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

The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 491 posts

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#411

Post by yucky »

philippejara wrote: post #165
robert_foss wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It used to be CIA and TV. Nothing new under the sun.

One would hope that after the patriot act, the bush jr wars, cablegate, the nsa leaks and so on just in the last 20 years people would desire to not keep the old habits, but I suppose all it took was one buffoon to take presidency and all that rolls back. Truly a sad sight from those looking hopeful after the occupy movement and all the anti surveillance sentiment post-leaks.

   > the bush jr wars
Small correction, we can't call them the Bush Jr. wars when they survived and thrived for 8 years under Obama. These were FULLY bipartisan fuckups of monumental proportion that proves how much both parties are in the pocket of Raytheon & Northrop Grumman.

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#412

Post by refurb »

mef wrote: post #9

I’ve been trying to read these Twitter files threads thoughtfully, and maybe it’s just a sign of the current average level of comfort with government involvement with social media platforms, but I’m generally not seeing much issue with the stuff being revealed. the worst thing about this particular thread seems like the govt agencies talking to Twitter about foreign influence are overreaching a bit (eg asking them to…

but I don’t see a problem with the FBI/CIA/etc having regular discussions with Twitter about potential threats, influence campaigns, etc.

You don't?

There is nothing special about Twitter as a private business when it comes to acceptable level of government interference. Police agencies are responsible for investigating crimes. That's their remit. They aren't allowed to compel a private individual/business to provide any evidence without a court order. Of course you can always cooperate (and Twitter looks like they were), but any lawyer worth their salt would tell you not to.

But let's tweak the scenario a bit - if the cops were coming to your local bar every day or two, asking about various patrons, maybe suggesting "hey next time maybe you shouldn't let that person in", you think there isn't a problem?

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#413

Post by refurb »

Eisenstein wrote: post #188
nverno wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> current average level of comfort with government involvement It really all comes down to this- it's largely a matter of personal comfort/risk tolerance. Personally, I'd be happy to see entire agencies wiped out, the CIA and the NSA obliterated, the FBI cut back to where it was in the 60s or so, preferably focused on mob/cartel activity and the like. The CIA should never have been separated out from the military and…

The FBI in the 60s was inflitrating and disrupting civil rights groups.

What makes you think they've stopped?

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#414

Post by refurb »

cloutchaser wrote: post #236
mef wrote: post #9

I’ve been trying to read these Twitter files threads thoughtfully, and maybe it’s just a sign of the current average level of comfort with government involvement with social media platforms, but I’m generally not seeing much issue with the stuff being revealed. the worst thing about this particular thread seems like the govt agencies talking to Twitter about foreign influence are overreaching a bit (eg asking them to…

I wonder if you’d have an issue with it if these organisations leaned mostly republican. When this last happened in the 1960s and 70s, when it was the left that was anti establishment, and didn’t want the Vietnam war, or didn’t want Christian orthodoxy imposed on society, the left was obsessed with free speech and being anti government organisations. Suddenly no one can think beyond their own party and as long as the…

Yup, it's pretty amazing now. Back in the 70's if you were anti-cop and anti-government you were left wing.

Now if you're those things, you're a "radical right-wing person".

Amazing how when the shoe is on the other foot the victim becomes the oppressor?

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#415

Post by refurb »

philippejara wrote: post #216
SyzygistSix wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What on earth happened to Matt Tiabbi and Glenn Greenwald? Does a certain amount of exposure to news and conspiracy break people at a certain point? I occasionally worry that they didn't change but that I did.

Greenwald stuck to his guns as he always did when his audience decided that they'd rather embrace the overbearing/surveillance state as long as the court jester didn't win the election again, that's how I see it at least. I'd like to give a less flippant answer but I honestly can't see any difference in his views now and back then, both in US coverage and Brazil's coverage.

Yup, it's pretty amazing how a large number of Greenwald's followers immediately jumped ship when Glenn started to hold their side to the same standards.

"Glenn has gone off the rails" is pretty funny to read honestly.

Nothing has changed except who Glenn is talking about about. Apparently as a "good progressive journalist" you're never supposed to turn the spotlight on your own side?

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#416

Post by refurb »

cyberphobe wrote: post #89
machina_ex_deus wrote: post #21

If you don't see anything wrong with the government forcing censorship on controversial political questions, such as whether elections are safe and fair, just imagine your own reaction if after the 2016 election, Trump's FBI would be monitoring Twitter for any information about Cambridge Analytica / Russia's interference, labeling them as misinformation and censoring and banning everyone mentioning them. If your valu…

I’m fine with the government shutting down anti-democratic movements. I’m not fine with anti-democratic governments shutting down legitimate discussion that looks bad on them, or serving a foreign power. These are not the same thing.

This reminds me of when Vietnam puts blog authors or journalists in prison for "abusing their democratic freedoms".

The irony is apparently lost on them.

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#417

Post by pclmulqdq »

tosc wrote: post #335
hermitdev wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to touch bot farm, but the problem with labeling someone a troll and thus is that is subjective and not clearly defined. There's a level of intent behind being a troll vs being thought of as a troll. Here, in the USA, we do have the right to freedoms of speech, press and association. These freedoms cannot be encroached on by the government without due process, and yes, that means it would need to go in…

Ok, this is fine, but that means we have to classify Twitter as press , with all of the responsibilities as a publisher that this entails.

There is no such thing as a "press" classification in the US with respect to the first amendment. The press has the same rights as everyone else.

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#418

Post by acdha »

lurquer wrote: post #410
acdha wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which specific actions do you think the FBI took which aren’t part of their mandate? Please link to the sources for those claims.

You have it backwards. The Federal Statutes grant specific authority to the FBI. The burden is in the FBI to point to a specific grant of statutory authority to justify any particular action. What federal statute gives the FBI (or any agency) the right to advise, suggest, or even comment on a particular company’s policies? What statute gives the FBI the power to ‘suggest’ certain accounts be blocked?

I note you’re continuing to present vague claims. Can you point to a specific example of something you think they don’t have legal authority for being involved in?

For example, the Twitter Files had a lot of stuff under election misinformation. Since that’s an entire mission, you can argue about effectiveness but it’s not like it’s a stretch:

https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/safety-resources/sca...

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#419

Post by dragonwriter »

refurb wrote: post #412
mef wrote: post #9

I’ve been trying to read these Twitter files threads thoughtfully, and maybe it’s just a sign of the current average level of comfort with government involvement with social media platforms, but I’m generally not seeing much issue with the stuff being revealed. the worst thing about this particular thread seems like the govt agencies talking to Twitter about foreign influence are overreaching a bit (eg asking them to…

but I don’t see a problem with the FBI/CIA/etc having regular discussions with Twitter about potential threats, influence campaigns, etc. You don't? There is nothing special about Twitter as a private business when it comes to acceptable level of government interference. Police agencies are responsible for investigating crimes. That's their remit. They aren't allowed to compel a private individual/business to provide…

> Police agencies are responsible for investigating crimes. That’s their remit.

The FBI has a broader official remit than “investigating crimes”.

Re: The FBI was the primary link between the intelligence community and Twitter

#420

Post by smitty1e »

hellfish wrote: post #321
complex_exp wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, no, private property is subjogated to national interest. Personal freedom is subjogated to national interest (you may be conscripted). In all countries. The only way for things not to fall into a terrible state of affairs (like in Russia or Iran) is for the civil society to perform political acts, like engage in honest journalism, activism and critical thinking. And even then freedom and security are not guarante…

> Thinking that you can be a free-from-all libertarian is like being a house cat that does not comprehend the system that keeps him alive. So because the government does something (THANK GOD), we all need to advocate for more government?

I'd like to differentiate between the Col. Jessup "You want me on that wall; you NEED me on that wall" class, and

...the specific Col. Jessup instance that breaks down and calls away a Code Red.

Our Civil Servants are neither civil nor (apparently) serving any but themselves.

How to avoid becoming a cure worse than the disease?

One thing would be to rotate these staffers more frequently, so they are less prone to what looks like GroupThink.

Post reply on HN