tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post3950205600175118419..comments2024-03-25T08:08:23.132-07:00Comments on Who Has Time For This?: Sensationalizing Cyber SurveillanceDavid Cowanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-83187478548684554812013-06-11T14:29:28.049-07:002013-06-11T14:29:28.049-07:00Well reading your own sentences for logic is not o...Well reading your own sentences for logic is not one of my skills.<br /><br />My last sentence should read:<br /><br /> The only people that didn't know the NSA was watching was the *US citizens*.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02041892308592857971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-76032907427233148912013-06-11T13:18:00.331-07:002013-06-11T13:18:00.331-07:00David,
Yes all the TLAs should be able to collect...David,<br /><br />Yes all the TLAs should be able to collect the data...but in the open and with the public's full knowledge and cooperation and understanding. It's the supposed secrets that are wrong. If I were a "bad guy" then I would assume that the NSA is watching. If the government's entire security plan demands that it be kept secret, then it's a flawed plan.<br /><br />And to claim that the national security is greatly harmed is also overblown. The only people that didn't know the NSA was watching was the people the NSA was spying on.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02041892308592857971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-4674382031665572262013-06-11T13:06:43.739-07:002013-06-11T13:06:43.739-07:00I would assume that the TLAs *already* have my nam...I would assume that the TLAs *already* have my name associated with my phone numbers. If you were a "bad guy", wouldn't you?Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02041892308592857971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-79322463232821577382013-06-11T11:37:42.814-07:002013-06-11T11:37:42.814-07:00That makes sense. I think I agree and I would like...That makes sense. I think I agree and I would like to see more transparency as well. Having said that, what you are prescribing is not captured in the law today, which makes Snowden the criminal, not Verizon or NSA.<br />David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-1661597940536793532013-06-11T08:48:20.861-07:002013-06-11T08:48:20.861-07:00"So you're saying that surveillance doesn..."So you're saying that surveillance doesn't actually work to stop attacks? That is incorrect".<br /><br />Ah. It is incorrect, because ... you say so? Unfortunately there are loads of documented cases where "terrorists" where not stopped despite lots of surveillance. And it does not work as a deterrence either. Terrorists are away that they might be tracked, and they still carry out their attacks.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-10979495061260210152013-06-11T03:26:32.899-07:002013-06-11T03:26:32.899-07:00You are _technically_ correct: it is not clear tha...You are _technically_ correct: it is not clear that any law was violated. I claim this is irrelevant. Here's why. You say "I would want some government agencies to keep secrets, at least for some period of time". I agree. But not ARBITRARY secrets. There exist things that any self-respecting democracy must keep public. Here's an example that should not be controversial: rules that decide how elections get decided, including what to do in case of ties. Here's another: people must know not only what's illegal, but what the penalties are. (Otherwise you find out one day that you got the death penalty for jay walking.) I claim that if, as a democracy, we decide that the government is allowed to collect data about everyone from phone companies, then so be it, though I think it's a bad idea. BUT, it is NOT OKAY for some government agency to collect such data in secret.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-37017479698944094002013-06-11T00:42:00.793-07:002013-06-11T00:42:00.793-07:00Sometimes quotes from past centuries, like right t...Sometimes quotes from past centuries, like right to bring firearms to enforce citizen's rights, are ridiculed, some others are praised as immutable truth written in the stone.<br />All boils down to: how much we feel citizens rather than captives, and how far are we capable to go to build a fair society?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-75626136999838930002013-06-11T00:34:23.980-07:002013-06-11T00:34:23.980-07:00I think some folks are missing the point and that ...I think some folks are missing the point and that is that the NSA is obtaining enough private communications from average 'Joe Blow' citizens to create a sizeable haystack from which to find 'the needle' and to further demonstrate their self appointed powers over all American citizens. Both Verizon and AT&T obtained individual Israeli companies to set up secret equipment rooms on site to splice into their fiber optic cables in order to obtain all data for use by NSA and other clients . I received this information from an article written yesterday by Jon Rappaport at nomorefakenews.com. He brings up some interesting questions regarding this 29 year old young man who apparently broke both legs in an Army training excersize and was discharged rather than rehabed and kept on duty. He apparently did not graduate from high school but was still accepted into the military and within a period of less than 10 years holds a job with the NSA paying $200K. That confuses me and I'm a reasonably intelligent man. I did watch the lnterview with this whistle blower and he seemed to be a thoughtful and intelligent person and I did like his reason for coming forward. But I'm still left with the idea that something just does't add up about the whole scenario. Does anybody else feel eaglebobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15798905856034621459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-25800685055555944452013-06-10T23:48:10.936-07:002013-06-10T23:48:10.936-07:00Google and Facebook are the most successful CIA pr...Google and Facebook are the most successful CIA programs ever devised. Both Verizon and AT&T have their own Israeli companies that set up the programs and on site secret rooms that contain all the necessary equipment to splice into their fiber optic cables to copy all activity in 'real time' and store or pass on to NSA. I got this info from an article I read by Jon Rappaport at nomorefakenews.com. eaglebobeaglebobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15798905856034621459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-46698623098325778532013-06-10T23:42:23.936-07:002013-06-10T23:42:23.936-07:00Do you have any proof that massive pervasive surve...Do you have any proof that massive pervasive surveillance stops any more attacks than ordinary, transparent, (not-secret)court-sanctioned surveillance?<br /><br />The Boston Bombers were not picked up by the NSA.Dylan72https://www.blogger.com/profile/01225931972493961635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-34270768070137085922013-06-10T23:16:14.191-07:002013-06-10T23:16:14.191-07:00actually, purchase is in the place of obtain in ma...actually, purchase is in the place of obtain in many references to this phrase. Not in the place of give up or surrender.<br /><br />The construction I prefer juxtaposes surrendering liberty to purchase security, because it adumbrates the concession of defeat inherent in the price.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-59773272699701344802013-06-10T23:13:59.587-07:002013-06-10T23:13:59.587-07:00You are right that Google gives us a service. I sh...You are right that Google gives us a service. I should have used Experian and TRW as examples instead, or any one of the advertising networks we've never heard of that cookie us. Experian collects whatever they can about us - without a warrant - and then sells the data! Why shouldn't our law enforcement and counter-terrorism agencies be able to do the same thing? How stupid they would be to ignore the internet as a data source.David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-61649222503032332582013-06-10T23:09:17.440-07:002013-06-10T23:09:17.440-07:00I did reply, but I forgot to nest it in this threa...I did reply, but I forgot to nest it in this thread. See my reply a few comments down...David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-53939495361503685112013-06-10T21:47:29.179-07:002013-06-10T21:47:29.179-07:00Jake,
You are right - I did not address Bruce'...Jake,<br /><br />You are right - I did not address Bruce's main point at all. My point was not necessarily to disagree with Bruce but to call for a little but more balance. Honestly, I do not know whether to think that Snowden should be protected as a whistle-blower because I cannot tell whether he was exposing evidence of a crime. Normally, it's a lot more clear that whistleblowers are actually reporting criminal behavior!<br /><br />Most or all of the commenters here, who are visiting from Bruce's excellent site Schneier on Security, seem to believe that it is wrong, criminal or unconstitutional for the federal government to keep any secrets about anyone, and that anyone who exposes government secrets is therefore a hero. But I can see why I would want some government agencies to keep secrets, at least for some period of time, which means that there should be legal consequences for people who leak that information. My initial impression is that as much as I admire Snowden for his principles, I think that he, not Verizon, committed a crime.<br /><br />Today, a lawsuit was filed against Verizon, NSA and Obama charging them with unconstitutional conduct. Even if the lawsuit prevails, it's not clear that anyone committed a crime, since a federal court did issue the warrant. But if the FISA court is declared unconstitutional, then I can see why Snowden should ultimately be exonerated and perhaps protected as a whistleblower. <br /><br />So I don't see how to pre-judge a question that needs to be debated in a court of law and decided based on evidence that is still being gathered. Automatically jumping to Snowden's defense now strikes me as dogmatic.<br /><br />Thanks,<br />David<br /><br />David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-83905399431123145562013-06-10T20:57:49.091-07:002013-06-10T20:57:49.091-07:00Australian citizen here. Why isn't my privacy ...Australian citizen here. Why isn't my privacy protected by your constitution?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-80574941040165072013-06-10T17:41:42.512-07:002013-06-10T17:41:42.512-07:00You are totally right, but I don't think there...You are totally right, but I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he'll answer this one, bro. Unless it's to discredit my or your response. He didn't cover that on purpose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-62615187261081880602013-06-10T17:38:55.678-07:002013-06-10T17:38:55.678-07:00Good job there.Good job there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-84695620226022208152013-06-10T17:07:22.097-07:002013-06-10T17:07:22.097-07:00'"We know [the FBI] can collect a wide ar...'"We know [the FBI] can collect a wide array of personal data from the Internet without a warrant," but so can Google and thousands of other internet companies who track everything we do; should the FBI do any less?'<br /><br />Because people give their data to Google. They give it because in some ways, it benefits them, they get a good service in exchange. Most importantly, it's their choice to do so - they can opt out and delete their Google account at any time. People don't give their information to the NSA - they take it. As for the involuntary, hard to opt out of ad-tracking that Google and their like do, that *should* be illegal in my book.<br /><br />Most importantly, you present the trade-off "between national security and privacy" without talking about the efficacy of dragnet surveillance at all. The terrorist and pedophile bogeymen are continually trotted out us justification for these expansive powers, without providing sufficient evidence that they are actually effective at preventing these crimes. It's akin to DRM for society - it only hurts honest citizens, and isn't effective at stopping the bad guys. Think about it, if you were a terrorist, would you email your master plan in cleartext from an email account with your real name attached to it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-83333936055964295572013-06-10T13:32:28.788-07:002013-06-10T13:32:28.788-07:00I was initially under the impression that this was...I was initially under the impression that this was a response to Bruce's article, but after reading both it seems that your response ignores a major point made in the Atlantic piece. Whether or not you think that the media is sensationalizing this NSA offense (definitely a possibility), you fail to address Bruce's main point: Whistleblowers should not be persecuted as criminals and are in fact necessary power-checks to an increasingly unchecked gov't. <br /><br />Wanted to hear your take on that, and whether or not you think Snowden was justified/unjustified/an american hero. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01898769175150544669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-45275465975629885102013-06-10T12:56:31.473-07:002013-06-10T12:56:31.473-07:00I agree test at some point the secret court orders...I agree test at some point the secret court orders should be declassified for public scrutiny. Having said that I'm not sure I would want my data publicized for public scrutiny...David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-15876279561191666922013-06-10T12:54:01.125-07:002013-06-10T12:54:01.125-07:00So you're saying that surveillance doesn't...So you're saying that surveillance doesn't actually work to stop attacks? That is incorrect. I agree with you and others that the public needs more visibility, even if the data are held for some period of time to facilitate law enforcement. David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-91957754763104930472013-06-10T12:45:24.137-07:002013-06-10T12:45:24.137-07:00So that's your concern, that NSA will do socia...So that's your concern, that NSA will do social engineering to identify you? If NSA wanted to "cheat" they could steal the data in much more scalable ways. David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-32998695861724318672013-06-10T12:41:15.088-07:002013-06-10T12:41:15.088-07:00Ok, as you asked I won't respond.Ok, as you asked I won't respond. David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-45785456066639696242013-06-10T12:40:24.318-07:002013-06-10T12:40:24.318-07:00When you say it's criminal, please explain the...When you say it's criminal, please explain the crime. What law is violated?David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14442178.post-57967549685111873312013-06-10T12:39:09.026-07:002013-06-10T12:39:09.026-07:00Agreed, grammar is irrelevant, but I cannot help i...Agreed, grammar is irrelevant, but I cannot help it. David Cowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075075203254308405noreply@blogger.com