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

US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 420 posts

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#321

Post by aneth4 »

kevinalexbrown wrote: post #143

I've lived under surveillance before, so I feel my perspective might be somewhat appropriate. I won't comment on the specifics (uninteresting and irrelevant, had to do with where I was living). I won't even make a statement about whether it's justified in my case or in general. I'd just ask everyone here to do one thing: Watch this, then ask yourself how you feel (if it doesn't go directly to 6:40, fastforward to it,…

Wow. He's not even a good liar. You can see all sorts of soothing behavior and micro-expressions.

Contrast that to his direct confident demeanor when he's telling evasive truths.

Clapper is the Director of National Intelligence

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#322

Post by mingmecca »

md224 wrote: post #317
Afforess wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loss of privacy is massive in comparison to the lives lost to terrorism. More people die each year due to car accidents than have lost their lives to all terrorist attacks on US Soil. If the information that is being gathered is about safety, then why isn't the government isn't creating a massive program to strictly monitor highway speeds, traffic roadways, and increase traffic safety then? Answer: The informatio…

Here's a Devil's Advocate position (not necessarily my personal beliefs, so please don't downvote based on disagreement. Just rip it to shreds instead!): The fear of losing privacy to the government is based on the fear that this increased surveillance will be used by the government to smother dissent. This is a valid fear, but has the government yet used surveillance to smother dissent? If you can find a solid examp…

On my cell phone (hi NSA!), so I can't give a full rebuttal, but start with COINTELPRO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#323

Post by mattdeboard »

EvanKelly wrote: post #175
nitrogen wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are national security assets: evidence gathered here will never be used in a drug case, or a tax evasion case. Information from intelligence programs has already been used in non-terrorism cases, like those of Petraeus and Spitzer.

I don't know about Spitzer (though he was Governor of New York), but someone holding blackmail leverage over Petraeus is certainly a matter of national security concern.

This is a ridiculous post hoc justification.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#324

Post by adventured »

mladenkovacevic wrote: post #273
Taylorious wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I laughed at how incredibly shifty the General is when he "answers."

Seriously... You'd think of all the billions of dollars that go into military training they'd be able to put up a few bucks to teach this guy how to lie a little more believably

The guy probably hasn't had to worry about such things for decades. He's an operations bureaucrat, and probably someone above him decided they could afford to burn him if the shit hit the fan (and by this point, they probably already knew some shit was heading toward the fan).

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#325

Post by [deleted] »

md224 wrote: post #317
Afforess wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loss of privacy is massive in comparison to the lives lost to terrorism. More people die each year due to car accidents than have lost their lives to all terrorist attacks on US Soil. If the information that is being gathered is about safety, then why isn't the government isn't creating a massive program to strictly monitor highway speeds, traffic roadways, and increase traffic safety then? Answer: The informatio…

Here's a Devil's Advocate position (not necessarily my personal beliefs, so please don't downvote based on disagreement. Just rip it to shreds instead!): The fear of losing privacy to the government is based on the fear that this increased surveillance will be used by the government to smother dissent. This is a valid fear, but has the government yet used surveillance to smother dissent? If you can find a solid examp…

[deleted]

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#326

Post by adventured »

frisco wrote: post #130

I think it's interesting to ask why these programs are so widely hated. These are national security assets: evidence gathered here will never be used in a drug case, or a tax evasion case. Why not? These tools exist for the bigger fish: the dozens of Soviet-era nuclear weapons believed to be missing, or the small amounts of dangerous pathogens that periodically vanish from research labs. These are what the government…

Such a long, weak argument deserves only one retort: because they have no moral right to take or erode my life or liberty.

There's no convoluted justification you could ever come up with to rationally argue otherwise.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#327

Post by sneak »

greedo wrote: post #199
sneak wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are legally required, personally and individually, to lie about the existence of these programs, or go to prison instantly. These orders are gag-ordered by default.

I doubt that Steve Jobs or Ballmer would "go to prison instantly" if they had disclosed the existence of these programs. Yes, they might have been prosecuted under statute, but they wouldn't vanish. In fact, the high visibility of Brin, Jobs, Ballmer etc would probably have been a deterrent against prosecution. Can you imagine the outrage if Jobs came out with a statement saying that the NSA was requiring that Apple…

Jobs was an elitist, knows-better-than-you prick. AFAICT he was fine with this kind of "trust us" nanny state bullshit. Apple does the same "we'll decide for you" stuff by policy as a matter of course.

We can assume that Cook, who appeared behind Obama during The State of the Union, is probably on the same page. Highly powerful people know they can't fight the tide; and truly, why should they? The normal rules could never apply to them.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#328

Post by adventured »

md224 wrote: post #317
Afforess wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loss of privacy is massive in comparison to the lives lost to terrorism. More people die each year due to car accidents than have lost their lives to all terrorist attacks on US Soil. If the information that is being gathered is about safety, then why isn't the government isn't creating a massive program to strictly monitor highway speeds, traffic roadways, and increase traffic safety then? Answer: The informatio…

Here's a Devil's Advocate position (not necessarily my personal beliefs, so please don't downvote based on disagreement. Just rip it to shreds instead!): The fear of losing privacy to the government is based on the fear that this increased surveillance will be used by the government to smother dissent. This is a valid fear, but has the government yet used surveillance to smother dissent? If you can find a solid examp…

By the time they're using these extreme powers to smother dissent, you're fucked. It's game over and your ability to speak out using the first amendment is non-existent.

The very reason why these things should never be allowed, is because the absolute protection of freedom of speech is ultimately the last safeguard against tyranny (before you get to violence anyway).

Why let the guy into my house with a gun and roll the dice on whether he intends to at some point do me harm? That's crazy. We've seen enough really malevolent politicians assume power all over the world and domestically, to know better than to take such chances. History is littered with endless examples, it's at best naive to think America can't suffer the same types of fate.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#329

Post by aneth4 »

frisco wrote: post #130

I think it's interesting to ask why these programs are so widely hated. These are national security assets: evidence gathered here will never be used in a drug case, or a tax evasion case. Why not? These tools exist for the bigger fish: the dozens of Soviet-era nuclear weapons believed to be missing, or the small amounts of dangerous pathogens that periodically vanish from research labs. These are what the government…

> It's important to remember that we still have a functioning democracy

You do not have a functioning democracy when the top military intelligence officers lie to elected representatives about the existence of a massive domestic surveillance apparatus.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#330

Post by lulzcraft »

md224 wrote: post #317
Afforess wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loss of privacy is massive in comparison to the lives lost to terrorism. More people die each year due to car accidents than have lost their lives to all terrorist attacks on US Soil. If the information that is being gathered is about safety, then why isn't the government isn't creating a massive program to strictly monitor highway speeds, traffic roadways, and increase traffic safety then? Answer: The informatio…

Here's a Devil's Advocate position (not necessarily my personal beliefs, so please don't downvote based on disagreement. Just rip it to shreds instead!): The fear of losing privacy to the government is based on the fear that this increased surveillance will be used by the government to smother dissent. This is a valid fear, but has the government yet used surveillance to smother dissent? If you can find a solid examp…

Yes, the government has used surveillance to smother dissent. Exhibit One: the prosecution of whistle blowers.
Post reply on HN