3 ms·

> This type of leaking gives credence to the national security concerns Gives credence to what/whose concerns? What do think Israel would have learnt from this

> This type of leaking gives credence to the national security concerns Gives credence to what/whose concerns? What do think Israel would have learnt from this leak? If Israel were spying on US drone video transmissions, and a "traitor" in the Israeli security apparatus leaked that info to the press, would it still be harmful for the "public" to know? It really weirds me out the degree to which people seem to moralize these brain-dead spy games. It's like we're already in state of paranoid pre-war. It's OK to spy on another country, and it's OK for our allies to spy on us, but its not OK for citizens to spy on their own government, it's OK for foreign governments to spy on our citizens, but we're only allowed to spy on our own citizens in foreign countries or foreign servers. If it's of no interest to the public, then surely the secret was not a secret at all, and there was no harm in leaking it.

drawnwren 11y ago
This gives credence to the concern that having all knowledge in the public domain is not the most beneficial way for a government to operate. The point is that perhaps Israel did not know that their feeds were compromised and the West was able to have a better understanding of the situation in that part of the world because of it. If an Israeli leaked it, it would have been beneficial to the US because that might have indicated the Israelis knew something that the US did not. It is of no significant interest to the public, but it _is_ of significant interest to the Israeli government. This is almost a textbook scenario of how nation states justify the need to keep secrets from the public.
- aburan28 11y ago
  Then why did the US publically admit to spying on Israel during the Iran talks? Why did Israel deploy Duqu 2 to spy on the Iran talks?
  - drawnwren 11y ago
    International politics is not engineering. We aren't dealing with immutable truths. Each of the moves should be taken in the larger picture of the subtle web of politics. Sometimes nations are allies and sometimes they are enemies. Admittedly, the US/Middle East dynamic is much more fluid than many parts of the world but it's not hard to generate a narrative that would explain your questions.
tyre 11y ago
> Gives credence to what/whose concerns? The concerns that there are leaks not in the public interest, which harm our[1] military's capabilities to defend us. If I were opposed to the west (Israel/US/UK), this is not only great military intelligence, but a fantastic propaganda opportunity. > If Israel were spying on US drone video transmissions, and a "traitor" in the Israeli security apparatus leaked that info to the press, would it still be harmful for the "public" to know? Would we be upset? Yes. Is Israel likely to release volumes of public condemnations of US/British intransigence in this case? Absolutely. Does that make it unethical? No. More on this in a second. > It really weirds me out the degree to which people seem to moralize these brain-dead spy games. It's like we're already in state of paranoid pre-war. Information is the most valuable asset for survival. Knowing what will happen or how someone will act is incalculably valuable, across pretty much every field. - Engineering: Why do we "spy" on our servers with analytics, logging, and alerts? Because it helps us make the right decisions. - Product: Why do we "spy" on users with tools like Heap or Mixpanel? Because it helps us make the right decisions. - Military: Why do we spy on other world powers? Because it helps us make the right decisions. - Business: You know the hardest parts of building a business? People. We have a lack of information (it's hard to get into their heads) which leads to a lack of perspective which leads to a lack of empathy. > but its not OK for citizens to spy on their own government Is it right for HR to know things about you but you cannot access everything they know about colleagues? Yes. Unless you have a legitimate interest (outside of "I'm interested") in knowing information that could cause others harm, you don't deserve to have it. You have elected officials who are informed on a need-to-know basis about the programs done in your name. Do they always make the right decisions? Absolutely not. In those cases, leaks are in the public interest. In cases like this, how are you better able to defend yourself with this information? > If it's of no interest to the public, then surely the secret was not a secret at all, and there was no harm in leaking it. I'm saying it is _against_ the public's interest to leak it, because the NSA is doing their job and this harms their ability to do so. If the NSA were doing something outside its job (e.g. dragnet surveillance) and a leak harmed its ability to do so, that leak is actually in the public's interest because they are protecting themselves. [1]: "our" in this context is democracy and/or the western world.
- rudolf0 11y ago

drawnwren 11y ago

This gives credence to the concern that having all knowledge in the public domain is not the most beneficial way for a government to operate. The point is that perhaps Israel did not know that their feeds were compromised and the West was able to have a better understanding of the situation in that part of the world because of it. If an Israeli leaked it, it would have been beneficial to the US because that might have indicated the Israelis knew something that the US did not. It is of no significant interest to the public, but it _is_ of significant interest to the Israeli government. This is almost a textbook scenario of how nation states justify the need to keep secrets from the public.

aburan28 11y ago
Then why did the US publically admit to spying on Israel during the Iran talks? Why did Israel deploy Duqu 2 to spy on the Iran talks?
- drawnwren 11y ago
  International politics is not engineering. We aren't dealing with immutable truths. Each of the moves should be taken in the larger picture of the subtle web of politics. Sometimes nations are allies and sometimes they are enemies. Admittedly, the US/Middle East dynamic is much more fluid than many parts of the world but it's not hard to generate a narrative that would explain your questions.

tyre 11y ago

> Gives credence to what/whose concerns? The concerns that there are leaks not in the public interest, which harm our[1] military's capabilities to defend us. If I were opposed to the west (Israel/US/UK), this is not only great military intelligence, but a fantastic propaganda opportunity. > If Israel were spying on US drone video transmissions, and a "traitor" in the Israeli security apparatus leaked that info to the press, would it still be harmful for the "public" to know? Would we be upset? Yes. Is Israel likely to release volumes of public condemnations of US/British intransigence in this case? Absolutely. Does that make it unethical? No. More on this in a second. > It really weirds me out the degree to which people seem to moralize these brain-dead spy games. It's like we're already in state of paranoid pre-war. Information is the most valuable asset for survival. Knowing what will happen or how someone will act is incalculably valuable, across pretty much every field. - Engineering: Why do we "spy" on our servers with analytics, logging, and alerts? Because it helps us make the right decisions. - Product: Why do we "spy" on users with tools like Heap or Mixpanel? Because it helps us make the right decisions. - Military: Why do we spy on other world powers? Because it helps us make the right decisions. - Business: You know the hardest parts of building a business? People. We have a lack of information (it's hard to get into their heads) which leads to a lack of perspective which leads to a lack of empathy. > but its not OK for citizens to spy on their own government Is it right for HR to know things about you but you cannot access everything they know about colleagues? Yes. Unless you have a legitimate interest (outside of "I'm interested") in knowing information that could cause others harm, you don't deserve to have it. You have elected officials who are informed on a need-to-know basis about the programs done in your name. Do they always make the right decisions? Absolutely not. In those cases, leaks are in the public interest. In cases like this, how are you better able to defend yourself with this information? > If it's of no interest to the public, then surely the secret was not a secret at all, and there was no harm in leaking it. I'm saying it is _against_ the public's interest to leak it, because the NSA is doing their job and this harms their ability to do so. If the NSA were doing something outside its job (e.g. dragnet surveillance) and a leak harmed its ability to do so, that leak is actually in the public's interest because they are protecting themselves. [1]: "our" in this context is democracy and/or the western world.

rudolf0 11y ago