Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Guardian)   Publishing the abilities of the NSA helps our enemies. YOU DON'T SAY?   (theguardian.com) divider line 123
    More: Obvious, NSA, United States, human trafficking  
•       •       •

2956 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Sep 2013 at 6:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



123 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-06 06:10:59 PM  
Yet somehow they're great at busting victimless crimes  but not so great at getting terrorists.
 
2013-09-06 06:36:58 PM  
1984 was a cautionary tale, not a guidebook. I wish our government would stop trying to make it reality instead.
 
2013-09-06 06:42:08 PM  
Enemies come if foreign AND domestic flavors.
 
2013-09-06 06:43:27 PM  
If you consider the American people to be the enemy, then yes.
 
2013-09-06 06:44:52 PM  

Apik0r0s: Enemies come if in foreign AND domestic flavors.


ftfm
 
2013-09-06 06:45:02 PM  

Apik0r0s: Enemies come if foreign AND domestic flavors.


The NSA calls everyone they spy on "adversaries" explicitly. This includes you and me.
 
2013-09-06 06:46:17 PM  
The enemy of your enemy is your friend.
 
2013-09-06 06:47:03 PM  
What I find absolutely amusing is that people actually think that any of this is being done without the approval of that NSA.

What's that?  Someone just released a new type of encryption that the NSA can't defeat?  lol sure they can't.

Hmm?  Someone just released a collection of NSA tactics and methods?  I'm sure that's not disinformation at all.

I'm sure the whole NSA is all upset and stuff.
 
2013-09-06 06:51:08 PM  
if I can't publish information that will help the terrorists win, then the terrorists have already won
 
2013-09-06 06:51:34 PM  
Our enemies being, of course, ourselves.
 
2013-09-06 06:52:29 PM  

Infernalist: What I find absolutely amusing is that people actually think that any of this is being done without the approval of that NSA.

What's that?  Someone just released a new type of encryption that the NSA can't defeat?  lol sure they can't.

Hmm?  Someone just released a collection of NSA tactics and methods?  I'm sure that's not disinformation at all.

I'm sure the whole NSA is all upset and stuff.



Tom Clancy books are not reference material.
 
2013-09-06 06:53:04 PM  

LoneWolf343: If you consider the American people to be the enemy, then yes.


This.
 
2013-09-06 06:58:53 PM  
We're all terrorists now.

/They won.
 
2013-09-06 07:02:27 PM  
But the NSA is our greatest enemy.
 
2013-09-06 07:04:14 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org

Great summer read, when I was 12.
 
2013-09-06 07:04:42 PM  
Who are OUR enemies?

It's a very important question.
 
2013-09-06 07:05:05 PM  

lostcat: [upload.wikimedia.org image 158x272]

Great summer read, when I was 12.


Huh, I wanded into the wrong thread.

Carry on.
 
2013-09-06 07:09:59 PM  

lostcat: [upload.wikimedia.org image 158x272]

Great summer read, when I was 12.


Is that a fight between the Glorious freedom loving GOP and Commie Obummer?
 
2013-09-06 07:11:03 PM  
Publishing ANYTHING could somehow in some way help our enemies.  That doesn't mean we make publishing illegal.
 
2013-09-06 07:12:04 PM  
If it wasn't for warfare, just think of what kinds of crazy awesome technology we could have by now
 
2013-09-06 07:13:36 PM  
according to the NSA, the 'adversaries' are us.  So isn't this good news?
 
2013-09-06 07:17:45 PM  
before the trolls try their thing.. here's the article where the NSA says we are the adversaries:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/05/nsa-snowden-enc ry ption-cracked/2772721/
 
2013-09-06 07:19:16 PM  

lostcat: lostcat: [upload.wikimedia.org image 158x272]

Great summer read, when I was 12.

Huh, I wanded into the wrong thread.

Carry on.


It works.
 
2013-09-06 07:21:59 PM  
www.wespeaknews.com
 
2013-09-06 07:22:04 PM  
 Considering the general public is included in that "enemy list" I'm ok with this.
 
2013-09-06 07:23:35 PM  
If the US Government doesn't like all this shiat being released, they can try behaving how they're supposed to next time. If they weren't massively and flagrantly violating everybody's rights, then nobody would feel the need to come forward and blow the whistle about that.

It's a very complicated concept, I know.
 
2013-09-06 07:26:00 PM  
If you define 'enemy' as everyone who isn't aligned with the Dubya/Obama administration, which I'm sure they do, then yes. That includes us.
 
2013-09-06 07:26:52 PM  

HypnozombieX: Considering the general public is included in that "enemy list" I'm ok with this.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/05/nsa-snowden-enc ry ption-cracked/2772721/

It bears repeating.  The NSA considers you an adversary.  Get pissed.  Then tell everyone you know.  Then get more pissed.  and stay pissed.  For a long time.  The only thing they have going for them is our goldfish-esque attention spans.  LETS END THIS CYCLE NOW.
 
2013-09-06 07:27:47 PM  
Well that's interesting, because the Public Editor at the New York Times said that publishing this story wasn't a difficult decision at all:

The New York Times has come under fire in the past for agreeing to government requests to hold back sensitive stories or information, but it bucked such requests in publishing a front-page article in Friday's paper.

The executive editor, Jill Abramson, told me that while she and the managing editor Dean Baquet went to Washington to meet with officials and gave them "a respectful hearing," the decision to publish was "not a particularly anguished one."

The article says that the National Security Agency has the ability - and uses it - to break the encryption used in a great deal of Internet communication. It's an important part of a continuing set of stories on the N.S.A.'s surveillance and its implications for privacy, the early ones of which have been published largely in The Guardian and The Washington Post, as a result of a huge leak by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor.

Top editors at The Times listened to government officials' concerns over national security but decided to publish despite their request, because it was in the public interest to do so.

"Our default position is to inform the public," Ms. Abramson told me. "Publishing information in the public service is our mission in our democracy." The balance between national security and the public's right to know must be considered, she said. In this case, the latter clearly prevailed.


The public in a Democracy has the right to know what it's government is doing in secret when those actions threaten civil liberties?

What a concept.
 
2013-09-06 07:31:54 PM  

A Non Amos: If it wasn't for warfare, just think of what kinds of crazy awesome technology we could have by now


Atomic power?
 
2013-09-06 07:32:03 PM  

A Non Amos: If it wasn't for warfare, just think of what kinds of crazy awesome technology we could have by now


And because of it. Microwaves? Thank radar development. GPS? Military tech. Internet? DARPA. Nuclear power? Yep.

Military. R&d has brought us a LOT of tech.
 
2013-09-06 07:33:19 PM  
I'm taking a computer forensics class this semester and I will seriously be using this news for one of our assignments.

I much prefer white-hat activity to black-hat*, but that doesn't mean I think everyone should have to fear being a potential target by the NSA.

*I have no idea how to 'hack' anything, it's just my opinion
 
2013-09-06 07:35:20 PM  

Go Fornicate Without a Partner: HypnozombieX: Considering the general public is included in that "enemy list" I'm ok with this.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/05/nsa-snowden-enc ry ption-cracked/2772721/

It bears repeating.  The NSA considers you an adversary.  Get pissed.  Then tell everyone you know.  Then get more pissed.  and stay pissed.  For a long time.  The only thing they have going for them is our goldfish-esque attention spans.  LETS END THIS CYCLE NOW.


gun nuts who don't trust the government aren't so crazy now are we?
 
2013-09-06 07:36:20 PM  
And by enemies, the NSA is referring to all of us.
 
2013-09-06 07:37:04 PM  

Apik0r0s: Enemies come if foreign AND domestic flavors.


The better question is thus: who is not on the list of NSA adversaries? It seems these days that after Snowden even NSA employees are on the list of NSA adversaries. And if they aren't trusted, who is? It strikes me as a tiny set of friendlies.
 
2013-09-06 07:38:23 PM  

HypnozombieX: Considering the general public is included in that "enemy list" I'm ok with this.


It is very much worth remembering what happened when the people began to protest economic injustice in our plutocracy.

New documents show that the violent crackdown on Occupy last fall - so mystifying at the time - was not just coordinated at the level of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and local police. The crackdown, which involved, as you may recall, violent arrests, group disruption, canister missiles to the skulls of protesters, people held in handcuffs so tight they were injured, people held in bondage till they were forced to wet or soil themselves -was coordinated with the big banks themselves.

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, in a groundbreaking scoop that should once more shame major US media outlets (why are nonprofits now some of the only entities in America left breaking major civil liberties news?), filed this request. The document - reproduced here in an easily searchable format - shows a terrifying network of coordinated DHS, FBI, police, regional fusion center, and private-sector activity so completely merged into one another that the monstrous whole is, in fact, one entity: in some cases, bearing a single name, the Domestic Security Alliance Council. And it reveals this merged entity to have one centrally planned, locally executed mission. The documents, in short, show the cops and DHS working for and with banks to target, arrest, and politically disable peaceful American citizens.

The documents show that from the start, the FBI - though it acknowledges Occupy movement as being, in fact, a peaceful organization - nonetheless designated OWS repeatedly as a "terrorist threat"


You'd have to be a complete farking idiot to claim we shouldn't be very, very worried about the direction this nation is heading.
 
2013-09-06 07:40:03 PM  
Kit Fister: You rock, thank you. *hugs*
 
2013-09-06 07:40:54 PM  
BullBearMS:

"Our default position is to inform the public," Ms. Abramson told me. "Publishing information in the public service is our mission in our democracy." The balance between national security and the public's right to know must be considered, she said. In this case, the latter clearly prevailed.

Now, let us translate this:

Both the Washington Post and The Guardian's ad impressions and click throughs are going through the roof. We wanted in on the payola.
 
2013-09-06 07:41:19 PM  
The terrorists have won.  All the small steps that have happened, or - as some suggest, been on the government's wish list but didn't have the excuse to implement, right up to our government collecting our communications and metadata and treating us as potential adversaries (without any particular reason) and actively seeking to weaken encryption standards for their own gains at the potential detriment of their citizens is one victory for our enemies.  That had to execute one attack on American soil, and then sit back while they watched our government restrict our freedoms to a point no outside entity ever could.  If they hated us for our freedom, they have succeeded getting the government to capitulate to their demands of less freedom for us.

I'm just a little sad that my country has decided that the best course of action is to collect and keep and data mine my presumably private communications.
 
2013-09-06 07:42:22 PM  

flynn80: The enemy of your enemy is your friend.


No, the enemy of your enemy is usually just not your enemy yet.
 
2013-09-06 07:48:38 PM  

worlddan: BullBearMS:

"Our default position is to inform the public," Ms. Abramson told me. "Publishing information in the public service is our mission in our democracy." The balance between national security and the public's right to know must be considered, she said. In this case, the latter clearly prevailed.

Now, let us translate this:

Both the Washington Post and The Guardian's ad impressions and click throughs are going through the roof. We wanted in on the payola.


Let's retranslate that to comport with reality, via Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black ruling on Nixon's attempt to shut down the New York Times publication of the Top Secret Pentagon Papers which showed our leadership had deliberately lied us into the Vietnam war:

Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.
 
2013-09-06 07:48:59 PM  

Kit Fister: Go Fornicate Without a Partner: HypnozombieX: Considering the general public is included in that "enemy list" I'm ok with this.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/05/nsa-snowden-enc ry ption-cracked/2772721/

It bears repeating.  The NSA considers you an adversary.  Get pissed.  Then tell everyone you know.  Then get more pissed.  and stay pissed.  For a long time.  The only thing they have going for them is our goldfish-esque attention spans.  LETS END THIS CYCLE NOW.

gun nuts who don't trust the government aren't so crazy now are we?


never thought you were, my brother.  I've always been afraid to be on a list of gun owners.  But now that I know I'm an enemy of the police state, I'm going to arm myself.  Fuk playing nice.  Clearly that's a mistake.

This is a chance for us to unify.  I love all of my fark brotheren.. left, right, under the bridge.  We are all people.  And we are collectively 'adversaries'.  Peace be with you, non-NSA brotheren.
 
2013-09-06 07:50:19 PM  
In other news, publishing companies in cahoots with the NSA will be terrible for their business.  What foreign company will want to buy American tech?
 
2013-09-06 07:51:50 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-09-06 07:52:20 PM  
This thread needs more drama queens freaking out.
 
2013-09-06 07:53:15 PM  
It's pretty sad when your own government neither likes you or trusts you.
 
2013-09-06 07:54:33 PM  
Another potential side effect of the NSA's behavior is the damage they've done to America's and the West's computer industry.  The newest revelations make it clear that NO American companies can be trusted to handle, transmit, or process sensitive data.  The NSA, by granting themselves the power to secretly compromise any company has thus placed every company under suspicion.  More and more system administrators across the internet are already saying that from now on, the only type of encryption that can be trusted is open-source software that has been heavily peer reviewed.  If you're a closed-source company that deals in products that handle sensitive data, than the NSA has very likely farked you over when it comes to our ability to make future sales.  On top of that, every network and system administrator now needs to second-guess all of the product and service advice he's worked off of for the last decade.  This is because the NSA revelations make it clear that not only were they trying to compromise software, but they were also trying to compromise individuals at all levels of the network industry... and now there's no way to know if that router, or that new service, or that new software package that an "expert" recommended for your company was recommended to you because it was the best for your situation, or because it was the best for NSA's desire to spy on you.
 
2013-09-06 07:55:45 PM  

uber humper: In other news, publishing companies in cahoots with the NSA will be terrible for their business.  What foreign company will want to buy American tech?


The companies with agreed-to backdoors in their software / hardware is more comprehensive than has been released so far.  I would wager that US products of this kind are now starting to be looked at as liabilities.  This can of worms will have far-reaching consequences.

/walked away from this in 2006
 
2013-09-06 07:56:58 PM  

Kit Fister: gun nuts who don't trust the government aren't so crazy now are we?


Yeah, right?
Are you going to shoot the government?
When? When they come for your guns, right?
Because you're sure not going to do it when they steal your data.
Hint: they don't need to use force to finish you off if they want to.

/Gun nuts who plan to shoot the government crack me up.
 
2013-09-06 07:57:10 PM  

Infernalist: This thread needs more drama queens freaking out.


Go back under your bridge.
 
2013-09-06 07:58:45 PM  

uber humper: In other news, publishing companies American companies of all types in cahoots with the NSA will be terrible for their business.  What foreign company will want to buy American tech?


At this point, you'd have to be crazy to buy a router from Cisco, et al.

Really, that's good news. Since Corporate citizens have so much more sway over our government than real flesh and blood citizens do, a boycott of American internet firms on the part of others in the world who don't like the idea of being spied on can really have an effect here.

American corporations are already afraid of this.

Their fear needs to become a reality.
 
2013-09-06 07:59:21 PM  

positronica: Another potential side effect of the NSA's behavior is the damage they've done to America's and the West's computer industry.  The newest revelations make it clear that NO American companies can be trusted to handle, transmit, or process sensitive data.  The NSA, by granting themselves the power to secretly compromise any company has thus placed every company under suspicion.  More and more system administrators across the internet are already saying that from now on, the only type of encryption that can be trusted is open-source software that has been heavily peer reviewed.  If you're a closed-source company that deals in products that handle sensitive data, than the NSA has very likely farked you over when it comes to our ability to make future sales.  On top of that, every network and system administrator now needs to second-guess all of the product and service advice he's worked off of for the last decade.  This is because the NSA revelations make it clear that not only were they trying to compromise software, but they were also trying to compromise individuals at all levels of the network industry... and now there's no way to know if that router, or that new service, or that new software package that an "expert" recommended for your company was recommended to you because it was the best for your situation, or because it was the best for NSA's desire to spy on you.


Ugh, I hadn't quite thought of it that way. It's entirely possible this could have a ripple effect on our entire economy, if foreign governments and businesses freak out about it. Good job, NSA...
 
2013-09-06 08:00:29 PM  

Go Fornicate Without a Partner: Infernalist: This thread needs more drama queens freaking out.

Go back under your bridge.


Isn't the most important thing trying to pretend this isn't a big deal, because Obama?
 
2013-09-06 08:07:14 PM  
Our only enemy is the government, so, no, it doesn't help them.
 
2013-09-06 08:07:31 PM  

worlddan: Apik0r0s: Enemies come if foreign AND domestic flavors.

The better question is thus: who is not on the list of NSA adversaries? It seems these days that after Snowden even NSA employees are on the list of NSA adversaries. And if they aren't trusted, who is? It strikes me as a tiny set of friendlies.


And just how much info. have they compiled to be used against anybody who might try to put them in check - ie Anton Scalia's online footprint must be a pathological nightmare. Time to play ball.
 
2013-09-06 08:08:47 PM  

skinink: It's pretty sad when your own government neither likes you or trusts you.


It's sadder that anyone ever thought the government did in the first place.
 
2013-09-06 08:11:39 PM  

Go Fornicate Without a Partner: Infernalist: This thread needs more drama queens freaking out.

Go back under your bridge.


Shouldn't you be out there arming yourself against the evil government with your fark brethren?
 
2013-09-06 08:12:30 PM  
FTA: ...the stories, simultaneously published on the front pages of the New York Times and Guardian, were "not news"

Fark did it first.
 
2013-09-06 08:12:37 PM  
I can imagine how horrible the NSA is feeling about having their most intimate secrets exposed and studied by faceless, unsympathetic, judgmental eyes. Being betrayed by a fellow countryman, someone who promised they would never violate a sacred oath of privacy. And now it's as if there's nowhere they can communicate in confidence.

I can only imagine how the NSA feels.
 
2013-09-06 08:18:27 PM  
Arthen
The NSA calls everyone they spy on "adversaries" explicitly. This includes you and me.

How do we know he was a terrorist? Well the bomb hit him, didn't it?
 
2013-09-06 08:19:55 PM  

Kit Fister: A Non Amos: If it wasn't for warfare, just think of what kinds of crazy awesome technology we could have by now

And because of it. Microwaves? Thank radar development. GPS? Military tech. Internet? DARPA. Nuclear power? Yep.

Military. R&d has brought us a LOT of tech.


As side effects. Think what we could accomplish if such problems were our primary objectives.
 
2013-09-06 08:24:16 PM  

A Non Amos: If it wasn't for warfare, just think of what kinds of crazy awesome technology we could have by now


Heh. Well done.
 
2013-09-06 08:25:05 PM  
Anyone else smell speggit o's while reading the comments in this thread...lol
 
2013-09-06 08:26:13 PM  

Go Fornicate Without a Partner: according to the NSA, the 'adversaries' are us.  So isn't this good news?


The NSA says it is "not news," so everyone go home.
 
2013-09-06 08:26:52 PM  

tbhouston: Anyone else smell speggit o's while reading the comments in this thread...lol


Cheetos. Lots of cheetos. And Mountain Dew.
 
2013-09-06 08:28:14 PM  

ladyfortuna: positronica: Another potential side effect of the NSA's behavior is the damage they've done to America's and the West's computer industry.  The newest revelations make it clear that NO American companies can be trusted to handle, transmit, or process sensitive data.  The NSA, by granting themselves the power to secretly compromise any company has thus placed every company under suspicion.  More and more system administrators across the internet are already saying that from now on, the only type of encryption that can be trusted is open-source software that has been heavily peer reviewed.  If you're a closed-source company that deals in products that handle sensitive data, than the NSA has very likely farked you over when it comes to our ability to make future sales.  On top of that, every network and system administrator now needs to second-guess all of the product and service advice he's worked off of for the last decade.  This is because the NSA revelations make it clear that not only were they trying to compromise software, but they were also trying to compromise individuals at all levels of the network industry... and now there's no way to know if that router, or that new service, or that new software package that an "expert" recommended for your company was recommended to you because it was the best for your situation, or because it was the best for NSA's desire to spy on you.

Ugh, I hadn't quite thought of it that way. It's entirely possible this could have a ripple effect on our entire economy, if foreign governments and businesses freak out about it. Good job, NSA...


Yeah.  I posted the below in June, and stand by it:

Currently, the US is the communications hub of the world.  Internet, cell, satellite... much of the worlds data goes through us, as pointed out in the NSA presentation.  And the US government is determined to take advantage of that, as pointed out in the very same NSA presentation.  The world's data flows through us, and what flows through us we are going to spy on.

So guess what?  The rest of the world just realized that they need to ensure their data doesn't get routed through us.  It's not a matter of trust, they KNOW what we are going to do with data that goes through the US.  We are going to use it to spy on them, we are very clear about that.

So in five, ten, twenty years from now... however long it takes... we will no longer be the world's communication hub.
 
2013-09-06 08:29:41 PM  
So, let me get this straight: The NSA's line is now that their entire security infrastructure is "security through security"?

How's that working out?
 
2013-09-06 08:30:17 PM  
images2.wikia.nocookie.net

What fun is it to have enemies if you can't toy with them?
 
2013-09-06 08:30:32 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Kit Fister: gun nuts who don't trust the government aren't so crazy now are we?

Yeah, right?
Are you going to shoot the government?
When? When they come for your guns, right?
Because you're sure not going to do it when they steal your data.
Hint: they don't need to use force to finish you off if they want to.

/Gun nuts who plan to shoot the government crack me up.


I agree. The point for me isn't to shoot the government. I just don't trust them. I own guns to have fun and for self defense. You assume gun nuts are all about taking on the feds. Most of them just want to be left alone.

What seems funny to me is that the more you want to be left alone and to stay out if harm's way the more attention you draw.

This is why I think the more "normal" you pretend to be, the less attention they pay to you.
 
2013-09-06 08:38:07 PM  

Mrbogey: Who are OUR enemies?

It's a very important question.


An equally important question is who does the NSA consider an enemy or a potential enemy? How is that defined?
 
2013-09-06 08:40:17 PM  
Much more transparency of the NSA is required.
 
2013-09-06 08:41:55 PM  

lostcat: lostcat: [upload.wikimedia.org image 158x272]

Great summer read, when I was 12.

Huh, I wanded into the wrong thread.

Carry on.


The strange thing is that it fits.
 
2013-09-06 08:45:35 PM  

SomeAmerican: So in five, ten, twenty years from now... however long it takes... we will no longer be the world's communication hub.


Yeah, but where would you put it?

Keeping in mind that I've been getting a lot of this second-hand:

* Europe's just as bad and possibly worse because they don't have to pretend that they're following the Constitution.
* China's been openly farking with their hardware AND using it for industrial espionage as well as governmental.  At least the NSA isn't forwarding all of your data to Google (that we know of) (yet) so that Google can steal your work.
* South America is a non-entity.
* Middle East and Africa are dictatorial shiatholes as well as incredibly backwards technologically.

It's the technical equivalent of "Both sides are bad, so vote Republican".
 
2013-09-06 08:46:19 PM  

SomeAmerican: Yeah. I posted the below in June, and stand by it:

Currently, the US is the communications hub of the world. Internet, cell, satellite... much of the worlds data goes through us, as pointed out in the NSA presentation. And the US government is determined to take advantage of that, as pointed out in the very same NSA presentation. The world's data flows through us, and what flows through us we are going to spy on.

So guess what? The rest of the world just realized that they need to ensure their data doesn't get routed through us. It's not a matter of trust, they KNOW what we are going to do with data that goes through the US. We are going to use it to spy on them, we are very clear about that.

So in five, ten, twenty years from now... however long it takes... we will no longer be the world's communication hub.


Same thing as is happening with GPS satellites.  Can't rely on the US, so other networks are going up.
 
2013-09-06 08:47:52 PM  

blahpers: Kit Fister: A Non Amos: If it wasn't for warfare, just think of what kinds of crazy awesome technology we could have by now

And because of it. Microwaves? Thank radar development. GPS? Military tech. Internet? DARPA. Nuclear power? Yep.

Military. R&d has brought us a LOT of tech.

As side effects. Think what we could accomplish if such problems were our primary objectives.


When mankind has effectively eliminated jealousy, rage, fear, sorrow, avarice, contempt, hate...then we might not need weapons of war.
 
2013-09-06 08:49:22 PM  

SomeAmerican: Yeah.  I posted the below in June, and stand by it:


Currently, the US is the communications hub of the world.  Internet, cell, satellite... much of the worlds data goes through us, as pointed out in the NSA presentation.  And the US government is determined to take advantage of that, as pointed out in the very same NSA presentation.  The world's data flows through us, and what flows through us we are going to spy on.

So guess what?  The rest of the world just realized that they need to ensure their data doesn't get routed through us.  It's not a matter of trust, they KNOW what we are going to do with data that goes through the US.  We are going to use it to spy on them, we are very clear about that.

So in five, ten, twenty years from now... however long it takes... we will no longer be the world's communication hub.

Unfortunately for you, you're forgetting about capitalism.  As long as we offer the best service at a competitive price, we'll continue to be the world's communication hub indefinitely.  Most companies don't have principles.  They have profit motives.
 
2013-09-06 08:58:04 PM  
I think "our" is pretty damn presumptuous.
 
2013-09-06 08:59:43 PM  

ronaprhys: Unfortunately for you, you're forgetting about capitalism.  As long as we offer the best service at a competitive price, we'll continue to be the world's communication hub indefinitely.  Most companies don't have principles.  They have profit motives.


And you're forgetting that all companies are run by human leaders, and those leaders often have things they'd like to keep to themselves.  If there's a way to keep law enforcement from finding out about their raging cocaine habit or the real reason for that last "business" trip to Thailand, they're going to do that instead, stockholders be damned.
 
2013-09-06 09:00:08 PM  

Kit Fister: gun nuts who don't trust the government aren't so crazy now are we?


No, that really hasn't changed any. Your gun is your blankey. A child's pacifier. You might feel safer, but only in the same way people 'feel safer' being made to take off their shoes in the airport. A weapon you're unwilling to use is worthless. And the moment you do, you're going to draw a degree of attention to yourself you are not prepared to deal with, and when that happens, you are going to stand _alone_. Like every other idiot who thought they could make a stand using force.
 
2013-09-06 09:01:44 PM  

ronaprhys: SomeAmerican: Yeah.  I posted the below in June, and stand by it:

Currently, the US is the communications hub of the world.  Internet, cell, satellite... much of the worlds data goes through us, as pointed out in the NSA presentation.  And the US government is determined to take advantage of that, as pointed out in the very same NSA presentation.  The world's data flows through us, and what flows through us we are going to spy on.

So guess what?  The rest of the world just realized that they need to ensure their data doesn't get routed through us.  It's not a matter of trust, they KNOW what we are going to do with data that goes through the US.  We are going to use it to spy on them, we are very clear about that.

So in five, ten, twenty years from now... however long it takes... we will no longer be the world's communication hub.

Unfortunately for you, you're forgetting about capitalism.  As long as we offer the best service at a competitive price, we'll continue to be the world's communication hub indefinitely.  Most companies don't have principles.  They have profit motives.


However, best service could be define, in the marketplace, as a service that does not llow the NSA to collect and decrypt your data...
 
2013-09-06 09:03:28 PM  
enemies like the american people who fund the NSA in the firdt place?

America is no safer post 911 because of the billions wasted on paranoia.
 
2013-09-06 09:04:25 PM  

T-Cubed: So in five, ten, twenty years from now... however long it takes... we will no longer be the world's communication hub.

Unfortunately for you, you're forgetting about capitalism. As long as we offer the best service at a competitive price, we'll continue to be the world's communication hub indefinitely. Most companies don't have principles. They have profit motives.

However, best service could be define, in the marketplace, as a service that does not llow the NSA to collect and decrypt your data...



best service also does not mean 'where something started'.  There are *plenty* of tech companies in other countries will to take up the slack.  And in fact, many of the companies that folks think of as 'American' are really multi-national already with no national loyalties.  They are already starting to get the stink eye from their non-US locales.
 
2013-09-06 09:04:57 PM  

ladyfortuna: Kit Fister: You rock, thank you. *hugs*


*hugs* and it's recurring.
 
2013-09-06 09:07:03 PM  

BullBearMS: uber humper: In other news, publishing companies American companies of all types in cahoots with the NSA will be terrible for their business.  What foreign company will want to buy American tech?

At this point, you'd have to be crazy to buy a router from Cisco, et al.

Really, that's good news. Since Corporate citizens have so much more sway over our government than real flesh and blood citizens do, a boycott of American internet firms on the part of others in the world who don't like the idea of being spied on can really have an effect here.

American corporations are already afraid of this.

Their fear needs to become a reality.


I agree.  Once they feel the pinch.  BUT, it will be hard for them to recover.  Once trust is gone, people won't believe that they are not leaving backdoors open.

Time for the Swiss to start building up their tech.
 
2013-09-06 09:12:26 PM  

MooseUpNorth: Kit Fister: gun nuts who don't trust the government aren't so crazy now are we?

No, that really hasn't changed any. Your gun is your blankey. A child's pacifier. You might feel safer, but only in the same way people 'feel safer' being made to take off their shoes in the airport. A weapon you're unwilling to use is worthless. And the moment you do, you're going to draw a degree of attention to yourself you are not prepared to deal with, and when that happens, you are going to stand _alone_. Like every other idiot who thought they could make a stand using force.


Eh the only thing a gun makes me feel safer from are crooks,.coyotes, and so on. But bottom line, you cannot honestly tell me that the activities of the NSA are in anyone's best interests but the government, and that coupled with the outcomes of occupy and other such movements, anything questioning the status quo is allowed to happen until it really starts to disrupt before its quietly shuffled off for the next circus.

Maybe I'm paranoid, but the only thing that seems to make sense is a state of living in which the vox populi are kept stirred up into a frenzy so they don't question the snake oil salesman. After all, nothing makes a conman more legit than a frenzy of people stirred up by his sales pitch in one side or the other and no one taking a closer look at him.
 
2013-09-06 09:18:10 PM  
The only thing more amusing than the freak outs by the drama queens is the notion that anyone here has a right to act surprised.

Be honest now: Did any one of you ever sincerely think that the government wasn't watching our activity on the internet?

Did you honestly think that the internet was this super anonymous system by which we could look at whatever we wanted, talk about whatever we wanted and, in some cases, act however we wanted...and the government wasn't watching and taking notes?
 
2013-09-06 09:19:51 PM  

Kit Fister: But bottom line, you cannot honestly tell me that the activities of the NSA are in anyone's best interests but the government,


Correct. If I were to suggest that, I would definitely be lying. Just drop the ITG act. Your gun doesn't mean a lick.
 
2013-09-06 09:23:22 PM  

Kit Fister: But bottom line, you cannot honestly tell me that the activities of the NSA are in anyone's best interests but the government,


I'll just add that I don't believe the NSA is acting in the best interests of anyone but the NSA, and ultimately, not even that. I have no reason to believe that any POTUS has ever had definitive knowledge of what the NSA has been up to.
 
2013-09-06 09:23:44 PM  

Raoul Eaton: Go Fornicate Without a Partner: according to the NSA, the 'adversaries' are us.  So isn't this good news?

The NSA says it is "not news," so everyone go home.


So, it's Fark.com, then.
 
2013-09-06 09:24:06 PM  
you people are farking retarded. you think the nsa cares about some farking farkers? HAHAHAHAHAHA
 
2013-09-06 09:24:54 PM  

Infernalist: The only thing more amusing than the freak outs by the drama queens is the notion that anyone here has a right to act surprised.

Be honest now: Did any one of you ever sincerely think that the government wasn't watching our activity on the internet?

Did you honestly think that the internet was this super anonymous system by which we could look at whatever we wanted, talk about whatever we wanted and, in some cases, act however we wanted...and the government wasn't watching and taking notes?


When it comes to public sites, nope, nothing posted is bound by any expectation of privacy due to being publicly disseminated. However, the contents of email, texts, direct conversations between two people NOT meant for public consumption? How is that not under the same protections as telephone communications? Wiretapping, whether digital or not, should be illegal without a warrent.

I don't understand how you can blow off such a massive thing because "its the internet". Do you support the government opening and censoring mail? Listening to your private phone conversations? And in the case of breaching private networks and breaking private codes for extended consumption, likewise I assume you're okay with someone randomly bugging your house and listening to everything you do?

Why should digital communications and privacy not be afforded the same protections as nonvirtual ones?
 
2013-09-06 09:26:26 PM  

MooseUpNorth: Kit Fister: gun nuts who don't trust the government aren't so crazy now are we?

No, that really hasn't changed any. Your gun is your blankey. A child's pacifier. You might feel safer, but only in the same way people 'feel safer' being made to take off their shoes in the airport. A weapon you're unwilling to use is worthless. And the moment you do, you're going to draw a degree of attention to yourself you are not prepared to deal with, and when that happens, you are going to stand _alone_. Like every other idiot who thought they could make a stand using force.


You're assuming "open battle against government forces".

That paradigm has been outdated since at least 1996.
 
2013-09-06 09:26:47 PM  
 
2013-09-06 09:27:10 PM  

DraconianTotalitarian: you people are farking retarded. you think the nsa cares about some farking farkers? HAHAHAHAHAHA


Oh look the NSA is here. Or one of their apologists. Whether or not they care about me, I still demand ththe natural right to privacy when my conversation is done in such a way as to exclude all but a single other party.
 
2013-09-06 09:27:59 PM  
Where are we to go now that they've gone too far?
 
2013-09-06 09:28:28 PM  

MooseUpNorth: I have no reason to believe that any POTUS has ever had definitive knowledge of what the NSA has been up to.


Aside from the fact that the NSA is part of the Executive Branch and it's director is appointed by the President?
 
2013-09-06 09:29:12 PM  

RDixon: Where are we to go now that they've gone too far?


I say we take over a small African or south American country.
 
2013-09-06 09:31:24 PM  

new_york_monty: 1984 was a cautionary tale, not a guidebook. I wish our government would stop trying to make it reality instead.


peacersvp.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-06 09:32:34 PM  
You people keep referring to "the Government" as being in control of this information. We have no idea who is actually in control, or posession, of this information. There are folks in the Intelligence Community whose views make a Teabagger look like Che Guevara. There are also many patriotic Americans in those circles. The potential for misuse, political blackmail or graymail, is astounding.

Yet nobody talks about that. J Edgar Hoover wasn't "the Government", yet he maintained his hold on power for a very long time by collecting dirt on anybody in a position to bring him down.

It might explain a lot about how crazy our Supreme Court and Congress have become.
 
2013-09-06 09:33:14 PM  

Kit Fister: Infernalist: The only thing more amusing than the freak outs by the drama queens is the notion that anyone here has a right to act surprised.

Be honest now: Did any one of you ever sincerely think that the government wasn't watching our activity on the internet?

Did you honestly think that the internet was this super anonymous system by which we could look at whatever we wanted, talk about whatever we wanted and, in some cases, act however we wanted...and the government wasn't watching and taking notes?

When it comes to public sites, nope, nothing posted is bound by any expectation of privacy due to being publicly disseminated. However, the contents of email, texts, direct conversations between two people NOT meant for public consumption? How is that not under the same protections as telephone communications? Wiretapping, whether digital or not, should be illegal without a warrent.

I don't understand how you can blow off such a massive thing because "its the internet". Do you support the government opening and censoring mail? Listening to your private phone conversations? And in the case of breaching private networks and breaking private codes for extended consumption, likewise I assume you're okay with someone randomly bugging your house and listening to everything you do?

Why should digital communications and privacy not be afforded the same protections as nonvirtual ones?


I'm not saying any of that.  All I'm saying is we've all known since achieving some level of mature understanding of the government that they stick their noses and ears and eyes into anything that they can.  That's what government does and everyone knows it and they 'should' expect it.

I'm commenting solely on the 'thisisanoutrage' posts that predominate in this thread.  Seriously?  Especially the ones who get so outraged that they start making comments about buying weapons (lol) and spouting 'my fark brethren!' speeches as if they're some Communist Party firebrand full of fury and outrage at some government atrocity.

Take a breath and get some perspective.
 
2013-09-06 09:33:36 PM  
 
2013-09-06 09:38:27 PM  

Kit Fister: Infernalist: The only thing more amusing than the freak outs by the drama queens is the notion that anyone here has a right to act surprised.

Be honest now: Did any one of you ever sincerely think that the government wasn't watching our activity on the internet?

Did you honestly think that the internet was this super anonymous system by which we could look at whatever we wanted, talk about whatever we wanted and, in some cases, act however we wanted...and the government wasn't watching and taking notes?

When it comes to public sites, nope, nothing posted is bound by any expectation of privacy due to being publicly disseminated. However, the contents of email, texts, direct conversations between two people NOT meant for public consumption? How is that not under the same protections as telephone communications? Wiretapping, whether digital or not, should be illegal without a warrent.

I don't understand how you can blow off such a massive thing because "its the internet". Do you support the government opening and censoring mail? Listening to your private phone conversations? And in the case of breaching private networks and breaking private codes for extended consumption, likewise I assume you're okay with someone randomly bugging your house and listening to everything you do?

Why should digital communications and privacy not be afforded the same protections as nonvirtual ones?


I think people have suspected that public communications were not private,but recently.  In, say, 1995 did I suspect that?  No.  Now I assumed it.  However, it's one thing to assume or suspect something, it's another to have proof that not only is it happening, but that the same government is lying to you about it and yet telling you to trust them.
 
2013-09-06 09:40:55 PM  
Well apparently all Americans are America's enemies now, so, uhhhh...it's Bush's fault?!?
 
2013-09-06 09:41:11 PM  

DraconianTotalitarian: you people are farking retarded. you think the nsa cares about some farking farkers? HAHAHAHAHAHA


The TEA party and religious segments of the GOP are trying very _very_ hard to get enough candidates into your government to make your country very... Russia-like for people like me. Maybe Uganda-like. And far too many of you are voting for them for my comfort.

/  For the same reason I don't like seeing loaded guns near kids, I'd rather not see a loaded NSA anywhere near the Teabaggers' grubby little mitts.
//  Others will have different very valid reasons for wanting to make sure nobody with an agenda ever gets to data mine the NSA's haul.
 
2013-09-06 09:45:26 PM  
Here's another occasion where Obama's NSA Director publicly lied to the world about what the NSA does.

"Our job is foreign intelligence," Alexander said, repeating that list of agencies overseeing the NSA. "Those who would want to weave the story that we have millions or hundreds of millions of dossiers on people, is absolutely false...From my perspective, this is absolute nonsense."

Meanwhile, back at Derpy Hooves,

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

Infernalist: Be honest now: Did any one of you ever sincerely think that the government wasn't watching our activity on the internet?

 
2013-09-06 09:45:27 PM  
The enemies are freedom, liberty, privacy, efficiency and economy.  Once these enemies are vanquished, then we will use ALL resources to voyeuristically survey ALL information about everything, which will be compiled in a massive data crunching computer that will answer the BIG question.

Seriously, what the NSA and the 15 other major US intelligence agencies are doing accomplishes the same thing as a teenage boy with unrestricted access to porn.  Depletion of precious bodily fluids.
 
2013-09-06 09:47:22 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-06 09:50:27 PM  

MooseUpNorth: DraconianTotalitarian: you people are farking retarded. you think the nsa cares about some farking farkers? HAHAHAHAHAHA

The TEA party and religious segments of the GOP are trying very _very_ hard to get enough candidates into your government to make your country very... Russia-like for people like me. Maybe Uganda-like. And far too many of you are voting for them for my comfort.

/  For the same reason I don't like seeing loaded guns near kids, I'd rather not see a loaded NSA anywhere near the Teabaggers' grubby little mitts.
//  Others will have different very valid reasons for wanting to make sure nobody with an agenda ever gets to data mine the NSA's haul.


Actually, a coalition of Tea Party Libertarians and Progressives in the House has been working together to force the NSA to obey the law and also to keep us out of war with Syria.

Dem Rep. Alan Grayson, a leader of the anti-war wing of the House Democratic caucus, tells TPM's Dylan Scott he is organizing across the aisle to create such an alliance by gearing up an "ad hoc whip organization." This sort of right-left alliance is often discussed but rarely materializes. But this time there could be something to it.

Here's a way to look at it. I compared the current whip count of Members of Congress who are firm or leaning No votes on Syria right now, with the Members who voted Yes on the recent amendment to end bulk NSA surveillance that corralled a surprising amount of bipartisan support. The vote on that amendment - which was sponsored by GOP Rep. Justin Amash and Dem Rep. John Conyers - was perhaps the clearest demonstration of such a developing alliance we've seen.

The overlap is striking. I count nearly four dozen Representatives - from both parties - that are on both lists. In other words, even though it's early in the whipping process on Syria, we're already seeing substantial numbers of Members who voted to end NSA surveillance now coming out or leaning against action in Syria.


In both instances they are working against the corrupt leadership of both parties.
 
2013-09-06 09:56:52 PM  
Unfortunately "our enemies" has been broadened to include Americans.
 
2013-09-06 10:17:07 PM  
I've heard that there's a lack of clearable US citizens (debt? pot? traffic tickets?), so US government agencies are giving short-term gigs to Asian visa workers.

If this is so, then I predict that the Chinese will trump the NSA in intel, if they haven't already.
 
2013-09-06 10:26:52 PM  

Infernalist: The only thing more amusing than the freak outs by the drama queens is the notion that anyone here has a right to act surprised.

Be honest now: Did any one of you ever sincerely think that the government wasn't watching our activity on the internet?

Did you honestly think that the internet was this super anonymous system by which we could look at whatever we wanted, talk about whatever we wanted and, in some cases, act however we wanted...and the government wasn't watching and taking notes?


Evidently, lots of people did, and are as upset as 13-year old girls when their little brothers read their secret locked diaries they left in their underwear drawers.

Although why anyone is surprised that something which came out of an agency called Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency WASN'T under the thumb of the government from its very inception (and by design) is beyond me. Did they honestly think the government spooks said "OK geeks, here's your DARPANet? Have at it, we're totally not looking!"
 
2013-09-06 10:39:53 PM  
They're just doing it for your own good and anyone who disagrees is a traitor.

Same with those banking and corporate regulations. They drive the economy so you can have an SUV and 60 inch TV. And we know that as long as you've got just a bit more than the folks in Whatsitstan and Thingyland you really won't pay attention to what's going on.
 
2013-09-06 11:00:10 PM  
This needs to be part of any NSA thread:

Sneakers

hiat this nail many years before the shiat hit the fan.
 
2013-09-06 11:52:18 PM  
Not according to the CSI principal. People are convinced the stuff they do on TV/CSI is real. They should just do an NSA show in which the agents 'magically' know everything about anyone and anything instantly and people will come to believe it...truth or not.
 
2013-09-07 12:39:05 AM  

LoneWolf343: If you consider the American people to be the enemy, then yes.


They should have never done that. If the government cannot trust it's citizens, why should we the people trust our government?

They breached the trust of the American people when we became their enemy and they need to spy on us.
 
2013-09-07 01:46:30 AM  

Infernalist: I'm not saying any of that.  All I'm saying is we've all known since achieving some level of mature understanding of the government that they stick their noses and ears and eyes into anything that they can.  That's what government does and everyone knows it and they 'should' expect it.

I'm commenting solely on the 'thisisanoutrage' posts that predominate in this thread.  Seriously?  Especially the ones who get so outraged that they start making comments about buying weapons (lol) and spouting 'my fark brethren!' speeches as if they're some Communist Party firebrand full of fury and outrage at some government atrocity.

Take a breath and get some perspective.


So if you were getting raped, since as we all know "rapists gonna rape," you'd just lie back and accept it, even try to enjoy it?  Go fark yourself.  "It's what they do" does not in any way make it acceptable.
 
2013-09-07 02:31:18 AM  

Arumat: Infernalist: I'm not saying any of that.  All I'm saying is we've all known since achieving some level of mature understanding of the government that they stick their noses and ears and eyes into anything that they can.  That's what government does and everyone knows it and they 'should' expect it.

I'm commenting solely on the 'thisisanoutrage' posts that predominate in this thread.  Seriously?  Especially the ones who get so outraged that they start making comments about buying weapons (lol) and spouting 'my fark brethren!' speeches as if they're some Communist Party firebrand full of fury and outrage at some government atrocity.

Take a breath and get some perspective.

So if you were getting raped, since as we all know "rapists gonna rape," you'd just lie back and accept it, even try to enjoy it?  Go fark yourself.  "It's what they do" does not in any way make it acceptable.


Take another breath. None of us who are saying "it's what they do" are saying it is in any way acceptable. Instead, it's like the old story of the frog who gave the scorpion a ride across the river and got stung halfway across. "You knew I was a scorpion when you let me crawl on your back."

It is NOT acceptable--any more than a rape is acceptable--but by the same token, if a woman were to allow Ted Bundy to escort her home, would the response solely be to be furious at Ted Bundy, or would you have to say to the woman "You knew he was a scorpion when you let him drive you home?" And considering--as I noted above--the Internet was created by the government, FOR the government, with the express purpose of preserving and decentralizing information so it would be readily accessible in the event it was needed; should our anger unilaterally descend on the government for accessing said information? "You knew they were scorpions when you let them crawl onto your back."
 
2013-09-07 02:44:20 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Arumat: Infernalist: I'm not saying any of that.  All I'm saying is we've all known since achieving some level of mature understanding of the government that they stick their noses and ears and eyes into anything that they can.  That's what government does and everyone knows it and they 'should' expect it.

I'm commenting solely on the 'thisisanoutrage' posts that predominate in this thread.  Seriously?  Especially the ones who get so outraged that they start making comments about buying weapons (lol) and spouting 'my fark brethren!' speeches as if they're some Communist Party firebrand full of fury and outrage at some government atrocity.

Take a breath and get some perspective.

So if you were getting raped, since as we all know "rapists gonna rape," you'd just lie back and accept it, even try to enjoy it?  Go fark yourself.  "It's what they do" does not in any way make it acceptable.

Take another breath. None of us who are saying "it's what they do" are saying it is in any way acceptable. Instead, it's like the old story of the frog who gave the scorpion a ride across the river and got stung halfway across. "You knew I was a scorpion when you let me crawl on your back."

It is NOT acceptable--any more than a rape is acceptable--but by the same token, if a woman were to allow Ted Bundy to escort her home, would the response solely be to be furious at Ted Bundy, or would you have to say to the woman "You knew he was a scorpion when you let him drive you home?" And considering--as I noted above--the Internet was created by the government, FOR the government, with the express purpose of preserving and decentralizing information so it would be readily accessible in the event it was needed; should our anger unilaterally descend on the government for accessing said information? "You knew they were scorpions when you let them crawl onto your back."


I know that. You obviously know that. Hell, most people reading this thread probably know that. But what percentage of internet-using do you think know that? I don't know, but given the average intelligence of the people I meet in this country, I don't believe it's a majority by any stretch of the imagination.
 
2013-09-07 08:40:22 AM  

LoneWolf343: If you consider the American people to be the enemy, then yes.


Its interesting that the NSA project is called Bullrun and that the GCQH project is called Edgehill.

Both appear to be named after the first major encounters of the US and British civil wars.

A little creepy and worrying.
 
2013-09-07 08:54:42 AM  
Kit Fister
What seems funny to me is that the more you want to be left alone and to stay out if harm's way the more attention you draw.

Well, yeah. You're not being exploited if you're being left alone.

This is why I think the more "normal" you pretend to be, the less attention they pay to you.

Normal = having a large portion of your productivity stolen. Which is the whole point of the economy and government.


Apik0r0s
There are folks in the Intelligence Community whose views make a Teabagger look like Che Guevara. There are also many patriotic Americans in those circles.

You say this as if they are different.


ginkor
i.imgur.com

The NSA has previously claimed that 54 terrorist plots had been disrupted "over the lifetime" of the bulk phone records collection and the separate program collecting the internet habits and communications of people believed to be non-Americans. On Wednesday, Inglis said that at most one plot might have been disrupted by the bulk phone records collection alone.
Not exactly the same comparison but that 54 number was obvious bullshiat, even considering how low it already is.


Gyrfalcon
It is NOT acceptable--any more than a rape is acceptable--but by the same token, if a woman were to allow Ted Bundy to escort her home, would the response solely be to be furious at Ted Bundy, or would you have to say to the woman "You knew he was a scorpion when you let him drive you home?" And considering--as I noted above--the Internet was created by the government, FOR the government, with the express purpose of preserving and decentralizing information so it would be readily accessible in the event it was needed; should our anger unilaterally descend on the government for accessing said information? "You knew they were scorpions when you let them crawl onto your back."

And therefore...?
Should we do something about it or not do something about it? I don't see a lot of other possibilities for the point you're trying to make.
 
2013-09-07 09:43:07 AM  

Arumat: And you're forgetting that all companies are run by human leaders, and those leaders often have things they'd like to keep to themselves.  If there's a way to keep law enforcement from finding out about their raging cocaine habit or the real reason for that last "business" trip to Thailand, they're going to do that instead, stockholders be damned.


No - I'm not forgetting that at all.  They aren't going to do anything like that if it costs the company money.  The BoD will put a very quick stop to that sort of nonsense if it costs more or they run into reliability things.  Secondly, any smart leader will keep that stuff on their personal machines, not company machines - which they could then elect to run through another country while keeping the business stuff running through our pipes.

Plus, the NSA likely doesn't care about the coke habit or boy-hookers.  None of those are likely to attack us.  They only care about actual threats.

Now, don't read that to say I support this - I don't.  It's nonsense to sacrifice liberty and civil rights for the illusion of safety (because it is only an illusion).  It's absolutely no different than gun control.  It infringes upon our rights while doing absolutely nothing to help us.


T-Cubed: However, best service could be define, in the marketplace, as a service that does not llow the NSA to collect and decrypt your data...


That's true, to an extent.  But timeliness, completeness, and reliability/up-time are much more likely to be the deciding factors - and cost.  Keep it cheap and they will come.  Since the infrastructure's already built, that makes it that much easier.  Plus, there's the other ways we play.  Sure - send your data through someone else, but then you lose access to our markets...
 
2013-09-07 10:50:26 AM  
121 comments on absolute confirmation that we are in the crosshairs of the NSA.

7,640 comments on Bin Laden being allegedly dumped off the side of an aircraft carrier.

We'll be okay, guys.  Oh, and all of this because 9/11.  You know?  That event that couldn't have possibly been orchestrated to create the cowardly hysteria needed as a pretext for now.

drjudywood.com

Where's the buildings?  You know?  Those two 1,000 foot tall structures that apparently dissapeared into the ground?  There should have been 100+ ft of rubble for EACH building.  It's time to revisit this, so that we can unravel the insane surveillance state that has arisen from this lie.

Trust me, the world will love us if we button this up.  There won't be a need for defense.

/drjudywood.com  - the site is atrocious, but FULL of interesting info.
 
2013-09-07 01:43:36 PM  
The NSA spends $250m a year on a program which, among other goals, works with technology companies to "covertly influence" their product designs

"with"

right
 
Displayed 123 of 123 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report