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

We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

outsidethebeltway.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 46 posts

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#31

Post by joering2 »

saalweachter wrote: post #29
joering2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously? Officials needs to follow up every time a company is pissed at the employee and they fire employee and that's not enough for them so lets report him/her on some "suspicious activity"? I am not implying this happened here, but we don't know what's the story behind this guy being fired. There are remote chances that the company tried to be vicious with him after letting him go. It happened many times before.…

I think this was a mostly appropriate response. In my opinion (and it wouldn't surprise me if this was the opinion of the law) police are obligated to follow up on more or less ever tip. I think if it had just been a couple of cops instead of the reported multitude, that would have been better. The problem is people making bad tips to the police; if the intent is malicious, they should be prosecuted.

Exactly my point so what I want to see from Suffolk is their follow up and thorough investigation into said computer of fired employees and some hard proof of what they searched for.

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#32

Post by mpyne »

thesis wrote: post #14

Ok, so, what IS the point of PRISM (or any other service monitoring Google or whatever company) then? Do you have to search something like "I want to _____ (insert terrorist action) on _______ (insert date) at ______ (location)" in order to actually trigger something?

The point of PRISM is that if you already have a person of interest in mind, you can data mine within that persons's communications, likes, pages read, etc. to determine if he/she is actually being 'radicalized', or if they have connections to other people who are 'radicalized'.

From there you can determine "who's who in the zoo" of extremist cells for use in other intelligence collection schemes. E.g. if someone receives messages from known intermediaries of an AQ bomb makers and then 'drops off the grid' it may be a good time to step up to video/satellite surveillance.

Simply doing random searches isn't tracked by PRISM (though it might be from systems that use wiretap features). But even random searches like those are likely to simply be filtered out outright by the NSA, they are simply too common (even without pranksters who run the search thinking they're Sticking It to The Man) to be worth following up individually.

Even the NSA doesn't have infinite resources after all, and they are still dependent on other agencies for follow-up activities, and those other agencies are certainly more resource-constrained than NSA is.

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#33

Post by mpyne »

cobrausn wrote: post #20
mpyne wrote: post #7

I read this on my phone last night and was convinced it would have already been submitted to HN by the time I got to work. Sad to say I was wrong, but I'm glad someone mentioned it. Here we have another win for tptacek in the "common sense and reason" column.

Not completely. He was quick to link alternate explanations that made equally little sense but didn't make it the result of NSA data mining - such as a picture of fireworks posted on facebook causing it all, despite the fact they showed up asking about pressure cookers. He was fighting a wave of people who were 100% certain it was the NSA, but still... 'Common Sense and Reason' belongs only to those who read the stor…

Well that's the point, there were many alternative explanations of at least as much sense (however little sense they actually made) but people fixated on the one alternative explanation that conformed to their worldview.

I also didn't comment on the thread as I didn't know what exactly was going on. But I was very sure that it would be something along the lines of what tptacek himself predicted so why say anything anyways? I just upvoted and moved on.

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#34

Post by grimtrigger »

ollysb wrote: post #9

There can't be many people that have at least searched for the anarchists cookbook at some time. The notion that the authorities now think it's ok to turn up at my doorstep for that is incredible. The language used is pretty chilling as well, apparently just searching for "bomb" is now an "incident". I'm also aware that I now have a little voice questioning whether or not I should post this comment...

> The notion that the authorities now think it's ok to turn up at my doorstep for that is incredible.

But this has always been true. If your neighbor gets robbed, you're going to get a knock on your door to see if you saw anything. They could stop by and ask for a glass of lemonade. Who cares? You seem to imply that there was some intimidation, but I read nothing to indicate that.

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#35

Post by mpyne »

mladenkovacevic wrote: post #27
gohrt wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we don't mock the hoaxers, we run the risk of genuine stories getting politely ignored along with the hoaxes. Remember the story of the Child Who Cried Wolf.

It wasn't a hoax. She genuinely believed the visit resulted from her search. Why must we either mock or promote it. Just look into it, settle what the truth is, and move on.

What if the child who cried wolf genuinely believed he'd seen wolves?

It's the same result in the end (no one believes you when it's most important), which is why it's necessary not to jump to conclusions that are not supported by evidence, especially conclusions that naturally mesh with your worldview.

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#36

Post by ollysb »

Karunamon wrote: post #26
joering2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously? Officials needs to follow up every time a company is pissed at the employee and they fire employee and that's not enough for them so lets report him/her on some "suspicious activity"? I am not implying this happened here, but we don't know what's the story behind this guy being fired. There are remote chances that the company tried to be vicious with him after letting him go. It happened many times before.…

Fine, but as law enforcement, if you receive a tip that someone is acting suspiciously, it is downright irresponsible for that tip to not be followed up on. Sounds like the problem here was the employer, not the cops. Heck, it sounds like they didn't even have a warrant to search - they asked if they could come in and the person said yes.

I think the point is that this didn't used to constitute suspicious activity. The range of suspicious activity is growing and growing. Something that no one has really talked about yet is the effect recent revelations have had on the overton window (the narrow range of opinions the public will accept)[1]. Having such extreme behaviour exhibited by governments has the effect of making previously questionable policies seem more moderate and acceptable.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#37

Post by mladenkovacevic »

mpyne wrote: post #35
mladenkovacevic wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't a hoax. She genuinely believed the visit resulted from her search. Why must we either mock or promote it. Just look into it, settle what the truth is, and move on.

What if the child who cried wolf genuinely believed he'd seen wolves? It's the same result in the end (no one believes you when it's most important), which is why it's necessary not to jump to conclusions that are not supported by evidence, especially conclusions that naturally mesh with your worldview.

"Jumping to conclusions" is a funny phrase to use. It seems to imply that there were actual conclusions being drawn out of the initial suspicions, instead of a "Hey let's look into this thing".

Now what if the child had cried wolf for the very first time and some of the villagers were all like "Shuttup you stupid kid, who do you think you are that the wolf would wanna eat you anyways! OOH LOOK THE WOLF IS GONNA EAT MEEEHHH! Stupid idiot."

Then once it was determined that there was no wolf, those same villagers proceeded to deride and mock the few people who actually tried to shine a light into the forest to see if there was a wolf in the first place: "I can't believe you fell for that you stupid idiots. Told ya there was no wolf!"

In conclusion, let's not allow our relationships and decisions rely TOO much on children's tales.

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#38

Post by jaredmcateer »

ollysb wrote: post #36
Karunamon wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fine, but as law enforcement, if you receive a tip that someone is acting suspiciously, it is downright irresponsible for that tip to not be followed up on. Sounds like the problem here was the employer, not the cops. Heck, it sounds like they didn't even have a warrant to search - they asked if they could come in and the person said yes.

I think the point is that this didn't used to constitute suspicious activity. The range of suspicious activity is growing and growing. Something that no one has really talked about yet is the effect recent revelations have had on the overton window (the narrow range of opinions the public will accept)[1]. Having such extreme behaviour exhibited by governments has the effect of making previously questionable policies…

We don't know the whole story, when the police interviewed the employers they may have described the employee as unstable or disgruntled which, with the internet searches, warranted a visit to the former employee. This story reminds me of a story by Adam Savage [1] where he was ordering a movie prop and received a call by the FBI and it was quickly dismissed but the agent still had to follow up the tip.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7I0...

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#39

Post by Karunamon »

ollysb wrote: post #36
Karunamon wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fine, but as law enforcement, if you receive a tip that someone is acting suspiciously, it is downright irresponsible for that tip to not be followed up on. Sounds like the problem here was the employer, not the cops. Heck, it sounds like they didn't even have a warrant to search - they asked if they could come in and the person said yes.

I think the point is that this didn't used to constitute suspicious activity. The range of suspicious activity is growing and growing. Something that no one has really talked about yet is the effect recent revelations have had on the overton window (the narrow range of opinions the public will accept)[1]. Having such extreme behaviour exhibited by governments has the effect of making previously questionable policies…

I'm not so sure, really. If a reasonably well respected employer phoned in a tip about an employee looking up what they thought were terrorist-y things on a work computer (we'll never know what they actually phoned in, I'd love to know though!), I'd have expected that to generate an investigation for quite some time now.

The worst I can possibly think of to accuse the cops with in this case is showing up with too many people. One or two uniformed officers was all that was necessary.

Re: We Can All Resume Googling Backpacks And Pressure Cookers

#40

Post by tptacek »

cobrausn wrote: post #20
mpyne wrote: post #7

I read this on my phone last night and was convinced it would have already been submitted to HN by the time I got to work. Sad to say I was wrong, but I'm glad someone mentioned it. Here we have another win for tptacek in the "common sense and reason" column.

Not completely. He was quick to link alternate explanations that made equally little sense but didn't make it the result of NSA data mining - such as a picture of fireworks posted on facebook causing it all, despite the fact they showed up asking about pressure cookers. He was fighting a wave of people who were 100% certain it was the NSA, but still... 'Common Sense and Reason' belongs only to those who read the stor…

Huh? I linked to Declan McCullagh's alternate (and more plausible) possibility. Nobody, including McCullagh, claimed to know for sure that that alternative was what happened. It's telling that you'd continue to make that argument --- noting that I was "quick to link to it" --- despite repeated clarifications from both me and McCullagh about the point of the link.
Post reply on HN