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

221–230 of 243 posts

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

#221

Post by int_19h »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #86
xyst wrote: post #84

This was going to pass regardless of the outcry. The unnecessary drama of stalling until after midnight is all theater. We need a significant change in leadership for all those that voted this in. If I recall correctly, this bill also includes an expansion of surveillance performed by federal law enforcement agencies and NSA.

> This was going to pass regardless of the outcry There was a real moment in the House where it might not have, at least without a warrant requirement. My Congresswoman was one of the attack dogs on this issue. She thought they would get an outpouring of support. She didn’t. The call sheets registered basically zero calls in support, and several lobbying against. So she caved. (This is a pattern I saw play out in New…

I think at this point most people just assume that this kind of stuff is a foregone conclusion, because they pass it every time without much of a fight (when you compare it to other matters) despite it being strongly disliked across the political spectrum.

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

#222

Post by int_19h »

_8j50 wrote: post #135

This is FISA right? The target is foreign individuals and entities? It seems by default HN is against it, can someone articulate why? There are elected representatives of the people providing oversight and it seems to have strong bipartisan support. Is there a popular line of thought with tech people that is suggesting foreign surveillance isn't neccesary? Or should some provision of the law be updated to protect ame…

There's so much information online on why and how FISA is bad, this is honestly hard to take as a serious question asked in good faith. But assuming that it is, start with the Wikipedia article for FISA and go from there; it has plenty food for thought, and links to more.

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

#223

Post by FezzikTheGiant »

user_7832 wrote: post #114
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This was going to pass regardless of the outcry There was a real moment in the House where it might not have, at least without a warrant requirement. My Congresswoman was one of the attack dogs on this issue. She thought they would get an outpouring of support. She didn’t. The call sheets registered basically zero calls in support, and several lobbying against. So she caved. (This is a pattern I saw play out in New…

> There was a real moment in the House where it might not have, at least without a warrant requirement. My Congresswoman was one of the attack dogs on this issue. She thought they would get an outpouring of support. She didn’t. The call sheets registered basically zero calls in support, and several lobbying against. So she caved. (This is a pattern I saw play out in New York years earlier in another privacy battle.)…

Hey, I replied to your comment about building an open source version of Aqua Voice. Emailed you about it too. Let me know your thoughts.

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

#224

Post by vinay427 »

int_19h wrote: post #204
beau_g wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

There are a variety of differences between having representatives vote with your interests and voting yourself, such as practicality, time expenditure and access to advising and expertise, etc. That’s perhaps why many direct democracy systems (California, Switzerland, etc.) combine the two with direct democracy used for relatively few decisions.

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

#225

Post by temporarely »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #98
hypothesis wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you really asking if being unconstitutional is worse than being codified and legal? I’m not the one here cheering for demise of constitutional republic…

Neither am I cheering for it. Don't put words in my mouth. I am seriously asking whether being flat-out unconstitutional is worse than building a (legislated and approved) backdoor around the constitution, yes. I mean, better than both would be to just follow the constitution , but that wasn't the question.

Well, you are asserting a binary choice here which is questionable and implies that unless we grant spooks legal OK for some violations of the constitution they are free to ignore the entire matter. If a government agency is acting in violation of constitution then there are legal and constitutional remedies to make sure the said agencies act according to the law of the land.

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

#226

Post by octopoc »

Cacti wrote: post #182
pessimizer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parties only have "disputes" on a short list of wedge issues, and either side winning on those removes the that issue as a cudgel that can motivate their base. If you look at their donors, you'll see the lines. The people who voted for it make money from the defense and intelligence industries, and the people who didn't, don't. Voting for for something majorities of the voters of both parties are against is expen…

I mean, except that many people can’t get either an abortion or IVF. This affects people’s entires lives, it’s not “pretend” unless you are unaffected.

My hot take is that IVF enables infertile couples to propagate their genes, which is bad in an evolutionary sense since it increases the population and decreases the fertility of the gene pool. Another way of putting it is, it increases the odds of people falling in love with someone who is infertile.

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

#227

Post by 93po »

deviantbit wrote: post #196
kdasme wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can relate to your opinions. Still, I’m going to mentions this: please, vote. Otherwise you are a part of the problem.

We were once called liberals. We believed in unalienable rights. Guess what, my liberties are gone, people are dying in wars, and I'm not happy. If you wanted to be part of this experiment we call the United States, you could gain citizenship by learning and understanding what liberalism meant. Not anymore, just cross the border, we will give you a debit card, and just wait, because we're going to make you a citizen,…

I will rebut by saying blank-and-white unnuanced opinions ("you all disgust me") is definitely part of the problem with political discourse, and it might be worth examining if you truly value the things you seem to

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

#228

Post by enlightenedfool »

The surveillance state is bound to happen anyway. There’s just no path for one country to be an ideal democracy with a world full of autocracies. The citizens of US had a good run while it lasted. They did fight well and was worth a try.

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

#229

Post by jrochkind1 »

twoodfin wrote: post #160
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Our Constitution gives powers to the executive that cannot be usurped or overruled by Congress, notably in this context to conduct the national defense and foreign affairs. This is not true. The constitution explicitly reserves the power to declare war or enact treaties to Congress. Neither the military nor federal law enforcement can spend a single dime, or even exist, without Congressional approval. If the budget…

Yes, Congress can defund the FBI, NSA, DIA, … or simply forbid them from spending money on foreign surveillance. What they can’t do is allow them to spend money on foreign surveillance, but only if an Article 3 court gives them a warrant.

That interpretation of the constitutional grant of foreign affairs and defense to the executive forbididng requiring a warrant is not obvious to me.

Do you have any case law to cite for this, or it's just your favored argument that you'd hope a court would agree with? You are talking about it like it's settled law. Cites?

Also, note that the cases you are talking about to which the law applies have someone in the USA involved in the wiretapped conversation as well. It wouldn't shock me if the courts -- although probably not the current supreme court, but you never know -- simply said it required a warrant constitutionally at some point in the future. It's certainly not obvious that you can wiretap an American without a warrant as long as they are talking to someone overseas.

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

#230

Post by golergka »

int_19h wrote: post #218
golergka wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of these points are just common sense. Does America really need a major party that's insane on one of the important issues?

I guarantee you that whichever points you think are "common sense" on this list, there's millions of people in this country who will disagree with you on every single one of them.

There are also millions of people who think that Earth's flat.
Post reply on HN