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

Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

greenwald.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 696 posts

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#521

Post by keernan »

otterley wrote: post #498
keernan wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a trial attorney for more than 40 years, I'd say these are examples of egregious illegal surveillance of American citizens by the current government: 1. A retired US citizen emailed a DHS attorney urging mercy for an asylum seeker he had read about. Five hours later he received an email from Google advising him the federal government had served Google with a subpoena demanding information about him. Then they foll…

Egregious, yes. Concerning, yes. Illegal, I’m not so sure. As a fellow attorney, why do you think they are illegal?[1] Maybe they should be, but our jurisprudence since the 1960s (the “put down the dirty hippies” age) seems to treat the the 4th Amendment not as an expansive right to be left alone but as a narrow one that treats only one’s home as a privacy zone. I found crim pro to be a very distressing and depressin…

Just off the top of my head all three examples I provided violate the First Amendment. It is Constitutionally prohibited for the government to track and gather information on citizens because they exercised their First Amendment rights.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#522

Post by otterley »

Loughla wrote: post #460
oldcigarette wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is times like these i am reminded of https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

That was actually my first thought. The focus on this part of the thread has left the actual meat of the article entirely and is focused instead on a post trying to weedle meaning where there is none.

You caught me, boys! I’d better go tell my boss I failed because these kids are too smart to be fooled.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#523

Post by epolanski »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #219
ambicapter wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

link?

https://voxukraine.org/en/messing-with-the-truth-disinformat...

Both the quotes of this, otherwise empty, article are reasonable and do not make him a Kremlin mouthpiece.

Stating that the west, and the US, has actively used Ukraine as a puppet in the geopolitical game is a fact.

It's also a fact that US troops and NATO forces have increasingly surrounded Russia since the 90s.

Mind you, I think that the NATO argument is bogus.

What happened in Ukraine was not a matter of Russian security, but Putin's own ambitions and paranoia against democratic waves in Belarus and Kazakhstan.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#524

Post by prmoustache »

lazide wrote: post #263
prmoustache wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really depends where the restaurant is located.

Name a place it isn’t true.

Any city with either an actual city center, an historic center or touristic area. Any restaurant that is in a major business area.

Any neighborhood were local zoning is not a thing and local restaurant can be open. We have a lot of tapas or marisquerías places in Spain that are almost only visited by people from the same neighborhood. I like fish and seafood but don't want the smell of it in my kitchen the next day, whenever I want to eat fish I go to some place selling that and I don't need google maps to find one in my neighborhood.

Also world of mouth is still a thing in many places in this world. Reading HN feels sometimes like a weird parallel universe were people would never open their front door nor meet and to people.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#525

Post by prmoustache »

joquarky wrote: post #378
jjulius wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. My kid just started kindergarten this past year - I've never been required to log into ParentSquare through a GMail address and I have only ever accessed it through a browser on a laptop. (Damn, I failed at my attempt to stop posting.)

The web is no better than phone apps when it comes to data gathering. Maybe the data is a little fuzzier, but you can be assured it's being gathered all the same as it is in phone apps.

Yes it is.

It is not perfect but you have much more control on which domain you connect to and/or which js you execute.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#526

Post by marcus_holmes »

StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #383
wredcoll wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would probably help if you made a more specific point rather than just ranting in very vague terms. Grouping terms like "the west" can be broad enough to include over half of all living humans or so narrow that it applies to a small village. It is, admittedly, not a particularly useful term, but it's not like americans are reaponsible for it.

Where have you seen it used outside of Americans pretending their culture is somehow a standard and NATO apologists? The world doesn't even exist as such in my own language. It's a staple on Hacker News and nearly always for the bad reasons. I'm supposed to politely nod and shut up when people are casually erasing my culture?

I (British/Australian) use it, but not in a cultural sense. I use "the West" when talking about military or economic matters.

I generally prefer the term "Anglosphere" to refer to only the bits of "the West" that share that cultural viewpoint when I'm discussing cultural matters. It's not perfect, but it's useful.

Given the widening gap between the USA and Europe (and Canada) in economic and military matters, I'm not sure how much longer "the West" is going to be useful.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#527

Post by prmoustache »

mvanbaak wrote: post #439
rolph wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

bring my kids now or i will call the police and you will be charged with abduction.

and how are you going to prove your ID? you might as well be the one abducting them, and especially if you refuse to use an app to identify yourself... (playing devils advocate here)

How about...showing your actual ID?

I am a parent and the school employees in primary would ask the kid to point finger at their parents and would remember our faces after just a few weeks. If someone had to pick them up because we had an issue we would just call the school.

I however never understood why I couldn't sign a paper so my kids could walk home on their own, especially since they would walk to school on their own already.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#528

Post by marcus_holmes »

wredcoll wrote: post #400
StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where have you seen it used outside of Americans pretending their culture is somehow a standard and NATO apologists? The world doesn't even exist as such in my own language. It's a staple on Hacker News and nearly always for the bad reasons. I'm supposed to politely nod and shut up when people are casually erasing my culture?

What even is a "nato apologist"??? > Where have you seen it used outside of Americans Well, there was this minor thing called "the western roman empire" for a few years, so that might be a starting point. I am fascinated to learn how a claim that westerners "prefer liberty over security" is somehow erasing your culture though.

The Western Roman Empire has nothing to do with "the West". I think it's fascinating that that's even suggested.

I lived in Germany for a while. Germany is definitely a part of "the West", have been the defining border with "the East" in the Cold War. Germans do not share a cultural viewpoint about liberty and security with the USA. So claiming that westerners "prefer liberty over security" while also including Germans (and others) in the definition of "the West" is absolutely erasing their culture.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#529

Post by DenisM »

y-c-o-m-b wrote: post #296
otterley wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that is true. But that is not a violation , which was in the first clause of your original claim. It's an end-run. If it were a violation, Courts could enjoin it. But since it's not a violation, there's nothing to enjoin.

You had me up until now. Turns out your whole point is arguing semantics? You're arguing just to argue and not providing anything of substance on this point. As another person said, this isn't a court.

If X is against law Y the recourse is to seek judgment from courts. If it’s not against the law the recourse is to seek new law from Congress.

The difference is significant for that reason alone. The other reason is that if you’re looking to recruit supporters you will get more of them if you get your ducks in a row. Disorganized ducks impair credibility and create friction.

Not making the distinction between the two is only helpful for the purpose of blowing off steam and the only outcome is outrage fatigue.

Re: Amazon's Ring and Google's Nest reveal the severity of U.S. surveillance state

#530

Post by _carbyau_ »

JCattheATM wrote: post #520
fn-mote wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument justifies CCTV surveillance of all public places. Is that what you intend to be arguing for? In any case, there needs to be more nuance in the discussion than a one-liner. I think the quantity of surveillance matters. When it’s just a few places, then it’s a minor intrusion on liberty. When it’s a lot of places, it’s a major intrusion that will facilitate the (further) rise of authoritarianism.

> This argument justifies CCTV surveillance of all public places. Well, yeah, I think that was super obvious, no? > In any case, there needs to be more nuance in the discussion than a one-liner. Not really. Super public busy places like train stations ought to be surveilled. The benefits far outweigh any cons.

There is far more nuance than this.

What counts as a "super public busy place" ? The airport? The bus terminal? The local library? All major roads that experience rush hour traffic?

Who is the person who says where the cutoff line is? What if that authority wants to move the line to include everything? Or nothing? Do they even need to provide notice to the public of their actions?

Who should be able to access to all this footage? Public? Government investigative branches only? What about the system administrators?

Does this footage require attestation to prove it's legitimacy in a world where AI can generate footage?

How long should this footage exist for? Do I have to trust not just current admins and their superiors but all the people who may be in those roles in perpetuity? IE do I have to trust people who haven't even been born yet?

Is it allowed to be centralised, so people can easily be tracked from one site to another for every step outside their house? Or should each site have separate data housing with access terms to match so that tracking a person is a significant task?

.. ..

There are a lot of concerns. You may argue that there isn't a lot of nuances because you have a set idea of how it should all go. But others may differ.

Post reply on HN