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

Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

mailman.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#71

Post by junto »

flyinRyan wrote: post #60
JanezStupar wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In ex Yugoslavia we had secret laws, published by secret official journal and enforced by secret courts. So you could easily get persecuted for breaking the law that you were prohibited to know it even existed. The same was going on in east Germany and other socialist countries. I warmly recommend watching The Lives of Others ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405094/ ) to those who haven't seen it yet.

Amusing that the US claimed victory in the cold war and then ends up adopting all their "enemies'" worst stuff.

They didn't give all those ex-Nazi scientists jobs for nothing you know.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#72

Post by brown9-2 »

LowKarmaAccount wrote: post #52
brown9-2 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would appear that the FISA court agrees with that interpretation as well, correct?

The court's opinion is classified. The DOJ is trying to block a FOIA suit filed by the EFF to release the opinion. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/government-says-secret...

Then why did the court re-authorize the Verizon order in April 2013?

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#73

Post by mcherm »

davmre wrote: post #20
jes5199 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sort of consequences can they impose without revealing the existence of the secret court?

The existence of the court is not secret, only its proceedings.

Also its members and its decisions.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#74

Post by mcherm »

steveklabnik wrote: post #24
jes5199 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sort of consequences can they impose without revealing the existence of the secret court?

The existence of the court isn't secret, it's the proceedings that are.

Also its members and its decisions.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#75

Post by dhimes »

flyinRyan wrote: post #61
zt wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just not sure there are easy answers in any direction here. Should they have the program at all? If they should, did they choose the right parameters? If the parameters are right, is the oversight adequate to both preventing misuse of these undeniably broad powers and making the rest of us feel like it is still, in the end, our government? Who should make each of those decisions? Given democratic uncertainty over…

There are easy answers here: there should be no program at all . Terrorism is no legitimate threat to the US and never has been. Any time you give the government the ability to override checks and balances, they are already abusing that ability (and usually want it applied to previous behavior so they can't be prosecuted for past infractions).

I hold a less extreme position, that (1) The laws should have a two-year sunset clause (2) The government should have to prove the law's efficacy to the public. Fuck this 'it works but we can't tell you' bullshit. (3) We have to understand full well that when we allows these laws they will be used fully. I don't think it takes an evil person for this to be true. I think most of us, if we were given the responsibility of protecting the public and the authority for doing so, we would use that authority. Nobody wants to be the guy that people look back on after a terrorist act and say, 'but YOU could have prevented this.' Look at all the grief the spooks are getting with this 'Marathon Bomber' kid (Tsarnaev). Apparently they were warned that he could be a threat. But they respected his rights and let him be free. And now they are being accused of being incompetent.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#76

Post by rtkwe »

mtgx wrote: post #63
LowKarmaAccount wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The court's opinion is classified. The DOJ is trying to block a FOIA suit filed by the EFF to release the opinion. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/government-says-secret...

"In its response filed with the FISC today, the government offers a circular argument, asserting that only the Executive Branch can de-classify the opinion, but that it is somehow prohibited by the FISC rules from doing so." It seems to me the FISA Court still has the power the make the ruling public, even if the government classified it. It wouldn't be the first time a judge overrules classified information, right?…

IIRC only the Supreme Court can really decide on constitutionality other judges are just supposed to follow the laws laid out by Congress.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#77

Post by drzaiusapelord »

scythe wrote: post #42

It might be wishful thinking, but part of me wonders if Steve Jobs might have actually been able to push back a little and prevented Apple from joining the program at the same time as Microsoft/Google et al. Apple isn't known for being outspoken about privacy, but Jobs is a formidable character to deal with and, well, if anyone had the balls to say 'no', he did. Apple wasn't added until after Jobs died, years after o…

Jobs doesn't have a history of EFF-like activism and has always played ball with the government. I think its a little unhealthy to build him into this superman juggernaut. Yes he was talented and died before his time, but he's no NSA slayer.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#78

Post by dllthomas »

weland wrote: post #58
JanezStupar wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In ex Yugoslavia we had secret laws, published by secret official journal and enforced by secret courts. So you could easily get persecuted for breaking the law that you were prohibited to know it even existed. The same was going on in east Germany and other socialist countries. I warmly recommend watching The Lives of Others ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405094/ ) to those who haven't seen it yet.

My surprise was directed at the fact that people have this in a system advertised as democratic. I am quite well-acquainted with cases like those you quote.

"Advertised as democratic" won't get you very far in predicting how democratic a country is.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#80

Post by kenko »

Speculation: because the heads of those companies think that surveillance is just peachy and it's their business model? That is certainly the case with Facebook, which acknowledges that they try to encourage sharing and break down norms surrounding privacy, then take the new norms they've created, treat them as a baseline, and extend them further. They think this is good. And it's not like the NSA is going to compete with them for advertiser $, so no bigs.
Post reply on HN