4 ms·

> 99.99 of people aren't being actually spied on. Complete and utter nonsense. Have you not heard about SQL's "JOIN" feature? Did you miss the numerous advance

by pdkl95 11y ago

> 99.99 of people aren't being actually spied on. Complete and utter nonsense. Have you not heard about SQL's "JOIN" feature? Did you miss the numerous advances in machine learning? > nobody will actually read them If you haven't figured out by now that it's not a human that reads them, you're being wilfully blind. Even if you are limiting it to humans, all it would take is you pissing off the right person. With your entire life in front of them, how many different types of revenge do you think they can find?

rhino369 11y ago
The Snowden leaks themselves show they have to get access to American email via the FISA system. They buffer pretty much everything for a while so they can backtrack a couple days but that information isn't being filtered through a search algorithm. Your email isn't in their database.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  Since when is this limited to "email"? Why are you ignoring programs like COTRAVELER (which only requires metadata)?
  - rhino369 11y ago
    CoTravler is aimed overseas. https://www.google.com/maps/timeline?authuser=0 https://www.google.com/maps/timeline?authuser=0
- cryoshon 11y ago
  Nah, you're misunderstanding. The FISA court is only for formal intelligence filings which could be used for active casework. Assuming they play by the rules (they don't, but anyway...) all they'd have to do to get your emails anyway is ask GCHQ for them. GCHQ isn't American, so they didn't break any laws by grabbing the content and metadata for all your communications. GCHQ passes the data to the NSA, and boom, they have your data. Legally, with no FISA warrant. The FISA court is a rubber stamp, anyway-- look at their approval rate.
  - tsotha 11y ago
    This is an underappreciated concern regarding spy agencies. What difference do laws that prohibit domestic surveillance make if spy agencies can just enter reciprocal agreements to share data? If you're running an agency in the US that can't spy on Americans, you can make a deal with a similarly bound agency in the UK - they get your UK data, you get their US data, and you have all the US data you want even if you didn't collect it.

by pdkl95 11y ago

rhino369 11y ago

The Snowden leaks themselves show they have to get access to American email via the FISA system. They buffer pretty much everything for a while so they can backtrack a couple days but that information isn't being filtered through a search algorithm. Your email isn't in their database.

pdkl95 11y ago
Since when is this limited to "email"? Why are you ignoring programs like COTRAVELER (which only requires metadata)?
- rhino369 11y ago
  CoTravler is aimed overseas. https://www.google.com/maps/timeline?authuser=0 https://www.google.com/maps/timeline?authuser=0
cryoshon 11y ago
Nah, you're misunderstanding. The FISA court is only for formal intelligence filings which could be used for active casework. Assuming they play by the rules (they don't, but anyway...) all they'd have to do to get your emails anyway is ask GCHQ for them. GCHQ isn't American, so they didn't break any laws by grabbing the content and metadata for all your communications. GCHQ passes the data to the NSA, and boom, they have your data. Legally, with no FISA warrant. The FISA court is a rubber stamp, anyway-- look at their approval rate.
- tsotha 11y ago
  This is an underappreciated concern regarding spy agencies. What difference do laws that prohibit domestic surveillance make if spy agencies can just enter reciprocal agreements to share data? If you're running an agency in the US that can't spy on Americans, you can make a deal with a similarly bound agency in the UK - they get your UK data, you get their US data, and you have all the US data you want even if you didn't collect it.