3 ms·

I understand why you say this, but even if they're truly doing the right thing here, I only owe them gratitude enough to say, "Thanks for stopping spying on me,

I understand why you say this, but even if they're truly doing the right thing here, I only owe them gratitude enough to say, "Thanks for stopping spying on me, finally, at least in this way." Add that to the number of times the NSA has shown itself to be untrustworthy and intentionally deceptive, and I'm willing to seem ungrateful and hard to satisfy. They've cultivated a hostile relationship, toward fixing which this is at best a small step.

netwanderer3 8y ago
They could be invasive, by monitoring even when there's nothing going on, but there are well-defined rules and strict protocols in place, and I have never heard any cases where they have used the data to attack anyone personally or are there?
- maxheadroom 8y ago
  Not sure if this[0] falls under the "attack anyone personally" umbrella but it definitely falls under the invasive, even when there's nothing going on, portion of your comment. [0] - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog-idUSBRE98Q14G20130927 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog...
- ionised 8y ago
  Certain employees were discovered to have been using these tools to spy on wives, partners, love interests, children etc. That's just the stuff we actually heard about.
- ibeckermayer 8y ago
  I never consented to have my data snooped on by some cabal of creeps out in Washington DC. If they suspect I’m up to something, then show sufficient evidence to get a warrant and be transparent about it. Whether they’ve acted on the data or not is irrelevant — they’re stealing what should be my property and building tools for tyranny.
- syshum 8y ago
  You wont, because of a little thing called Parallel Construction. NSA finds something out illegally, unethically, they pass it to another agency so proceeds to figure out a way to "discover" what the NSA did in a way that is legal, or at least plausible to the courts, thus never having to admit the investigation started with the NSA
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

netwanderer3 8y ago

They could be invasive, by monitoring even when there's nothing going on, but there are well-defined rules and strict protocols in place, and I have never heard any cases where they have used the data to attack anyone personally or are there?

maxheadroom 8y ago
Not sure if this[0] falls under the "attack anyone personally" umbrella but it definitely falls under the invasive, even when there's nothing going on, portion of your comment. [0] - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog-idUSBRE98Q14G20130927 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog...
ionised 8y ago
Certain employees were discovered to have been using these tools to spy on wives, partners, love interests, children etc. That's just the stuff we actually heard about.
ibeckermayer 8y ago
I never consented to have my data snooped on by some cabal of creeps out in Washington DC. If they suspect I’m up to something, then show sufficient evidence to get a warrant and be transparent about it. Whether they’ve acted on the data or not is irrelevant — they’re stealing what should be my property and building tools for tyranny.
syshum 8y ago
You wont, because of a little thing called Parallel Construction. NSA finds something out illegally, unethically, they pass it to another agency so proceeds to figure out a way to "discover" what the NSA did in a way that is legal, or at least plausible to the courts, thus never having to admit the investigation started with the NSA
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]