7 ms·
"A spokesperson for GCHQ told the Sunday Times: "We don't comment on our defence against the dark arts." I don't care about anything else, I'm just so glad tha
by NamTaf 11y ago
"A spokesperson for GCHQ told the Sunday Times: "We don't comment on our defence against the dark arts."
I don't care about anything else, I'm just so glad that someone at GCHQ maintains their sense of humour whilst being a spook.
- abrodersen 11y agoWe should start calling intelligence analysts "Dementors"
- delinka 11y agoI think they'd call themselves Aurors.
- jessaustin 11y agoThe best deception is self-deception.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jMyles 11y ago> I'm just so glad that someone at GCHQ maintains their sense of humour whilst being a spook. > I don't care about anything else I suspect that's exactly the intention of this sort of PR.
- NamTaf 11y agoI should have clarified, my statement was with tongue planted firmly in cheek. A sibling post described it best when they said it was flippant. It's up there with the Google wiretap post-it note smileys.
- fit2rule 11y agoYeah, this is clearly a fluff piece to associate two nice, fluffy British institutions - Harry Potter, and GCHQ - in a way that reminds people its not all about death, destruction, prejudice, using arcane methods to control people against their will, killing those not of your own race/culture, stealing their resources and covering it up so that an ignorant 'sub-class' of people can continue to live their pathetic, un-magical lives, etc. Oh wait. It actually still is all about that. Just warmer and fluffier.
- madaxe_again 11y agoThat is indeed the purpose of this PR, and PR it absolutely is, as they did not prevent the leak of the book - I for one read it as a PDF several days before it was published. This is up there with the piece they ran a few days ago about how they saved us from shitty smart meters, which were instituted and approved by another department of government (ofgem). They're playing themselves off against themselves in order to make you think of them as GCHQ as better, when the whole is still just as rotten as it ever was.
- nsgi 11y agoI'm not. I think questions about the actions of GCHQ merit a serious response.
- AnkhMorporkian 11y agoDo they? There's no reason to think that anything creepy was going on. Surely one of GCHQ's legitimate missions is simple OSINT, and certainly forum trawling. Someone posts a copy of the supposed manuscript to some forum, some GCHQ minion sees it, off-handedly mentions it to a supervisor who is a Harry Potter fan, the supervisor calls the publisher, mentions he's from GCHQ, and 11 years later it's mentioned in a retrospective story. When I was in the military, I discovered a vulnerability in a website while I was browsing the web bored at work. I did mention I was an airman. If somehow that resulted in a news story, I don't think it would be fair to demand a response from the Air Force. Sure, they were technically paying for me to do that, but it wasn't really the mission.
- techdragon 11y agoThere's a difference between "organisation helps corporate entity" and "employee of organisation helps corporate entity". One suggests possible altruism existing inside the organisation the other suggests the organisation is prepared to aid corporations either as its mission or views such operations as acceptable use of the organisations resources.
- OJFord 11y agoThere is, a bit. But: a) We don't know which this is b) An organisation might choose to stand behind its - as you say, altruistic - employee
- chris_wot 11y agoThen it should have been referred to the police. GCHQ is a security and intelligence organisation tasked by Government to protect the nation from threats. A leaked copy of the Harry Potter novel is not a national security threat in any way, shape or form. GCHQ are not there to enforce copyright.
- branchless 11y agoYeah great guys. This after the other GCHQ feel good on smart metres. No thanks GCHQ. PR on a dodgy govt agency that thinks the rules don't apply to them delivered via state web site.
- mistercow 11y agoI think there's something super creepy about a secretive government agency flippantly exhibiting power creep.
- superuser2 11y agoNoticing that something has been "posted on the internet" isn't an exercise of power. Plucking it out of private correspondence, or offering to help take it down, sure, but intelligence agencies are entitled to access public information, same as everyone else.
- tempodox 11y agoGCHQ may be good for nothing else, but defence against the dark arts is obviously very important.