NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand • Hacker News Board

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#61

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 10:42 PM UTC

__jal wrote: post #60

slg wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not usually in the "if you have nothing to hide..." crowd, but this isn't some kid in Minnesota who downloaded a Metallica album. This is someone who created a business enterprise to circumvent US law. This is someone who pulled in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars from this business. For a time this business was the single biggest source of pirated content in the world. All of this was done basically…

So what happens when a US citizen starts publishing stuff China (or Russia, or the UAE, or England, or any other state that doesn't protect free speech as we do) doesn't like? What happens in 40 years, when the US is on much less-firm footing as de facto World Cop?

> So what happens when a US citizen starts publishing stuff China (or Russia, or the UAE, or England, or any other state that doesn't protect free speech as we do) doesn't like?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses_controver...

Didn't take any US precedent.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#62

Post by wildmusings » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 10:43 PM UTC

__jal wrote: post #60

slg wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not usually in the "if you have nothing to hide..." crowd, but this isn't some kid in Minnesota who downloaded a Metallica album. This is someone who created a business enterprise to circumvent US law. This is someone who pulled in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars from this business. For a time this business was the single biggest source of pirated content in the world. All of this was done basically…

So what happens when a US citizen starts publishing stuff China (or Russia, or the UAE, or England, or any other state that doesn't protect free speech as we do) doesn't like? What happens in 40 years, when the US is on much less-firm footing as de facto World Cop?

Never forget Thucydides' wisdom from 2500 years ago, as true today as then and as in 2500 more years:

"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

Tying our hands today will do nothing to help us when we are the weak and someone else is the strong.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#63

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 10:45 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #54

adrianratnapala wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right, or something resembling right, as regards Kim Dotcom in relation to the US. But there is still something troubling here for Americans, because it means that there is an existing mechanism (and/or set of social relations) in place by which American copyright interests can turn the intelligence agencies into their servants. Once such machinery exists, it is at least as dangerous to Americans as it is to…

I am not usually in the "if you have nothing to hide..." crowd, but this isn't some kid in Minnesota who downloaded a Metallica album. This is someone who created a business enterprise to circumvent US law. This is someone who pulled in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars from this business. For a time this business was the single biggest source of pirated content in the world. All of this was done basically…

[deleted]

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#64

Post by will_brown » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 11:01 PM UTC

As long as the US wastes tax payer dollars doing investigations and enforcement of Hollywood copyrights, I'd like to see them pay some dumb as agent to do a comparison of the total number of copyright violations on YouTube vs the total number of copyright violations on Mega servers.

For fun they could do a comparison of the number of copyright complaints both YouTube and Mega received and the number of those complaints they have acted on. Maybe for extra bonus we can also compare the number of counterfeit products on Amazon (violating copyright or trademark).

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#65

Post by freshhawk » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 11:04 PM UTC

tenpies wrote: post #31

philip1209 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm more interested in how much corporate espionage and counter-espionage they do. If a foreign company steals/hacks domestic IP and that hurts the US economy, I wouldn't be surprised if they took action. So, if we can agree that this type of action is reasonable by the NSA, then I could see them justifying the surveillance of Kim Dotcom under industrial counter-surveillance.

It's not just protective. Snowden indicated that part of what they consider national security involves economic security. In their interpretation, their mandate includes corporate and economic espionage, and ensuring that the US maintains its economic edge. See: Spying on Petrobas, a a Brazilian oil company: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-bra... Spying on an EU Anti-trust official: https://w…

I thought this was common knowledge long before Snowden, it's been a core responsibility of intelligence gathering agencies from the very beginning.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#66

Post by freshhawk » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 11:08 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #64

As long as the US wastes tax payer dollars doing investigations and enforcement of Hollywood copyrights, I'd like to see them pay some dumb as agent to do a comparison of the total number of copyright violations on YouTube vs the total number of copyright violations on Mega servers. For fun they could do a comparison of the number of copyright complaints both YouTube and Mega received and the number of those complain…

But is it a waste? The export of American values through their media is an incredibly powerful tool. Ignoring their goals and values, which I disagree with, the tactics and strategy make complete logical sense.

There is a reason that military agencies get to edit scripts before they allow the use of their resources in movies and it's not because they're stupid people.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#67

Post by slg » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 11:11 PM UTC

quirkot wrote: post #57

slg wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not usually in the "if you have nothing to hide..." crowd, but this isn't some kid in Minnesota who downloaded a Metallica album. This is someone who created a business enterprise to circumvent US law. This is someone who pulled in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars from this business. For a time this business was the single biggest source of pirated content in the world. All of this was done basically…

> someone who created a business enterprise to circumvent US law Kinda like Uber? rim shot But I'm still kinda serious. Your whole comment works if you swtich "pirated content" for "unlicensed, unregistered taxi service"

If you truly wanted to dig through my comment history, you would find numerous posts criticizing Uber and AirBnb for basically establishing businesses on ignoring the law. However there is still a difference between feigning ignorance of the law and turning your middle finger up at it like Kim Dotcom did.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#68

Post by wildmusings » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 11:12 PM UTC

adrianratnapala wrote: post #49

wildmusings wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economic security is national security. You can't really separate them once you're thinking past the immediate short term. A richer enemy will have better weapons, better technology, better surveillance, and better leverage.

The agency's existence is politically feasible because people see it as protecting them from terrorists and foreign governments. Peforming spy-work to marginally improve the bottom line of American companies doesn't really stack up on that scale; even if you beleive the beggar-thy-neighbour economics that it implies. And even if we naively assume some economic gain to the US, isn't that outweighed by the cost of thei…

>The agency's existence is politically feasible because people see it as protecting them from terrorists and foreign governments.

I don't think the US public really cares about the privacy of foreigners against US intelligence agencies. Further, it's not just some marginal benefit. If piracy became user friendly (think Netflix or better) and easy to do with impunity, it would be a massive threat to the entire American creative industry. No one is under the fantasy that we can root out piracy altogether.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#69

Post by slg » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 11:15 PM UTC

__jal wrote: post #60

slg wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not usually in the "if you have nothing to hide..." crowd, but this isn't some kid in Minnesota who downloaded a Metallica album. This is someone who created a business enterprise to circumvent US law. This is someone who pulled in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars from this business. For a time this business was the single biggest source of pirated content in the world. All of this was done basically…

So what happens when a US citizen starts publishing stuff China (or Russia, or the UAE, or England, or any other state that doesn't protect free speech as we do) doesn't like? What happens in 40 years, when the US is on much less-firm footing as de facto World Cop?

It is up to a government to protect its own citizens. There is a reason why Kit Dotcom is fighting the government of New Zealand currently and not the US government.

I think it is unrealistic to expect the US government to willingly give up one of their citizens to China or Russia over an issue of free speech anytime soon. And frankly I think it would be irrational for the average citizen to fear they would be involved in such an exchange.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#70

Post by barrkel » Tue, Aug 01, 2017, 11:16 PM UTC

wildmusings wrote: post #62

__jal wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what happens when a US citizen starts publishing stuff China (or Russia, or the UAE, or England, or any other state that doesn't protect free speech as we do) doesn't like? What happens in 40 years, when the US is on much less-firm footing as de facto World Cop?

Never forget Thucydides' wisdom from 2500 years ago, as true today as then and as in 2500 more years: "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." Tying our hands today will do nothing to help us when we are the weak and someone else is the strong.

Of course, acting with moral authority extends the lifespan of leaders, because such leaders get more support than the nakedly self-interested. And thus tying your hands today does in fact put off the day when you're weak.