5 ms·

Reddit AmA: Director of the first ISP to challenge the USA Patriot Act

154 points by mixmax 16y ago

jka 16y ago
While reading Nick's story in text is incredible, I caught his presentation on the topic & the repercussions at 27C3 in December, and would thoroughly recommend watching the video recording if you're interested in it. Could be good question fuel for the AMA too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDkHPNbCC1M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDkHPNbCC1M
- mdaniel 16y ago
  Thank you for that link. It it overwhelmingly scary and makes me feel as though I did not donate enough to the ACLU and EFF. I often wonder if there is any amount which is "enough."
- mdaniel 16y ago
  The other comment I have is that I heard him say that one person can win, and can make a difference. However, there are two caveats to that statement: if you can get access to the resources of the ACLU and if your story turns out, in the end, as Nick's did. I don't want to be a wet blanket, but I am painfully aware that for his one story, there are [by his account] 200,000 other stories which did not turn out that way. Maybe they are living happy free lives in Ohio, or maybe they were "disappeared."
- snsr 16y ago
  It's mind boggling that the greatest threat to an individual's freedom in this country is in fact the federal government itself.
duke_sam 16y ago
One of the concerns of the 2nd amendment was protecting the people from an unjust government. Back then I could see a citizens militia being able to violently protect their rights as a form of last resort. These days unless you live in a fortified mountain cave you would have great difficulty protecting yourself from the US military (if it came to that). Luckily the chances of the US military/government staging an overt violent coup are slim to none. Unluckily there are a range of new means to subvert freedoms that you can't resist with guns. Mr. Calyx holing up with a machine gun would have done nothing to preserve the rights he thought were being violated. Today we need a new form of the 2nd amendment that prevents figures of authority trying to prevent people recording them when they work[1][2], and protections for people's privacy both in person and online. [1]http://www.pixiq.com/article/maryland-motorcyclist-spends-26-hours-in-jail-on-wiretapping-charge-for-filming-cop-with-gun http://www.pixiq.com/article/maryland-motorcyclist-spends-26... [2]http://newsone.com/nation/newsonestaff2/chad-holley-brutally-beaten-by-houston-police-on-tape/ http://newsone.com/nation/newsonestaff2/chad-holley-brutally... - the video was initially suppressed
- protomyth 16y ago
  I am pretty sure a citizen militia today could get pretty far with popular support (thankfully it has never gotten that bad in the US). I think anything that weakens any single amendment of the bill of rights weakens them all.
  - macrael 16y ago
    I don't buy it. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights was built to be amended should change be necessary. More importantly, it is clear that the Bill of Rights is, to some degree, a cobbled together response to the specific grievances the colonies suffered from dear old England, rather than some platonic listing of the rights of man. (I'm looking right at the 3rd amendment here. It doesn't seem like it belongs in the company of say, the first and the fourth.) My point is that not all of the points in the Bill of Rights were created equal, so ascribing equal importance to all of them seems misguided.
    - protomyth 16y ago
      The history of the Bill of Rights is pretty interesting and complicated, but at its heart, it is a listing of what was believed was needed to keep a people free from government oppression. It was not designed to be amended by reduction. I believe (and it seems to go with SC rulings) that attempts to limit any of them weaken the rest by erosion. The third amendment might seem to have lost some of its importance because it unthinkable today, but it provides a very important restriction on government. Weakening one allows the weakening of all.
- parfe 16y ago
  Not sure how comments like this always get so much support. We just witnessed citizen militias giving the US military trouble for years in Iraq. It didn't stop until we started paying those militias not to attack (Awakening) aka "The Surge". And in Afghanistan the fight is still continuing. In the long run a professional military cannot beat a indigenous population without resorting to near genocide. It's too easy for the locals to bury their weapons and go about their business until the opportune moment presents itself. Professional military must supply, train and fund soldiers continually. There is no "taking a few months off." Also people who think the 2nd amendment has been nullified by our military having better weapons always seem to assume soldiers themselves are thoughtless automatons incapable of rational though. If the situation in this country ever came to insurrection a portion of active military would certainly end up on the citizens' side.
jdp23 16y ago
Great post -- kudos to Nick for him coming forward on this. With the PATRIOT Act up for renewal, now's a good time to do something about it. A few links: http://bit.ly/demandjustice http://bit.ly/demandjustice http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/patriotact http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/patriotact https://eff.org/r.x8P https://eff.org/r.x8P http://bit.ly/oppose514 http://bit.ly/oppose514
shahidbuttar 16y ago
"With three provisions set to expire at the end of this month, and Tuesday’s revolt in the House against fast-track reauthorization, there has never been a better time to insist that Congress restore constitutional rights. Take action now." http://bordc.org/alerts/2011-02-10.php http://bordc.org/alerts/2011-02-10.php

154 points by mixmax 16y ago

jka 16y ago

While reading Nick's story in text is incredible, I caught his presentation on the topic & the repercussions at 27C3 in December, and would thoroughly recommend watching the video recording if you're interested in it. Could be good question fuel for the AMA too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDkHPNbCC1M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDkHPNbCC1M

mdaniel 16y ago
Thank you for that link. It it overwhelmingly scary and makes me feel as though I did not donate enough to the ACLU and EFF. I often wonder if there is any amount which is "enough."
mdaniel 16y ago
The other comment I have is that I heard him say that one person can win, and can make a difference. However, there are two caveats to that statement: if you can get access to the resources of the ACLU and if your story turns out, in the end, as Nick's did. I don't want to be a wet blanket, but I am painfully aware that for his one story, there are [by his account] 200,000 other stories which did not turn out that way. Maybe they are living happy free lives in Ohio, or maybe they were "disappeared."
snsr 16y ago
It's mind boggling that the greatest threat to an individual's freedom in this country is in fact the federal government itself.

duke_sam 16y ago

One of the concerns of the 2nd amendment was protecting the people from an unjust government. Back then I could see a citizens militia being able to violently protect their rights as a form of last resort. These days unless you live in a fortified mountain cave you would have great difficulty protecting yourself from the US military (if it came to that). Luckily the chances of the US military/government staging an overt violent coup are slim to none. Unluckily there are a range of new means to subvert freedoms that you can't resist with guns. Mr. Calyx holing up with a machine gun would have done nothing to preserve the rights he thought were being violated. Today we need a new form of the 2nd amendment that prevents figures of authority trying to prevent people recording them when they work[1][2], and protections for people's privacy both in person and online. [1]http://www.pixiq.com/article/maryland-motorcyclist-spends-26-hours-in-jail-on-wiretapping-charge-for-filming-cop-with-gun http://www.pixiq.com/article/maryland-motorcyclist-spends-26... [2]http://newsone.com/nation/newsonestaff2/chad-holley-brutally-beaten-by-houston-police-on-tape/ http://newsone.com/nation/newsonestaff2/chad-holley-brutally... - the video was initially suppressed

protomyth 16y ago
I am pretty sure a citizen militia today could get pretty far with popular support (thankfully it has never gotten that bad in the US). I think anything that weakens any single amendment of the bill of rights weakens them all.
- macrael 16y ago
  I don't buy it. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights was built to be amended should change be necessary. More importantly, it is clear that the Bill of Rights is, to some degree, a cobbled together response to the specific grievances the colonies suffered from dear old England, rather than some platonic listing of the rights of man. (I'm looking right at the 3rd amendment here. It doesn't seem like it belongs in the company of say, the first and the fourth.) My point is that not all of the points in the Bill of Rights were created equal, so ascribing equal importance to all of them seems misguided.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    The history of the Bill of Rights is pretty interesting and complicated, but at its heart, it is a listing of what was believed was needed to keep a people free from government oppression. It was not designed to be amended by reduction. I believe (and it seems to go with SC rulings) that attempts to limit any of them weaken the rest by erosion. The third amendment might seem to have lost some of its importance because it unthinkable today, but it provides a very important restriction on government. Weakening one allows the weakening of all.
parfe 16y ago
Not sure how comments like this always get so much support. We just witnessed citizen militias giving the US military trouble for years in Iraq. It didn't stop until we started paying those militias not to attack (Awakening) aka "The Surge". And in Afghanistan the fight is still continuing. In the long run a professional military cannot beat a indigenous population without resorting to near genocide. It's too easy for the locals to bury their weapons and go about their business until the opportune moment presents itself. Professional military must supply, train and fund soldiers continually. There is no "taking a few months off." Also people who think the 2nd amendment has been nullified by our military having better weapons always seem to assume soldiers themselves are thoughtless automatons incapable of rational though. If the situation in this country ever came to insurrection a portion of active military would certainly end up on the citizens' side.

jdp23 16y ago

Great post -- kudos to Nick for him coming forward on this. With the PATRIOT Act up for renewal, now's a good time to do something about it. A few links: http://bit.ly/demandjustice http://bit.ly/demandjustice http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/patriotact http://act.demandprogress.org/sign/patriotact https://eff.org/r.x8P https://eff.org/r.x8P http://bit.ly/oppose514 http://bit.ly/oppose514

shahidbuttar 16y ago

"With three provisions set to expire at the end of this month, and Tuesday’s revolt in the House against fast-track reauthorization, there has never been a better time to insist that Congress restore constitutional rights. Take action now." http://bordc.org/alerts/2011-02-10.php http://bordc.org/alerts/2011-02-10.php