3 ms·

First: thanks for answering the actual question. > It also applies to the consequences of reckless or negligent behavior. It does, but is rarely used that way

by woodman 11y ago

First: thanks for answering the actual question. > It also applies to the consequences of reckless or negligent behavior. It does, but is rarely used that way. The man wearing a sausage link necklace went on a nature walk and faced the music when bears showed up. I'm just pointing out that the phrase is heavily biased to the point of being a dog whistle. > It could very well be narcissism masquerading as altruism. While possible, it is very unlikely that such a trait would manifest at this point in his life. I see no evidence of it in what little I know about his history, and a narcissist would be busy filling that gap. Also, and I recognize the value of a stranger's personal experience, but in my experience: the background checks conducted for security clearance above secret (for military personnel) will filter a lot of narcissists out - as their story fails to match up when you go a hop beyond their provided references. > There's a small chance he's even been been working for... So small that it is as equally likely that he is a quadruple agent still acting under the orders of the USG. > ...the end result was massive damage to U.S. foreign policy. Eh, I'm not a fan of the original sin concept - but the USG might share some of the responsibility. As far as the classified methods - you are spot on with the observation of the fact that there was nothing new. There were two classes of people before the leak: those who knew that USG had the technical ability and the disposition for a global dragnet, and those who didn't. Aside from posturing (commercial and political) there has been no change, which means the leak of operational details has had no operational impact (likely because it was already well known). So the leak did no harm to the security apparatus, but served to inform those who did not understand the USG's disposition on the matter of domestic and foreign surveillance.

rl3 11y ago
>It does, but is rarely used that way. The man wearing a sausage link necklace went on a nature walk and faced the music when bears showed up. That assumes the man did not first violate the sausage factory's trust by breaking numerous agreements pertaining to sausage use. >I'm just pointing out that the phrase is heavily biased to the point of being a dog whistle. Agreed; I dislike the phrase as well. It however doesn't absolve Snowden of responsibility. >I see no evidence of it in what little I know about his history, and a narcissist would be busy filling that gap. My read is he's a bit self-aggrandizing and narcissistic at times. I'm not a professional, so that's only as good as any other lay person's assessment. >So small that it is as equally likely that he is a quadruple agent still acting under the orders of the USG. Or worse, the sausage factory. In all seriousness though, I'd classify the chances of him being a foreign intelligence asset as low—but not low enough so as to be non-trivial. >... which means the leak of operational details has had no operational impact (likely because it was already well known). I wouldn't be so sure: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9508191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9508191 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=20m39s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=20m39s (Last Week Tonight with John Oliver)
- woodman 11y ago
  > That assumes the man did not first violate... My point exactly - your brain skips right over reckless or accidental and goes straight to malice. > ...doesn't absolve Snowden of responsibility. Not my intent, just pointing out the use of the phrase betrayed a thinly veiled hope for some federal pound me in the ass prison time. > ...foreign high-level leadership targets... If you are referring to NATO allies, then I think the lack of actual response beyond grandstanding indicates that they were aware already. > ...clandestine hardware implantation in transit... This was already well known, supply chain security isn't a new concept. The consumers were the only ones surprised by this revelation. > ...co-traveler inference as a method... Funny you should mention this. Check drudge, where you'll find "Ex-CIA officer faces 'unprecedented' extradition..." [0] The Italian police used this technique to identify 22 individuals alleged to be part of a CIA snatch team, in 2005. [1] So not a big hit to lose a secret surveillance method that had been widely used by foreign governments for at least a decade prior to the leak. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ex-cia-officer-faces-extradition-from-portugal-to-italy-for-her-alleged-role-in-clerics-rendition/2016/04/21/b8b08b22-0727-11e6-bdcb-0133da18418d_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ex-cia-officer-faces-ex... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case
  - rl3 11y ago
    >My point exactly - your brain skips right over reckless or accidental and goes straight to malice. No, I was just trying to illustrate that the analogy is absurd given the context. Snowden was not unwitting and made explicit choices that had consequences, regardless of underlying motivation. >Not my intent, just pointing out the use of the phrase betrayed a thinly veiled hope for some federal pound me in the ass prison time. Agreed. Though, on the bright side the incidence of rape is probably nonexistent in a place like ADX Florence. You unfortunately just go crazy from solitary instead. >This was already well known, supply chain security isn't a new concept. The consumers were the only ones surprised by this revelation. Yeah, but it's still solid confirmation that a specific actor is doing a very specific thing—one which involved extremely sneaky custom hardware modifications with very fast turnaround times. >The Italian police used this technique to identify 22 individuals alleged to be part of a CIA snatch team, in 2005. This is actually apples and oranges. Cell phone surveillance has been around forever, and the Italians were leveraging the cellular networks in their own country at that. What I'm referring to is automated co-traveler inference in foreign countries to protect friendly personnel. In other words, analyzing massive amounts of data in real-time to detect previously unknown persons based on movement alone. A prerequisite for doing that is first compromising the entire telecommunications network of whatever country you're operating in.

by woodman 11y ago

rl3 11y ago

>It does, but is rarely used that way. The man wearing a sausage link necklace went on a nature walk and faced the music when bears showed up. That assumes the man did not first violate the sausage factory's trust by breaking numerous agreements pertaining to sausage use. >I'm just pointing out that the phrase is heavily biased to the point of being a dog whistle. Agreed; I dislike the phrase as well. It however doesn't absolve Snowden of responsibility. >I see no evidence of it in what little I know about his history, and a narcissist would be busy filling that gap. My read is he's a bit self-aggrandizing and narcissistic at times. I'm not a professional, so that's only as good as any other lay person's assessment. >So small that it is as equally likely that he is a quadruple agent still acting under the orders of the USG. Or worse, the sausage factory. In all seriousness though, I'd classify the chances of him being a foreign intelligence asset as low—but not low enough so as to be non-trivial. >... which means the leak of operational details has had no operational impact (likely because it was already well known). I wouldn't be so sure: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9508191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9508191 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=20m39s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=20m39s (Last Week Tonight with John Oliver)

woodman 11y ago
> That assumes the man did not first violate... My point exactly - your brain skips right over reckless or accidental and goes straight to malice. > ...doesn't absolve Snowden of responsibility. Not my intent, just pointing out the use of the phrase betrayed a thinly veiled hope for some federal pound me in the ass prison time. > ...foreign high-level leadership targets... If you are referring to NATO allies, then I think the lack of actual response beyond grandstanding indicates that they were aware already. > ...clandestine hardware implantation in transit... This was already well known, supply chain security isn't a new concept. The consumers were the only ones surprised by this revelation. > ...co-traveler inference as a method... Funny you should mention this. Check drudge, where you'll find "Ex-CIA officer faces 'unprecedented' extradition..." [0] The Italian police used this technique to identify 22 individuals alleged to be part of a CIA snatch team, in 2005. [1] So not a big hit to lose a secret surveillance method that had been widely used by foreign governments for at least a decade prior to the leak. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ex-cia-officer-faces-extradition-from-portugal-to-italy-for-her-alleged-role-in-clerics-rendition/2016/04/21/b8b08b22-0727-11e6-bdcb-0133da18418d_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ex-cia-officer-faces-ex... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case
- rl3 11y ago
  >My point exactly - your brain skips right over reckless or accidental and goes straight to malice. No, I was just trying to illustrate that the analogy is absurd given the context. Snowden was not unwitting and made explicit choices that had consequences, regardless of underlying motivation. >Not my intent, just pointing out the use of the phrase betrayed a thinly veiled hope for some federal pound me in the ass prison time. Agreed. Though, on the bright side the incidence of rape is probably nonexistent in a place like ADX Florence. You unfortunately just go crazy from solitary instead. >This was already well known, supply chain security isn't a new concept. The consumers were the only ones surprised by this revelation. Yeah, but it's still solid confirmation that a specific actor is doing a very specific thing—one which involved extremely sneaky custom hardware modifications with very fast turnaround times. >The Italian police used this technique to identify 22 individuals alleged to be part of a CIA snatch team, in 2005. This is actually apples and oranges. Cell phone surveillance has been around forever, and the Italians were leveraging the cellular networks in their own country at that. What I'm referring to is automated co-traveler inference in foreign countries to protect friendly personnel. In other words, analyzing massive amounts of data in real-time to detect previously unknown persons based on movement alone. A prerequisite for doing that is first compromising the entire telecommunications network of whatever country you're operating in.