5 ms·

> This suggests an interesting tactic to build public support for mass surveillance. I'm not entirely convinced that mass surveillance by government is worse t

> This suggests an interesting tactic to build public support for mass surveillance. I'm not entirely convinced that mass surveillance by government is worse than mass surveillance by huge private corporations. In democratic societies at least, the public has at least some control over the government. It has virtually none over private entities.

barry-cotter 7y ago
> In democratic societies at least, the public has at least some control over the government. Indeed. That’s why the CIA was disbanded after the Snowden revelations, he was hailed as a hero and how he became Governor of DC.
- icebraining 7y ago
  Have you considered the public may have some control, they just don't want to use it as you'd like them to?
  - Nasrudith 7y ago
    If they don't even consider it when it is harming them because of its emotional impact do they really have control or is it controlling them? I mean a heroin addict technically has control but it would be delusional to claim the heroin has no power over them and they could easily quit any time they liked.
    - icebraining 7y ago
      Is it harming them? I mean, I'm opposed to widespread spying on principle, but I couldn't point to an actual harm the americans have suffered due to it yet.
      - Nasrudith 7y ago
        That has been the general prevailing wisdom of the idiots and psychopaths in robes but if you strip away the brainwashing commonly referred to as "norms" it becomes clear that is a moronic double standard that I wonder how the hell it has gone so collectively unchallenged. If you were to personally spy on the entirety of the CIA and keep the data within your basement you would make history and record books with the harm your grand act of treason did or would cause. Hell if you did it to one neighborhood let alone one town you would be widely regarded as a terrifying criminal! The fact they are government and not one deranged citizen only makes matters far worse not better. They have no legitimacy. The fact so few see the goddamned obvious because they are so brainwashed is deeply disturbingm
- hoseja 7y ago
  > In democratic societies
  - barry-cotter 7y ago
    If the US doesn’t qualify as a democracy either there aren’t any or the only one is Switzerland.
    - modo_mario 7y ago
      2 entrenched parties, first past the post, gerrymandering, etc... idk there's plenty between the US and Switzerland
      - barry-cotter 7y ago
        The US system is not exactly perfect but two entrenched parties that actually alternate in power regularly and have very different policies is vast different from a one party state. Japan is a democracy even though the LDP has been in power almost continuously since WWII. The threat of being replaced is enough to make politicians responsive to constituents even if it very rarely actually happens. San Francisco has been governed by Democrats continuously for more than a hundred years. It’s not a one party state. Even the two entrenched parties thing overstates the stability of the US power structure. A European party system with members who choose their candidates is different from the US primary system where anyone can run and unseat an incumbent do has the backing of the party grandees. The Republican Party did not want Trump. The voters chose him. The Democratic Party does not want Sanders. He’s still going to be the Democratic nominee for President. The Tea Party for the Republicans or DSA for the Democrats are instances of the same phenomena. That’s just not possible in a European party system.
    - agustif 7y ago
      Well the CIA+Germans had infiltrated a swiss crypto ag company for years, as seen in a recent submission. Which they used to spy to all governments who hired such company, while also getting paid for their encryption services lol
- PavlovsCat 7y ago
  If you want to say that the public has no control over the government, or more control over corporations, then actually argue that, instead of hiding the sophistry behind sarcasm.
raxxorrax 7y ago
Of course both is so much worse than no surveillance. But otherwise history would suggest government surveillance to be much, much worse.
felipelemos 7y ago
The government has a much bigger control of your life than a corporation.
- casefields 7y ago
  The government also has a monopoly on violence. Google doesn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    Is that an argument leaning pro government surveillanc or against it?
austhrow743 7y ago
Democratic societies are democratic until they're not. And the systems put in place when they're democratic don't suddenly disappear alongside democracy. The Weimar Republic was democratic.
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
If a private corporation erroneously thinks you're a bad guy the results are a lot less bad than when an entity that can legally use violence to enforce its policy makes the same mistake.
dang 7y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22431580 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22431580.

barry-cotter 7y ago

> In democratic societies at least, the public has at least some control over the government. Indeed. That’s why the CIA was disbanded after the Snowden revelations, he was hailed as a hero and how he became Governor of DC.

icebraining 7y ago
Have you considered the public may have some control, they just don't want to use it as you'd like them to?
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  If they don't even consider it when it is harming them because of its emotional impact do they really have control or is it controlling them? I mean a heroin addict technically has control but it would be delusional to claim the heroin has no power over them and they could easily quit any time they liked.
  - icebraining 7y ago
    Is it harming them? I mean, I'm opposed to widespread spying on principle, but I couldn't point to an actual harm the americans have suffered due to it yet.
    - Nasrudith 7y ago
      That has been the general prevailing wisdom of the idiots and psychopaths in robes but if you strip away the brainwashing commonly referred to as "norms" it becomes clear that is a moronic double standard that I wonder how the hell it has gone so collectively unchallenged. If you were to personally spy on the entirety of the CIA and keep the data within your basement you would make history and record books with the harm your grand act of treason did or would cause. Hell if you did it to one neighborhood let alone one town you would be widely regarded as a terrifying criminal! The fact they are government and not one deranged citizen only makes matters far worse not better. They have no legitimacy. The fact so few see the goddamned obvious because they are so brainwashed is deeply disturbingm
hoseja 7y ago
> In democratic societies
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  If the US doesn’t qualify as a democracy either there aren’t any or the only one is Switzerland.
  - modo_mario 7y ago
    2 entrenched parties, first past the post, gerrymandering, etc... idk there's plenty between the US and Switzerland
    - barry-cotter 7y ago
      The US system is not exactly perfect but two entrenched parties that actually alternate in power regularly and have very different policies is vast different from a one party state. Japan is a democracy even though the LDP has been in power almost continuously since WWII. The threat of being replaced is enough to make politicians responsive to constituents even if it very rarely actually happens. San Francisco has been governed by Democrats continuously for more than a hundred years. It’s not a one party state. Even the two entrenched parties thing overstates the stability of the US power structure. A European party system with members who choose their candidates is different from the US primary system where anyone can run and unseat an incumbent do has the backing of the party grandees. The Republican Party did not want Trump. The voters chose him. The Democratic Party does not want Sanders. He’s still going to be the Democratic nominee for President. The Tea Party for the Republicans or DSA for the Democrats are instances of the same phenomena. That’s just not possible in a European party system.
  - agustif 7y ago
    Well the CIA+Germans had infiltrated a swiss crypto ag company for years, as seen in a recent submission. Which they used to spy to all governments who hired such company, while also getting paid for their encryption services lol
PavlovsCat 7y ago
If you want to say that the public has no control over the government, or more control over corporations, then actually argue that, instead of hiding the sophistry behind sarcasm.

raxxorrax 7y ago

Of course both is so much worse than no surveillance. But otherwise history would suggest government surveillance to be much, much worse.

felipelemos 7y ago

The government has a much bigger control of your life than a corporation.

casefields 7y ago
The government also has a monopoly on violence. Google doesn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  Is that an argument leaning pro government surveillanc or against it?

austhrow743 7y ago

Democratic societies are democratic until they're not. And the systems put in place when they're democratic don't suddenly disappear alongside democracy. The Weimar Republic was democratic.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago

If a private corporation erroneously thinks you're a bad guy the results are a lot less bad than when an entity that can legally use violence to enforce its policy makes the same mistake.

dang 7y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22431580 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22431580.