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

Pentagon surveilling Americans without a warrant, Senator Wyden reveals

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–265 of 265 posts

Re: Pentagon surveilling Americans without a warrant, Senator Wyden reveals

#261

Post by nnvvhh »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #129
WalterBright wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Constitution is just a piece of paper. It is powerless if people ignore it. It's the same with presidents, kings, and dictators. If people just stopped doing what they said, they become nothing. There's an incident in Soviet history where Stalin was sure they were coming to arrest and execute him. He was shaking and completely powerless. But they were just coming to affirm his power. The Arab Spring came about be…

The 2nd Amendment is always a great point in these kind of debates if any other right had half as many restrictions on it people would be on the streets. Requiring an ID to vote is viewed as completely unacceptable by many but the very same people think it's perfectly reasonable to require it for other rights.

Although to distinguish the 2nd Amendment, its the language specifically mentions firearm ownership in connection with a "well regulated militia." There are disagreements about the effect of that part of the text, but it's worth mentioning.

Re: Pentagon surveilling Americans without a warrant, Senator Wyden reveals

#263

Post by pope_meat »

jackpirate wrote: post #133
pope_meat wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's one negative thing you can now associate with mass surveillance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

The problem is that most ordinary people view that as a positive, not a negative.

Sigh.

What is the road to hell paved with?

That's right, good intentions.

See you in hell, folks, when the laws change and your perfectly legal existence up until that point becomes a problem to the state, and then the good cops will break a few little constitutional protections to build a parallel case against you...which of course, ordinary people view as a positive, not a negative.

Sometimes I think I should run away to another place that isn't turning in to a fascists police state, but then I realize ordinary scared people act predictably, so I guess I welcome our fascist overlords, hand me an arm band, let's clean up these streets of the checks notes trash.

lots of sarcasm included for free.

Re: Pentagon surveilling Americans without a warrant, Senator Wyden reveals

#264

Post by pope_meat »

treis wrote: post #130
pope_meat wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's one negative thing you can now associate with mass surveillance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

I don't see that as a clearly negative thing. At worst it's controversial and theoretically could lead to negative things. But I don't see any concrete harm to associate with that practice.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree

A justice system that contradicts itself like that can't be just.

Re: Pentagon surveilling Americans without a warrant, Senator Wyden reveals

#265

Post by SuoDuanDao »

godelski wrote: post #215
maybelsyrup wrote: post #30

The thing I still can't fathom, all these years after Bush II and then Snowden, is just how little human beings really care about mass surveillance. Yeah, the Snowden leaks made a splash, but the media cycle turned over a couple weeks later and everyone moved onto other things. It's like, if you're of a certain age, you had to read 1984 or whatever in school. You'd think "well, no one would stand for that sort of thi…

I think what confuses me most is that one side of the political isle says their major concern is big government and them taking away rights. Yet these people are the hardest to convince to use services like Signal, VPNs, or even basic privacy things like ad blockers (or pick your poison of basic privacy tools). Like if you don't want them to take your guns you should also be concerned about them spying on you. It has…

I've a theory that it might break down along 'faith in process' vs 'faith in community' - the types to hold on to their guns seem to generally imagine using them alongside a few people they trust very deeply on a personal level, while the types to care about privacy seem to imagine more that well-intentioned individuals can steer things into a better direction without ever building the sort of interpersonal trust a militia movement would require.

The vaccine question breaks down similarly, we either trust our inner circle and our own health, or our own judgement and that of the people who designed vaccines/protocols, but rarely both - it's like we orient to only a small or a large community.

Post reply on HN