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

Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

animalnewyork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 374 posts

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#261

Post by atlantic »

dragontamer wrote: post #248
adamnemecek wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Snowden is the first guy I'm aware of who fled to China (and later, to Russia) to protect his own free speech. Color me a little bit suspicious of him. There aren't that many countries who would not release Snowden to the US.

Yes there are. Ecuador has proven itself reliable with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. It proved itself reliable _long_ before Snowden decided to pull Chinese-specific information from the US Spy agency, fly to China, release Chinese information and (probably) beg to stay. Instead of going to a reliable country like Ecuador, he went to China. Snowden isn't a dumb guy either, he was clearly keeping up with the news.…

Snowden would not have been safe from kidnapping in South America. Once his location was known, he would have been as good as captured. Only Russia or China have the kind of military might that could deter the US from attempting to take him back by force.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#262

Post by dragontamer »

dreamfactory2 wrote: post #253
dragontamer wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. Part of Snowden's treasure trove was him revealing to China about US hacking into Chinese Universities. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2013/06/22/u-s-hacked-... Snowden explicitly collected how the US was spying on China, went to China, and then "publicly" gave out those details. I think he was expecting the Chinese Government to take him in and protect him after the big reveal. For whatever reason…

It's a matter of record that the US prevented him travelling after he got to Hong Kong. Your original comment claims he was a double agent for China and Russia. Now you speculate that he was a failed wannabe Chinese asset. Wild speculations aside, you might want to consider the revelations on their own merits rather than a ham-fisted smear against the source. The fact remains that they have been confirmed as true and…

> Wild speculations aside, you might want to consider the revelations on their own merits rather than a ham-fisted smear against the source. The fact remains that they have been confirmed as true and are therefore not some kind of black propaganda.

Fair enough. I'm more interested in the political implications anyway.

So what do we do about Swatters? Metadata collection seems to be the only useful tool against them.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#263

Post by Semiapies »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #203
cdbajorin wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similarly: "I've never seen a plausible argument supporting what Snowden did that boiled down to more than [my morality is more important than your laws]. At most, you get a side order of [George Orwell] mumble mumble [he wouldn't have been able to accomplish anything if he tried to do it differently] mumble mumble [The government was so evil towards him that he fled to RUSSIA!]". These aren't arguments that people a…

Perhaps you could be one of those better conversational partners instead of implying that he's lying? Also I think you have something to learn about human nature if you don't believe people will bluff on a political opinion without being able to give a coherent argument.

An interesting detail is that while I was complaining about a non-argument, he at least advanced an actual argument while trying to parody it.

And you know what? Where "my morality" is our Constitution and the principles of a constrained government that serves (and is accountable to) the people, then yes, that trumps the Hell out of laws designed to allow what's going on and keep it secret from us.

Given the context of the original memorial that the bust was added to, I wish I could say I was still surprised at people like cdbajorin.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#264

Post by tedunangst »

Semiapies wrote: post #34
toomuchtodo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NSA went too far by violating the constitutional rights of US citizens, both on US soil and abroad. I'm unaware of how you can go "too far" when directing sunlight on corruption and illegal activities perpetrated by an arm of your own government.

I've never seen a plausible argument what Snowden did that went "too far" that boiled down to more than "he did anything at all". At most, you get a side order of " mumble mumble national security mumble mumble he should have done it 'differently' mumble mumble he went to RUSSIA for sanctuary! mumble mumble

Snowden had, perhaps, a duty to disclose that the NSA was spying on Americans. He went too far by also revealing the list of targetted embassies.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#265

Post by rosser »

dragontamer wrote: post #243
Dylan16807 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, you have a point, but that's about proxies, not normal calls between two people. If the police can't get access to limited phone metadata with oversight, the solution is to give them a way to get limited phone metadata with oversight, not to give them access to all the phone metadata. >Now if you don't like it, that's fine. But know that you're moving from the status-quo. This is how the government has operated…

> If the police can't get access to limited phone metadata with oversight, the solution is to give them a way to get limited phone metadata with oversight, not to give them access to all the phone metadata. Did you read the business records provision? https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1861 Read it again. It requires the agencies to check off with a Judge . It already _has_ oversight built into it. If somethi…

If you're seriously suggesting that FISA is some kind of check on the use/abuse of the government's surveillance powers, you're either a shill, or deluded.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#266

Post by Dylan16807 »

dragontamer wrote: post #258
Dylan16807 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I have heard, requests even by normal law enforcement are often for unreasonable amounts of data, and data is held onto and used for things other than the case they were requested for without oversight. In addition, the NSA collects data before asking for permission. And I am doubtful that their oversight is effective . But I don't want to argue about it for hours. I just want less metadata to be collected.…

> In addition, the NSA collects data before asking for permission. And I am doubtful that their oversight is effective. Snowden's first revealed document was the court order where the NSA / FBI was asking for permission from the FISA courts. Now I don't think you've even read Snowden's docs. > But I don't want to argue about it for hours. Fair enough. I hope that in our short discussion, you learned how things actual…

>Snowden's first revealed document

Okay I'll be more specific. Without specific permission pertaining to a specific case, they collect whatever they feel like to sort out later. I don't like that.

>I hope that in our short discussion, you learned how things actually work.

I learned there has been more access to metadata than I previously thought, but my main worry is and has been the exploding amount of metadata and analysis, which I do have a pretty good grasp on.

Thanks for the discussion.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#267

Post by tedunangst »

fatterday wrote: post #257
tedunangst wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't the American way involve a vote or some other involvement of the democratic process at some point? Is America now all about individuals just doing whatever they want, and if somebody doesn't like it, too bad?

Oh you mean like when we separated from Britain by asking them to come down and have a nice little vote on it? Or when MLK asked all of the south to politely, democratically fix the whole racism thing. Sometimes protest has to break the rules. Because protest.

As I recall from my history classes, they did ask before breaking the rules.

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#268

Post by cryoshon »

rhino369 wrote: post #252
cryoshon wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can, should, do, and must continue to have a strong and overriding sense of personal morality when dealing with government-- "just following orders" is not, has not, should not, and will never be an acceptable response to government wrongdoing as committed by the people who make up the organs of the government. Without Snowden, Ellsberg, Drake, Binney, Manning, and the other leakers, we would still be completely a…

There is a vast difference between not accepting "just following orders" as a defense for crimes against humanity and allowing people to spill state secrets when it is against their politics. If Snowden didn't want to be involved in the NSA, he could have quit. But like I said, you can't let individuals determine government policy by themselves. Otherwise we'd have no ability to keep information classified. You can c…

I see that your heart is set on being stuck to upholding the "laws" that make up our system of government while steadfastly ignoring the entire "laws are made for the benefit of the powerful and subject to change based upon convenience" reality we live in. To reiterate, this isn't some small-time debate about whether "leaking confidential files" is "legal" or not, but rather a debate about whether the public has the right to know what the government is doing. The public does, in fact, have a right to know what the government is doing in their name. Snowden and whistleblowers need to exist in the current configuration of the government, which favors secrecy because they fear the public's reaction to their bad deeds.

One last try: Snowden leaked information which tells us that the NSA effectively has the power to blackmail anyone in the US or elsewhere. Via whistleblower Russ Tice we know that the NSA was spying on Obama starting from 2004. Anything Obama has done, the NSA has known. Doesn't that seem like it creates an avenue for major abuse?

This sure seems like a backdoor to democracy which would justify letting the members of the democracy know, right? Or is it still more important to maintain confidential materials when the materials show that democracy has a workaround via surveillance?

Re: Massive, Illicit Bust of Edward Snowden Stuck to a War Monument in Brooklyn

#270

Post by cryoshon »

Semiapies wrote: post #34
toomuchtodo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NSA went too far by violating the constitutional rights of US citizens, both on US soil and abroad. I'm unaware of how you can go "too far" when directing sunlight on corruption and illegal activities perpetrated by an arm of your own government.

I've never seen a plausible argument what Snowden did that went "too far" that boiled down to more than "he did anything at all". At most, you get a side order of " mumble mumble national security mumble mumble he should have done it 'differently' mumble mumble he went to RUSSIA for sanctuary! mumble mumble

Agreed entirely.

People get insulted when there is information which implies the USA has done something wrong. On some level, they admit the truth, but they react against it strongly by suppressing that admission and focusing their anger on the person or people who brought it to their attention.

Post reply on HN