3 ms·

"After Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election in particular, many tweets recommended using hard disk encryption and the ostensibly secure messen

"After Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election in particular, many tweets recommended using hard disk encryption and the ostensibly secure messenger app Signal while discouraging the use of competitor apps Threema and Telegram." Oh FFS. We've seen a continuation of invasive, Bush-era policies under Obama...but now Trump is terrifying? Spoiler alert: it has been a problem for quite some time, and given the alternative to Trump it was going to still be a problem regardless of who won the election: freedom ponies and rainbows were never an option. Get a damn grip, people. Can we end the partisan pity party?

dragonwriter 10y ago
> We've seen a continuation of invasive, Bush-era policies IRT the NSA under Obama...but now Trump is terrifying? Uh, yeah. The Bush/Obama surveillance policies have largely been seen as dangerous not because of actual concrete harms that have materialized, but because if continued they raise the prospect of a much worse (because of the increased scope possible with modern tools) version of the kind of political targeting based on surveillance that was done by Nixon (prompting legal limits, notably the original FISA act.) And perhaps even beyond that, to the kind of retaliation for dissent seen in authoritarian regimes. Trump is seen as the kind of figure that would be more likely than a more conventional candilate of either party to make those theoretical risks into concrete harms.
- MrZongle2 10y ago
  I'm not buying it. The house is already on fire, and people are wringing their hands because the new owner might have a can of lighter fluid in his pocket.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    I would say that many people view the Bush/Obama surveillance policies more as unreasonably dangerous highly flammable fuel stored in the house than an actual fire, and Trump as more analogous to someone carrying an ignition source than additional fuel. I don't think many serious observers think that, whatever the potential, the actual substantive harm has yet been even close to Nixon levels, though the potential scope of intercepted communication (and hence, potential for harm with simply a change of intent at the top) is much broader.
  - mullen 10y ago
    Yes, the house is on fire, but your friend's friend who is a narcissistic and thin skinned and promises to use the power of government to go after his enemies just showed up with 2 55 gallon barrels of jet fuel. He is about to enter the house and does not believe jet fuel can catch fire.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> We've seen a continuation of invasive, Bush-era policies IRT the NSA under Obama...but now Trump is terrifying? Uh, yeah. The Bush/Obama surveillance policies have largely been seen as dangerous not because of actual concrete harms that have materialized, but because if continued they raise the prospect of a much worse (because of the increased scope possible with modern tools) version of the kind of political targeting based on surveillance that was done by Nixon (prompting legal limits, notably the original FISA act.) And perhaps even beyond that, to the kind of retaliation for dissent seen in authoritarian regimes. Trump is seen as the kind of figure that would be more likely than a more conventional candilate of either party to make those theoretical risks into concrete harms.

MrZongle2 10y ago
I'm not buying it. The house is already on fire, and people are wringing their hands because the new owner might have a can of lighter fluid in his pocket.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  I would say that many people view the Bush/Obama surveillance policies more as unreasonably dangerous highly flammable fuel stored in the house than an actual fire, and Trump as more analogous to someone carrying an ignition source than additional fuel. I don't think many serious observers think that, whatever the potential, the actual substantive harm has yet been even close to Nixon levels, though the potential scope of intercepted communication (and hence, potential for harm with simply a change of intent at the top) is much broader.
- mullen 10y ago
  Yes, the house is on fire, but your friend's friend who is a narcissistic and thin skinned and promises to use the power of government to go after his enemies just showed up with 2 55 gallon barrels of jet fuel. He is about to enter the house and does not believe jet fuel can catch fire.