise questions about it of being terrorists/communists/racists/nazis etc it simply has to be true doesn't it? I mean as long as someone just says something is to save lives or…

Hasn't it always been this way? The emperor has been naked for a very long time but most people seem to care just enough to attack the messengers.

I've been having this concerning feeling lately that we are in fact getting the leaders we deserve :(

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#216

Post by jariel »

orthecreedence wrote: post #206
jariel wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a shoe bomber who almost took down an airplane. [1] Shoes, when they are not inspected, are rational places for people to hide explosives. While it may or may not be a 'valid' tool, it's not rational to say it's 'pointless' when it's literally a known - and used - vector of attack. It's not 'pointless' - the question is, 'is it a good policy given the likelihood of attack, the effectiveness of 'shoes throug…

It is pointless. It's stupidly pointless. Shove the bomb up your ass, they can't check in there. "But the scanner..." Ok, so opt out and do the pat down. I opt out every time. The TSA is completely hairbrained. They don't proactively think of anything, they only react to stuff that has already happened. Always one step behind. So useful.

If it's pointless, then so is putting your bags through security, and by extension of some of your comments 'all airline security pointless'. You must have some amazing deep insights that the rest of the world does not.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#217

Post by slg »

Grimm1 wrote: post #201
slg wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean in tangible and concrete terms? How has my life been made worse by these laws? You need to explain that because these abstract concepts don't seem to motivate people to action.

Your life is worse because the government is openly antagonist towards the populace it was created to serve. Even if it doesn't effect you now all you need to do is look at historical examples from other nations going down the same path. There's a reason the poem "First they came ..." exists and it's a direct counter point to the argument you're making. Otherwise I don't know what you want here, historically the mass…

>Your life is worse because the government is openly antagonist towards the populace it was created to serve.

What does this mean in relation to the debate about NSA spying? How is the NSA antagonizing me? What is one example of a material impact on my life?

>Even if it doesn't effect you now all you need to do is look at historical examples from other nations going down the same path. There's a reason the poem "First they came ..." exists and it's a direct counter point to the argument you're making.

This is getting into slippery slopes and hypotheticals that don't seem to motivate anyone and they are the exact arguments that are used in defense of this spying. If we demand examples of the safety this spying supposedly provides, we need examples of the freedom this spying destroys.

>Otherwise I don't know what you want here, historically the masses mostly don't do anything until they start starving...

I am looking for anything that will motivate people to political action. It doesn't need to motivate people to overthrow the government. A simple here is why you real life is worse so vote for this candidate, volunteer with organization, donate to this cause, etc.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#218

Post by maerF0x0 »

michannne wrote: post #212
maerF0x0 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are similar kinds of non-falsifiable claims that many authoritarian or the like use. * The stock is down 25% this year with our $100M/yr CEO, but think of how bad it would have been without them * We need tough on crime policies because unreported crimes are on the rise * Tough on crime policies deterred all the decline in crimerate * The king is good because we didnt get invaded since he sat on the throne

There's no need to qualify that with "many authoritarian or the like use". There's no way to know whether or not PRISM has had any impact. Even if the program were to stop today, if everything remained the same, you could still argue that the effects of the program were so great that they've essentially collapsed the US-targeted terrorist attack industry, possibly forever. The only real discussion that can take place…

> Its the most complex issue voters would be straddled with

Which is unfortunate because the point of representation is to remove much of that onus from voters. If your representation just becomes a selfish risk factor, may as well do direct democracy.

It's too bad there isn't something like what lawyers, doctors, or fiduciaries must adhere to but for politicians.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#219

Post by 36373644664 »

ianbutler wrote: post #5

No one should be surprised by this. This program was simply another extension of the US's march towards authoritarianism. Much like the patriot act and our secret warrants, founded on a dubious premise that over the last 20 years have largely borne no fruit in terms of protecting our freedoms and safety but have instead eroded them. This is a system designed to protect the larger system from any civs who may be getti…

I say good, if anything I want this funded even more. I watched a bunch of BLM protestors tear apart my downtown while local politicians held back the police because they were scared of looking racist. I want federal power expanded until I live in a country that doesn't tolerate arson and murder again. People had their chance to show the merits of an unmonitored society, I got a neighborhood full of businesses with boarded up windows because of it.

Re: PRISM – NSA surveillance program did not prevent a single terrorist attack

#220

Post by orthecreedence »

jariel wrote: post #216
orthecreedence wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is pointless. It's stupidly pointless. Shove the bomb up your ass, they can't check in there. "But the scanner..." Ok, so opt out and do the pat down. I opt out every time. The TSA is completely hairbrained. They don't proactively think of anything, they only react to stuff that has already happened. Always one step behind. So useful.

If it's pointless, then so is putting your bags through security, and by extension of some of your comments 'all airline security pointless'. You must have some amazing deep insights that the rest of the world does not.

Your bags get scanned. The inside of your asshole doesn't. A bomb that fits in your shoe will fit in your ass. That's my amazingly deep insight.
Post reply on HN