Live data from Hacker News

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

washingtonpost.com

401–410 of 420 posts

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

#401
post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acts of war and nuclear disasters are excluded from insurance.

Buffett's insurance business took a $2.4 billion underwriting loss from the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks. The insurance industry as a whole paid $33 billion in claims (in 2001 dollars).

That's because terrorism wasn't specifically defined as an "act of war" for general risk policies under the underwriting standards of the time. (although anything nuke has been excluded for many years) War requires a nation-state actor. Terrorism is a broader concept.

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

#402
post #321

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

Given all the contortions that politicians have to make just to get through the day, it wouldn't surprise me that Obama truly believes what he said back in 2007, but once he got into power he got an education on what the CIA/NSA is doing and he realized that either he can try to live up to these values and likely cause wildly unpredictable outcomes (some positive, some negative), or he can let it continue, given there were enough plausibly compelling reasons, despite the potential for abuse. thus - status quo reigns. truly change we can believe in, and a good example of how power corrupts. the military-industrial complex has a life of its own. thank you eisenhower.

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

#403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which you voluntarily shared with Facebook and not a violation of the constitution. If you want privacy, don't share it on the Internet.

This argument is weak because everything is "shared on the internet" at this point - including phone calls. How is this different than saying "if you want privacy don't share over the postal system" or "if you want privacy don't share over the phone"?

[deleted]

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

#404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which you voluntarily shared with Facebook and not a violation of the constitution. If you want privacy, don't share it on the Internet.

This argument is weak because everything is "shared on the internet" at this point - including phone calls. How is this different than saying "if you want privacy don't share over the postal system" or "if you want privacy don't share over the phone"?

> How is this different than saying "if you want privacy don't share over the postal system" or "if you want privacy don't share over the phone"?

Posting something on a website is vastly different than direct person to person communication over the phone or mailing something. Phone calls and snail mail are transient things, the post office and phone company don't keep copies of your conversations and mail for later investigation whereas posting something on a website is communicating through a third party who stores everything in a database for later display, it's not transient, you'd be a fool to post something you want to remain private on Facebook, or any internet website. Phones and mail also enjoy legal protection that the Internet doesn't and Facebook isn't a carrier of transient information, it's a database that stores things possibly forever. They are nothing alike.

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

#405
post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People can put their lives on Facebook's database, it's still Facebook's database. The problem is not that Facebook is sharing this information, it is that people are sharing it with Facebook.

I'm aware of the distinction, but the average person out there doesn't think of themselves as sharing with Facebook the company, they think they are sharing with their friends.

The law doesn't care what the average person thinks nor does reality. It's the persons responsibility to maintain his own privacy by not posting private information on a public website. If you post something on the Internet, it's going to get out there; people should know this by now and if they don't it's their own damn fault.

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

#406
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…

    "These are national security assets: evidence gathered 
    here will never be used in a drug case, or a tax evasion 
    case."
The evidence gathered doesn't need to be used in a drug case directly in order to provide value. The information being collected is sufficiently broad and inclusive to give law enforcement more than enough leads they would not have already had. The discovery process required to determine if such a system were misappropriated for anything more than these national security concerns would be overly burdensome for any defendant in a court of law, especially when said defendants are spending every penny on just trying to remain free.

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

#407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm aware of the distinction, but the average person out there doesn't think of themselves as sharing with Facebook the company, they think they are sharing with their friends.

The law doesn't care what the average person thinks nor does reality. It's the persons responsibility to maintain his own privacy by not posting private information on a public website. If you post something on the Internet, it's going to get out there; people should know this by now and if they don't it's their own damn fault.

According to this comment by a self-proclaimed lawyer (in training?), the law does care what the average person thinks:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5833747

If people don't know something by now it's equally the fault of the services they use for not educating them about the real implications of what they do online.

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

#408
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…

>These tools exist for the bigger fish:

Funny, that's what they said about the PATRIOT act, yet virtually all invocations of said act have had nothing to do with terrorism (e.g. drug arrests). If you give the government these powers you are assuming there will never be someone in charge of this information who is corrupt. But corrupt people are already in charge of it! This will only get worse.

>Warren Buffet has predicted a major nuclear terrorist attack on an American city to be a "virtual certainty" given enough time.

Buffet probably has no idea what would be involved in pulling off a nuclear attack. Hint: "dirty bombs" is just made up nonsense.

If I had the money to make it interesting for him, I'd take a long bet on this one and even leave it open ended. I'm sure we'll all be dead before it happens.

>Ok, but no one here is going to argue that stopping terrorism is bad

I do. Terrorism isn't a legitimate concern for the US. Over the last 30 years, we've had around 100 deaths per year. That about a drop of piss in the ocean. Not worth even thinking about for one second. Us all those resources to do something that would have an effect like fighting cancer, making highways safer, etc.

Fighting terrorism as the US does is like doing extreme chemo therapy for a sniffle.

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

Really? Go look up some executive orders that have come out of the president's office (past as well as present). This paragraph is more a hope about how things should be then proof of how they are. Ask yourself how you can know any of it's true. It's legal to take pictures of cops, yet if you do it you could end in jail anyway. It's illegal for cops to rape and murder, yet it happens and often enough with no real consequence to the cop.

>Extreme efforts such as these may still be insufficient to prevent New York from being destroyed by terrorists.

Then why bother? We're only giving corrupt people unchecked power to lord over us and we're getting back a small chance that we might possible prevent some attack that might possibly happen (but if you look at the actual history of terrorist attacks, they usually fail from their own incompetence).

>However, do not forget that we can't see NSA success stories.

Then why would we assume any exist. The onus is on those who violate us to prove it's providing some value.

>hidden in the background, don't inconvenience you, or lead to loss of freedom or property.

Of course they do. They expose we to the whims of low paid morons on power trips.

> But the incentives the intelligence apparatus have to not use any data collected here against anyone for reasons less than "real" terrorism are strong enough, that I think it's not open-and-shut.

Complete and utter bullshit. Have you actually looked at e.g. what the PATRIOT act has actually been used for? Hint: terrorism is line noise in the application of that act. It's used for almost anything but.

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

#409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most my examples would be of the US acting in cases that are technically illegal and only so related directly to this kind of surveillance (like ELF, bradley manning, mccarthyism (not to mention other, foreign policy related or historical atrocities)), I certainly do not think that, even if we pretend the US always has super great intentions, they are not always the best to have stick their hands in things. I wonder…

But COINTELPRO was 40 years ago and a huge scandal that led to many of the restrictions that our current intelligence operations work under.

40 years ago is not that long, some of the same people might even be employed! Also, what if Malcolm X had been an issue 20 years ago? Also, this is one we know about, what about the ones we don't know about? Also, half the equation is the surveillance in this PRISM thing. To enough of a point to be concerned: The other half can be extrapolated from actions during the war on drugs/terror, whistleblowers, iran contra, northwoods, vietnam, grenada, bay of pigs, chile, and generally messy law making. Some of these are dated, but that's partially due to one: my info being out of date/depth, some things not being released or uncovered yet. There is no real assurance that any of these behaviors have stopped. The burden of proof is on them. This news is not reassuring. There is a difference between secrecy and lying.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9845595-7.html

Disclaimer: I don't actually mind as much as I should. I somewhat OK with a cyberpunk dystopia because the closer to Ghost in the Shell we get, the cooler.

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

#410
post #277
post #36

What really saddens me is that this confirms all the conspiracy rumors. Wasn't it always just a rumor going around that the U.S. Government "made" Microsoft buy Skype for spying purposes? Well: "10 May 2011, Microsoft Corporation acquired Skype Communications" and on 2/6/11 Skype was added to the US spy program [1] They were so eager to spy on Skype users that they implemented that "feature" even before the deal was…

Not to detract from the concerns surrounding this program, or to defend Microsoft, but from the dates for Google, YouTube, and AOL one can see that Skype joined on February 6, not June 2.

It seems reasonable to suspect that for matters of urgency the transition process might have started earlier than the actual acquisition was publicly announced. Plus I am not quite sure if the dates on the slide indicate the starting or finishing date of the implementation process.
Post reply on HN