4 ms·

Yet this whole event is being used as a catalyst for further degradation of freedom and encryption. How can we take the powers above seriously when they can't

by mgo 11y ago

Yet this whole event is being used as a catalyst for further degradation of freedom and encryption. How can we take the powers above seriously when they can't even catch a fairly large network of terrorists scheming over the clearnet? This is a lesson in the ineffectiveness and incompetence of the spying apparatus of the free world. We've given up so much already for no benefit, and whenever they fail it's never because they were bad at their job, they just didn't have enough power or money to do their job.

alecksandros 11y ago
We don't exactly have data on foiled terrorism attempts and so it is difficult to say "no benefit". That being said we need a way to gauge risk/reward as citizens regarding terrorism/privacy. There should be openness regarding the actual terrorism risks and what giving up certain freedoms/privacy actually gains us in protection from said risks. A system where terrorism scorecard is openly available so we can weigh pros/cons is probably never going to happen though.
aking2 11y ago
Did you thought about the fact that other acts of terrorism where prevented and most of them keep secret because of the nature of investigations?
- DamnYuppie 11y ago
  Yes, I think about it all the time but when pressed for numbers the CIA/NSA/FBI never reveal any. What isn't discussed here is the numerous times that these institutions have actually created terrorists. Or lead people to a course of action of their choosing.
- Retra 11y ago
  "Because of the nature" is not a reason for keeping victories secret. A democratic government is responsible to its people. Moreover, you do not do a very good job of preventing terrorism by keeping secret all the times terrorism fails and publicly over-reacting every time it does.
- dirktheman 11y ago
  Genuinly curious: why would they hide their successes? It would change public perception about the surveillance, and it would also act as a deterrent to potential terrorists. I get that they don't want to reveal their methods, but I can't see any issues with sharing their successes.
  - krapp 11y ago
    Revealing their successes would probably just lead skeptics to believe they were engaging in propaganda, and it probably wouldn't act as a deterrent to terrorists at all.
    - dirktheman 11y ago
      Maybe... On the other hand, keeping silent doesn't seem to convert a whole lot of skeptics either. And revealing a couple of successes would probably result in a lot more votes for your administration the next elections, right?
      - krapp 11y ago
        It certainly could bring in political capital, but aren't politicians who do that already accused of manufacturing terrorist plots and ratcheting up fear for points during election season? How valuable is public relations for the US intelligence community versus keeping their methods secret (within a culture of secrecy?) It's not as though the CIA or NSA are likely to be defunded soon, regardless of who gets elected.
  - aianus 11y ago
    Revealing how the plots were foiled might teach future would-be terrorists how to better avoid detection. Just to play devil's advocate.
aresant 11y ago
You make a good top level point that I think most would agree with - successful terror plots degrade our freedom because we fearfululy grant our government more power. But to broadly call spying apparatus ineffective and incompetent weakens your argument. There have been dozens of publicly disclosed terror plots interrupted against the USA alone, surely many more we will never know about.(1) There is a clear underlying reason for survellience - it works. The complexity in the discussion is that it clearly doesn't work 100% of the time and comes at a significant cost But this isn't a black and white issue, we are in the grey. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United_States_post-9/11 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrori...
- fukusa 11y ago
  >There have been dozens of publicly disclosed terror plots interrupted against the USA alone Many of these terror plots are orchestrated by the FBI. Source: https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrorist/ https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrori...
- scrollaway 11y ago
  > There is a clear underlying reason for survellience - it works. It works, but not (just) for terrorism prevention. It also works great for other things, such as preventing political ideologies you don't like from spreading. Or just in general as a power play over citizens.
- moistgorilla 11y ago
  Ah yes, the Brooklyn Bridge terrorist that was trying to use a jackhammer to bring it down. Thank you NSA for preventing this tragedy that could only prevented with pervasive surveillance.
- kefs 11y ago
  The Talk section of the Wiki article lists the many problems with that list.. You really should stop citing it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United_States_post-9/11#Incredibly_biased_title_and_premise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_unsuccessful_terr...
hokkos 11y ago
No there won't be degradation of encryption, the politicians no longer have any weight against megacorp like Apple and Google, and open source isn't bound by the wants of the USA. The failing of the french spying agencies is one of scale, they didn't scale to the exponential progression of jihadist x100 in few years.

by mgo 11y ago

alecksandros 11y ago

We don't exactly have data on foiled terrorism attempts and so it is difficult to say "no benefit". That being said we need a way to gauge risk/reward as citizens regarding terrorism/privacy. There should be openness regarding the actual terrorism risks and what giving up certain freedoms/privacy actually gains us in protection from said risks. A system where terrorism scorecard is openly available so we can weigh pros/cons is probably never going to happen though.

aking2 11y ago

Did you thought about the fact that other acts of terrorism where prevented and most of them keep secret because of the nature of investigations?

DamnYuppie 11y ago
Yes, I think about it all the time but when pressed for numbers the CIA/NSA/FBI never reveal any. What isn't discussed here is the numerous times that these institutions have actually created terrorists. Or lead people to a course of action of their choosing.
Retra 11y ago
"Because of the nature" is not a reason for keeping victories secret. A democratic government is responsible to its people. Moreover, you do not do a very good job of preventing terrorism by keeping secret all the times terrorism fails and publicly over-reacting every time it does.
dirktheman 11y ago
Genuinly curious: why would they hide their successes? It would change public perception about the surveillance, and it would also act as a deterrent to potential terrorists. I get that they don't want to reveal their methods, but I can't see any issues with sharing their successes.
- krapp 11y ago
  Revealing their successes would probably just lead skeptics to believe they were engaging in propaganda, and it probably wouldn't act as a deterrent to terrorists at all.
  - dirktheman 11y ago
    Maybe... On the other hand, keeping silent doesn't seem to convert a whole lot of skeptics either. And revealing a couple of successes would probably result in a lot more votes for your administration the next elections, right?
    - krapp 11y ago
      It certainly could bring in political capital, but aren't politicians who do that already accused of manufacturing terrorist plots and ratcheting up fear for points during election season? How valuable is public relations for the US intelligence community versus keeping their methods secret (within a culture of secrecy?) It's not as though the CIA or NSA are likely to be defunded soon, regardless of who gets elected.
- aianus 11y ago
  Revealing how the plots were foiled might teach future would-be terrorists how to better avoid detection. Just to play devil's advocate.

aresant 11y ago

You make a good top level point that I think most would agree with - successful terror plots degrade our freedom because we fearfululy grant our government more power. But to broadly call spying apparatus ineffective and incompetent weakens your argument. There have been dozens of publicly disclosed terror plots interrupted against the USA alone, surely many more we will never know about.(1) There is a clear underlying reason for survellience - it works. The complexity in the discussion is that it clearly doesn't work 100% of the time and comes at a significant cost But this isn't a black and white issue, we are in the grey. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United_States_post-9/11 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrori...

fukusa 11y ago
>There have been dozens of publicly disclosed terror plots interrupted against the USA alone Many of these terror plots are orchestrated by the FBI. Source: https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrorist/ https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrori...
scrollaway 11y ago
> There is a clear underlying reason for survellience - it works. It works, but not (just) for terrorism prevention. It also works great for other things, such as preventing political ideologies you don't like from spreading. Or just in general as a power play over citizens.
moistgorilla 11y ago
Ah yes, the Brooklyn Bridge terrorist that was trying to use a jackhammer to bring it down. Thank you NSA for preventing this tragedy that could only prevented with pervasive surveillance.
kefs 11y ago
The Talk section of the Wiki article lists the many problems with that list.. You really should stop citing it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United_States_post-9/11#Incredibly_biased_title_and_premise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_unsuccessful_terr...

hokkos 11y ago

No there won't be degradation of encryption, the politicians no longer have any weight against megacorp like Apple and Google, and open source isn't bound by the wants of the USA. The failing of the french spying agencies is one of scale, they didn't scale to the exponential progression of jihadist x100 in few years.