6 ms·

I condemn Snowden. Prove that I'm intellectually lazy.

by watwatwatwat 10y ago

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
throwawaymaroon 10y ago
...this is an intellectually lazy approach?
jacalata 10y ago
Well, you didn't bother to give any reasoning....
- hood_syntax 10y ago
  Obviously it's just low-hanging fruit /s
  - Practicality 10y ago
    Perhaps HN has cultured the evolution of a different type of troll.
omginternets 10y ago
>Prove that I'm intellectually lazy. Snowden has a well-argued moral case for what he did. He demonstrably tried to minimize harm and maximize the positive impact of his disclosures. You give literally no reason for your condemnation (though in all fairness, your comment is likely to be rhetorical). More to the point, you will likely argue that he broke laws and cite some unspecified damage to the intelligence community that can neither be qualified nor quantified. Importantly, you will likely do this -- as every condemning voice has -- without offering a cogent rebuttal to Snowden's case. Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, you will fail to address the the clear and present danger of allowing a government to perform dragnet surveillance on its citizens without suspecting them of criminal activity. If that's not intellectual laziness, then I honestly don't know what is. If that's not going to be your line of argumentation, then congratulations! You are literally the first person I have encountered who condemns Snowden without being intellectually lazy or dishonest. I'll believe it when I see it. (I feel compelled to mention, once more, that I mean no disrespect. I think your comment is rhetorical in nature, so I beg of you not to take anything personally.)
- dllthomas 10y ago
  > Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, you will fail to address the the clear and present danger of allowing a government to perform dragnet surveillance on its citizens without suspecting them of criminal activity. Dragnet surveillance that is being abused. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOVEINT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOVEINT "Most incidents are self-reported", which says to me that they do not have effective monitoring - there are doubtless abuses that have gone undetected.
- tzs 10y ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/52k179/edward_snowden_why_barack_obama_should_grant_me_a/d7kv7z7 https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/52k179/edward_sno...
  - omginternets 10y ago
    Interesting. I'll mull this over. Thank you.
RodericDay 10y ago
How come proven collateral damage such as innocent deaths caused by US military interventionism is widely considered reasonable and acceptable. So, tenuous upside/blatant downside = no outrage. But the unproven collateral damage of Snowden's leaks, which had the giant upside of revealing democracy-chilling surveillance techniques, leads to mass reaction from the government. So, undeniable upside/debatable downside = Enemy of the State, threats to nations that offer him asylum. How does this arithmetic work out for anyone?
- saynsedit 10y ago
  Yeah, Americans sleep when they hear 90% of drone attack deaths are civilians: https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-complex/ https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-comp... But they are wide awake and outraged when Snowden's ostensible act of espionage has caused an enormous amount of public good and technological innovation. It's not really the American's fault. We hear few of their real voices. It's the media that speaks the loudest.
  - fixermark 10y ago
    Don't sell Americans short on their ability to withold empathy for non-Americans though. They know that the men who stole control of four planes on 9/11 were civilians too, and they still generally trust that their government is ID'ing threats to national security correctly. Whether the government is actually doing that (and whether---even if it were---that's sufficient for completely extrajudicial killing that would be called "waging warfare" in any other context) may not be things an average American is asking before going to sleep at night.
  - Practicality 10y ago
    Who are these generic Americans that think that Snowden should be condemned? Everyone American I know is very grateful for what he did. And I know quite a few. I've only ever heard official policy statements condemning him. I am not even really sure those stating such policy agree with what they are saying (at a personal level).
coldtea 10y ago
>I condemn Snowden. Prove that I'm intellectually lazy. You haven't even bothered to provide an argument to justify your condemnation. Case closed.
Practicality 10y ago
You didn't bother with an actual argument and instead tried to force others to do the cognitive work to prove you wrong. This is intellectually lazy.

I condemn Snowden. Prove that I'm intellectually lazy.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

throwawaymaroon 10y ago

...this is an intellectually lazy approach?

jacalata 10y ago

Well, you didn't bother to give any reasoning....

hood_syntax 10y ago
Obviously it's just low-hanging fruit /s
- Practicality 10y ago
  Perhaps HN has cultured the evolution of a different type of troll.

omginternets 10y ago

>Prove that I'm intellectually lazy. Snowden has a well-argued moral case for what he did. He demonstrably tried to minimize harm and maximize the positive impact of his disclosures. You give literally no reason for your condemnation (though in all fairness, your comment is likely to be rhetorical). More to the point, you will likely argue that he broke laws and cite some unspecified damage to the intelligence community that can neither be qualified nor quantified. Importantly, you will likely do this -- as every condemning voice has -- without offering a cogent rebuttal to Snowden's case. Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, you will fail to address the the clear and present danger of allowing a government to perform dragnet surveillance on its citizens without suspecting them of criminal activity. If that's not intellectual laziness, then I honestly don't know what is. If that's not going to be your line of argumentation, then congratulations! You are literally the first person I have encountered who condemns Snowden without being intellectually lazy or dishonest. I'll believe it when I see it. (I feel compelled to mention, once more, that I mean no disrespect. I think your comment is rhetorical in nature, so I beg of you not to take anything personally.)

dllthomas 10y ago
> Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, you will fail to address the the clear and present danger of allowing a government to perform dragnet surveillance on its citizens without suspecting them of criminal activity. Dragnet surveillance that is being abused. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOVEINT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOVEINT "Most incidents are self-reported", which says to me that they do not have effective monitoring - there are doubtless abuses that have gone undetected.
tzs 10y ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/52k179/edward_snowden_why_barack_obama_should_grant_me_a/d7kv7z7 https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/52k179/edward_sno...
- omginternets 10y ago
  Interesting. I'll mull this over. Thank you.

RodericDay 10y ago

How come proven collateral damage such as innocent deaths caused by US military interventionism is widely considered reasonable and acceptable. So, tenuous upside/blatant downside = no outrage. But the unproven collateral damage of Snowden's leaks, which had the giant upside of revealing democracy-chilling surveillance techniques, leads to mass reaction from the government. So, undeniable upside/debatable downside = Enemy of the State, threats to nations that offer him asylum. How does this arithmetic work out for anyone?

saynsedit 10y ago
Yeah, Americans sleep when they hear 90% of drone attack deaths are civilians: https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-complex/ https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-comp... But they are wide awake and outraged when Snowden's ostensible act of espionage has caused an enormous amount of public good and technological innovation. It's not really the American's fault. We hear few of their real voices. It's the media that speaks the loudest.
- fixermark 10y ago
  Don't sell Americans short on their ability to withold empathy for non-Americans though. They know that the men who stole control of four planes on 9/11 were civilians too, and they still generally trust that their government is ID'ing threats to national security correctly. Whether the government is actually doing that (and whether---even if it were---that's sufficient for completely extrajudicial killing that would be called "waging warfare" in any other context) may not be things an average American is asking before going to sleep at night.
- Practicality 10y ago
  Who are these generic Americans that think that Snowden should be condemned? Everyone American I know is very grateful for what he did. And I know quite a few. I've only ever heard official policy statements condemning him. I am not even really sure those stating such policy agree with what they are saying (at a personal level).

coldtea 10y ago

>I condemn Snowden. Prove that I'm intellectually lazy. You haven't even bothered to provide an argument to justify your condemnation. Case closed.

Practicality 10y ago

You didn't bother with an actual argument and instead tried to force others to do the cognitive work to prove you wrong. This is intellectually lazy.