If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tech Dirt)   NSA: We try to only spy on foreign targets, but get the occasional US citizen. Latest Leak: We tap into about 75% of US internet traffic and set our own filters with no oversight to worry about   (techdirt.com) divider line 322
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

4202 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Aug 2013 at 2:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



322 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 01:11:49 PM
Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.
 
2013-08-21 01:20:24 PM
Clearly, the semantic difference between the headline's words and the article's words mean there is nothing here about which anyone should be concerned. As all patriots know, we should never fear the government's ability to do something. This is why so many people who are fine with NSA spying programs completely support gun registration.
 
2013-08-21 01:26:08 PM
I just can't wait until the next Republican president so that I can say, "But Obama."
 
2013-08-21 01:26:52 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.


So if the NSA is only 25% violating the law, that's all good?
 
2013-08-21 01:28:08 PM
I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 01:30:38 PM

Pocket Ninja: Clearly, the semantic difference between the headline's words and the article's words mean there is nothing here about which anyone should be concerned. As all patriots know, we should never fear the government's ability to do something. This is why so many people who are fine with NSA spying programs completely support gun registration.


So if you say something that isn't true, it's just a "semantic difference", sort of like being "economical with the truth"?  Or is this one of your trolls?
 
2013-08-21 01:32:27 PM

Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting


I'm guessing its a catch all, parsed through some recognition programs to see certain words, addresses, etc... then checking against other stuff, then if it raises a flag, is brought to the attention of a human...who then looks at your phone calls, emails, library books checked out, credit report, name of the person you took to prom...
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 01:32:54 PM

Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting


I do think that the idea of being interesting enough to watch is a part of what attracts people to these sort of conspiracy theories.
 
2013-08-21 01:36:06 PM

vpb: Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting

I do think that the idea of being interesting enough to watch is a part of what attracts people to these sort of conspiracy theories.


This is how I feel about it...

i586.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-21 01:52:39 PM

Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting


That's hardly the point. See, what happens is, people with good intentions create powerful tools, and then later on people with bad intentions take those tools and use them for nefarious purposes.

Could this tool be used to identify US citizens that are talking about doing something against the government, because the government is ignoring certain parts of the Constitution? Then this is a tool that could really do some serious harm to our society.
 
2013-08-21 01:53:19 PM
images.nitrosell.com
 
2013-08-21 02:26:41 PM

vpb: We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.


Actually that's a pretty good comparison: We have the capacity to nuke Beijing, but we have the capacity to re-target and then nuke Chicago. And re-targeting nukes is not a few computer taps away.

It's publicly known NSA can spy on Americans with a keypress. Now imagine what we haven't heard about.
 
2013-08-21 02:31:26 PM
Again, the US government has the capability to spy on you. This will never change. The questions are 1) do they have the legal authority to spy on you? 2a) Are they abusing that authority? 2b) Are they breaking the law and doing it anyway?

The answer to 1 seems to be mostly no, barring unusual circumstance, and while you may have suspicions about the answers to 2a and/or 2b, so far all the "shocking news" has been about capability, which isn't actually all that new, and not about any actual abuses of that capability.
 
2013-08-21 02:44:17 PM
How is NSAnta Claus supposed to find out who is naughty and nice without spying on everyone?
 
2013-08-21 02:44:28 PM
Article: "The NSA is spying on 75% of the Internet!"

Reality: The NSA has the capability to log 75% of communications, but doesn't because of the vast amount of rules and regulations they have to adhere too.
 
2013-08-21 02:45:52 PM
Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.
 
2013-08-21 02:46:05 PM

Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting


It would be interesting to see how they calibrate or tune their filters. Do they use persons of interest to do that? Do they use fake data? Do they use some soccer mom's daily internet adventures? Fleshlight customers?
 
2013-08-21 02:46:18 PM

Rand's lacy underwear: Now imagine what we haven't heard about.


As someone who used to be in this line of work, this was the first thing outta my mouth when the story originally broke.
 
2013-08-21 02:46:27 PM

Outrageous Muff: Reality: The NSA has the capability to log 75% of communications, but doesn't because of the vast amount of rules and regulations they have to adhere too.


It's not like they were illegally doing this years ago and once they were found out to be doing it, just changed the laws to make it legal.

No, no, our government would never do anything like that.
 
2013-08-21 02:47:04 PM

The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.


"But they're keeping us SAFE!"
 
2013-08-21 02:47:09 PM
Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?
 
2013-08-21 02:47:10 PM
Obvious tag on vacation?  Where have you people been the last 10 years?
 
2013-08-21 02:47:17 PM

I_C_Weener: vpb: Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting

I do think that the idea of being interesting enough to watch is a part of what attracts people to these sort of conspiracy theories.

This is how I feel about it...

[i586.photobucket.com image 508x528]


LLS!
Ever have a kid ask to use your laptop and you think, "now, I'm pretty sure I closed that page but I could have forgot while I was wiping spunk off of my hands"?

Then, you have to tell the kid...sure, but hold on a second.


/I'm asking because I've heard that it happens.
 
2013-08-21 02:47:58 PM
farm3.staticflickr.com
 
2013-08-21 02:49:11 PM

Lando Lincoln: It's not like they were illegally doing this years ago and once they were found out to be doing it, just changed the laws to make it legal.

No, no, our government would never do anything like that.


Guess what. Governments have been spying on each other since the one cave found another cave and wanted to know what they were up too.  Your complete lack of understanding is this basic realm of international relations is stunning, but not unexpected.
 
2013-08-21 02:49:59 PM

The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.


The total feark left is a prime example of stockholm syndrome
 
PJ-
2013-08-21 02:50:04 PM

The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.


My personal favorite one is 'well if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be worried about'.  So if i'm doing nothing wrong, I should have no problem with being treated like a criminal?
 
2013-08-21 02:50:32 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.


The only group denying they do these things are the media, and you're taking their opinion over the NSA and CIA themselves who have said in no uncertain terms they do collect data on everyone. I guess we know who does your thinking for you.
 
2013-08-21 02:50:38 PM

Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?


Do you non-technical unpatriotic fascist boot-lickers realize the ease that a computer (or a whole farm of computers) can run data through filters?  Do you realize that these filters then mark data for review by a live human?

I don't understand the point you're making.  Every piece of digital data that goes across a physical line in the United States and is routed through commerical network hubs, is routed through NSA equipment that filters the data and looks for key words/phrases (or origination/destination) and either marks it for further review and stores the data, or decides it not worthwhile, and does not store the data.

You do know the post office is taking pictures of every piece of mail and storing them in databases??
 
2013-08-21 02:51:01 PM

Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?


guess you havent heard about that 2 billion dollar data hub they built... john oliver did a good piece on it, its on youtube.

try to keep up grandpa.
 
2013-08-21 02:51:01 PM

Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?


Which is why they can't waste time getting warrants.
 
2013-08-21 02:51:03 PM
Just a piece of paper.

a.abcnews.com
 
2013-08-21 02:51:36 PM

Al_Ed: Rand's lacy underwear: Now imagine what we haven't heard about.

As someone who used to be in this line of work, this was the first thing outta my mouth when the story originally broke.


I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training
 
2013-08-21 02:52:10 PM
Let's try paraphrasing former agent Le Carre again; "post-war security agencies have cost their own countries more than they're worth."

Now let's see if we'll get a calm, dispassionate analysis of his theorem, or the simple-minded ad hominem attacks we got the last time we advanced the idea.

/I know, welcome to fark :)
 
2013-08-21 02:52:19 PM
The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

We can spy on them... we have the capacity.

It's the six billion petabyte plan.

In all seriousness, it's a bit unnerving. The oversight is thin, and the people doing the oversight are the jackinapes who voted 40 times to repeal Obamacare.
 
2013-08-21 02:52:47 PM
Hello...just stay in the 25% of the internet they're not monitoring.   Duhhh?
 
2013-08-21 02:53:36 PM

Outrageous Muff: Article: "The NSA is spying on 75% of the Internet!"

Reality: The NSA has the capability to log 75% of communications, but doesn't because of the vast amount of rules and regulations they have to adhere too.


Yet there are repeated reports of violation of these SOPs.

I know that government doesn't care how much i search for redheads when looking for pr4ns, but that doesn't mean this data can't be used in other ways that was not intended when the rules and regs were created. I mean, it appears any analyst can walk away with loads of data and give it to a journalist. That alone tells me these programs need far more rigorous oversight and security measures. If those need to be looked at, then I bet the oversight into controlling law conformity needs addressing as well.

There will always be spying - some will be necessary, some won't. The trick is to have enough vigilance to force oversight to keep the amount of power from getting out of hand.
 
2013-08-21 02:53:56 PM

AGremlin: Hello...just stay in the 25% of the internet they're not monitoring. Duhhh?


That's reserved for the illuminati pedophile ring.
 
2013-08-21 02:54:00 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.


I agree with your point about the article and the headline.

But once government gets the ability or power (two different things, yes) to do or for something, it rarely lets go.
 
2013-08-21 02:54:32 PM

Outrageous Muff: Article: "The NSA is spying on 75% of the Internet!"


Reality: The NSA has the capability to log 75% of communications, but doesn't get to nearly half that because of the vast amount of rules and regulations they have to adhere too ignore.

FTFM
 
2013-08-21 02:54:52 PM

PJ-: My personal favorite one is 'well if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be worried about'. So if i'm doing nothing wrong, I should have no problem with being treated like a criminal?


Gee, people who are against gun registration, arbitrary gun bans, and many other of the proposals floated for gun control say the same damn thing and are called paranoid.

NOT SO FUNNY NOW, IS IT?!
 
2013-08-21 02:55:24 PM

uncleacid: Just a piece of paper.

[a.abcnews.com image 640x360]


A piece of paper that is being treated like this more and more:

1389blog.com
 
2013-08-21 02:56:05 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training


As has been mentioned, the actual usefulness of what data has actually been collected I'd imagine is questionable...simply from sheer volume. But that doesn't make the act of collection proper or legal.
 
2013-08-21 02:56:38 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.


I came in here to say this. Jesus christ, you people are tech-illiterate.
 
2013-08-21 02:57:12 PM
This is why I always attach MP3's to my emails. If the RIAA finds out that NSA is listening to music without paying for it, the NSA will have their internet service disconnected.
 
2013-08-21 02:57:26 PM

I_C_Weener: I just can't wait until the next Republican president so that I can say, "But Obama."


Obama made congress create this law before he was even President! That's how deep it goes!

And he won't even use his dictator powers to stop it!
 
2013-08-21 02:57:30 PM

uncleacid: Just a piece of paper.

[a.abcnews.com image 640x360]


I thought it was hemp.
 
2013-08-21 02:58:03 PM

Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?


So instead of speaking up now when its merely a moral outrage we should let em do whatever they want for a decade until the technology improves enough for it to be a practical outrage as well?

Any reason why?
 
2013-08-21 02:58:04 PM

The Irresponsible Captain: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

We can spy on them... we have the capacity.

It's the six billion petabyte plan.

In all seriousness, it's a bit unnerving. The oversight is thin, and the people doing the oversight are the jackinapes who voted 40 times to repeal Obamacare.


When did Feinstein (Senate Intelligence Committee head - in charge over oversight) vote to overturn Obamacare? And what does Obamacare have to do with NSA spying?
 
2013-08-21 02:58:17 PM
The conclusion on the redacted document was very clear.

EVERYTHING IS FINE!!! What more do you people need?!?!?!
 
2013-08-21 02:58:59 PM

Al_Ed: DROxINxTHExWIND: I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training

As has been mentioned, the actual usefulness of what data has actually been collected I'd imagine is questionable...simply from sheer volume. But that doesn't make the act of collection proper or legal.


Right, because people always do things over a period of years that don't work and aren't useful to them. Just like the question of whether steroids work.
 
2013-08-21 02:59:20 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Al_Ed: Rand's lacy underwear: Now imagine what we haven't heard about.

As someone who used to be in this line of work, this was the first thing outta my mouth when the story originally broke.

I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training


I remember when the NSA scandal first broke, venting my outrage to my mother over crepes at iHop.
Given how liberal she is, I figured she'd be outraged right along with me.

Imagine my surprise when she tells me that "back in the day" she helped build some of the equipment
that enabled the NSA to do what they do and that one of my uncles, who was in the Army and later
was a DoD and DHS contractor, was an actual "listener".

GAH! I couldn't believe it.

It's so sad. It's come to the point these days where if I have to search for something that might even
have the slightest chance of seeming remotely "flaggable", I rack my brain thinking of an alternate
way to search for it without using any potential "hot" words.
 
2013-08-21 02:59:35 PM

mraudacia: guess you havent heard about that 2 billion dollar data hub they built... john oliver did a good piece on it, its on youtube.

try to keep up grandpa.


A data hub, next to housing development, that was publicly announced as a data hub by the government. I don't know if you are aware, but Big Data is the new thing and housing the servers for an organization as large as the US Government would require a large building. But you keep thinking someone in some shadowy room is logging all the cock pics you sext to people.

Snarfangel: Which is why they can't waste time getting warrants.


The NSA does not need warrants since foreign nationals do not have the same rights as Americans. Deal with it.

However regulations say that all NSA collected data can not be used against a US citizen and that all dealings with citizens are handed over to the FBI who does get warrants. But don't let that keep you from your Jackbooted Governments Brown Shirt fantasies.
 
2013-08-21 02:59:55 PM

Al_Ed: DROxINxTHExWIND: I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training

As has been mentioned, the actual usefulness of what data has actually been collected I'd imagine is questionable...simply from sheer volume. But that doesn't make the act of collection proper or legal.


You need a better understanding of the term "collection" if you are going to claim it is illegal. The law passed by Congress makes it legal.
 
2013-08-21 03:00:39 PM
As expected.  About a month ago a person from the TLAs told me about the first all hands briefing they had after Snowden.  The person said it was going to get 'much worse'.

/welcomes all of you to the party.
/better late than never
/can I take your coat?
 
2013-08-21 03:00:49 PM

cameroncrazy1984: vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.

I came in here to say this. Jesus christ, you people are tech-illiterate.


Why would they create a system that they have no intention of using? Why would a guy with 1984 in his name not be worried about the possibilities?
 
2013-08-21 03:00:55 PM
When we hear about intercepting credible threats, where the f*ck did you think it came from?  A guy hiding in a bathroom stall with his feet up?
 
2013-08-21 03:01:01 PM

CrazyCracka420: Obvious tag on vacation?  Where have you people been the last 10 years?


I think the real story here is how many people apparently had no idea the NSA was the NSA.
 
2013-08-21 03:01:25 PM

skinink: [farm3.staticflickr.com image 300x187]


Love that movie, so far ahead of its time.
 
2013-08-21 03:02:05 PM

Kit Fister: PJ-: My personal favorite one is 'well if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be worried about'. So if i'm doing nothing wrong, I should have no problem with being treated like a criminal?

Gee, people who are against gun registration, arbitrary gun bans, and many other of the proposals floated for gun control say the same damn thing and are called paranoid.

NOT SO FUNNY NOW, IS IT?!


I bet you think that made sense.

Cuz it didn't.
 
2013-08-21 03:02:43 PM
Will the NSA please send me an extra life for Candy Crush?

/I'm surprised Google hasn't had me assassinated yet because of my search history.
 
2013-08-21 03:02:52 PM
Also the FBI and other spying agencies certainly would never illegally spy on citizens, it's not like Hoover used this information for furthering political agendas in this country.

Seriously, you unpatriotic spineless farks who support this illegal spying on our own citizens, are pretty farking ignorant to our own country's history.
 
2013-08-21 03:03:25 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: cameroncrazy1984: vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.

I came in here to say this. Jesus christ, you people are tech-illiterate.

Why would they create a system that they have no intention of using? Why would a guy with 1984 in his name not be worried about the possibilities?


Jesus. Talk about tech illiterate.
 
2013-08-21 03:03:33 PM
 It's the whole reason that the internet was released to the masses to begin with. To have another dimension in which developed countries could dominate. The good news is that they didn't think their clever plan all the way through. Oh yeah,
fark the NSA
 
2013-08-21 03:03:42 PM

Outrageous Muff: mraudacia: guess you havent heard about that 2 billion dollar data hub they built... john oliver did a good piece on it, its on youtube.

try to keep up grandpa.

A data hub, next to housing development, that was publicly announced as a data hub by the government. I don't know if you are aware, but Big Data is the new thing and housing the servers for an organization as large as the US Government would require a large building. But you keep thinking someone in some shadowy room is logging all the cock pics you sext to people.

Snarfangel: Which is why they can't waste time getting warrants.

The NSA does not need warrants since foreign nationals do not have the same rights as Americans. Deal with it.

However regulations say that all NSA collected data can not be used against a US citizen and that all dealings with citizens are handed over to the FBI who does get warrants. But don't let that keep you from your Jackbooted Governments Brown Shirt fantasies.


And... fruit of the poison tree there.

1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

Of course this has been going on for a loooong time.
 
2013-08-21 03:04:00 PM

Al_Ed: As has been mentioned, the actual usefulness of what data has actually been collected I'd imagine is questionable...simply from sheer volume.


The rationale from the CIA themselves is that they collect and store all data on everyone indefinitely so if someone becomes interesting to them later they can go back and see everything they were doing in the months or years before.

And this is no longer uncertain, they have said this in public. The notion there is some uncertainty about it is a media fabrication. One which certain people are all to eager to grab on to.
 
2013-08-21 03:04:13 PM

Ned Stark: So instead of speaking up now when its merely a moral outrage we should let em do whatever they want for a decade until the technology improves enough for it to be a practical outrage as well?

Any reason why?


Can you think of a reason 1)Why the government would collect US citizen data without a warrant. 2)Then arrest people on that data. 3)Then find a judge willing to convict you on that data. 4)Then finding an appeals court to uphold that verdict. 5)Find another appeals court to uphold that verdict. 6)The US Supreme Court to uphold that verdict. 7)A populace that would allow such a violation.
 
2013-08-21 03:04:56 PM

J. Frank Parnell: AGremlin: Hello...just stay in the 25% of the internet they're not monitoring. Duhhh?

That's reserved for the illuminati pedophile ring.


The Vatican has it's own internet?  That's swank.
 
2013-08-21 03:05:32 PM

Nana's Vibrator: When we hear about intercepting credible threats, where the f*ck did you think it came from?  A guy hiding in a bathroom stall with his feet up?


No. A law enforcement official with a warrant, either from a military or civilian court. That was always my guess, anyway.
 
2013-08-21 03:05:55 PM

mediablitz: You need a better understanding of the term "collection" if you are going to claim it is illegal. The law passed by Congress makes it legal.


The law passed by Congress is superseded by the constitution, and I would hope for some good precedents when someone with pockets challenges something.
 
2013-08-21 03:06:30 PM

cameroncrazy1984: vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.

I came in here to say this. Jesus christ, you people are tech-illiterate.


The problem with government confessions is that they never reveal all that they're doing and never all at once. It's like when a teenager has just totaled your car and you're trying to drag the facts out of him, bit by horrifying bit: "Just a fender-bender, it will buff right out" * half an hour later * "yeah, we drove it over a cliff. It's completely wrecked." The NSA has a long history of being well . . . . less than candid about their unconstitutional activities. You have to consider the source.
 
2013-08-21 03:07:06 PM
Government agency installs equipment at private facilities to monitor private citizens' "metadata", with no oversight and without voluntarily disclosing the fact that they're doing it or the particulars of it... and everyone's OK with this.  Very good.   I'm just a paranoid guntoting survivalist teabagger conservatard for being concerned about this.

The fact that the government can just mandate private companies comply with this  doesn't trouble anyone either?   Did AT&T volunteer for operation Blarney?   Or were they forced to?  Were they paid to participate?  Well, whatever, its all OK, because the government 'cares' about us, and will give us all health care and food and free abortions and lots of marijuana and same sex marriages.
 
2013-08-21 03:07:34 PM

BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation


"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.
 
2013-08-21 03:08:20 PM
 
2013-08-21 03:09:12 PM

mediablitz: DROxINxTHExWIND: cameroncrazy1984: vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.

I came in here to say this. Jesus christ, you people are tech-illiterate.

Why would they create a system that they have no intention of using? Why would a guy with 1984 in his name not be worried about the possibilities?

Jesus. Talk about tech illiterate.



My question was an opportunity. A cool person who feels they have more information would respond to let me know what they think  I don't know. But an old douchebag will use it as an opportunity to suggest that they're superior becauuse of their knowledge, as they fail to support their claim.
 
2013-08-21 03:09:19 PM
Hackers and advertisement companies have a access to a higher percentage of the internet, I think the NSA can do better.
 
2013-08-21 03:10:18 PM

Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?


You don't understand the true purpose of this. It is not preventative but retaliatory. Someone pisses off a politician, you can go root throuhg all of their files
 
2013-08-21 03:10:27 PM
Phineas, I'm a liberal who isn't scared of everything killing me (so I don't drive a big truck, don't cling to guns or the bible) and I take your concerns just as seriously as you do.  So this certainly can cross the political aisle.

It really comes down to two or three camps:
"are you a nationalist who supports the government 100% and thinks people who criticize it are unpatriotic?"
"Are you a person who believes government will overstep it's bounds and the citizens need to keep them in check"
"Are you the cynical type who doesn't think it's important or that the government cares what they personally are doing"
 
2013-08-21 03:10:58 PM

nmrsnr: Again, the US government has the capability to spy on you. This will never change. The questions are 1) do they have the legal authority to spy on you? 2a) Are they abusing that authority? 2b) Are they breaking the law and doing it anyway?

The answer to 1 seems to be mostly no, barring unusual circumstance, and while you may have suspicions about the answers to 2a and/or 2b, so far all the "shocking news" has been about capability, which isn't actually all that new, and not about any actual abuses of that capability.


The NSA themselves acknowledge thousands of those abuses.

Outrageous Muff: Lando Lincoln: It's not like they were illegally doing this years ago and once they were found out to be doing it, just changed the laws to make it legal.

No, no, our government would never do anything like that.

Guess what. Governments have been spying on each other since the one cave found another cave and wanted to know what they were up too.  Your complete lack of understanding is this basic realm of international relations is stunning, but not unexpected.


He wasn't talking about governments spying on each other.  He was talking about government spying on their own citizens.  How often that happens is not an equivocation of it being proper.
 
2013-08-21 03:11:06 PM

Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.



Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.
 
2013-08-21 03:11:06 PM
Next stage: We record and data-mine absolutely everything in every electronic form of communication using super-computers programmed to look for suspicious key-words and patterns. But humans do not read more than a fraction of the data, after it is tagged by the computers for a human judgment and more complete surveillance if deemed useful.

In other words, we hardly know more about you than Facebook, Twitter, Google, your blog, your Mother's friends, your credit card company, your telephone company, your cable company, your bank, your school, your wife's Private Eye, and your official records know about you.

Well, apart from the kind of information that can only be obtained by sophisticated data-mining and which consists of secrets that you don't even know about yourself.

Your sudden interest in what the government knows about you is going on your permanent record, citizen.
 
2013-08-21 03:11:34 PM
I read an old book on propaganda years ago.  A lot of it had to do with the cold war.  Something always stuck with me.  Essentially it was an expansion of the phrase: 'guilty dog barks loudest'.  Or rather, accuse your enemies of doing what you are doing.

It's kind of like when one is cheating on their SO and think that the SO has found out so they go into complete 'accuse the other of what I've been doing' mode, hoping it will deflect accusations.

The US is constantly barking very loudly.
 
2013-08-21 03:12:51 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.


https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence- la undering
 
2013-08-21 03:13:21 PM

Nemo's Brother: You don't understand the true purpose of this. It is not preventative but retaliatory. Someone pisses off a politician, you can go root throuhg all of their files


Their files? How do you think the world works? Politicians hire PI's all the time. You honestly think the government spends all day working to keep you down?
 
2013-08-21 03:13:28 PM
I'm curious... to those of you here who say "they aren't actually monitoring, they just have the capability to monitor", would you be as dismissive of this situation if the president had a different (LETTER) behind his name?

Be honest with yourselves.  I'm sure some of you actually would be as dismissive, but I'm equally sure that some or you would be very vocal about your displeasure.


/personally, I think it's bad no matter who's in charge
//but I try not to be a partisan idiot most of the time, too.
 
2013-08-21 03:14:26 PM

The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.


CrazyCracka420: Also the FBI and other spying agencies certainly would never illegally spy on citizens, it's not like Hoover used this information for furthering political agendas in this country.

Seriously, you unpatriotic spineless farks who support this illegal spying on our own citizens, are pretty farking ignorant to our own country's history.


We need Inigo Montoya up in here. "Illegal" does not mean "I don't like it." I do not support illegal spying, but as of right now none of what has been reported on by the press has mentioned any law breaking, just that the NSA has the capability of intercepting and reading lots of information which they do not do until they have an approved warrant from a judge.
 
2013-08-21 03:14:47 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.


Yet. The word you are looking for is 'yet'. They wouldn't have the capacity to do a gotdamned thing if they didn't have the intention of using it.

Don't make excuses for this shiat. It is wholesaley (is that a word?) unAmerican.
 
2013-08-21 03:15:14 PM

Outrageous Muff: Ned Stark: So instead of speaking up now when its merely a moral outrage we should let em do whatever they want for a decade until the technology improves enough for it to be a practical outrage as well?

Any reason why?

Can you think of a reason 1)Why the government would collect US citizen data without a warrant. 2)Then arrest people on that data. 3)Then find a judge willing to convict you on that data. 4)Then finding an appeals court to uphold that verdict. 5)Find another appeals court to uphold that verdict. 6)The US Supreme Court to uphold that verdict. 7)A populace that would allow such a violation.


1) so the instant they decide to slap down any given citizen for any reason they can pull up the complete record of everything that person has ever done and go over it with a fine toothed comb matching actions to crimes and then hauling them off, or collecting reputation destroying breeches of mere taboo and making them public.
2)see 1.
3) hardly difficult. Perhaps not even nessecary becade, again, destroying a reputation can be enough.
4-5) irrelevant as fark
6)not at all implausible.
7)you, for a start.
 
2013-08-21 03:15:25 PM
Buckle up... Drudge dusted off the gif!

www.drudgereport.com
 
2013-08-21 03:15:37 PM

BafflerMeal: I read an old book on propaganda years ago.  A lot of it had to do with the cold war.  Something always stuck with me.  Essentially it was an expansion of the phrase: 'guilty dog barks loudest'.  Or rather, accuse your enemies of doing what you are doing.

It's kind of like when one is cheating on their SO and think that the SO has found out so they go into complete 'accuse the other of what I've been doing' mode, hoping it will deflect accusations.

The US is constantly barking very loudly.


It's a ruff world.
 
2013-08-21 03:15:56 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Nana's Vibrator: When we hear about intercepting credible threats, where the f*ck did you think it came from?  A guy hiding in a bathroom stall with his feet up?

No. A law enforcement official with a warrant, either from a military or civilian court. That was always my guess, anyway.


Being facetious?  No?  I wouldn't think it's possible that you have more faith in government than I do.
My thoughts 1) illegally/unconstitutionally obtained information 2) legal surveillance 3) legally obtained probable cause 4) legal warrant
I just don't think they randomly start spying on people.  They likely point themselves in the right direction with dirty info.

On top of that, enforcement doesn't have time to worry about every single citizen.  Petty criminals are likely found and ignored with whatever info they obtain.  But hey, if they want to know what porn I surf or why my fantasy football team is always in last place, I say let 'em.  When it gets out of line, they'll know about it.
 
2013-08-21 03:16:30 PM

Nemo's Brother: Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?

You don't understand the true purpose of this. It is not preventative but retaliatory. Someone pisses off a politician, you can go root throuhg all of their files


That strategy worked for Nixon, for a little while. It backfired, though.
 
2013-08-21 03:16:39 PM

Nana's Vibrator: When we hear about intercepting credible threats, where the f*ck did you think it came from?  A guy hiding in a bathroom stall with his feet up?


Like the Al Qaeda "conference call"? That kind of "hearing about credible threats"?
 
2013-08-21 03:16:57 PM

BafflerMeal: DROxINxTHExWIND: Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence- la undering


On yes, a organization that thinks all media is fair use and there should be no protection for individual's ideas because the collective good is more important.
 
2013-08-21 03:17:02 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.


They've been doing that since mid 2000's at least.  I remember reading stories about the information that was being gathered from the NSA was mainly used for domestic law enforcement, not to catch "turrists".
 
2013-08-21 03:17:11 PM

Outrageous Muff: Guess what. Governments have been spying on each other


We're not talking about governments spying on each other.
 
2013-08-21 03:17:29 PM

HypnozombieX:  It's the whole reason that the internet was released to the masses to begin with. To have another dimension in which developed countries could dominate. The good news is that they didn't think their clever plan all the way through. Oh yeah,
fark the NSA


There's paranoia, then there is PARANOIA...
 
2013-08-21 03:17:55 PM

nmrsnr: The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.

CrazyCracka420: Also the FBI and other spying agencies certainly would never illegally spy on citizens, it's not like Hoover used this information for furthering political agendas in this country.

Seriously, you unpatriotic spineless farks who support this illegal spying on our own citizens, are pretty farking ignorant to our own country's history.

We need Inigo Montoya up in here. "Illegal" does not mean "I don't like it." I do not support illegal spying, but as of right now none of what has been reported on by the press has mentioned any law breaking, just that the NSA has the capability of intercepting and reading lots of information which they do not do until they have an approved warrant from a judge.


Haha, sure they do *pats nmrsnr on the head*, sure they do.
 
2013-08-21 03:19:12 PM

GanjSmokr: I'm curious... to those of you here who say "they aren't actually monitoring, they just have the capability to monitor", would you be as dismissive of this situation if the president had a different (LETTER) behind his name?

Be honest with yourselves.  I'm sure some of you actually would be as dismissive, but I'm equally sure that some or you would be very vocal about your displeasure.


/personally, I think it's bad no matter who's in charge
//but I try not to be a partisan idiot most of the time, too.



Presidente?
 
2013-08-21 03:19:43 PM

mediablitz: HypnozombieX:  It's the whole reason that the internet was released to the masses to begin with. To have another dimension in which developed countries could dominate. The good news is that they didn't think their clever plan all the way through. Oh yeah,
fark the NSA

There's paranoia, then there is PARANOIA...


Yeah, next he'll be saying the internet was invented and given to the world by DARPA.
 
2013-08-21 03:19:44 PM

Ned Stark: Outrageous Muff: Ned Stark: So instead of speaking up now when its merely a moral outrage we should let em do whatever they want for a decade until the technology improves enough for it to be a practical outrage as well?

Any reason why?

Can you think of a reason 1)Why the government would collect US citizen data without a warrant. 2)Then arrest people on that data. 3)Then find a judge willing to convict you on that data. 4)Then finding an appeals court to uphold that verdict. 5)Find another appeals court to uphold that verdict. 6)The US Supreme Court to uphold that verdict. 7)A populace that would allow such a violation.

1) so the instant they decide to slap down any given citizen for any reason they can pull up the complete record of everything that person has ever done and go over it with a fine toothed comb matching actions to crimes and then hauling them off, or collecting reputation destroying breeches of mere taboo and making them public.
2)see 1.
3) hardly difficult. Perhaps not even nessecary becade, again, destroying a reputation can be enough.
4-5) irrelevant as fark
6)not at all implausible.
7)you, for a start.


And they don't need to use the data for "legal" proceedings against the person.  They can use it for blackmailing, or to otherwise put pressure on people.   Look at the FBI during Hoover's reign. They used all sorts of information on citizens to further "their" own agenda.  They used it against political rivals, against community leaders (like MLK), and other people in social movements.
 
2013-08-21 03:20:50 PM

Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: DROxINxTHExWIND: Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence- la undering

On yes, a organization that thinks all media is fair use and there should be no protection for individual's ideas because the collective good is more important.



A brilliant straw man.  Flail moar.
 
2013-08-21 03:21:03 PM

midigod: The NSA themselves acknowledge thousands of those abuses.


THAT is real news. Although the fact that they keep those numbers and ran an internal investigation points more to "normal bureaucracy" than "diabolical big brother agency," but it's disturbing that they don't have to share those numbers with the Congressmen who authorize the program. They should see how often, and how badly, it messes up as part of their decision making.
 
2013-08-21 03:21:27 PM
Has anyone mentioned how allies like the UK's GCHQ collects large caches of emails and other data, and then sends it neatly packaged to NSA and DIA? That way NSA can claim they didn't "collect" the information.

Nor is this news. James Bamford reported on all this over ten years ago.
 
2013-08-21 03:21:39 PM

Lando Lincoln: We're not talking about governments spying on each other.


No, you're talking about a subject you only know have the side off, and when you are told it you dismiss it because the "government is evil and lies to us". You think a democratic government that has secrets is evil, yet you cheer China and Russia for defending "freedoms".
 
2013-08-21 03:22:42 PM

J. Frank Parnell: mediablitz: HypnozombieX:  It's the whole reason that the internet was released to the masses to begin with. To have another dimension in which developed countries could dominate. The good news is that they didn't think their clever plan all the way through. Oh yeah,
fark the NSA

There's paranoia, then there is PARANOIA...

Yeah, next he'll be saying the internet was invented and given to the world by DARPA.


If I could go back in time, I would change their name to the Defense Enhanced Research Projects Agency.

Strictly for entertainment purposes.
 
2013-08-21 03:23:01 PM

T-Servo: K's GCHQ collects large caches of emails and other data, and then sends it neatly packaged to NSA and DIA? That way NSA can claim they didn't "collect" the information.

Nor is this news. James Bamford reported on all this over ten years ago.



Yep.  The FISA and foreign service intel has been bypassing the 4th for a good long while now.
 
2013-08-21 03:23:09 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: My question was an opportunity. A cool person who feels they have more information would respond to let me know what they think I don't know. But an old douchebag will use it as an opportunity to suggest that they're superior becauuse of their knowledge, as they fail to support their claim.


Yes, your "1984" comment was meant to foment conversation. CLEARLY.

I'm not explaining data collection from my tablet. Educate yourself.
 
2013-08-21 03:23:49 PM
nmrsnr:
We need Inigo Montoya up in here. "Illegal" does not mean "I don't like it." I do not support illegal spying, but as of right now none of what has been reported on by the press has mentioned any law breaking, just that the NSA has the capability of intercepting and reading lots of information which they do not do until they have an approved warrant from a judge.

lying to congress is a crime
 
2013-08-21 03:23:49 PM

mediablitz: Nana's Vibrator: When we hear about intercepting credible threats, where the f*ck did you think it came from?  A guy hiding in a bathroom stall with his feet up?

Like the Al Qaeda "conference call"? That kind of "hearing about credible threats"?


Well, yeah, but that wasn't a guy in a bathroom stall writing on toilet paper.  He was in the drop-ceiling and translated the whole conference call on a ceiling tile.  He actually smuggled the whole tile out of Yemen in one piece saying he was a hunchback.  True Story.
 
2013-08-21 03:24:00 PM

CrazyCracka420: Haha, sure they do *pats nmrsnr on the head*, sure they do.


Hooray, I was just talking about these yesterday and now I have a reason to post one:

www.visi.com
 
2013-08-21 03:24:09 PM
Face it, you all think the government is lying to you. So no matter what they tell you, you will dismiss it as a lie.

Basically:
static.someecards.com
 
2013-08-21 03:24:47 PM

T-Servo: Has anyone mentioned how allies like the UK's GCHQ collects large caches of emails and other data, and then sends it neatly packaged to NSA and DIA? That way NSA can claim they didn't "collect" the information.

Nor is this news. James Bamford reported on all this over ten years ago.


Typical liberal. Believing 'facts' and 'reality' over anything the media says.
 
2013-08-21 03:24:59 PM
Only 10% of the prison population is innocent, so it is all good, right? Rights? What the hell are those?

Gobama, go sheeple. You guys cried bloody murder because under Bush there were rumors if you took out bomb making books in a library for might be reported. Not a single incident I can remember hearing about. Obama? Record everyone's telephone and Internet traffic, no problem. Sick the IRS and EPA on your political enemies, no problem. Americans killed overseas because of screw ups? Who cares....

Hippiecrits man, big time.
 
2013-08-21 03:25:20 PM

MadMattressMack: redheads when looking for pr4ns


Ginger Prawns?
 
2013-08-21 03:26:08 PM

J. Frank Parnell: mediablitz: HypnozombieX:  It's the whole reason that the internet was released to the masses to begin with. To have another dimension in which developed countries could dominate. The good news is that they didn't think their clever plan all the way through. Oh yeah,
fark the NSA

There's paranoia, then there is PARANOIA...

Yeah, next he'll be saying the internet was invented and given to the world by DARPA.


So they worked with universities to create the internet with the evil plan that they could then track everyone?

That's what you are going with?
 
2013-08-21 03:26:18 PM
Due to the invention of Google toilet Internet, cameras have been placed to observe your shiatty data uploads to prevent piracy.
i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-21 03:26:30 PM

Voiceofreason01: lying to congress is a crime


Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.
 
2013-08-21 03:26:42 PM

midigod: The NSA themselves acknowledge thousands of those abuses.


From your link: "The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders."

I hate to tell you this, but if you look at any situation where people are collecting confidential data on you (hospitals, credit card companies, ISPs), you're going to see large numbers of violations. Any time you employ human beings to manage confidential data, there are going to be violations.

The question is what the institution is doing about it, and what other solutions are available.

Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.
 
2013-08-21 03:27:20 PM
NSA: We try to only spy on foreign targets, but get the occasional US citizen. Latest Leak: We tap into about 75% of US internet traffic and set our own filters with no oversight to worry about

Subby both those things can be true. AT&T "taps" into their lines to it doesn't mean AT&T is listening in to call those conversations.
 
2013-08-21 03:27:44 PM

Outrageous Muff: No, you're talking about a subject you only know have the side off, and when you are told it you dismiss it because the "government is evil and lies to us". You think a democratic government that has secrets is evil, yet you cheer China and Russia for defending "freedoms".


No, I don't think that a government that has secrets is evil. When did I cheer China and Russia for defending "freedoms?"

I'm talking to a crazy person, aren't I. Dag nabbit.
 
2013-08-21 03:28:09 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Al_Ed: Rand's lacy underwear: Now imagine what we haven't heard about.

As someone who used to be in this line of work, this was the first thing outta my mouth when the story originally broke.

I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training


Which trutherism do you mean?  The one where Bush ignored the warning so he could get the wars he wanted.  Or that one where government agent actively planted the charges to do a 'controlled' demolition of the towers?
 
2013-08-21 03:28:11 PM
And as this thread goes on I get an AP news alert: NSA collected thousands of US communications with no connection to terrorism.

But hey, just because they can doesn't mean they are right? They're only spying on terrorists, been doing it for years, nothing to see here.
 
2013-08-21 03:30:04 PM

nmrsnr: Again, the US government has the capability to spy on you. This will never change.


Your posts over the past weeks on this topic all echo the "nothing new here, not to worry, the good adults are in charge" line.  It is time to retake the test you display on your profile, where you characterize yourself as a left-leaning libertarian.  If your posts represent your views then truer answers and/or a better test would likely peg you as more authoritarian.
 
2013-08-21 03:30:10 PM

js34603: And as this thread goes on I get an AP news alert: NSA collected thousands of US communications with no connection to terrorism.

But hey, just because they can doesn't mean they are right? They're only spying on terrorists, been doing it for years, nothing to see here.


Oh, very well. They have only been spying on terrorists and pre-terrorists.
 
2013-08-21 03:30:20 PM

Thunderpipes: Only 10% of the prison population is innocent, so it is all good, right? Rights? What the hell are those?

Gobama, go sheeple. You guys cried bloody murder because under Bush there were rumors if you took out bomb making books in a library for might be reported. Not a single incident I can remember hearing about. Obama? Record everyone's telephone and Internet traffic, no problem. Sick the IRS and EPA on your political enemies, no problem. Americans killed overseas because of screw ups? Who cares....

Hippiecrits man, big time.


I guess you don't notice all the liberals saying this is wrong. Why would that be? Doesn't fit your need for confirmation bias?

And for the last time, OBAMA DIDN'T AUTHORIZE THIS! Congress passed the law. Obama isn't a dictator.

Keep on with your "I'm SO above it all" bullshiat if you like. You just look childish.
 
2013-08-21 03:31:01 PM
Is [Obvious] tag on holiday this week?   Or is it just being detained by UK customs agents?
 
2013-08-21 03:31:15 PM

nmrsnr: Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.


That doesn't negate a lie. If you saw me smack somebody and then you asked me if I just smacked somebody and I said, "No, I didn't," that doesn't mean I was not lying.
 
2013-08-21 03:31:48 PM

mediablitz: DROxINxTHExWIND: My question was an opportunity. A cool person who feels they have more information would respond to let me know what they think I don't know. But an old douchebag will use it as an opportunity to suggest that they're superior becauuse of their knowledge, as they fail to support their claim.

Yes, your "1984" comment was meant to foment conversation. CLEARLY.

I'm not explaining data collection from my tablet. Educate yourself.



Mining the comments for jokes to justify your douchbaggery is weak. Any dumbass can walk around claiming to know shiat while citing nothing. But, to do it with an air of superiority makes it a little more special.
 
2013-08-21 03:32:21 PM

nmrsnr: Voiceofreason01: lying to congress is a crime

Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.


I'm embarrassed whenever anyone trots out the "Clapper lied!!!" silliness. His response is online, in PDF form. He misunderstood a question. He's really old. He clarified as soon as he realized he misunderstood.
 
2013-08-21 03:32:22 PM

Thunderpipes: Only 10% of the prison population is innocent, so it is all good, right? Rights? What the hell are those?

Gobama, go sheeple. You guys cried bloody murder because under Bush there were rumors if you took out bomb making books in a library for might be reported. Not a single incident I can remember hearing about. Obama? Record everyone's telephone and Internet traffic, no problem. Sick the IRS and EPA on your political enemies, no problem. Americans killed overseas because of screw ups? Who cares....

Hippiecrits man, big time.


You're a farking idiot (as usual).  Liberals (like myself) who voted (reluctantly) for Obama are just as upset as conservatives.  There's conservatives who are fascist boot lickers who also defend or marginalize these spying programs.

nmrsnr:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a337/crazycracka420/gofyourelf_zps d2 ff1e10.gif

I already know the NSA is spying on us illegally, they've admitted it, and I have firsthand knowledge.  Keep apologizing for the government stepping all over your rights. I'm sure all the men and women who bravely defended your freedoms are saluting patriotic Americans like yourself who willingly give up those freedoms.  Go fark yourself.
 
2013-08-21 03:33:11 PM
75% of the internet? Damn! That's a LOT of porn.
 
2013-08-21 03:33:13 PM

mediablitz: So they worked with universities to create the internet with the evil plan that they could then track everyone?


And you're saying the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency often does things simply out of the goodness of its heart and has little or no interest in defense?
 
2013-08-21 03:33:26 PM
Yes yes, you should trust the NSA because they would never lie to you.

Ask the CIA, they'll totally vouch for them.
 
2013-08-21 03:33:36 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: mediablitz: DROxINxTHExWIND: My question was an opportunity. A cool person who feels they have more information would respond to let me know what they think I don't know. But an old douchebag will use it as an opportunity to suggest that they're superior becauuse of their knowledge, as they fail to support their claim.

Yes, your "1984" comment was meant to foment conversation. CLEARLY.

I'm not explaining data collection from my tablet. Educate yourself.


Mining the comments for jokes to justify your douchbaggery is weak. Any dumbass can walk around claiming to know shiat while citing nothing. But, to do it with an air of superiority makes it a little more special.


So you know NOTHING about the subject, and you're butthurt because you are ignorant AND unwilling to do your own research?

Nice. Keep whining.
 
2013-08-21 03:33:45 PM

draypresct: midigod: The NSA themselves acknowledge thousands of those abuses.

From your link: "The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders."

I hate to tell you this, but if you look at any situation where people are collecting confidential data on you (hospitals, credit card companies, ISPs), you're going to see large numbers of violations. Any time you employ human beings to manage confidential data, there are going to be violations.

The question is what the institution is doing about it, and what other solutions are available.

Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.


"All the intelligence [the NSA] need[s]" is definitely under dispute as well. That was a pretty neat little verbal trick you tried to take it off the table with though.
 
2013-08-21 03:34:35 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: 75% of the internet? Damn! That's a LOT of porn.


Exactly. On the other hand, I bet their PornTube site has all the best videos!
 
2013-08-21 03:35:38 PM

J. Frank Parnell: mediablitz: So they worked with universities to create the internet with the evil plan that they could then track everyone?

And you're saying the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency often does things simply out of the goodness of its heart and has little or no interest in defense?


I'm saying you are claiming a government agency had AMAZING future knowldge powers. Hell, they foresaw Facebook from simple network code!

You are making a leap so fanciful, Mary Poppins applauds...
 
2013-08-21 03:35:55 PM

wingnut396: DROxINxTHExWIND: Al_Ed: Rand's lacy underwear: Now imagine what we haven't heard about.

As someone who used to be in this line of work, this was the first thing outta my mouth when the story originally broke.

I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training

Which trutherism do you mean?  The one where Bush ignored the warning so he could get the wars he wanted.  Or that one where government agent actively planted the charges to do a 'controlled' demolition of the towers?



The one where they allowed it to happen...but with that said, WTC7. Really? Ok, ok, please don't flame me. I'm not going there today.
 
2013-08-21 03:36:10 PM
The real danger in all of this unprecedented spying is that those running the machine use it to dig up dirt on Supreme Court Justices, Attorneys General, Senators, etc etc.

This is how J Edgar Hoover maintained his power for so long, by holding dirt on everyone. Don't play ball? Forget Lewinsky, we have a new method now, the Spitzer - where we leak wiretap info to the NYT and let them out you as using an escort service - can't have you digging into all the dirty money that is Wall Street.

Compromised emails and internet use would explain why Congress and SCOTUS went completely insane about the same time the new NSA toys came online.

Only question is, who is actually in charge now?
 
2013-08-21 03:37:36 PM

mediablitz: I'm embarrassed whenever anyone trots out the "Clapper lied!!!" silliness. His response is online, in PDF form. He misunderstood a question. He's really old. He clarified as soon as he realized he misunderstood.


I'm embarrassed to see the sheer level of lunacy of your ball-gargling defense of him.

"Come on, he's OLD and when asked a direct question under oath he said "NO" instead of "YES".  Honest mistake !!"

LOL
 
2013-08-21 03:38:01 PM

mediablitz: DROxINxTHExWIND: mediablitz: DROxINxTHExWIND: My question was an opportunity. A cool person who feels they have more information would respond to let me know what they think I don't know. But an old douchebag will use it as an opportunity to suggest that they're superior becauuse of their knowledge, as they fail to support their claim.

Yes, your "1984" comment was meant to foment conversation. CLEARLY.

I'm not explaining data collection from my tablet. Educate yourself.


Mining the comments for jokes to justify your douchbaggery is weak. Any dumbass can walk around claiming to know shiat while citing nothing. But, to do it with an air of superiority makes it a little more special.

So you know NOTHING about the subject, and you're butthurt because you are ignorant AND unwilling to do your own research?

Nice. Keep whining.



Meh. I asked you to tell me whatyou know that proves i was uninformed. you responded with nothing but more insults. And I see its a pattern with you in the thread. Nothing added. Just one, "I can't believe you don't know what i know" comment after another. It comes off as pretty insecure. But, we're way off topic, now. Take care.
 
2013-08-21 03:38:51 PM
This is where these sorts of conversations always devolve...

Later, 'tards.
 
2013-08-21 03:38:56 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.



The Air Force buys missiles with the intent to aim them at our enemies.  The fact that they could theoretically be targeted inside the country is coincidental.

Its far more worrisome that the NSA would feel the need to set up an infrastructure that would be capable of monitoring such a huge fraction of internal US internet traffic.  Infrastructure like that would need to be wired into network interchanges all across the country.  Its not something they could simply re-target at a foreign state as the need arises (as is the case with your missile analogy).  At some point, somebody at the NSA (actually it must have been a lot of people) sat down and decided that they needed to build a massive domestic spying infrastructure.  If that mentality doesn't concern you, then either you're directly benefiting from the NSA's actions or -- more likely -- have little knowledge of the history of abusive governments.
 
2013-08-21 03:39:19 PM
Step 1: NSA convinces people they can spy on any piece of data.
Step 2: Fabricate evidence which never has to be made public.
Step 3: Arrests and convictions of child pornographers and terrorists up 10,000 percent!
 
2013-08-21 03:41:15 PM

Ned Stark: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.

"All the intelligence [the NSA] need[s]" is definitely under dispute as well. That was a pretty neat little verbal trick you tried to take it off the table with though.


I'm sorry - I don't understand what you are saying. Are you trying to imply that we (the United States as a country and we as citizens of this country) don't need intelligence (i.e. information)?

I really don't get what you're saying. I meant no "verbal trick" in my post.
 
2013-08-21 03:42:29 PM
Some dude printed a bunch of these signs....

i.imgur.com
Just how far are people willing to bend over?
 
2013-08-21 03:42:39 PM

mediablitz: I'm saying you are claiming a government agency had AMAZING future knowldge powers. Hell, they foresaw Facebook from simple network code!


Yeah, back in 1985 you'd need special powers to know most information might be sent electronically in the future, and recognize it as something to be tapped for security purposes. I'm sure DARPA was more interested in putting on bake sales than anything like that.
 
2013-08-21 03:43:10 PM

Apik0r0s: Only question is, who is actually in charge now?


It's not the NOW I'm worried about, it's the future.

I don't believe for a second all this data will remain secure.  Too many contractors and too much value on the info.  If Snowden could get all this info at his fingertips there's bound to be someone else who could do the same and SELL it.

And the NSA would hush it up because they would be too embarrassed
 
2013-08-21 03:45:51 PM

nmrsnr: CrazyCracka420: Haha, sure they do *pats nmrsnr on the head*, sure they do.

Hooray, I was just talking about these yesterday and now I have a reason to post one:

[www.visi.com image 500x75]


Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary proof.  Especially when the Extraordinary claim would require an Extraordinary response -- I'm not gonna encourage someone raid the NSA, arrest everyone, and burn the building down unless and until you show something more serious than "Leaks suggest they can do blah".

Yeah, I know; to a believer, that just sounds like sheeple bleating.  But seriously, you're talking about stuff that should require an aggressive, if not armed, response from the public, so forgive us if we're not quite ready to grab our pitchforks and torches and march on Washington based on all the other crap out there.  Especially after all the X-Files "Illuminati Area 51 Booga Booga!" crap spewed.
 
2013-08-21 03:46:25 PM
Let's see if I understand what they are saying:

We aren't supposed to spy on Americans at all, but as a result of messages (internet, text, telephone, fax, etc.) that you send overseas, we get to read 75% of everything produced in America by Americans.

We already have a legal excuse to spy on 75% of your purely domestic communications. The other 25% might require a wiretap authorization. Oh, bother! Thanks for arguing with that jerk in Tokyo last night! We got some primo pron when you switched to one-hand typing an hour or two later.

Did Auntie Tilda get that cherry bomb that I sent her in Sweden?

Key words logged: bomb, Sweden, Tilda, cherry, Auntie

Recommend: Send to next level


Do you understand how many bytes of data a super computer can process in one second?

If you say anything that might seem suspicious to Microsoft Word's spelling checker, let alone about something illegal or questionable, it can be logged and subjected to triage along with the data from hundreds of thousands of other telephone calls, computers, fax machines, etc. -- in seconds.

My first computer had 2 gigabytes of RAM (second hand).
My first iPod has 4 gigabytes of RAM  .
My second iPod has 120 gigabytes of RAM  .
My third iPod is practically a smart-phone. It lacks only one function: a phone.
My first computer (I paid for) had 180 gigabytes of RAM.
My new computer has 1 terabyte of RAM.
My lap top has 500 Gigabytes of RAM.
My netbook has, say, 250 Gigabytes of RAM.

The days when the Government had to have somebody tape what you say on a telephone while listening to you, taking notes, are long gone. That was the Sixties, man!

The tapes went into computers even in the Sixties.

They were replaced by computers in the 1970s.

The computers started shrinking to the size of terminals by the 1980s, but they kept building bigger and bigger supercomputers. Where IBM once thought they'd sell five room sized computers, they now have one in every university, every corporation, every government building of any size. Banks of servers, each more powerful that the flimsy little 256-equivalent that sent three men to the Moon.

In a world where most legal and medical questions can be solved by expert software without going to your sister the nurse, you can bet that most activities that might draw the bemused interest of a cop, PR wonk, politician or spy chief can be throughly analysed for information you can't even imagine.

Do you shop at Walmart or Target?
Do you read The Atlantic Monthly, Chatelaine or The Advocate?
Did you watch MIB II, The Bourne Conspiracy or Teletubbies?
Are you a Bronie, a Furry or a sheep-sticker?
What did you rent on cable last night?

Your credit card might identify the payment for that hooker you rented in Washington, DC without any specific information on the services provided, where, when, or by whom, but combine credit card information with GPS information and you were in a whorehouse or the Watergate, 15th floor. Combine with your bank account info and it is clear your wife's name is not anywhere on the account debited. Combine with GPS data from your car and you cruised a certain shady street frequented between dusk and dawn by boy prostitutes. Combined with your political donations and you are a target for blackmail who can turn in your Commie friends, your gun nut neighbours or your drug dealer and his sister's father-in-law. Or perhaps a certain election will go to the Republicans rather than the Democrats or an Independent this year.

Datamining is a thousand times more powerful than mere spying. But you still need the brains and intuitions of professionals. They may not have to be spies any more. An IT guy or a marketing man might be more useful. You can not only gather information together, you can scatter information in ways which allow you to outsource the analysis to China if you want. Let the Red Chinese process the data you've collected on Libertarians with militia acquaintances and allies. They'll never even know what they are helping you to do if you split the job into harmless-looking sub-steps, something computers can do better than humans, like coding data for further analysis.
 
2013-08-21 03:47:15 PM

mediablitz: Kit Fister: PJ-: My personal favorite one is 'well if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be worried about'. So if i'm doing nothing wrong, I should have no problem with being treated like a criminal?

Gee, people who are against gun registration, arbitrary gun bans, and many other of the proposals floated for gun control say the same damn thing and are called paranoid.

NOT SO FUNNY NOW, IS IT?!

I bet you think that made sense.

Cuz it didn't.


*sigh*

Look. Lawful gun owners (not gun nuts, no one listens to them) don't want to be treated like criminals because they want to own guns and don't want to have all kinds of extra licensing and crap just to exercise their rights -- in short, they don't want to be treated like criminals.

Likewise, people like PJ- who want the government not to spy on their e-mails and phone calls preemptively because HEY LOOK 4TH AMENDMENT, don't want to be treated like criminals.

Of course, when it's gun owners, the answer is "ZOMG WELL REGULATED AND YOU SHOULD ACCEPT SOME CRAP FROM THE GOVERNMENT IN ORDER TO EXERCISE YOUR RIGHTS, AND THE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH CAN BE LIMITED TOO!"

But, when it's the NSA, only the bad guys say that, and the "Good guys" say "Well, no, the government should have a reason to invade my privacy and needs a warrant and my right trumps their paranoia."

So which farking is it? Not so great when the shoe is on the other foot, now is it?
 
2013-08-21 03:48:02 PM
My take:

Liberals:  "This is an outrage!, Spying on Americans? This can't be allowed to...  Oh, Obama is president...uh, it's not that bad....I mean...we safer now..."

Conservatives: "This is needed...we need to be safe...9/11!!!....Oh, Obama is president...this has to stop...I think...unless we really need it...Obama sucks anyway..."

End result: crickets......while the NSA clearly oversteps it's authority, the Constitution, and presiding law...
 
2013-08-21 03:48:44 PM
Strawmen, slippery slope, baseless (and sourceless accusations), concern trolling.

This thread delivers.
 
2013-08-21 03:48:57 PM

Apik0r0s: The real danger in all of this unprecedented spying is that those running the machine use it to dig up dirt on Supreme Court Justices, Attorneys General, Senators, etc etc.

This is how J Edgar Hoover maintained his power for so long, by holding dirt on everyone. Don't play ball? Forget Lewinsky, we have a new method now, the Spitzer - where we leak wiretap info to the NYT and let them out you as using an escort service - can't have you digging into all the dirty money that is Wall Street.

Compromised emails and internet use would explain why Congress and SCOTUS went completely insane about the same time the new NSA toys came online.

Only question is, who is actually in charge now?


I've mentioned this (in much less detail) a couple times already in this thread.  It's amazing the amount of ignorance our countrymen/women display about our country's past.
 
2013-08-21 03:49:03 PM

jshine: At some point, somebody at the NSA (actually it must have been a lot of people) sat down and decided that they needed to build a massive domestic spying infrastructure.  If that mentality doesn't concern you, then either you're directly benefiting from the NSA's actions or -- more likely -- have little knowledge of the history of abusive governments.


I figure the apologists have very low critical thinking skills to actually realise how oppressive and dangerous it is.  Or they are so lazy that if they DID disagree they might have to do something.

And most have no clue who the STASI were, and would gladly become a "neighborhood informant".
 
2013-08-21 03:49:56 PM
NSA NSA NSA NSA NSA NSA NSA MDMA NSA NSA NSA NSA

*be back there is a knock at the door
 
2013-08-21 03:50:21 PM

ApeShaft: Some dude printed a bunch of these signs....

[i.imgur.com image 850x680]
Just how far are people willing to bend over?


That's one of the questions that they hope the research will answer.
 
2013-08-21 03:51:09 PM

4tehsnowflakes: Your posts over the past weeks on this topic all echo the "nothing new here, not to worry, the good adults are in charge" line.  It is time to retake the test you display on your profile, where you characterize yourself as a left-leaning libertarian.  If your posts represent your views then truer answers and/or a better test would likely peg you as more authoritarian.


Two things: 1) 10 question tests on the Internet do not entirely accurately encapsulate a humans ideology, who knew? 2) There is a very large distinction between what the government has the legal authority to do, and what I would like the government to have the authority to do. I dislike the Patriot Act, but I don't yell "scandal!" and "it's illegal!" every time it's implemented, because it is neither of those things. We gave our government the authority to listen for communications between non-US citizens, under government oversight of a secret court, and the US has been using that authority. But everybody who says "they're reading my E-mail" either misunderstands or is deliberately misrepresenting what the government has authority to do, and what it has been shown to actually be doing. They do not have the authority to read your E-mail, they do not have the authority to listen to your phone calls. The article linked above with data of the number of times the authority has been misused is what is of real concern here. The fact that that happens with some regularity and that it is not reported to congress is disturbing. The mere existence of the program, however, is neither news nor shocking.

Lando Lincoln: That doesn't negate a lie. If you saw me smack somebody and then you asked me if I just smacked somebody and I said, "No, I didn't," that doesn't mean I was not lying.


I didn't say it negated the lie. If you want to prosecute Clapper for lying, have fun, but the NSA's official documents which were the official responses to the official requests by congress were all accurate, so the organization was not attempting to deceive congress, regardless of what their director happened to do on a specific day.
 
2013-08-21 03:51:57 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: My take:

Liberals:  "This is an outrage!, Spying on Americans? This can't be allowed to...  Oh, Obama is president...uh, it's not that bad....I mean...we safer now..."


Your take is dumb.
 
2013-08-21 03:52:01 PM

draypresct: Ned Stark: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.

"All the intelligence [the NSA] need[s]" is definitely under dispute as well. That was a pretty neat little verbal trick you tried to take it off the table with though.

I'm sorry - I don't understand what you are saying. Are you trying to imply that we (the United States as a country and we as citizens of this country) don't need intelligence (i.e. information)?

I really don't get what you're saying. I meant no "verbal trick" in my post.


You obviously never meant the citizens of the united states needed intelligence. Your post explicitly excludes them. "This stuff needs to be kept secret".

And you did in fact, frame you question around preventing employees from inappropriately accessing data and simply took it as gospel that the NSA needed the data in the first place.
 
2013-08-21 03:52:37 PM

vpb: Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting

I do think that the idea of being interesting enough to watch is a part of what attracts people to these sort of conspiracy theories.



"Theories"?

LOL!
 
2013-08-21 03:52:38 PM

elchupacabra: Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary proof.


Here's the chief technology officer of the CIA saying they collect everything on everyone and hold on to it indefinitely in case they need it in the future. Among other things.

/it won't even matter
//a news anchor on TV will tell you different and you'll believe them
 
2013-08-21 03:53:08 PM
My phone calls itself my "life companion"
 
2013-08-21 03:53:49 PM
There are two types of people, those that can extrapolate...
 
2013-08-21 03:55:12 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: My take:

Liberals:  "This is an outrage!, Spying on Americans? This can't be allowed to...  Oh, Obama is president...uh, it's not that bad....I mean...we safer now..."

Conservatives: "This is needed...we need to be safe...9/11!!!....Oh, Obama is president...this has to stop...I think...unless we really need it...Obama sucks anyway..."

End result: crickets......while the NSA clearly oversteps it's authority, the Constitution, and presiding law...


There are some of both of those types.  But there's the liberals like me who care more about our freedoms than the promise of safety by taking them away.   I don't think  I can imagine many liberals defending the program who actually have the full story of what's going on, and understand the history of the American spying apparatus. 

For conservatives, you do have the fearful boot lickers who will give up freedoms for the promise of safety at the drop of a hat.  But you also have the conspiracy type conservatives who are very leery of big government, and they feel this is a massive intrusion (and expansion) by the government.
 
2013-08-21 03:55:37 PM

nmrsnr: I didn't say it negated the lie. If you want to prosecute Clapper for lying, have fun, but the NSA's official documents which were the official responses to the official requests by congress were all accurate, so the organization was not attempting to deceive congress, regardless of what their director happened to do on a specific day.


Clapper wasn't trying to deceive Congress. Clapper was trying to deceive the general public. Clapper didn't want to give the media a sound bite of "Yes, we're totally spying on you guys."
 
2013-08-21 03:56:58 PM

Kit Fister: (not gun nuts, no one listens to them)

I've got an entity known as the United States House of Representatives that says otherwise.

 
2013-08-21 03:57:39 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-21 03:58:36 PM

draypresct: midigod: The NSA themselves acknowledge thousands of those abuses.

From your link: "The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders."

I hate to tell you this, but if you look at any situation where people are collecting confidential data on you (hospitals, credit card companies, ISPs), you're going to see large numbers of violations. Any time you employ human beings to manage confidential data, there are going to be violations.

The question is what the institution is doing about it, and what other solutions are available.

Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.


Wow you saved me a post. But no one else will reply to this, because it absolutely destroys their paranoia.
 
2013-08-21 03:58:43 PM
I won't lie... I support NSA cybersurveillance for all the people in this thread that use "it's" when they should use "its"
 
2013-08-21 03:58:52 PM

sheep snorter: Due to the invention of Google toilet Internet, cameras have been placed to observe your shiatty data uploads to prevent piracy.
[i.imgur.com image 523x490]


Considering that phone number is for the CoS in Las Vegas... I'm gonna call bullshiat.
 
2013-08-21 04:00:30 PM

Kentucky Fried Children: sheep snorter: Due to the invention of Google toilet Internet, cameras have been placed to observe your shiatty data uploads to prevent piracy.
[i.imgur.com image 523x490]

Considering that phone number is for the CoS in Las Vegas... I'm gonna call bullshiat.


That's the only thing that tipped you off?
 
2013-08-21 04:00:43 PM
History

The predecessor of the National Security Agency was the Armed Forces Security Agency (AFSA), created on May 20, 1949.

Employees

The number of NSA employees is officially classified[3] but in 2012, the NSA said more than 30,000 employees work at Ft. Meade and other facilities.[1] In 2012 John C. Inglis, the deputy director, said that the total number of NSA employees is "somewhere between 37,000 and one billion" as a joke,[3] and stated that the agency is "probably the biggest employer of introverts."[3] In 2013 Der Spiegel stated that the NSA had 40,000 employees.[4] More widely, it has been described as the world's largest single employer of mathematicians.[78] Some NSA employees form part of the workforce of the National Reconnaissance Office, the agency that provides the NSA with satellite signals intelligence. It is the owner of the single largest group of supercomputers.[79]

^ Risen, James; Nick Wingfield (June 19, 2013). "Web's Reach Binds N.S.A. and Silicon Valley Leaders". The New York Times. Retrieved June 20, 2013. "The sums the N.S.A. spends in Silicon Valley are classified, as is the agency's total budget, which independent analysts say is $8 billion to $10 billion a year."


Let's just pretend they're not sitting around playing parcheesi.  You have no privacy.

Of course any police officer can run your plate or phone number whenever they want, but that's OK... right?
 
2013-08-21 04:02:54 PM
QFTA:

The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic in the hunt for foreign intelligence


Subby needs to remove his stealthy horse-head mask and read the farking article...

/where were all these anti-government people when Bush/Cheney encouraged people to volunteer for military service to hunt down and kill OBL. Then Bush/Cheney sent them for a oil war in Iraq. BTW, BP and the China National Petroleum Company are now running the huge oil fields in Iraq--the ones that were going to pay for our war in Iraq.
 
2013-08-21 04:03:04 PM
If they are going to insist on doing what they are doing, I can't help wonder what they have on Benghazi, Fast and Furious, or several other points of interest.

Not that I would want to be involved in anything unconstitutional.
 
2013-08-21 04:03:14 PM

Lando Lincoln: Clapper wasn't trying to deceive Congress. Clapper was trying to deceive the general public. Clapper didn't want to give the media a sound bite of "Yes, we're totally spying on you guys."


"Lying to Congress" is the crime, "lying to the American people" isn't, that's called politics.

instantwin: [i.imgur.com image 316x1500]


Now that's funny.
 
2013-08-21 04:03:51 PM

Outrageous Muff: However regulations say that all NSA collected data can not be used against a US citizen and that all dealings with citizens are handed over to the FBI who does get warrants.


We should also let the cops search our houses and vehicles so they can decide if they need to get a warrant to search for the things that they just searched for. I can't see how this could possibly go wrong.
 
2013-08-21 04:07:01 PM
Who are these people bending over backwards to defend the NSA in online forums and threads like this one? I could understand being naive or in denial, but being naive isn't usually accompanied by such a strong desire to let everyone know about it. I find it strange the amount of time these people spend into making it seem like the NSA is no big deal and they're not really spying on anyone. What's the motivation? I get the argument that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but you seem to be strongly engaged in the topic yourself for someone advocating a lack of concern.
 
2013-08-21 04:10:12 PM

draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?


There is no solution where the NSA can legally and Constitutionally collect all the data they need to prevent terrorism, or crime in general.  To do that, they need all data.  The data they need isn't the point.  We should be looking at whether the data they are collecting infringes on Constitutional rights.  If it does, they need to stop collecting that data, and come up with another method of crime-fighting, or not fight those crimes until they are actually committed.

No one will dispute that crimes can be prevented using this, and other, information.  It's a question of whether we want to allow so much power to be reigned over to secret parties, with no oversight as to its use or abise, or even what type of data is being collected.  We only know about the current collection because the extent of it has been leaked.  That's a long way away from actual oversight.
 
2013-08-21 04:10:58 PM

mediablitz: Thunderpipes: Only 10% of the prison population is innocent, so it is all good, right? Rights? What the hell are those?

Gobama, go sheeple. You guys cried bloody murder because under Bush there were rumors if you took out bomb making books in a library for might be reported. Not a single incident I can remember hearing about. Obama? Record everyone's telephone and Internet traffic, no problem. Sick the IRS and EPA on your political enemies, no problem. Americans killed overseas because of screw ups? Who cares....

Hippiecrits man, big time.

I guess you don't notice all the liberals saying this is wrong. Why would that be? Doesn't fit your need for confirmation bias?

And for the last time, OBAMA DIDN'T AUTHORIZE THIS! Congress passed the law. Obama isn't a dictator.

Keep on with your "I'm SO above it all" bullshiat if you like. You just look childish.


No but Obama is quite fine with it. He's defended it many times
 
2013-08-21 04:14:20 PM

umad: We should also let the cops search our houses and vehicles so they can decide if they need to get a warrant to search for the things that they just searched for. I can't see how this could possibly go wrong.


You apparently missed the thread/article about the DEA basically taking dirt on someone and then retconning the circumstances when obtaining a warrant to act on it.

So, they know you did something wrong, so they make up the circumstances by which they came by the knowledge and probable cause in order to generate a warrant.
 
2013-08-21 04:14:27 PM

brantgoose: My new computer has 1 terabyte of RAM.


No, no it doesnt.  You're confusing memory and hard drive space.

Your point is very valid though.
 
2013-08-21 04:15:22 PM

Ned Stark: Kentucky Fried Children: sheep snorter: Due to the invention of Google toilet Internet, cameras have been placed to observe your shiatty data uploads to prevent piracy.
[i.imgur.com image 523x490]

Considering that phone number is for the CoS in Las Vegas... I'm gonna call bullshiat.

That's the only thing that tipped you off?


Nope, but its the most blatantly obvious feature.  Unless the CoS is into that kinda thing...

/giggity?
 
2013-08-21 04:15:40 PM
Another question to be asking is about what involvement foreign companies and governments have in all of this spying.

Fox News once ran a 4 part piece (Carl Cameron) about Israeli spying in the US. One of the main thrusts of the report was to make it clear just how all encompassing Israeli compromise of our phone networks was. 25 US phone companies had contracted out to AMDOCS and other Israeli companies. We ran them out, supposedly, but Amdocs is still alive, well and growing, in Alpharetta GA.

I wonder what AMDOCS does for us now.

The (since scrubbed of course) Fox report:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWpWc_suPWo

I feel sorry for any of our leaders who would try to push Israel towards peace, they will have their shiat smeared all over Wolf Blitzer's Situation Room before you can say foreign entanglement.
 
2013-08-21 04:15:45 PM

draypresct: I hate to tell you this, but if you look at any situation where people are collecting confidential data on you (hospitals, credit card companies, ISPs), you're going to see large numbers of violations. Any time you employ human beings to manage confidential data, there are going to be violations.

The question is what the institution is doing about it,


Having worked in institutions that deal with confidential data (not Government, though) for the last 20 years, I can tell you that those organizations are required by law to inform their customers when those violations occur.  The fact that the NSA doesn't have to tell anyone, doesn't have to be accountable, and doesn't get charged with violation of any law, is absolutely not acceptable.  What they're doing about it is having an internal audit, and not telling anyone.  They should be required to go to either the FISA court, or another legal entity separated from themselves for the reporting, so that the external party can decide the best course of action/penalty/disclosure.  That's what all private companies have to do, and our government should be held to at least that standard.
 
2013-08-21 04:16:30 PM
Btw, you people talking about Obama and taking this as a political issue are completely missing the point. This has nothing to do with Obama. The NSA's power is going to continue to grow, and its abilities will be even greater with the next administration, which very well could be republican. Republican, Democrat, back and fourth from one set of four years to the next, this power will continue to grow, and it's something we all should be concerned with no matter what side of the aisle we're on.
 
2013-08-21 04:17:30 PM

justoneznot: Who are these people bending over backwards to defend the NSA in online forums and threads like this one? I could understand being naive or in denial, but being naive isn't usually accompanied by such a strong desire to let everyone know about it. I find it strange the amount of time these people spend into making it seem like the NSA is no big deal and they're not really spying on anyone. What's the motivation? I get the argument that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but you seem to be strongly engaged in the topic yourself for someone advocating a lack of concern.


They deeply identify with the united states. Being a good patriot is part of their self image and they see the nation itself as a sort of extended family. Hence the use of we in place of the actual actors. The NSA can't be bad because they are good* and the NSA is an extension of themselves.

*by their terms. Everyone is the hero of their own story.
 
2013-08-21 04:18:35 PM

justoneznot: Who are these people bending over backwards to defend the NSA in online forums and threads like this one? I could understand being naive or in denial, but being naive isn't usually accompanied by such a strong desire to let everyone know about it. I find it strange the amount of time these people spend into making it seem like the NSA is no big deal and they're not really spying on anyone. What's the motivation? I get the argument that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but you seem to be strongly engaged in the topic yourself for someone advocating a lack of concern.


1. The whole "Crying Wolf" of conspiracy theories -- many people are sick of being told bullshiat stories about Kennedy Assassinations, 9/11, et al, especially when you see that everything becomes a conspiracy (come on, Boston Bombers?  REALLY?).
2. The expectation that there is genuine need for the NSA, coupled with the implied suggestion that fixing the alleged problem would actually require gutting our Intelligence Services and making us genuinely insecure.  Not so much anti-terrorism as preparing for an expansionist China, especially when that's definitely a country that would be dangerous in cyberwar terms.
3.  Political Fatigue -- on a personal level, there's not a time in my life that I was not told "If we don't do X Y Z, our country is finished and you're living the rest of your life as a slave or murdering loved ones over a crust of bread.  If you even have a 'rest of your life.'"  Quite frankly, we're tired of being told we're doomed.

I'm sure there's more, but I gotta make this short.
 
2013-08-21 04:19:03 PM

Outrageous Muff: Face it, you all think the government is lying to you. So no matter what they tell you, you will dismiss it as a lie.

Basically:
[static.someecards.com image 420x294]


Ric Romero here, reporting that people tend to disbelieve claims made by pathological liars. Up next is Connie with the weather...
 
2013-08-21 04:21:07 PM

Lando Lincoln: nmrsnr: Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.

That doesn't negate a lie. If you saw me smack somebody and then you asked me if I just smacked somebody and I said, "No, I didn't," that doesn't mean I was not lying.


He thought the question was about something else; this was clarified pretty quickly. There isn't some vast government conspiracy to protect Clapper from perjury charges because there was no "lie" in the first place.
 
2013-08-21 04:21:58 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Al_Ed: Rand's lacy underwear: Now imagine what we haven't heard about.

As someone who used to be in this line of work, this was the first thing outta my mouth when the story originally broke.

I don't want to be THAT guy, but I remember in all of the "Truther" threads when people like me suggested that maybe the Bush administration knew more or even were complicit, the argument against it was, "the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency".


/I guess they've been training


There is a difference, the people that did 9/11 didn't want to be heard. They were keeping as low a profile as they could. We got bits and pieces but never put it together. So with 20/20 hindsight it became obvious.

The difference with the NSA is that as Americans we don't think we need to hide anything because the idea is that no one is looking. We give full and complete stories because we aren't trying to live underground. Track someone's browser history, credit cards, and facebook posts for a few weeks and you'll know a lot about them. There is no puzzle to put together when you have that kind of data.

/Track their Fark posts and you'll know what time they start drinking.
 
2013-08-21 04:24:15 PM

elchupacabra: justoneznot: Who are these people bending over backwards to defend the NSA in online forums and threads like this one? I could understand being naive or in denial, but being naive isn't usually accompanied by such a strong desire to let everyone know about it. I find it strange the amount of time these people spend into making it seem like the NSA is no big deal and they're not really spying on anyone. What's the motivation? I get the argument that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but you seem to be strongly engaged in the topic yourself for someone advocating a lack of concern.

1. The whole "Crying Wolf" of conspiracy theories -- many people are sick of being told bullshiat stories about Kennedy Assassinations, 9/11, et al, especially when you see that everything becomes a conspiracy (come on, Boston Bombers?  REALLY?).
2. The expectation that there is genuine need for the NSA, coupled with the implied suggestion that fixing the alleged problem would actually require gutting our Intelligence Services and making us genuinely insecure.  Not so much anti-terrorism as preparing for an expansionist China, especially when that's definitely a country that would be dangerous in cyberwar terms.
3.  Political Fatigue -- on a personal level, there's not a time in my life that I was not told "If we don't do X Y Z, our country is finished and you're living the rest of your life as a slave or murdering loved ones over a crust of bread.  If you even have a 'rest of your life.'"  Quite frankly, we're tired of being told we're doomed.

I'm sure there's more, but I gotta make this short.


"OH MY GOD THE RED CHINESR ARE GONNA SKIN OUR BABIES TO MAKE COATS ZOMG WHY WOT YOU SAVE US NSA!?!!"
"Oh, and stop telling us were doomed no one cares about your fearmongering."

lol dude, and I do mean LOL.
 
2013-08-21 04:25:47 PM

elchupacabra: justoneznot: Who are these people bending over backwards to defend the NSA in online forums and threads like this one? I could understand being naive or in denial, but being naive isn't usually accompanied by such a strong desire to let everyone know about it. I find it strange the amount of time these people spend into making it seem like the NSA is no big deal and they're not really spying on anyone. What's the motivation? I get the argument that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but you seem to be strongly engaged in the topic yourself for someone advocating a lack of concern.

[snip]

I'm sure there's more, but I gotta make this short.


Oh:

4.  Questioning the motives of the most vocal proponents -- seems like most are some "Wouldn't the world be Utopia if we could just.... " Go isolationist/communist/christian/racialpuritan, whatever.  Not too many that don't eventually go some crackpot route to a long term solution.
 
2013-08-21 04:27:28 PM

justoneznot: Btw, you people talking about Obama and taking this as a political issue are completely missing the point. This has nothing to do with Obama. The NSA's power is going to continue to grow, and its abilities will be even greater with the next administration, which very well could be republican. Republican, Democrat, back and fourth from one set of four years to the next, this power will continue to grow, and it's something we all should be concerned with no matter what side of the aisle we're on.


I'm no republican, but Obama has explicitly stated his position: (paraphrasing) you can't have 100% freedom and 100% security at the same time.
Not exactly a smoking gun, but Obama is doing nothing to put a stop to it.

That said, in my mind, his silence is consent approach is the result of one thing:  The Republican/Democrat game of wonderball.  No party wants to hold office of President of the United States when the next major "successful" terror attack occurs.  I'm guessing presidents from here on will accept illegal surveillance as a calculated violation/unpopular act, so as to not fall victim to something much worse and much more unpopular (ie devastating to their political party).
 
2013-08-21 04:28:20 PM
A little sidebar here.
Is the NSA hireing?
Because if the NSA is monitoring 75% of all Internet traffic, and if 94% of that is porn, I may finally be qualified for a Government job.
 
2013-08-21 04:28:59 PM

justoneznot: Who are these people bending over backwards to defend the NSA in online forums and threads like this one? I could understand being naive or in denial, but being naive isn't usually accompanied by such a strong desire to let everyone know about it. I find it strange the amount of time these people spend into making it seem like the NSA is no big deal and they're not really spying on anyone. What's the motivation? I get the argument that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but you seem to be strongly engaged in the topic yourself for someone advocating a lack of concern.


The NSA didn't spring up yesterday. It's not going to go away tomorrow, either. People going all apeshiat over it, each trying to out-do the last with their indignation, is silly and, from what i've seen so far, entirely pointless.

Why should i care?

Because we could be having an informed discussion regarding the past, present and future of the internet instead
 
2013-08-21 04:30:00 PM
Ned Stark:

"OH MY GOD THE RED CHINESR ARE GONNA SKIN OUR BABIES TO MAKE COATS ZOMG WHY WOT YOU SAVE US NSA!?!!"

I phrased my statement in a mature fashion.  Why don't you give it a try: convince people that there's NO threat from other nations in a NSA-free world.

"Oh, and stop telling us were doomed no one cares about your fearmongering."


It's a valid assertion.  Boy cries Wolf enough, people get tired of it.  As an aside, I believed these conspiracies until about the time the Y2K thing happened.  Now, I see them all as "Bullshiat until proven otherwise".

lol dude, and I do mean LOL.

Ah, you win the argument by laughing at me.  That's it, off to go start a civil war that will lead to millions dead because surely laughing at me means you're right and we must rise up and slay our masters.

Try not being retarded.
 
2013-08-21 04:31:10 PM
Quite honestly, my big concern is how are they identifying individual users of their tools who might be using it for their own personal or malicious purposes?

Such as, a contractor with access gets bribed by a politician's aides to dig up something on a political opponent

Or an employee with access uses it to get back at a neighbor they hate

I doubt they are tracking access all that well after you see things like Manning and Snowden, people who weren't high level analysts that had access to all kinds of data they probably didn't really need access to. And no one noticed until they went public on their own.
 
2013-08-21 04:34:22 PM

21-7-b: justoneznot: Who are these people bending over backwards to defend the NSA in online forums and threads like this one? I could understand being naive or in denial, but being naive isn't usually accompanied by such a strong desire to let everyone know about it. I find it strange the amount of time these people spend into making it seem like the NSA is no big deal and they're not really spying on anyone. What's the motivation? I get the argument that we shouldn't be concerned about it, but you seem to be strongly engaged in the topic yourself for someone advocating a lack of concern.

The NSA didn't spring up yesterday. It's not going to go away tomorrow, either. People going all apeshiat over it, each trying to out-do the last with their indignation, is silly and, from what i've seen so far, entirely pointless.

Why should i care?

Because we could be having an informed discussion regarding the past, present and future of the internet instead


This is better -- let's actually define some limits here we'd prefer they operate under.
 
2013-08-21 04:36:43 PM

Urbn: Quite honestly, my big concern is how are they identifying individual users of their tools who might be using it for their own personal or malicious purposes?

Such as, a contractor with access gets bribed by a politician's aides to dig up something on a political opponent

Or an employee with access uses it to get back at a neighbor they hate

I doubt they are tracking access all that well after you see things like Manning and Snowden, people who weren't high level analysts that had access to all kinds of data they probably didn't really need access to. And no one noticed until they went public on their own.


They are not and they have no way of doing so.

Report: NSA doesn't know the extent of Snowden damage

The National Security Agency (NSA) doesn't know how much information leaker Edward Snowden was able to obtain because of an underdeveloped capacity to audit its own data, according to a NBC News report released late Tuesday.
 
2013-08-21 04:37:15 PM

machoprogrammer: No but Obama is quite fine with it. He's defended it many times


He's also moved to expand it over and over.

Obama administration asks Supreme Court to allow warrantless cellphone searches

and

The Obama administration is urging Congress not to adopt legislation that would impose constitutional safeguards on Americans' e-mail stored in the cloud.

and

The Obama administration told a federal court Tuesday that the public has no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in cellphone location data, and hence the authorities may obtain documents detailing a person's movements from wireless carriers without a probable-cause warrant.

and

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to allow the government, without a court warrant, to affix GPS devices on suspects' vehicles to track their every move.

and

The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of an individual's Internet activity without a court order

and

The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens

Not only has Obama constantly worked to expand warrantless spying, he has also constantly worked to shut down any lawsuits challenging his secret actions.

Remember way back under Bush when whistle blowers stepped forward to say that AT&T's fiber optic lines had been tapped and provided proof?

Guess what happened to the lawsuit over that.

Obama shut it down.

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to halt a legal challenge weighing the constitutionality of a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans' communications

Just as he has been seeking to shut down the current lawsuits over Snowden's whistle blowing.

The Obama administration for the first time responded to a Spygate lawsuit, telling a federal judge the wholesale vacuuming up of all phone-call metadata in the United States is in the "public interest," does not breach the constitutional rights of Americans and cannot be challenged in a court of law.
 
2013-08-21 04:37:46 PM

EngineerBob: A little sidebar here.
Is the NSA hireing?
Because if the NSA is monitoring 75% of all Internet traffic, and if 94% of that is porn, I may finally be qualified for a Government job.


They're always hiring to some extent.  Suck the kiddies in now before they realize just how much farking money they can make in the private sector (It's trivial to break the government pay scale within 5 years of leaving school), and they'll be on the teat forever.  The big problem for the NSA is that you have to have a clearance.  And since a clearance takes over a year to get, they can only hire people who not only are looking for a job today, but don't have a job a year from now.  (In other words, if you want to work at the NSA, start looking in sophomore year of college).

/And if you want to know why the TSA is so absolutely farking incompetent, take that and add "Is willing to work for $10/hour in Northern VA".
 
2013-08-21 04:39:55 PM

elchupacabra: Ned Stark:

"OH MY GOD THE RED CHINESR ARE GONNA SKIN OUR BABIES TO MAKE COATS ZOMG WHY WOT YOU SAVE US NSA!?!!"

I phrased my statement in a mature fashion.  Why don't you give it a try: convince people that there's NO threat from other nations in a NSA-free world.

"Oh, and stop telling us were doomed no one cares about your fearmongering."

It's a valid assertion.  Boy cries Wolf enough, people get tired of it.  As an aside, I believed these conspiracies until about the time the Y2K thing happened.  Now, I see them all as "Bullshiat until proven otherwise".

lol dude, and I do mean LOL.

Ah, you win the argument by laughing at me.  That's it, off to go start a civil war that will lead to millions dead because surely laughing at me means you're right and we must rise up and slay our masters.

Try not being retarded.


Which leads me to:

5.  The most strident conspiracy supporters won't be satisfied with basic fixes.  It's a Tautology to them that the system is rotten to the core.  The government could come out and say tomorrow, "We are shutting down NSA operations and all employees are under arrest" and there's still going to be "oh, we didn't catch the REAL conspirators!"
 
2013-08-21 04:40:50 PM

justoneznot: Btw, you people talking about Obama and taking this as a political issue are completely missing the point. This has nothing to do with Obama. The NSA's power is going to continue to grow, and its abilities will be even greater with the next administration, which very well could be republican. Republican, Democrat, back and fourth from one set of four years to the next, this power will continue to grow, and it's something we all should be concerned with no matter what side of the aisle we're on.


The US presidency is like the role of James Bond.  Sometimes different actors, but all playing a ROLE that is written for them.  The important thing is continuity.

Notice Obama never went after Bush for anything.  He said "Let's look forward not back."

GITMO stays open, whistleblowers are aggressively prosecuted, surveillance increases, and everything stays status quo.

I guarantee the next President will say those same words.
 
2013-08-21 04:41:02 PM
If you don't want them spying on you, build your own communications system.

Crying?  You didn't built that!
 
2013-08-21 04:42:10 PM

elchupacabra: Ned Stark:

"OH MY GOD THE RED CHINESR ARE GONNA SKIN OUR BABIES TO MAKE COATS ZOMG WHY WOT YOU SAVE US NSA!?!!"

I phrased my statement in a mature fashion.  Why don't you give it a try: convince people that there's NO threat from other nations in a NSA-free world.

"Oh, and stop telling us were doomed no one cares about your fearmongering."

It's a valid assertion.  Boy cries Wolf enough, people get tired of it.  As an aside, I believed these conspiracies until about the time the Y2K thing happened.  Now, I see them all as "Bullshiat until proven otherwise".

lol dude, and I do mean LOL.

Ah, you win the argument by laughing at me.  That's it, off to go start a civil war that will lead to millions dead because surely laughing at me means you're right and we must rise up and slay our masters.

Try not being retarded.


Shivering in terror at the thought of the yellow menace and dismissing any pessimism about the NSA's intent as paranoia are bother legitimate points of view. I mean, they're totally wrong, but they make a certain sort of internal sense and merit rebuttal. Its holding both those thoughts at the same time that makes you laughable.

Also, y2k is a strange thing to be put of "conspiracies" by, since it was pretty much real. Its was just easily fixable and we had a decade of warning.
 
2013-08-21 04:44:10 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Al_Ed: Rand's lacy underwear: Now imagine what we haven't heard about.

"the governement is incapable of that sort of efficiency"
/I guess they've been training


The fact that the agencies appear to be pretty, pretty good at tracking does not prove that govt usually does things efficiently. It is the nature of the technology that makes it so effective. With those tools, budget, and access, combined with legal/prosecutorial authority that is broad, vague and easily circumvented, even a bloated and incompetent group of agencies could help the executive branch rule the people, because the people all live in glass rooms.

The supporters in Congress, who are in the majority in both chambers, will try to tinker with domestic surveillance to make it seem less offensive. They will propose special exemptions for people like judges, legislators, law enforcement and certain other officials. They will propose cosmetic improvements in transparency such as limited access to some FISA court opinions in redacted form. They may propose having a people's privacy advocate weigh in before the FISA court on its decisions, but there is a lot of uncertainty about how that could work. They may go in the direction of a white-list similar to the various trusted traveler programs that were supposed to help get you past the TSA.

It's possible but unlikely that further revelations could tip the scales of public outrage enough to force real change through the Congress and current administration. Barring that, real change is likely to come only from the Supreme Court.  Justice Scalia has sided with privacy advocates on some important 4th Amendment cases, but it is not certain how he will rule or which case will get there first.
 
2013-08-21 04:44:19 PM
Learn the clowered and pivin strategy and just add all these key words to emails, and throw in a few small town names from Afghanistan and flood their system. If we all do this we render NSA worthless. Basically, make them chase their own tails.
For example:
FBI, AK-47, pressure cooker, powder, Kandahar, AQIM

You get the idea, just overwhelm them render their system useless.
(Though I just probably made the top of the list!). See my point?
 
2013-08-21 04:45:41 PM

Nutsac_Jim: If you don't want them spying on you, build your own communications system.


My company has, actually.  We figured issues like this were going to be a problem at some point.  Also makes security far easier when you're not out on the public 'net.
 
2013-08-21 04:46:00 PM
Don't worry, eventually a Republican will be President again, and all you "Patriots" can go back to not caring about this sort of thing.
 
2013-08-21 04:49:08 PM

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Don't worry, eventually a Republican will be President again, and all you "Patriots" can go back to not caring about this sort of thing.


What will be even more interesting if/when the power changes is seeing how many people change their feelings from complete dismissal to thinking this is the worst thing ever.
 
2013-08-21 04:50:54 PM

Lando Lincoln: Mugato: I'm not an expert on This but I know a little and while they're not looking at everyones shiat just assume that they are. But most likely you Are not that interesting

That's hardly the point. See, what happens is, people with good intentions create powerful tools, and then later on people with bad intentions take those tools and use them for nefarious purposes.

Could this tool be used to identify US citizens that are talking about doing something against the government, because the government is ignoring certain parts of the Constitution? Then this is a tool that could really do some serious harm to our society.


Yeah but nothing is going to stop the technology so as much as it might suck, we have to get used to the idea of our privacy quotient inherently aproaching zero.
 
2013-08-21 04:52:34 PM

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Don't worry, eventually a Republican will be President again, and all you "Patriots" can go back to not caring about this sort of thing.


Without patriots you'd be a slave. Careful not to slander people willing to fight for what you are losing.
 
2013-08-21 04:53:00 PM
CrazyCracka420:
It really comes down to two or three camps:
"are you a nationalist who supports the government 100% and thinks people who criticize it are unpatriotic?"
"Are you a person who believes government will overstep it's bounds and the citizens need to keep them in check"
"Are you the cynical type who doesn't think it's important or that the government cares what they personally are doing"


How about the camp of "Government will always abuse secretive powers but if I try to do anything about it, I'll become a martyr, so I'll live with it."?
 
2013-08-21 04:53:56 PM

FourPetesake: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Don't worry, eventually a Republican will be President again, and all you "Patriots" can go back to not caring about this sort of thing.

Without patriots you'd be a slave. Careful not to slander people willing to fight for what you are losing.


*dismissive jerking motion*
 
2013-08-21 04:55:07 PM

Pocket Ninja: Clearly, the semantic difference between the headline's words and the article's words mean there is nothing here about which anyone should be concerned. As all patriots know, we should never fear the government's ability to do something. This is why so many people who are fine with NSA spying programs completely support gun registration.


media.tumblr.com
 
2013-08-21 04:55:36 PM

mediablitz: nmrsnr: Voiceofreason01: lying to congress is a crime

Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.

I'm embarrassed whenever anyone trots out the "Clapper lied!!!" silliness. His response is online, in PDF form. He misunderstood a question. He's really old. He clarified as soon as he realized he misunderstood.


You do know he had the question in hand, in writing, the day before the hearing, right? If he really is that incompetent, he needs to be replaced immediately.
 
2013-08-21 04:56:12 PM

midigod: draypresct: I hate to tell you this, but if you look at any situation where people are collecting confidential data on you (hospitals, credit card companies, ISPs), you're going to see large numbers of violations. Any time you employ human beings to manage confidential data, there are going to be violations.

The question is what the institution is doing about it,

Having worked in institutions that deal with confidential data (not Government, though) for the last 20 years, I can tell you that those organizations are required by law to inform their customers when those violations occur.  The fact that the NSA doesn't have to tell anyone, doesn't have to be accountable, and doesn't get charged with violation of any law, is absolutely not acceptable.  What they're doing about it is having an internal audit, and not telling anyone.  They should be required to go to either the FISA court, or another legal entity separated from themselves for the reporting, so that the external party can decide the best course of action/penalty/disclosure.  That's what all private companies have to do, and our government should be held to at least that standard.


I don't think that private companies are informing their customers when those violations occur.

The simplest way around reporting this information is to have no real safeguards against the wrong people accessing the information. Most hospitals operate in this way - the cost of a doctor not being able to access your drug allergy information or comorbid condition is too high to put much of a barrier around your data. Yes, if someone brings a violation to their attention, they report it, but they really don't have the capability to catch that sort of thing. If Dr. X or nurse Y or clerk Z accesses your information, how is the database security guy going to figure out whether they actually needed that information, or whether they were just being nosy?

With the FISA court, the NSA has more of an internal investigation process (weak as it is) than most private organizations with access to private information have.
 
2013-08-21 04:56:31 PM

vpb: Pocket Ninja: Clearly, the semantic difference between the headline's words and the article's words mean there is nothing here about which anyone should be concerned. As all patriots know, we should never fear the government's ability to do something. This is why so many people who are fine with NSA spying programs completely support gun registration.

So if you say something that isn't true, it's just a "semantic difference", sort of like being "economical with the truth"?  Or is this one of your trolls?


Coming from an admitted trolLOL, that's rich. You got spanked. Live with it, or address the point raised in Ninja's last sentence.
 
2013-08-21 04:57:48 PM

GanjSmokr: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Don't worry, eventually a Republican will be President again, and all you "Patriots" can go back to not caring about this sort of thing.

What will be even more interesting if/when the power changes is seeing how many people change their feelings from complete dismissal to thinking this is the worst thing ever.


I think even more interesting will be the folks who ignore improtant things like how the information is used when they're discussing the issue during the next administration.

"Jeb Bush's administration is using NSA gathered intelligence to single out people who fought for abortion rights!"

"So what. Where was all this outrage when Obama did it?!?!?"
 
2013-08-21 04:59:34 PM

GanjSmokr: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Don't worry, eventually a Republican will be President again, and all you "Patriots" can go back to not caring about this sort of thing.

What will be even more interesting if/when the power changes is seeing how many people change their feelings from complete dismissal to thinking this is the worst thing ever.


I've noticed a few right wingers's on Fark still defending warrantless spying, but not many.

The actual Republican party leadership, on the other hand, has been nothing but supportive of Obama on this. That's easy to understand since Obama has totally adopted their position after he gained power

Let's remind ourselves of what Senator Obama claimed to stand for:

As a senator, Obama wanted to limit bulk records collection.

As a senator, Obama wanted to require government analysts to get court approval before accessing incidentally collected American data.

As a senator, Obama wanted the executive branch to report to Congress how many American communications had been swept up during surveillance.

As a senator, Obama wanted to restrict the use of gag orders related to surveillance court orders.

As a senator, Obama wanted to give the accused a chance to challenge government surveillance.
 
2013-08-21 05:00:24 PM

BullBearMS: GanjSmokr: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Don't worry, eventually a Republican will be President again, and all you "Patriots" can go back to not caring about this sort of thing.

What will be even more interesting if/when the power changes is seeing how many people change their feelings from complete dismissal to thinking this is the worst thing ever.

I've noticed a few right wingers's on Fark still defending warrantless spying, but not many.

The actual Republican party leadership, on the other hand, has been nothing but supportive of Obama on this. That's easy to understand since Obama has totally adopted their position after he gained power

Let's remind ourselves of what Senator Obama claimed to stand for:

As a senator, Obama wanted to limit bulk records collection.

As a senator, Obama wanted to require government analysts to get court approval before accessing incidentally collected American data.

As a senator, Obama wanted the executive branch to report to Congress how many American communications had been swept up during surveillance.

As a senator, Obama wanted to restrict the use of gag orders related to surveillance court orders.

As a senator, Obama wanted to give the accused a chance to challenge government surveillance.


Impeach!
 
2013-08-21 05:00:32 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: cameroncrazy1984: vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.

I came in here to say this. Jesus christ, you people are tech-illiterate.

Why would they create a system that they have no intention of using? Why would a guy with 1984 in his name not be worried about the possibilities?


two words: LAN PARTY

The most awesome Deathmatch Evar!
 
2013-08-21 05:01:33 PM

elchupacabra: Ned Stark:

"OH MY GOD THE RED CHINESR ARE GONNA SKIN OUR BABIES TO MAKE COATS ZOMG WHY WOT YOU SAVE US NSA!?!!"

I phrased my statement in a mature fashion.  Why don't you give it a try: convince people that there's NO threat from other nations in a NSA-free world.

"Oh, and stop telling us were doomed no one cares about your fearmongering."

It's a valid assertion.  Boy cries Wolf enough, people get tired of it.  As an aside, I believed these conspiracies until about the time the Y2K thing happened.  Now, I see them all as "Bullshiat until proven otherwise".

lol dude, and I do mean LOL.

Ah, you win the argument by laughing at me.  That's it, off to go start a civil war that will lead to millions dead because surely laughing at me means you're right and we must rise up and slay our masters.

Try not being retarded.


Who's talking about rising up and slaying our corporate overlords?  I'm certainly not.  You know you can effect change by spreading information to your family friends and neighbors.  Using that information to be more informed come election time, and trying to change the system using existing non-violent methods.

I'm not advocating a complete overthrowing of the government because the NSA is domestically spying and collecting data on it's citizens (and sharing this information with local law enforcement agencies). 

But we should be upset about it, and we should be spreading the word about it (as well as holding those in power accountable).
 
2013-08-21 05:01:57 PM

Ned Stark: draypresct: Ned Stark: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.

"All the intelligence [the NSA] need[s]" is definitely under dispute as well. That was a pretty neat little verbal trick you tried to take it off the table with though.

I'm sorry - I don't understand what you are saying. Are you trying to imply that we (the United States as a country and we as citizens of this country) don't need intelligence (i.e. information)?

I really don't get what you're saying. I meant no "verbal trick" in my post.

You obviously never meant the citizens of the united states needed intelligence. Your post explicitly excludes them. "This stuff needs to be kept secret".

And you did in fact, frame you question around preventing employees from inappropriately accessing data and simply took it as gospel that the NSA needed the data in the first place.


US citizens need someone to access the intelligence. We also need someone to know how the sewers work, how air traffic control works, etc. Most individual citizens do not need to have this information.

We (US citizens) need the NSA to gather intelligence. We also need the gathered information to be kept secret. Yes, that includes being kept secret from most citizens (I might cynically include most members of Congress as well).

I'm still not clear on where your argument is going. Do you dispute these statements, or are you saying that the NSA is ignoring the intelligence they're supposed to be gathering to pursue other goals, or ?
 
2013-08-21 05:02:07 PM
Starting about five years ago, my hometown newspaper started regularly publishing stories of large drug busts along I-80 in Henry County, Illinois. I didn't think much of it at the time, but as the cases started to go to court and the evidence came out, there was a common thread that connected all of the busts. The drivers were being pulled over for the most minor of traffic infractions. One was pulled over for having a hat on his dashboard, which technically "obstructed his view." Another was pulled over for going three mph over the speed limit (68 in a 65) and for having a registration sticker on his vehicle that was starting to peel. Case after case where the flimsiest of excuses led to vehicle stops. The news obviously uncritically reported the drug busts and loudly advertised that Henry County, Illinois lead the nation in 2008 for drug busts.

Now I definitely didn't think this was NSA-related at the time, but I definitely knew that the police were not being candid. I have friends on some of the various police forces and I know that profiling not only occurs, but is tacitly allowed, so I thought that this was simply a derivative of that behavior, as the local drug taskforce MEG which eventually coordinates the busts with the Illinois State Troopers is populated by the various community police forces. In this case, my conservative assumption was that they actively profiled suspicious-looking vehicles with California plates. But the more I think about it now, the more I believe that they were being tipped to pull over specific vehicles and that these tips were illegally obtained.
 
2013-08-21 05:02:26 PM

acohn: CrazyCracka420:
It really comes down to two or three camps:
"are you a nationalist who supports the government 100% and thinks people who criticize it are unpatriotic?"
"Are you a person who believes government will overstep it's bounds and the citizens need to keep them in check"
"Are you the cynical type who doesn't think it's important or that the government cares what they personally are doing"

How about the camp of "Government will always abuse secretive powers but if I try to do anything about it, I'll become a martyr, so I'll live with it."?


That would be a subsection of the cynical type (couldn't cover all the cynicisms)
 
2013-08-21 05:02:26 PM

draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?


Yeah, I do. Don't collect the data. And stop giving a terrorists a reason to hate us. Imagine all of the money and lives we'd save if we stopped spying on everyone AND pulled our troops out of the middle east. We'd be rolling in the dough.
 
2013-08-21 05:02:59 PM

justoneznot: Btw, you people talking about Obama and taking this as a political issue are completely missing the point. This has nothing to do with Obama. The NSA's power is going to continue to grow, and its abilities will be even greater with the next administration, which very well could be republican. Republican, Democrat, back and fourth from one set of four years to the next, this power will continue to grow, and it's something we all should be concerned with no matter what side of the aisle we're on.


This has more to do with our ever-increasing fear of "terrorism" and xenophobia. The problem isn't the government, it's the people who demand "safety" at any and all expense.

As someone who has seen firsthand what Big Data can do, what this article talks about and what the NSA does... is trivial. It's easy. They've probably been doing it for a long time. And they'll continue to do it, and get better at it.
If you think the technological advancements do no exist for this type of a program, you're way behind and very wrong.
 
2013-08-21 05:04:30 PM

nmrsnr: "Lying to Congress" is the crime, "lying to the American people" isn't, that's called politics.


When you're talking to Congress and you lie, that's called "lying to Congress." Even if your intended target for the lie was the American people instead of Congress, it's still technically lying to Congress.
 
2013-08-21 05:04:44 PM

nmrsnr: Voiceofreason01: lying to congress is a crime

Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.


WAT? If I know my kid broke a lamp and he says he didn't, is that telling the truth?!
 
2013-08-21 05:06:45 PM

Lando Lincoln: draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?

Yeah, I do. Don't collect the data. And stop giving a terrorists a reason to hate us. Imagine all of the money and lives we'd save if we stopped spying on everyone AND pulled our troops out of the middle east. We'd be rolling in the dough.


So much this. It's pretty obvious they don't hate us for our Freedoms(tm). They hate us for doing what America has done for 70+ years.
 
2013-08-21 05:06:51 PM

Mugato: Yeah but nothing is going to stop the technology so as much as it might suck, we have to get used to the idea of our privacy quotient inherently aproaching zero.


I don't know about that. Technology gives us tools to spy on people and it also gives us tools to stop people from spying on us.
 
2013-08-21 05:08:12 PM

justinguarini4ever: Starting about five years ago, my hometown newspaper started regularly publishing stories of large drug busts along I-80 in Henry County, Illinois. I didn't think much of it at the time, but as the cases started to go to court and the evidence came out, there was a common thread that connected all of the busts. The drivers were being pulled over for the most minor of traffic infractions. One was pulled over for having a hat on his dashboard, which technically "obstructed his view." Another was pulled over for going three mph over the speed limit (68 in a 65) and for having a registration sticker on his vehicle that was starting to peel. Case after case where the flimsiest of excuses led to vehicle stops. The news obviously uncritically reported the drug busts and loudly advertised that Henry County, Illinois lead the nation in 2008 for drug busts.

Now I definitely didn't think this was NSA-related at the time, but I definitely knew that the police were not being candid. I have friends on some of the various police forces and I know that profiling not only occurs, but is tacitly allowed, so I thought that this was simply a derivative of that behavior, as the local drug taskforce MEG which eventually coordinates the busts with the Illinois State Troopers is populated by the various community police forces. In this case, my conservative assumption was that they actively profiled suspicious-looking vehicles with California plates. But the more I think about it now, the more I believe that they were being tipped to pull over specific vehicles and that these tips were illegally obtained.


Then your assumption would be correct.  I also have friends in law enforcement (sheriff's deputies, local police departments, and other government entities), and they have confirmed this as well.  There were stories about the NSA tipping off local law enforcement (mainly regarding drugs, go figure war on drugs) about grow operations and other drug dealings.

neversubmit: Urbn: Quite honestly, my big concern is how are they identifying individual users of their tools who might be using it for their own personal or malicious purposes?

Such as, a contractor with access gets bribed by a politician's aides to dig up something on a political opponent

Or an employee with access uses it to get back at a neighbor they hate

I doubt they are tracking access all that well after you see things like Manning and Snowden, people who weren't high level analysts that had access to all kinds of data they probably didn't really need access to. And no one noticed until they went public on their own.

They are not and they have no way of doing so.

Report: NSA doesn't know the extent of Snowden damage

The National Security Agency (NSA) doesn't know how much information leaker Edward Snowden was able to obtain because of an underdeveloped capacity to audit its own data, according to a NBC News report released late Tuesday.


And that's just one more thing (that I didn't even consider) that we should be concerned with.  It's not necessarily some big wigs behind the scenes using the information for political gain, if someone like Snowden can get this information, I wonder what other personal vendettas people are getting information about to use in their personal/business lives...

These apologists are the worst kind of Americans.
 
2013-08-21 05:08:26 PM

Evil High Priest: mediablitz: nmrsnr: Voiceofreason01: lying to congress is a crime

Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.

I'm embarrassed whenever anyone trots out the "Clapper lied!!!" silliness. His response is online, in PDF form. He misunderstood a question. He's really old. He clarified as soon as he realized he misunderstood.

You do know he had the question in hand, in writing, the day before the hearing, right? If he really is that incompetent, he needs to be replaced immediately.


Shhhh... Don't interrupt the lies about the lies.

As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Wyden had been briefed on the top-secret-plus programs that we now all know about. That is, he knew that he was putting Clapper in a box; He knew that the true answer to his question was "Yes," but he also knew that Clapper would have a hard time saying so without making headlines.

Nor was this a spontaneous lie or a lie he regretted making. Wyden revealed in a statement today that he'd given Clapper advance notice that he would ask the question and that, after the hearing, he offered Clapper a chance to revise his answer. Clapper didn't take the offer.
 
2013-08-21 05:09:26 PM

draypresct: Ned Stark: draypresct: Ned Stark: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.

"All the intelligence [the NSA] need[s]" is definitely under dispute as well. That was a pretty neat little verbal trick you tried to take it off the table with though.

I'm sorry - I don't understand what you are saying. Are you trying to imply that we (the United States as a country and we as citizens of this country) don't need intelligence (i.e. information)?

I really don't get what you're saying. I meant no "verbal trick" in my post.

You obviously never meant the citizens of the united states needed intelligence. Your post explicitly excludes them. "This stuff needs to be kept secret".

And you did in fact, frame you question around preventing employees from inappropriately accessing data and simply took it as gospel that the NSA needed the data in the first place.

US citizens need someone to access the intelligence. We also need someone to know how the sewers work, how air traffic control works, etc. Most individual citizens do not need to have this information.

We (US citizens) need the NSA to gather intelligence. We also need the gathered information to be kept secret. Yes, that includes being kept secret from most citizens (I might cynically include most members of Congress as well).

I'm still not clear on where your argument is going. Do you dispute these statements, or are you saying that the NSA is ignoring the intelligence they're supposed to be gathering to pursue other goals, or ?


For the Nthe time, yes I dispute thode statements. "All information anyone on the internet generates" is not nessecary information.
 
2013-08-21 05:09:55 PM

Lando Lincoln: Technology gives us tools to spy on people and it also gives us tools to stop people from spying on us.


Do you really thing the latter will ever outweigh the former?
 
2013-08-21 05:10:41 PM

midigod: draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?

There is no solution where the NSA can legally and Constitutionally collect all the data they need to prevent terrorism, or crime in general.  To do that, they need all data.


I agree, with one quibble. The NSA isn't (or shouldn't) really be trying to fight domestic crime.

The data they need isn't the point.  We should be looking at whether the data they are collecting infringes on Constitutional rights.  If it does, they need to stop collecting that data, and come up with another method of crime-fighting, or not fight those crimes until they are actually committed.

No one will dispute that crimes can be prevented using this, and other, information.  It's a question of whether we want to allow so much power to be reigned over to secret parties, with no oversight as to its use or abise, or even what type of data is being collected.  We only know about the current collection because the extent of it has been leaked.  That's a long way away from actual oversight.


I think that the data they need is a pretty big point. I won't say they need their data to fight the nebulous "war on terror", but I will say that they need to gather information detect threats to us and our allies. This information must be kept secret.

We really wouldn't want them to have a big, obvious hole in their surveillance, so they have to have the capability to monitor domestic traffic. This isn't a constitutional violation if done right (like wiretapping). They should be very careful about when and how they do so, and they should answer to internal audits about this. Heck, put all their employees through regular lie detector tests and financial audits, if you like. But I just don't think public oversight is a reasonable solution given the kind of data we're asking them to gather. And, no matter what internal audits we put in place, there will be violations.
 
2013-08-21 05:11:43 PM

Lando Lincoln: nmrsnr: "Lying to Congress" is the crime, "lying to the American people" isn't, that's called politics.

When you're talking to Congress and you lie, that's called "lying to Congress." Even if your intended target for the lie was the American people instead of Congress, it's still technically lying to Congress.


He didn't just lie.

He lied under oath.

This is a felony, and he wasn't even fired, much less prosecuted.
 
2013-08-21 05:18:59 PM

Outrageous Muff: Lando Lincoln: It's not like they were illegally doing this years ago and once they were found out to be doing it, just changed the laws to make it legal.

No, no, our government would never do anything like that.

Guess what. Governments have been spying on each other since the one cave found another cave and wanted to know what they were up too.  Your complete lack of understanding is this basic realm of international relations is stunning, but not unexpected.


Ah, the old "It's always been this way, so it's OK" argument.  Usually the weapon of six-year-olds, right after they realize that "Because everybody else is doing it" isn't a legitimate argument, either.

Some civics, history, and critical thinking courses would do you good.
 
2013-08-21 05:21:00 PM

Ned Stark: For the Nthe time, yes I dispute thode statements. "All information anyone on the internet generates" is not nessecary information.


Who was saying that the NSA should have "all information anyone on the internet generates?" I believe the article stated that they have the capability to access 75% of the information on the internet.

If the NSA did not have the capability to access information on the internet, that would be a pretty big hole in their surveillance. I'm hoping that no-one's arguing that they shouldn't have the capability.

I believe that the NSA should have the capability to look for intelligence on the internet if they have reason to believe that it might lead to detection of a threat against us or our allies. I suspect that "75% of the internet" means "everything that is completely public", in which case I'm even more in favor of them having the capability to look.
 
2013-08-21 05:21:51 PM

BullBearMS: [Excellent links to coverage of Obama's BS]


Just want to say thanks for bringing good information to these threads. You're farkied in green.

/ran a link aggregation site of Bush administration abuses in the 2000s
//thinking about firing it up again for Obama
 
2013-08-21 05:24:13 PM

robbiex0r: Lando Lincoln: draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?

Yeah, I do. Don't collect the data. And stop giving a terrorists a reason to hate us. Imagine all of the money and lives we'd save if we stopped spying on everyone AND pulled our troops out of the middle east. We'd be rolling in the dough.

So much this. It's pretty obvious they don't hate us for our Freedoms(tm). They hate us for doing what America has done for 70+ years.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-21 05:24:16 PM

BullBearMS: Lando Lincoln: nmrsnr: "Lying to Congress" is the crime, "lying to the American people" isn't, that's called politics.

When you're talking to Congress and you lie, that's called "lying to Congress." Even if your intended target for the lie was the American people instead of Congress, it's still technically lying to Congress.

He didn't just lie.

He lied under oath.

This is a felony, and he wasn't even fired, much less prosecuted.


True, he committed a felony. He was given the choice between lying under oath or revealing confidential information. Either way, he'd be committing a felony.
 
2013-08-21 05:25:14 PM

Mugato: Lando Lincoln: Technology gives us tools to spy on people and it also gives us tools to stop people from spying on us.

Do you really thing the latter will ever outweigh the former?


Outweigh? No. But it doesn't need to.
 
2013-08-21 05:25:46 PM

Evil High Priest: mediablitz: nmrsnr: Voiceofreason01: lying to congress is a crime

Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.

I'm embarrassed whenever anyone trots out the "Clapper lied!!!" silliness. His response is online, in PDF form. He misunderstood a question. He's really old. He clarified as soon as he realized he misunderstood.

You do know he had the question in hand, in writing, the day before the hearing, right? If he really is that incompetent, he needs to be replaced immediately.


It wouldn't matter how well in advance he had the question if he thought the question was about something else entirely.
 
2013-08-21 05:26:22 PM

brantgoose: Let's see if I understand what they are saying:
{lots of stuff}


1> your premise is sound
2> you know very little about computers... it's not RAM but Hard/Flash drive space you meant to say - two different animals
3> The computer that sent the men to the moon was actually compared in power to a Commodore 64 (an 8bit computer not a 16bit computer like the 286) and only ran at 1MhZ (aprox).
4> Enemy of the State was a great movie.
 
2013-08-21 05:28:12 PM

draypresct: True, he committed a felony. He was given the choice between lying under oath or revealing confidential information. Either way, he'd be committing a felony.


I'm thinking that telling the truth is the better of the two options. But he chose the worse one. He wouldn't have revealed confidential information. He would have confirmed it.
 
2013-08-21 05:28:47 PM

robbiex0r: Lando Lincoln: draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?

Yeah, I do. Don't collect the data. And stop giving a terrorists a reason to hate us. Imagine all of the money and lives we'd save if we stopped spying on everyone AND pulled our troops out of the middle east. We'd be rolling in the dough.

So much this. It's pretty obvious they don't hate us for our Freedoms(tm). They hate us for doing what America has done for 70+ years.


Do you think you can put together a list of things we can do that would make everyone with the capability to attack us stop hating us? Even in countries that like us, where most of the citizens have a favorable view of us, there are groups that hate us.

I can't even think of how we'd be able to get everyone _inside_ the US to approve of our government and society, let alone everyone in the world.
 
2013-08-21 05:29:08 PM

draypresct: He was given the choice between lying under oath or revealing confidential information. Either way, he'd be committing a felony.


No.

He was given a choice between committing a felony and saying he couldn't answer that question in an open forum.
 
2013-08-21 05:30:05 PM

100 Watt Walrus: Just want to say thanks for bringing good information to these threads. You're farkied in green.


Well, thanks. So are you.
 
2013-08-21 05:31:07 PM

Lando Lincoln: draypresct: True, he committed a felony. He was given the choice between lying under oath or revealing confidential information. Either way, he'd be committing a felony.

I'm thinking that telling the truth is the better of the two options. But he chose the worse one. He wouldn't have revealed confidential information. He would have confirmed it.


Confirming confidentical information is still a crime. This has put people in some pretty odd positions in the past, but it's still a crime.
 
2013-08-21 05:35:27 PM

BullBearMS: draypresct: He was given the choice between lying under oath or revealing confidential information. Either way, he'd be committing a felony.

No.

He was given a choice between committing a felony and saying he couldn't answer that question in an open forum.


I think that response would have been just as revealing as a "yes", given the context, but that might have been a better approach given his choices.
 
2013-08-21 05:37:42 PM

The_Gallant_Gallstone: Kit Fister: (not gun nuts, no one listens to them)
I've got an entity known as the United States House of Representatives that says otherwise.


Because the majority of the people who are talking right now are doing the same things that Feinstein's doing: Forcing an extreme in order to compromise closer to what they're willing to live with. And, when it comes to rights and responsibilities, sometimes the "Extreme" is the correct one.
 
2013-08-21 05:38:05 PM

draypresct: robbiex0r: Lando Lincoln: draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?

Yeah, I do. Don't collect the data. And stop giving a terrorists a reason to hate us. Imagine all of the money and lives we'd save if we stopped spying on everyone AND pulled our troops out of the middle east. We'd be rolling in the dough.

So much this. It's pretty obvious they don't hate us for our Freedoms(tm). They hate us for doing what America has done for 70+ years.

Do you think you can put together a list of things we can do that would make everyone with the capability to attack us stop hating us? Even in countries that like us, where most of the citizens have a favorable view of us, there are groups that hate us.

I can't even think of how we'd be able to get everyone _inside_ the US to approve of our government and society, let alone everyone in the world.


It's not like its difficult to pick out shiat that needs changing. If you're old enlightened to post on fark the USG has been responsible for the deaths of half a million innocent peopleat the very least during your lifetime.
 
2013-08-21 05:39:54 PM

Ned Stark: draypresct: robbiex0r: Lando Lincoln: draypresct: Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need?

Yeah, I do. Don't collect the data. And stop giving a terrorists a reason to hate us. Imagine all of the money and lives we'd save if we stopped spying on everyone AND pulled our troops out of the middle east. We'd be rolling in the dough.

So much this. It's pretty obvious they don't hate us for our Freedoms(tm). They hate us for doing what America has done for 70+ years.

Do you think you can put together a list of things we can do that would make everyone with the capability to attack us stop hating us? Even in countries that like us, where most of the citizens have a favorable view of us, there are groups that hate us.

I can't even think of how we'd be able to get everyone _inside_ the US to approve of our government and society, let alone everyone in the world.

It's not like its difficult to pick out shiat that needs changing. If you're old enlightened to post on fark the USG has been responsible for the deaths of half a million innocent peopleat the very least during your lifetime.


Old enough.


Enlightened?? What the hell spellcheck?
 
2013-08-21 05:40:39 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.


Before the recent leaks most idiots assumed that just because the Patriot act said the Feds could do this kind of spying that it wasn't actually happening.
 
2013-08-21 05:41:29 PM

draypresct: Do you think you can put together a list of things we can do that would make everyone with the capability to attack us stop hating us?


Nope. We'll never make everyone happy, just like we'll never stop every attack. But we can sure as hell minimize the gripes by stop putting American troops in foreign countries. How would we feel if Saudi Arabia sent troops to a Saudi-controlled base in the middle of Texas? Our government would say, "No, it's okay, Texans! We asked them to put a base in Dallas! To protect the oil fields!" And then Texans would say, "Oh, well...if our government ASKED them to be there, then I guess it's okay..."
 
2013-08-21 05:43:49 PM

reaperducer: Outrageous Muff: Lando Lincoln: It's not like they were illegally doing this years ago and once they were found out to be doing it, just changed the laws to make it legal.

No, no, our government would never do anything like that.

Guess what. Governments have been spying on each other since the one cave found another cave and wanted to know what they were up too.  Your complete lack of understanding is this basic realm of international relations is stunning, but not unexpected.

Ah, the old "It's always been this way, so it's OK" argument.  Usually the weapon of six-year-olds, right after they realize that "Because everybody else is doing it" isn't a legitimate argument, either.

Some civics, history, and critical thinking courses would do you good.


You're right. The arguments of strawman, slippery slope, concern trolling, and bare assertions are much better than a factual understanding of the ongoing situation.

You're so smart. What University do you teach at? I need to make sure my future children avoid it forever.
 
2013-08-21 05:44:41 PM
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-08-21 05:45:03 PM

Lando Lincoln: draypresct: Do you think you can put together a list of things we can do that would make everyone with the capability to attack us stop hating us?

Nope. We'll never make everyone happy, just like we'll never stop every attack. But we can sure as hell minimize the gripes by stop putting American troops in foreign countries. How would we feel if Saudi Arabia sent troops to a Saudi-controlled base in the middle of Texas? Our government would say, "No, it's okay, Texans! We asked them to put a base in Dallas! To protect the oil fields!" And then Texans would say, "Oh, well...if our government ASKED them to be there, then I guess it's okay..."


That's really a different argument entirely from the "should the government collect data from the internet?" though isn't it? They are certainly not mutually exclusive.
 
2013-08-21 05:45:52 PM

Lando Lincoln: Outrageous Muff: Reality: The NSA has the capability to log 75% of communications, but doesn't because of the vast amount of rules and regulations they have to adhere too.

It's not like they were illegally doing this years ago and once they were found out to be doing it, just changed the laws to make it legal.

No, no, our government would never do anything like that.


This is exactly why the politicians say that things like the FISA court is a good thing that is protecting our liberties. They knew this was going on anyway and saw the court as a way to provide some oversight.
 
2013-08-21 05:46:03 PM
As always, it's easiest to just follow the money.  Who gets paid from these heuristic search algorithms and mountains of database servers?

The TSA nudie-scanners made Michael Chertoff a rich man.  Who is in on this payday?
 
2013-08-21 05:46:33 PM

Lando Lincoln: Could this tool be used to identify US citizens that are talking about doing something against the government, because the government is ignoring certain parts of the Constitution? Then this is a tool that could really do some serious harm to our society.


The obvious solution is that everyone needs to start talking about how to do something against the government, and just flood them with noise.

\Noise.
\\Noise
 
2013-08-21 05:47:44 PM

mizchief: vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.

Before the recent leaks most idiots assumed that just because the Patriot act said the Feds could do this kind of spying that it wasn't actually happening.


Although there have been many people trying to get you to believe the Patriot Act allows for Bush and Obama's blanket spying on all Americans, this is a total lie.

What happened is that just like Bush falsely claimed his secret interpretation of the law allowed for tortue, Obama claimed he had his own secret interpretation of the Patriot Act that allowed him to spy on everyone.

For more than two years, a handful of Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee have warned that the government is secretly interpreting its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming if the public - or even others in Congress - knew about it.

On Thursday, two of those senators - Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado - went further. They said a top-secret intelligence operation that is based on that secret legal theory is not as crucial to national security as executive branch officials have maintained.
 
2013-08-21 05:47:57 PM

Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?


This is why the started hitting up Google and the other tech companies. They did all the hard work of aggregating the data and the NSA just incorporated the results into their own searches.
 
2013-08-21 05:49:35 PM
The most ironic thing ever:

The "Private" sector is transparent whereas the "Public" sector is the most private/obscured.
 
2013-08-21 05:49:39 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.


I know I rag on you a lot, but this.

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/10/the_nsa_dea_police_state_tango/
 
2013-08-21 05:52:04 PM

justtray: That's really a different argument entirely from the "should the government collect data from the internet?" though isn't it? They are certainly not mutually exclusive.


True, but someone asked how to minimize the collateral damage from data mining. One solution is to "not data mine." Which leads to the question, "but how are we going to stop people from attacking us then?" and the answer to THAT is "focus on minimizing why people want to attack us in the first place, thus obviating the need to spend so much effort on spying on everyone on earth."

We want our cake and we want to eat it too. We want to do whatever we want to whomever we want and we want to suffer zero consequences for doing so, and to achieve both of those goals, we need to keep an eye on everybody. It's a cycle that deserves to end.
 
2013-08-21 05:52:50 PM

mizchief: Lando Lincoln: Outrageous Muff: Reality: The NSA has the capability to log 75% of communications, but doesn't because of the vast amount of rules and regulations they have to adhere too.

It's not like they were illegally doing this years ago and once they were found out to be doing it, just changed the laws to make it legal.

No, no, our government would never do anything like that.

This is exactly why the politicians say that things like the FISA court is a good thing that is protecting our liberties. They knew this was going on anyway and saw the court as a way to provide some oversight.


Oh, really?

"The FISC is forced to rely upon the accuracy of the information that is provided to the Court," its chief, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, said in a written statement to The Washington Post. "The FISC does not have the capacity to investigate issues of noncompliance, and in that respect the FISC is in the same position as any other court when it comes to enforcing [government] compliance with its orders."

There is no possible way that can be interpreted as "oversight".
 
2013-08-21 05:54:02 PM

GoodDoctorB: CrazyCracka420: Obvious tag on vacation?  Where have you people been the last 10 years?

I think the real story here is how many people apparently had no idea the NSA was the NSA.


Yea it was a brilliant move when the NSA was created and one wise man suggested changing the word "Surveillance" to "Security"
 
2013-08-21 05:54:30 PM

Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


There was an article in the New York Times about this a couple of weeks ago.

Summary:  The NSA has ways of cleaning the data and getting it to the local law enforcement agencies.  Sometimes by arranging physical coincidences.  Sometimes through a "nexus" that different agencies use to pass information.  Sometimes through "anonymous informants" who cannot be questioned in court.

tl;dr version:  You're wrong.
 
2013-08-21 05:54:41 PM

draypresct: midigod: The NSA themselves acknowledge thousands of those abuses.

From your link: "The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders."

I hate to tell you this, but if you look at any situation where people are collecting confidential data on you (hospitals, credit card companies, ISPs), you're going to see large numbers of violations. Any time you employ human beings to manage confidential data, there are going to be violations.

The question is what the institution is doing about it, and what other solutions are available.

Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.


"Most"?

So some of those were with malice aforethought?
 
2013-08-21 05:54:41 PM

This text is now purple: DROxINxTHExWIND: Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.

I know I rag on you a lot, but this.

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/10/the_nsa_dea_police_state_tango/


FTA: "Maybe this is how a police state comes to America: Not with a bang, but with a parallel construction."

Though I would have put it: "So this is how liberty dies... not with a bang, but with thunderous applause."
 
2013-08-21 05:57:28 PM

BafflerMeal: As expected.  About a month ago a person from the TLAs told me about the first all hands briefing they had after Snowden.  The person said it was going to get 'much worse'.

/welcomes all of you to the party.
/better late than never
/can I take your coat?


You want my coat, too, now?
 
2013-08-21 05:58:14 PM
I hate it when I am right. :S
 
2013-08-21 05:59:07 PM

Outrageous Muff: mraudacia: guess you havent heard about that 2 billion dollar data hub they built... john oliver did a good piece on it, its on youtube.

try to keep up grandpa.

A data hub, next to housing development, that was publicly announced as a data hub by the government. I don't know if you are aware, but Big Data is the new thing and housing the servers for an organization as large as the US Government would require a large building. But you keep thinking someone in some shadowy room is logging all the cock pics you sext to people.

Snarfangel: Which is why they can't waste time getting warrants.

The NSA does not need warrants since foreign nationals do not have the same rights as Americans. Deal with it.

However regulations say that all NSA collected data can not be used against a US citizen and that all dealings with citizens are handed over to the FBI who does get warrants. But don't let that keep you from your Jackbooted Governments Brown Shirt fantasies.


The BigData aspect is exactly what the NSA wants from the american people. Having a good sense of exactly how much BS the public will take. Need to know if you can afford to piss off a certain lobby group? Want to know how to draw the congressional districts so that you and your other fellow congress critters can stay in power?
 
2013-08-21 05:59:36 PM

Lando Lincoln: justtray: That's really a different argument entirely from the "should the government collect data from the internet?" though isn't it? They are certainly not mutually exclusive.

True, but someone asked how to minimize the collateral damage from data mining. One solution is to "not data mine." Which leads to the question, "but how are we going to stop people from attacking us then?" and the answer to THAT is "focus on minimizing why people want to attack us in the first place, thus obviating the need to spend so much effort on spying on everyone on earth."

We want our cake and we want to eat it too. We want to do whatever we want to whomever we want and we want to suffer zero consequences for doing so, and to achieve both of those goals, we need to keep an eye on everybody. It's a cycle that deserves to end.


I agree, but as I think you or someone else mentioned, there's no perfect solution. There will always be terrorism. If not because "f america!" then it will simply be senseless along the lines of Sandy Hook or the Boston Marathon bombers. (although you can make a strong case for religious focus for that too)
 
2013-08-21 06:00:16 PM

Apik0r0s: This is how J Edgar Hoover maintained his power for so long, by holding dirt on everyone. Don't play ball? Forget Lewinsky, we have a new method now, the Spitzer - where we leak wiretap info to the NYT and let them out you as using an escort service - can't have you digging into all the dirty money that is Wall Street.

Compromised emails and internet use would explain why Congress and SCOTUS went completely insane about the same time the new NSA toys came online.


I wonder if Clapper also likes to dress up as a woman and engage in homosexual BDSM encounters.

Because Hoover sure did.
 
2013-08-21 06:05:37 PM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Outrageous Muff: BafflerMeal: 1.  NSA et al collects data w/o warrants
2.  finds something domestic
3.  hands over poison data to domestic
4.  4th amendment violation

"Posion" data that can't be used as evidence in any court. So no 4th Amendment violation.


Check out this guy, who missed the article about local law enforcement officers using NSA gathered intelligence and lying about the source. Somebody less lazy than me, please provide him with a link.


It's called information laundering and it happens all the time not just with NSA data. This happens all the time when the civil air patrol or police aircraft uses IR cameras to find houses with hot grow lights installed, then the cops just happen to walk by the house with a drug dog that gives the cue that they smell pot and then go get a warrant based on probable cause.
 
2013-08-21 06:07:34 PM

draypresct: True, he committed a felony. He was given the choice between lying under oath or revealing confidential information. Either way, he'd be committing a felony.


It's like he received a national security letter.

Let me play my tiny violin for him.
 
2013-08-21 06:11:17 PM

J. Frank Parnell: elchupacabra: Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary proof.

Here's the chief technology officer of the CIA saying they collect everything on everyone and hold on to it indefinitely in case they need it in the future. Among other things.

/it won't even matter
//a news anchor on TV will tell you different and you'll believe them


That's a slight distortion of what the Hunt said.  Around the 20:30 mark, he says, "We fundamentally try to collect everything and hang on to it forever, 'forever' being in quotes, of course."  This validates your first point but invalidates your second point.  Granted, we will never know what the CIA thinks is "forever," but Hunt strongly implies it's not forever.
 
2013-08-21 06:13:40 PM

acohn: J. Frank Parnell: elchupacabra: Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary proof.

Here's the chief technology officer of the CIA saying they collect everything on everyone and hold on to it indefinitely in case they need it in the future. Among other things.

/it won't even matter
//a news anchor on TV will tell you different and you'll believe them

That's a slight distortion of what the Hunt said.  Around the 20:30 mark, he says, "We fundamentally try to collect everything and hang on to it forever, 'forever' being in quotes, of course."  This validates your first point but invalidates your second point.  Granted, we will never know what the CIA thinks is "forever," but Hunt strongly implies it's not forever.


www.partycrashertshirts.com
 
2013-08-21 06:17:04 PM

acohn: J. Frank Parnell: elchupacabra: Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary proof.

Here's the chief technology officer of the CIA saying they collect everything on everyone and hold on to it indefinitely in case they need it in the future. Among other things.

/it won't even matter
//a news anchor on TV will tell you different and you'll believe them

That's a slight distortion of what the Hunt said.  Around the 20:30 mark, he says, "We fundamentally try to collect everything and hang on to it forever, 'forever' being in quotes, of course."  This validates your first point but invalidates your second point.  Granted, we will never know what the CIA thinks is "forever," but Hunt strongly implies it's not forever.


He should have just testified that they "hang on to what they collect forever - literally" and he would have been fine either way.
 
2013-08-21 06:18:51 PM

ThighsofGlory: BafflerMeal: As expected.  About a month ago a person from the TLAs told me about the first all hands briefing they had after Snowden.  The person said it was going to get 'much worse'.

/welcomes all of you to the party.
/better late than never
/can I take your coat?

You want my coat, too, now?


Well, if it's a nice coat, sure.

24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-08-21 06:26:41 PM
 
2013-08-21 06:48:10 PM

BullBearMS: draypresct: He was given the choice between lying under oath or revealing confidential information. Either way, he'd be committing a felony.

No.

He was given a choice between committing a felony and saying he couldn't answer that question in an open forum.


He had another option - to say something like this: "Senator Wyden, given your position on the Senate Intelligence Committee, you should know when an action violates national security laws.  I will do everything in my power to see that those laws are vigorously enforced."  and then leave.  The following day, Wyden would be lucky to be alive, much less in Congress.
 
2013-08-21 06:53:56 PM

Outrageous Muff: Nemo's Brother: You don't understand the true purpose of this. It is not preventative but retaliatory. Someone pisses off a politician, you can go root throuhg all of their files

Their files? How do you think the world works? Politicians hire PI's all the time. You honestly think the government spends all day working to keep you down?


I am hoping that this is a joke. What if you invoke HIPPA and say well no cloud data for you.
/just sayin
// n joy the cloud
 
2013-08-21 06:56:24 PM
BullBearMS:

NSA Director Keith Alexander: ...But to conduct that kind of collection in the United States it would have to go through a court order, and the court would have to authorize it. We're not authorized to do it, nor do we do it.

As mentioned earlier, he's being lawyerly, not explicitly lying.  The NSA has other groups/companies do their data collection and send them the results.  A distinction without a difference, to be sure, but not legally lying.
 
2013-08-21 07:17:27 PM

robbiex0r: The problem isn't the government, it's the people who demand "safety" at any and all expense.


For eight years we had an administration screaming "You're all going to die tomorrow unless you give us everything we want!" while at the same time spoon-feeding our lame-ass media their scare stories of the day. This fear didn't bubble up from the people, it was carefully tended by the government.
 
2013-08-21 07:21:42 PM

acohn: BullBearMS:

NSA Director Keith Alexander: ...But to conduct that kind of collection in the United States it would have to go through a court order, and the court would have to authorize it. We're not authorized to do it, nor do we do it.

As mentioned earlier, he's being lawyerly, not explicitly lying.  The NSA has other groups/companies do their data collection and send them the results.  A distinction without a difference, to be sure, but not legally lying.


Bullshiat excuse is incorrect.

He is explicitly lying.
 
2013-08-21 07:22:33 PM

Biological Ali: Evil High Priest: mediablitz: nmrsnr: Voiceofreason01: lying to congress is a crime

Oh, you talking about Clapper? If you want to go after him, be my guest, the NSA, however, didn't lie to Congress, since they already knew the answer when they asked him the question.

I'm embarrassed whenever anyone trots out the "Clapper lied!!!" silliness. His response is online, in PDF form. He misunderstood a question. He's really old. He clarified as soon as he realized he misunderstood.

You do know he had the question in hand, in writing, the day before the hearing, right? If he really is that incompetent, he needs to be replaced immediately.

It wouldn't matter how well in advance he had the question if he thought the question was about something else entirely.


Wow. That's incredibly weak even for you. Bootlick harder.
 
2013-08-21 07:25:43 PM

Evil High Priest: Wow. That's incredibly weak even for you. Bootlick harder.


Instead of meaningless insults, how about you try to walk me through your logic here?

I mean, if Clapper is under the impression that the question is about email content and not telephone metadata, what difference would it make if he was given the question in advance? Would he magically be able to discern the question's true meaning just by staring at it long enough or something?
 
2013-08-21 07:32:46 PM
 
2013-08-21 07:33:49 PM

The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.


No, what I find sad, or perhaps astonishing, is how many of those citizens are carrying on as if this is something new and unusual.
 
2013-08-21 07:34:37 PM
 
2013-08-21 07:37:23 PM

BullBearMS: Clapper Admits He Lied to Congress in Letter Posted by Senator Wyden


Hilarious! Thanks.
 
2013-08-21 07:39:31 PM

Gyrfalcon: The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.

No, what I find sad, or perhaps astonishing, is how many of those citizens are carrying on as if this is something new and unusual.


And I find it sad that that is your focus. Let's take one more minute to dwell on this, and then move the fark along to the actual subject at hand.
 
2013-08-21 07:40:55 PM

Evil High Priest: BullBearMS: Clapper Admits He Lied to Congress in Letter Posted by Senator Wyden

Hilarious! Thanks.


Just doing my part against the forces of lies and misinformation.

/Hat tip
 
2013-08-21 07:45:30 PM

Evil High Priest: BullBearMS: Clapper Admits He Lied to Congress in Letter Posted by Senator Wyden

Hilarious! Thanks.


Yeah, it's about as hilarious as the various right-wing blogs offering ironclad proof about how the administration "admitted" that they "lied" about Benghazi.
 
2013-08-21 07:46:12 PM

Evil High Priest: Gyrfalcon: The Muthaship: Maybe sadder than the fact that the government is illegally spying on innocent Americans en mass, is how many of those citizens are making excuses for them.

No, what I find sad, or perhaps astonishing, is how many of those citizens are carrying on as if this is something new and unusual.

And I find it sad that that is your focus. Let's take one more minute to dwell on this, and then move the fark along to the actual subject at hand.


We should probably just ignore the fact that the Obama administration has constantly lied and claimed they were doing no such thing right up until the point when whistle blowers proved them to be liars.

How dare anybody believe that lying ass Obama!?

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-08-21 08:06:44 PM

BullBearMS: Evil High Priest: BullBearMS: Clapper Admits He Lied to Congress in Letter Posted by Senator Wyden

Hilarious! Thanks.

Just doing my part against the forces of lies and misinformation.

/Hat tip


You have been killing this thread. I am in awe.
 
2013-08-21 08:15:18 PM
You can pretty much count on everything that people say as pure bullsh.
 
2013-08-21 08:36:52 PM

umad: You have been killing this thread. I am in awe.


Everyone's doing their part. Are you? The war against the Bill of Rights needs everyone's defense. At work, at home, in your community!

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

/Would you like to know more?
 
2013-08-21 08:37:17 PM

vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.


You don't have to white knight the NSA so hard... I don't think it's going to sleep with you.
 
2013-08-21 08:41:17 PM

Outrageous Muff: However regulations say that all NSA collected data can not be used against a US citizen and that all dealings with citizens are handed over to the FBI who does get warrants. But don't let that keep you from your Jackbooted Governments Brown Shirt fantasies.


"They're not allowed to do that" isn't a particularly reassuring argument, especially when they have the ability to do something. They design, built and maintained a complex system, and now they're just waiting for the go-ahead to use it?
 
2013-08-21 08:47:13 PM

cameroncrazy1984: vpb: Headline: We tap into 75% of US internet traffic.

TFA: The system has the capacity to reach roughly 75% of all U.S. Internet traffic

Having the capacity to do something is not the same thing as doing it.  We have the capacity to nuke Chicago, but that doesn't mean that we have already done it.

This sort of straw man is typical of these NSA "spying" stories.

I came in here to say this. Jesus christ, you people are tech-illiterate.


Says the guy that's never seen a government program or extension of centralized authority that he doesn't like.
 
2013-08-21 10:01:40 PM
 
2013-08-21 10:33:37 PM

Evil High Priest: robbiex0r: The problem isn't the government, it's the people who demand "safety" at any and all expense.

For eight years we had an administration screaming "You're all going to die tomorrow unless you give us everything we want!" while at the same time spoon-feeding our lame-ass media their scare stories of the day. This fear didn't bubble up from the people, it was carefully tended by the government.


But the "greatest nation in the world" the "home of the brave" bought it... They bought it all.
 
2013-08-21 10:44:05 PM

BullBearMS: Obama claimed he had his own secret interpretation of the Patriot Act that allowed him to spy on everyone.

For more than two years, a handful of Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee have warned that the government is secretly interpreting its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming if the public - or even others in Congress - knew about it.

On Thursday, two of those senators - Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado - went further. They said a top-secret intelligence operation that is based on that secret legal theory is not as crucial to national security as executive branch officials have maintained.


I don't think your link supported your interpretation that Obama thought he could spy on everyone. I thought the article said that there was two uses of the section 215 orders from the FISA court - one obvious, and one that is "apparently not obvious from a plain text reading of the provision." While two senators are making a lot of noise,* it sounds like the surveillance is taking place under the oversight of the FISA court, which is a step up from how things were under Bush. Also note that these are supposed to only apply to "tangible things . . . that are deemed 'relevant' to a terrorism or espionage investigation." In other words, the NSA has to convince the FISA court that what they're after will help them in an investigation. Also, "terrorism or espionage" doesn't really make it seem like their primary focus is domestic.

*I don't know anything about these senators. Are they whackadoodles like Bachmann? Or pretty level-headed people?
 
2013-08-21 10:51:09 PM

This text is now purple: draypresct: midigod: The NSA themselves acknowledge thousands of those abuses.

From your link: "The NSA audit obtained by The Post, dated May 2012, counted 2,776 incidents in the preceding 12 months of unauthorized collection, storage, access to or distribution of legally protected communications. Most were unintended. Many involved failures of due diligence or violations of standard operating procedure. The most serious incidents included a violation of a court order and unauthorized use of data about more than 3,000 Americans and green-card holders."

I hate to tell you this, but if you look at any situation where people are collecting confidential data on you (hospitals, credit card companies, ISPs), you're going to see large numbers of violations. Any time you employ human beings to manage confidential data, there are going to be violations.

The question is what the institution is doing about it, and what other solutions are available.

Just out of curiosity - can anyone in this thread think of a solution? One where we collect all the intelligence we need? I don't think public oversight is realistic in this context - this stuff needs to be kept secret.

"Most"?

So some of those were with malice aforethought?


I don't know if it was malice, stupidity, or secret orders, but violating a court order or unauthorized access of data on green-card holders are pretty serious, and I'm hoping heads rolled for those. I also don't know how serious the accidental violations were.

But if you think that an entire institution should be shut down whenever there are violations like this, there wouldn't be a hospital left operating.
 
2013-08-21 11:07:29 PM

draypresct: BullBearMS: Obama claimed he had his own secret interpretation of the Patriot Act that allowed him to spy on everyone.

For more than two years, a handful of Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee have warned that the government is secretly interpreting its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming if the public - or even others in Congress - knew about it.

On Thursday, two of those senators - Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado - went further. They said a top-secret intelligence operation that is based on that secret legal theory is not as crucial to national security as executive branch officials have maintained.

I don't think your link supported your interpretation that Obama thought he could spy on everyone. I thought the article said that there was two uses of the section 215 orders from the FISA court - one obvious, and one that is "apparently not obvious from a plain text reading of the provision." While two senators are making a lot of noise,* it sounds like the surveillance is taking place under the oversight of the FISA court, which is a step up from how things were under Bush. Also note that these are supposed to only apply to "tangible things . . . that are deemed 'relevant' to a terrorism or espionage investigation." In other words, the NSA has to convince the FISA court that what they're after will help them in an investigation. Also, "terrorism or espionage" doesn't really make it seem like their primary focus is domestic.

*I don't know anything about these senators. Are they whackadoodles like Bachmann? Or pretty level-headed people?


Obama has since been forced to release his secret interpretation of the Patriot Act, which indeed has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual text of the act.

The head of the FISA court has publicly said that they have no way to verify whatever the executive branch tells them, so that's not oversight in any way, shape or form.

Either Wyden or Udall would make much better presidents than anyone we've had in office over the past two decades.
 
2013-08-21 11:31:46 PM

When a spy operation says it only has the power to overreach by 75% under the strictest of conditions, what it really means is its already been overreaching by 120% for the last few years and have probably done some horrible stuff with our data along the way.



/Some undertrained desk jockey is living the Orwellian dream right now.
 
2013-08-22 01:36:05 AM

Outrageous Muff: Do you tinfoil-wearing internet pirvacy people understand the logistical problems that arise from recording that much data? Much less the time and manpower it would take to look at at and catalog it for anything?



http://www.forbes.com/pictures/feki45jgmj/colorful-pipes-in-the-dal les -3/
 
2013-08-22 04:05:29 AM
Technologically speaking, tapping roughly 100% of the domestic internet would be...well not easy, but doable.  Storing all the relevant bits for long periods of time, is again, utterly doable.

Ultimately, pretty much the entire domestic internet goes through a relatively small number of backbone lines, and 100% of all international internet goes through one of 4 places.

From a "could the government be doing this?" perspective.  Yes, it wouldn't even be that hard.  It would cost a lot.  But "a lot" doesn't even register on government scale spending.  Hell, google is doing most of the work for them.

I could explain in great technical detail how to go about setting a system like this up, and how to filter the results and store only the parts worth keeping, and how to build out the data centers, and what kind of hardware you'd need.  But why bother?  This isn't a technical issue.  It's a political one.

Either you realize that the US government (and many others) has been doing this sort of "monitoring" since AT LEAST the 1950's, or you are brain dead.

The only thing that has changed is that instead of ignoring most of the chatter, they are storing it for later retrieval, because the means to do so now exist, and are relatively cheap.
 
2013-08-22 11:55:57 AM

BullBearMS: Obama has since been forced to release his secret interpretation of the Patriot Act, which indeed has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual text of the act.


I've done a (very) little research on this, and I have to agree that they've strained the definition of "relevance".

I guess my only response on this is that we should make certain to not conflate collecting the "details" (time of call & phone numbers involved) with collecting the content of the calls. I'm not trying to minimize the fact that the "details" are a source of a considerable amount of information themselves, but (despite the jokes made) I don't believe that there's been any serious suggestion that they're data-mining the content of the calls.

The head of the FISA court has publicly said that they have no way to verify whatever the executive branch tells them, so that's not oversight in any way, shape or form.

I agree that FISA has no independent data-gathering arm to verify what NSA tells it about its activities. Neither does Congress, really. This is true for most government agencies - do you think that Congress pays an independent contractor to validate what the Dept. of Agriculture reports? There is oversight; it's just not multiply redundant.

If there was no oversight whatsoever, then the NSA would have had no motivation to keep track of the 3000+ (mostly accidental) violations that have occurred.

Either Wyden or Udall would make much better presidents than anyone we've had in office over the past two decades.

Having looked at their records a bit, I'll agree that they both seem to have good qualifications and records - nowhere near Bachmann.

By the way - while I've concentrated on the aspects of your responses that I've disagreed with, I've liked your posts. They've been informative and have forced me to try to educate myself to write responses.
 
2013-08-22 12:40:51 PM

draypresct: I don't believe that there's been any serious suggestion that they're data-mining the content of the calls.


As of yesterday, a lawsuit forced them to release more details and it turns out that the FISA court biatch slapped them for collecting much more than metadata.

A federal judge sharply rebuked the National Security Agency in 2011 for repeatedly misleading the court that oversees its surveillance on domestic soil, including a program that is collecting tens of thousands of domestic e-mails and other Internet communications of Americans each year, according to a secret ruling made public on Wednesday.

The 85-page ruling by Judge John D. Bates, then serving as chief judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, involved an N.S.A. program that systematically searches the contents of Americans' international Internet communications, without a warrant, in a hunt for discussions about foreigners who have been targeted for surveillance.

The Justice Department had told Judge Bates that N.S.A. officials had discovered that the program had also been gathering domestic messages for three years. Judge Bates found that the agency had violated the Constitution and declared the problems part of a pattern of misrepresentation by agency officials in submissions to the secret court.


So yes, they were collecting communications and not just metadata, and they weren't just lying to us about it. They were also lying to the FISA court they claim has the power to act as a check on them.

draypresct: If there was no oversight whatsoever, then the NSA would have had no motivation to keep track of the 3000+ (mostly accidental) violations that have occurred.


Obama has claimed that Congress and the FISA courts serve as a check to his actions.

The FISA court has said they cannot verify anything they are told, but they already know they have been subjected to a pattern of deception.

Congress has also called bullshiat. Only members of the intelligence committee who are prevented from discussing what they know had any idea what was going on.

The author of the Patriot Act has been particularly outspoken of late.

As I have said numerous times, I did not know the administration was using the Patriot Act for bulk collection, and neither did a majority of my colleagues. Regardless, the suggestion that the administration can violate the law because Congress failed to object is outrageous. But let them be on notice: I am objecting right now.

draypresct: By the way - while I've concentrated on the aspects of your responses that I've disagreed with, I've liked your posts. They've been informative and have forced me to try to educate myself to write responses.


Well, thanks. This is a very important issue, and we all should be paying attention to it.
 
2013-08-22 01:02:29 PM

BullBearMS: So yes, they were collecting communications and not just metadata, and they weren't just lying to us about it. They were also lying to the FISA court they claim has the power to act as a check on them.


Yep, that's what the story says. Dammit, NSA, I'm disappointed.

BullBearMS: This is a very important issue, and we all should be paying attention to it.


Yes, I have to say I hope the senate keeps the pressure on. There needs to be some serious housecleaning.
 
2013-08-22 01:22:01 PM
Amendment IVThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


I know at this point it is basically meaningless, but there it is.
 
2013-08-22 03:04:07 PM
You kids and your silly "privacy" and "freedom" illusions are so cute.

If you truly value your privacy that much, smash your smartphone, disconnect your computer and never leave your house.

thebrainworkofanidealist.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-08-22 03:20:38 PM

STORAGE JARS: If you truly value your privacy that much, smash your smartphone, disconnect your computer and never leave your house.


Or we could still allow people to make their own choices on what to share through social media, hold corporations responsible for following their own published privacy policy as well as the law,and force the government to stay within the bounds of the Constitution.
 
Displayed 322 of 322 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report