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 144
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

4201 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Aug 2013 at 2:41 PM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-08-21 01:20:24 PM
15 votes:
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 02:45:52 PM
10 votes:
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 02:46:18 PM
6 votes:

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 01:52:39 PM
6 votes:

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 03:02:52 PM
5 votes:
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 03:13:28 PM
4 votes:
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 02:55:24 PM
4 votes:

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 02:46:27 PM
4 votes:

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 07:17:27 PM
3 votes:

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 05:02:07 PM
3 votes:
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 04:37:15 PM
3 votes:

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 04:27:28 PM
3 votes:

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 03:15:14 PM
3 votes:

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 03:11:34 PM
3 votes:
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 02:57:12 PM
3 votes:
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 02:51:01 PM
3 votes:

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 02:50:38 PM
3 votes:

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 01:36:06 PM
3 votes:

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 01:26:52 PM
3 votes:

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 01:26:08 PM
3 votes:
I just can't wait until the next Republican president so that I can say, "But Obama."
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 01:11:49 PM
3 votes:
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 06:26:41 PM
2 votes:
2013-08-21 05:52:50 PM
2 votes:

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 05:52:04 PM
2 votes:

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 05:49:35 PM
2 votes:
The most ironic thing ever:

The "Private" sector is transparent whereas the "Public" sector is the most private/obscured.
2013-08-21 05:11:43 PM
2 votes:

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 05:08:26 PM
2 votes:

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 05:04:30 PM
2 votes:

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 04:44:10 PM
2 votes:

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 04:36:43 PM
2 votes:

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 04:14:20 PM
2 votes:

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 04:10:12 PM
2 votes:

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 04:07:01 PM
2 votes:
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 04:03:51 PM
2 votes:

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 03:55:37 PM
2 votes:

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 03:49:03 PM
2 votes:

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 03:47:15 PM
2 votes:

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 03:46:25 PM
2 votes:
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 03:43:10 PM
2 votes:

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 03:36:10 PM
2 votes:
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 03:12:51 PM
2 votes:

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 03:11:06 PM
2 votes:

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 03:10:18 PM
2 votes:

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 03:07:06 PM
2 votes:
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 02:59:20 PM
2 votes:

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 02:58:59 PM
2 votes:

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 02:58:03 PM
2 votes:

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 02:52:10 PM
2 votes:
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 02:51:03 PM
2 votes:
Just a piece of paper.

a.abcnews.com
2013-08-21 02:50:32 PM
2 votes:

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.
PJ-
2013-08-21 02:50:04 PM
2 votes:

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 02:49:59 PM
2 votes:

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
2013-08-21 02:47:04 PM
2 votes:

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 02:26:41 PM
2 votes:

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 01:28:08 PM
2 votes:
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
2013-08-22 12:40:51 PM
1 votes:

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 04:05:29 AM
1 votes:
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.
2013-08-21 11:31:46 PM
1 votes:

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.
2013-08-21 11:07:29 PM
1 votes:

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 08:47:13 PM
1 votes:

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 08:41:17 PM
1 votes:

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 08:37:17 PM
1 votes:

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 08:36:52 PM
1 votes:

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 07:34:37 PM
1 votes:
2013-08-21 07:32:46 PM
1 votes:
2013-08-21 07:21:42 PM
1 votes:

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 06:13:40 PM
1 votes:

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 05:59:07 PM
1 votes:

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 05:54:41 PM
1 votes:

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 05:54:30 PM
1 votes:

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 05:49:39 PM
1 votes:

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 05:47:44 PM
1 votes:

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 05:40:39 PM
1 votes:

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 05:37:42 PM
1 votes:

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 05:24:16 PM
1 votes:

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 05:18:59 PM
1 votes:

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 05:06:45 PM
1 votes:

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 05:04:44 PM
1 votes:

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 05:02:26 PM
1 votes:

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 04:59:34 PM
1 votes:

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 04:55:36 PM
1 votes:

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 04:55:07 PM
1 votes:

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 04:53:00 PM
1 votes:
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 04:49:08 PM
1 votes:

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 04:39:55 PM
1 votes:

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 04:31:10 PM
1 votes:
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 04:28:20 PM
1 votes:
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 04:24:15 PM
1 votes:

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 04:21:58 PM
1 votes:

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 04:19:03 PM
1 votes:

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 04:17:30 PM
1 votes:

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 04:16:30 PM
1 votes:
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 04:15:40 PM
1 votes:
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 04:02:54 PM
1 votes:
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 04:00:43 PM
1 votes:
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 04:00:30 PM
1 votes:

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 03:57:39 PM
1 votes:
i.imgur.com
2013-08-21 03:53:49 PM
1 votes:
There are two types of people, those that can extrapolate...
2013-08-21 03:52:38 PM
1 votes:

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 03:52:37 PM
1 votes:

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 03:51:57 PM
1 votes:

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 03:48:02 PM
1 votes:
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 03:45:51 PM
1 votes:

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 03:42:29 PM
1 votes:
Some dude printed a bunch of these signs....

i.imgur.com
Just how far are people willing to bend over?
2013-08-21 03:38:56 PM
1 votes:

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 03:38:01 PM
1 votes:

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 03:31:01 PM
1 votes:
Is [Obvious] tag on holiday this week?   Or is it just being detained by UK customs agents?
2013-08-21 03:30:20 PM
1 votes:

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 03:28:11 PM
1 votes:
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 03:27:44 PM
1 votes:

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 03:27:20 PM
1 votes:
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 03:26:42 PM
1 votes:

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 03:24:59 PM
1 votes:
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 03:24:47 PM
1 votes:

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 03:24:09 PM
1 votes:
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 03:23:01 PM
1 votes:

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 03:22:42 PM
1 votes:

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 03:21:27 PM
1 votes:
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 03:21:03 PM
1 votes:

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 03:20:50 PM
1 votes:

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 03:17:55 PM
1 votes:

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 03:14:47 PM
1 votes:

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 03:11:06 PM
1 votes:
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 03:10:58 PM
1 votes:

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 03:09:12 PM
1 votes:

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 03:08:20 PM
1 votes:
2013-08-21 03:06:30 PM
1 votes:

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 03:03:42 PM
1 votes:

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 03:01:01 PM
1 votes:

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 03:00:49 PM
1 votes:

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 03:00:39 PM
1 votes:
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 02:54:52 PM
1 votes:

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 02:54:32 PM
1 votes:

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 02:53:36 PM
1 votes:

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 02:52:47 PM
1 votes:
Hello...just stay in the 25% of the internet they're not monitoring.   Duhhh?
2013-08-21 02:52:19 PM
1 votes:
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 02:51:36 PM
1 votes:

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 02:51:01 PM
1 votes:

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 02:47:58 PM
1 votes:
farm3.staticflickr.com
2013-08-21 02:47:09 PM
1 votes:
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 02:44:28 PM
1 votes:
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 02:31:26 PM
1 votes:
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.
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 01:32:54 PM
1 votes:

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 01:32:27 PM
1 votes:

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...
 
Displayed 144 of 144 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report