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

NSA Owns Everything (2015)

blog.thinkst.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 265 posts

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#241

Post by ColanR »

jacquesm wrote: post #239
ColanR wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're the one missing the point, which is that you're misusing the term 'conspiracy theory'. The NSA engaged in a conspiracy, which was to "hoover up everything in sight". There was a theory (which was largely dismissed) that the NSA was in fact doing this. It was therefore a conspiracy theory that the NSA was doing what it was doing. That is the point: please use the phrase correctly.

If I combine apples and sauce I don't necessarily get applesauce. It is a clever linguistic trick but you are not helping by making such a disingenuous argument. Juxtaposition of terms in frequently used combinations can have a different meaning than terms used separately.

I'm not making a disingenuous argument, I'm saying exactly the same thing that most of the people replying to your original post are saying.

You've taken the phrase and made up a new definition for it. I'm saying that the phrase already has a definite meaning. Feel free to make up your own phrase though...so long as it's unique.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#242

Post by AnthonyMouse »

kubanczyk wrote: post #183
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your individualism leads not to "freedom" but to accountants who help companies dodge (not avoid) tax, to politicians who don't speak up because it will damage their career, to bankers who extend credit when they know it's unsustainable in pursuit of their bonus, to news anchors who hold their tongue to avoid upsetting sponsors, on and on. Every one of your complaints is a criticism of institutional incentives and…

You seem to be in a violent agreement with parent. What parent calls "[flawed] culture", you call "layers of indirection between the principals and the agents". The number of these layers is a vital characteristic of the business culture, and you cannot just wish them away and claim victory. Have an idea for a system that will work with as many people but less layers - please do tell about it (and about its relation…

One of the biggest reasons that the economy has transitioned to such enormous corporations is that regulatory compliance burdens are a ratchet. Every year new laws are passed but the old laws are not repealed, so every year the minimum size of an entity that can comply with all of the rules increases. We've also seen, on the other side, lax antitrust enforcement as large corporations regularly buy out their competitors and use vertical integration and vendor lock-in to constrain upstarts.

That isn't a cultural problem at all, it's a regulatory problem. We need the rules to be easier on smaller entities and harder on larger ones. So that more of the decisions actually are in the hands of individuals rather than large institutions, and individuals are once again given the authority to choose to do the right thing instead of being constrained by perverse institutional incentives.

More to the point, the parent's complaint was about the culture of individualism in particular, not some generic cultural problems that you can shoehorn any arbitrary failing into just because it's possible to describe anything systemic as cultural.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#243

Post by arminiusreturns »

minerjoe wrote: post #169
arminiusreturns wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm increasingly close to doing an AMA where I just let HN ask me any conspiracy related question right before I burn this account... I figure it would get lost in the sauce though... Any specifics you are most curious about?

I'd hope HN wouldn't clean it out... How dire? Where to look? Timeline? I wish there was a wiki build on a trust network where I could control the weights.

How dire: This is very subjective. I have moments of deep dispair, and then I see glimmers of hope. I don't know what to tell you other than it seems like the ratchet is turning against freedom more than for it.

Where to look: I suggest starting with one term, though often overly applied to just terrorsts, and that is "threat finance".

Timeline: Minimum is ~120 years or so.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#244

Post by jacquesm »

mellow2020 wrote: post #240
jacquesm wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great quote and great person. And how her life ended is a good indicator that what I wrote isn't nonsense. But I actually meant it in a more present day technical and less all-out fascism way. Still, the principles remain the same.

She was arguably a bit careless in the moment that lead to them getting caught, and since pushing that stack of fliers wasn't really useful for their greater aims, that kinda proves your point as well. The idea of the White Rose not getting caught, so rather shortly before the end of the Nazi regime, and Sophie Scholl writing more letters, or even books, is fit to make me cry with homesickness. It's an unspeakable lo…

All fair. And I feel much the same way. Pick your battles, know when to expose and when to stay anonymous. Evaluate everything in a situation like that from a risk perspective and make sure that you indeed engage those risks that will allow you to look back and say you don't regret any of it.

This can be very hard.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#245

Post by nyolfen »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #175
ctack wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Him being there makes Russia look more tolerant than his home country.. Which is already a Pretty big bonus.

His continued reliance on Russia gives them more than enough power to force his hand into something he may not otherwise do.

what might he do? write another book? he doesn't have any power besides moral authority and he cannot travel internationally

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#246

Post by nyolfen »

JackFr wrote: post #202
boomboomsubban wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The facts absolutely do not support either interpretation. The only reason Snowden is in Russia is that the US canceled his passport.

They revoked his passport because he's a fugitive, formally charged with two counts of violating the Espionage Act. I think the reason he's Russia is that they don't have an extradition treaty with the United States.

he was stuck in the moscow airport (for over a month) after his passport was cancelled en route to equador and was eventually granted asylum

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#247

Post by nyolfen »

michael1999 wrote: post #138
jacquesm wrote: post #104

The difference between a theory, a conspiracy theory and the truth are best described by varying levels of evidence. A theory is not currently accepted as the truth, but it might be the truth. A conspiracy theory is something that has been proven to be untrue, but people still believe it and pass it on. The truth is the internally consistent and fact supported state of the world as it was and as it is. There were man…

While your usage is common, it is completely wrong. A "conspiracy theory" is simply a "theory" that posits a "conspiracy". What you describe is the opposite - when the evidence is so overwhelming, that the secrecy of the conspiracy can no longer be maintained. Room 641A was discovered in 2006 FFS. The reluctance of the press to acknowledge it has much more to do with propaganda, confused nationalism, concentrated pre…

the idea that conspiracy theories are spurious is a result of mentally ill people irrationally latching onto them and far predates cointelpro. that said, it is trivially true that the world is run by conspiracies -- conspiracy is simply a label for private agreement for coordinated action, which carries negative emotional valence as a result of that association.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#248

Post by nyolfen »

BickNowstrom wrote: post #184
TheMblabla wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Then instead of facing justice (and there are whistleblower protections for doing the right thing) I think it was pretty well understood at the time that the Obama administration could not be dependant on upholding whistle blower protections.

Snowden could have exposed this too.

the media was already filled with stories about the obama administration's record number of whistleblower prosecutions in 2013. there was nothing to 'expose'.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#249

Post by nyolfen »

justanotheranon wrote: post #216
exikyut wrote: post #40

An observation: The exfiltration protocol described in the "misdirection" section has "Dated: 24 Feb 98" in the bottom right corner. That it's being regarded as reasonably novel is a good measure of just how broken the collective security discussion is. Just as broken as the PGP situation, thinking about it; in which case everything is operating as intended... moving on...

nice catch. that date of 1998 is a Big Fucking Deal. the Patriot Act was passed in October 2001. the narrative we have all be lead to believe is that NSA only ramped up domestic mass surveillance in 2001. but why would NSA have a protocol for exfil across passive sensor hops in 1998? passive exfil only works if you have sensors mirroring backbone traffic at all the biggest upstream meetme rooms. but NSA supposedly wa…

>passive exfil only works if you have sensors mirroring backbone traffic at all the biggest upstream meetme rooms. but NSA supposedly wasnt legally allowed to install Boeing Narus mirror routers at ISPs until 2001.

you're assuming this is intended for american infrastructure. they were probably violating the civil rights of americans before 9/11, but this is an inconclusive piece of evidence.

Re: NSA Owns Everything (2015)

#250

Post by boomboomsubban »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #174
boomboomsubban wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What possible use could Snowden provide Russia?

I'm not certain at this point. His skills? His voice/platform? for example if he were to come forth and say something plausible but false many would just believe him.

He has a fairly small number of supporters, very few of which hold any power, and are some of the most aware of government interference. Russia will be fine with what they (presumably) already coerce him to do, pay taxes.

And as for why your post was down voted, you stated that a whistleblower should lose their career for their uncovering the truth.

Post reply on HN