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

Microsoft exec: Targeting of Americans’ records ‘routine’

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–56 of 56 posts

Re: Microsoft exec: Targeting of Americans’ records ‘routine’

#51

Post by swiley »

wiredone wrote: post #20
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #11

Let me see... Microsoft wants me to have a Microsoft account to use a computer that I bought. They nag me every time I log in because I gave them a bogus email address. And then you read something like this. All those abstract privacy concerns just got a bit more concrete...

And yet when they limit their new version of Windows specifically to devices that cant have rootkits installed, everyone freaks out. ...maybe they know that people are installing root kits... because they see first hand what the "good" guys are doing routinely.

There was a story just the other day about how Microsoft has been signing rootkits. The new "security measures" don't do crap for malware and just make legitimate uses of the machine (installing software that respects your freedom) harder.

Re: Microsoft exec: Targeting of Americans’ records ‘routine’

#52

Post by adjkant »

enkid wrote: post #47
adjkant wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a nuanced point here that looking at GDP % vs inflation adjusted yields different results depending on the range. For example, from 1982-1990, military spending was up, even after adjusting for inflation. It was actually 1990-2000 where military spending actually decreased, both before and after adjusting for inflation. Compare that to GDP % which would indicate a steady decline in spending. So now we very mu…

This is the only data point the poster had which supported their argument and it was factually incorrect, whether you look at inflation adjusted or as a percentage of GDP. Now, whether to use inflation adjusted or as a percentage of GDP is a valid argument, but doesn't change the fact the poster is wrong, and I don't think this is the forum where it really is going to get resolved.

> but doesn't change the fact the poster is wrong

Again, I think you're missing the point. The very specific, non relevant way you interpreted the claim is factually wrong.

To me, the claim read as:

> the military spending is never cut in a significant way

Which again, at an absolute level, is generally true when looking at inflation adjusted spending. Within context, absolute is relevant here though as this is about government process. The whole context makes this claim incredibly tangential to the whole point, which more or less boils down to "government has a lot of inertia".

> doesn't change the fact the poster is wrong

Again, did it ever really matter how the cold war affected spending here? What's the point of calling this super nuance out? My point is not to argue about 1990-2000 military spending and the measures of it.

I'm calling this out to say "arguing over small irrelevant details to an argument is not very productive if you care about the real topic at hand".

Are you trying to make this case because you believe that the government does not have a lot of inertia when it comes to these things? Great, then make that case instead of this rabbit hole. Or is this rabbit hole just about the non relevant fact itself?

Re: Microsoft exec: Targeting of Americans’ records ‘routine’

#53

Post by enkid »

adjkant wrote: post #52
enkid wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the only data point the poster had which supported their argument and it was factually incorrect, whether you look at inflation adjusted or as a percentage of GDP. Now, whether to use inflation adjusted or as a percentage of GDP is a valid argument, but doesn't change the fact the poster is wrong, and I don't think this is the forum where it really is going to get resolved.

> but doesn't change the fact the poster is wrong Again, I think you're missing the point. The very specific, non relevant way you interpreted the claim is factually wrong. To me, the claim read as: > the military spending is never cut in a significant way Which again, at an absolute level, is generally true when looking at inflation adjusted spending. Within context, absolute is relevant here though as this is about…

Your missing why I'm making my comment. I'm not arguing for anything. I'm arguing against making any conclusions based on what the original poster said, because the only factual evidence they present is at the very least questionable. I'm not making a positive assertion that government inertia is not a problem, simply that the above post does not provide sufficient evidence that it is a problem.

Re: Microsoft exec: Targeting of Americans’ records ‘routine’

#54

Post by whatshisface »

Black101 wrote: post #35
im_down_w_otp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the enforcement mechanism for these laws? Who compels who to do what?

I think that they have ultimate power and they even trump the constitution...

Only in the sense that any person has unlimited power and the ability to trump the constitution, insofar as they're not caught or not stopped if caught.

Re: Microsoft exec: Targeting of Americans’ records ‘routine’

#55

Post by cudgy »

sneak wrote: post #49
cudgy wrote: post #45

“… Justice Department prosecutors obtained as part of leak investigations phone records belonging not only to journalists but also to members of Congress and their staffers.“ Eek! These illegal violations of privacy must stop now that congressman and their staffers are being surveilled too!

Who's to stop them when the watchers now have blackmail information on the entirety of the legislature and judiciary? Have you considered for a moment that NSA and CIA have the phone numbers and location track logs of every mistress, hooker, and drug dealer used by every member of congress?

Why should the outrage only matter when someone “important” has their rights violated? Have you considered that the NSA/CIA have been monitoring Congress for longer than they have been monitoring average citizens?
Post reply on HN