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

Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

covertactionmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 510 posts

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#361

Post by ineedasername »

bombolo wrote: post #285
ineedasername wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like your most immediate concern should be the Swedish government. They’re the ones required to actually agree & implement actions based on the BS accusation.

So we should focus on the goons and ignore the boss sending them? Makes total sense.

It's not either or. But in this situation the Swedish people have a better chance of influencing their own government than the one trying to get it to do what it wants. In this situation the boss is powerless over swedish people if the goons lose their power.

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#362

Post by fasterik »

DanHulton wrote: post #284
Ghexor wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment and your behavior. I'm grateful for everyone of us out there working with strong moral boundaries. Thank you! I also disagree with your perspective on corporations. To me they seem very much alive - in a less recognisable form, more complex than we can grasp with human minds. I argue mainly because I'd like to keep the term as something free of judgment. A group of people th…

> A group of people that comes together as a larger body or organism can be quite beautiful too. Sure, but that doesn't have to be a corporation. There are all kinds of terms that describe that, and they don't come with the clear emotional and interpretational baggage that "corporation" does. The term honestly isn't free of judgement, it carries with it a _lot_ of associations, and you can't just ignore them and pret…

If they're a group of people working toward some common purpose within an organizational structure that's legally recognized, that's a corporation. Just because it's become a bad word in certain sectors doesn't mean the concept is inherently corrupted.

>For example, try talking about "a corporation of churchgoers" and see what kinds of reactions you get.

I would point out that most churches are 501(c)(3) corporations ;)

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#363

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

> Snowden was not a whistleblower

> Despite Snowden's later public claim that he would have faced retribution for voicing concerns about intelligence activies, the Committee found that laws and regulations in effect at the time of Snowden's actions afforded him protection.

> Snowden was a disgruntled employee who became engaged in numerous spats with his supervisors.

> Most of the documents Snowden stole have no connection to programs that could impact privacy or civil liberties

> Snowden was, and remains, a serial exaggerator and fabricator

Review of the Unauthorized Disclosures of Former National Security Agency Contractor Edward Snowden (pdf warning): https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hpsci_snowden_r...

Highlights (pdf warning): https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/snowden_report_...

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#364

Post by jongjong »

suzzer99 wrote: post #321
HeckFeck wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly the problem. You know they are speaking an essential truth when you look at the feathers ruffled by Snowden, Assange and those who follow in their path. They will get their due acclaim if we're lucky to have a more moral and free society in the future.

There's a difference between releasing everything, and only releasing stuff Russia wants you to release, like Assange was doing.

That's not true. Wikileaks was releasing all sorts of documents. I think the stuff about western governments just got a lot more attention because it broke through carefully crafted narratives and beliefs that people had about those governments. If some info about Russian corruption was released on Wikileaks, most Russians would be like "I already know most of these government people are corrupt, what is the news?"

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#365

Post by lazide »

fasterik wrote: post #358
trinsic2 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I don't operate in these power structures. From 1995 to 2005 I worked for corporations and seeing it was harmful to my well being, I decide to provide computer services directly to the public. Now I set my own rules, and I work very hard to set my own ethical spaces where people are forced to do the right thing if they want to operate in my world. I have found that people want to do the right things, but…

There is nothing inherently good or bad about a group of people working toward some common purpose. In principle, given the right value system, incentives, and organizational structure, you could create a corporation that does an extraordinary amount of good in the world. The problem is bad power structures, not power structures per se . Just because corporations as they exist today have problems doesn't mean that we…

[flagged]

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#366

Post by ClumsyPilot »

jiggywiggy wrote: post #169
paulmd wrote: post #71

Whistleblowers act against power structures and that's the ultimate transgression as far as the power structure is concerned. Transgressions in favor of the state are one thing, you'll get a slap on the wrist at most, even personal benefit and promotion in some cases, but transgressions against the state are what will provoke a real response. See, for example, the incredible vigor pursued against the people who relea…

What makes it worse is, whistleblowers are trouble makers often. They are difficult people, at best like Snowden, they lay low. It makes it easier to dismiss them. Why? Because people who are good and social with the group do not have a contrarian character. To whistleblow against a very powerful organisation, like the NSA, you have to be a pain in the ass. I don't mean that in a bad way. Normal sociable people just…

> Because people who are good and social with the group do not have a contrarian character. To whistleblow against a very powerful organisation... you have to be a pain in the ass.

I am confused - people who are good and social have no principles and value? They have no backbone to stand up for them?

This is like the worst definition of social - like amoral sociopaths desperate to fit in.

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#367

Post by lazide »

jiggywiggy wrote: post #340
nullc wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

At times it's justified to be unreasonable

It’s rarely the comfortable choice however.

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#368

Post by Aeolun »

jvm_fan wrote: post #273
paulmd wrote: post #71

Whistleblowers act against power structures and that's the ultimate transgression as far as the power structure is concerned. Transgressions in favor of the state are one thing, you'll get a slap on the wrist at most, even personal benefit and promotion in some cases, but transgressions against the state are what will provoke a real response. See, for example, the incredible vigor pursued against the people who relea…

> It's actually probably worse to rock the boat and try to save a failing project, not only do you take it on yourself if it fails (which it likely will anyway, because they won't listen/the project is too far gone) but even if it succeeds you've stuck your head up and shown yourself to not be a yes-man. This is really bad career advice. There are certain situations where it makes sense to rock the boat, situations w…

> This is really bad career advice.

Depends entirely on where you work. In any place with 4+ layers of management it sounds like a reasonably good idea.

You want to be seen as doing your best for the project, but not sticking your head out more than is reasonable.

The project will fail, but you’ll be remembered as the one that almost made it succeed, and you’ll have more political capital to make the changes you desire going forward.

Conversely, if you keep hammering at something when it is clear everyone doesn’t believe you or doesn’t share the same values, you are just making everyone hate you. Even if the project does somehow succeed.

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#369

Post by George83728 »

myshpa wrote: post #281
phailhaus wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a fan of the idea that "oh, the right people are mad, therefore it must have been a Good thing to do!" The same feathers would have been ruffled if Snowden had leaked our nuclear codes. The point is that he exposed wrongdoing, and the public agreed . There are plenty of people who are punished by the state that the majority does not believe are "speaking an essential truth". For example: domestic terrorists.

> leaked our nuclear codes You mean 00000000 ? https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/launch-code-for-...

This story is a bit convoluted, mostly true but incomplete as the Ars article tells it.

From what I can gather, the way the system was originally meant to work is that each Minuteman squadron had five Launch Command Centers (LLCs), each with two men in them who would have to simultaneously turn their keys. In order for the missiles to fly normally, at least two of the five LLCs would have to command a launch. The computers in the LLCs contained launch codes which would be sent to the missiles, and these codes were never set to 00000000.

Disconcertingly, there was a 'backup' system that was meant to enable if the LLC lost electrical power, a single-vote timer. The single-vote timer would allow a single LLC (two men) to launch the missiles after a delay of at least one hour (during which time the order could be countermanded by one of the four other LLCs.) Sounds okay, except according to John H. Rubel these timers could be set to zero. So if the main power went out and the LLCs were running on backup power, a single LLC could have commanded the launch, and if the single-vote timer were set to zero, there would be no countermanding it.

To supplement the above systems, McNamara commanded the installation of another system (perhaps erroneously) called PAL, which would be required to arm the missiles but was itself insufficient to launch the missiles. According to Dr. Bruce Blair, it was this 'PAL' system for which the codes were set to 00000000, rendering it effectively moot.

Re: Whistleblowers are the conscience of society, yet suffer gravely

#370

Post by tootie »

nopcode wrote: post #336
tootie wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

John Kiriakou springs to mind a guy who leaked classified info mixed with a bit of incorrect hearsay to push an agenda. Julian Assange leaked the DNC emails on behalf of Russian intelligence. And even the guy who turned out to be Deep Throat admitted he did what he did out of pure spite over failure to earn recognition for his role in the crime.

> Julian Assange leaked the DNC emails on behalf of Russian intelligence. Journalists report on leaks from intelligence all the time, to the point that the "Intelligence sources say"-phrase is becoming a meme of US "news". You can't open CNN or MSNBC without seeing some FBI or CIA head telling you what they want you to think. Why something is being leaked is relevant, but it shouldn't be a reason to ignore the truth…

That's a pretty sanguine point of view. Russia stole emails from a private organization for the explicit intent of disrupting the election and then fed them to WikiLeaks and then Assange had audacity to try to blame Seth Rich. Julian Assange provably lies to further his personal agenda. Any good he has done for the world has been purely coincidental.

Cable news hire experts to give expert opinions. Not to divulge state secrets for personal gain.

Well, except Fox. Fox has Oliver North.

Post reply on HN