6 ms·

Pretty shocking in a state that has such strict privacy laws. Not sure how the two can come from the same mouth, and even be in public view. My understanding i

Pretty shocking in a state that has such strict privacy laws. Not sure how the two can come from the same mouth, and even be in public view. My understanding is that the privacy restrictions are largely the result of half the country having lived under the Statsi, and thus being extremely weary of government eyes. Here it’s out in the open!

qwertox 6y ago
By no means. The Stasi was active in the GDR (German Democratic Republic, "East Germany"), and it is not as if those from the east are particularly watchful for state-instigated surveillance. This predates the wall, but the wall only confirmed what was going on beforehand.
- azinman2 6y ago
  https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/11/19/world/stasi-legacy-gives-germans-different-view-on-nsa-spying/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/11/19/world/stasi-leg...
durnygbur 6y ago
There is something hilarious and schizoid in how Germany is perceived and the realities about this country. They have strict privacy laws? First Nazi personel in the first half then Stasi personel in the second half of the 20th century were simply requalified and rehired, each bloody time. How do you think? They are top environmentally-friendly country? Highest polluting coal power plants in EU are located in Germany.
- jejay 6y ago
  These are both known and highly controversial issues in Germany. The first one is widely accepted as without any alternative. You can't just replace a whole bureaucracy and in retrospect it worked out to only change key positions. But obviously it was a healing and cleaning process over time. The other thing is to be attributed to the fact the we were very quick to abandon atomic power even before climate change issues were that popular. Its a hilarious contradiction. We now actually also have a plan to also get rid of the coal power plants but it will be hard, maybe we need to reintroduce the candle as a source of light. There is no lack of willingness and intent but reality has us all in its tight grip.
- rurban 6y ago
  You forgot the Nazi personal in the 2nd half. The BND is a NAZI organization. Lookup Gehlen. Didn't change much after they died, if you look at the various BND scandals since.
- kleiba 6y ago
  <redacted> Obviously, the OP was talking about the perception of Germany today and I think we can safely assume that no Ex-Nazi personnel is currently working at the German secret service. And coming to think of it, why wouldn't someone whose qualified to spy on others be rehired to do the same job in Germany after the end of GDR? What do you think secret services do? Regarding "environmentally friendly", this point is correct but you're omitting that Germany just recently passed a law to get out of coal until 2038. The energy produced in Germany will then be pretty much exclusively renewable which is not a small feat for a country with such a large population.
  - durnygbur 6y ago
    > Hilarious and schizoid are adjectives that I would assign to your post. Sorry but you are rude. > I think we can safely assume that no Ex-Nazi personnel is currently working at the German secret service Stasi personel though? Are you expecting that people using such nuanced and subtle techniques like Zersetzung against domestic population [1] will suddently become ethical towards anyone they perceive as threat? or as undesirable? On the facade Germans get some show off initiatives (no Street View!), behind the scenes is business as usual. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zersetzung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zersetzung
    - kleiba 6y ago
      > Sorry but you are rude. Yes, you are right. I apologize, I clearly went overboard. > Stasi personel though? [...] I think it's just an over-generalization. Just because you worked for the Stasi automatically makes you a bad fit for a certain job. It really depends.
      - levleontiev 6y ago
        >Just because you worked for the Stasi automatically makes you a bad fit for a certain job. I am sorry, I am from Russia initially, the KGB-land. No, it's not an over-generalization.
- chalst 6y ago
  Nazis were indeed rehired to senior positions, but sensitive parts of the civil service were purged of Stasi operatives, although this did take a long time, especially in Saxony. There has been some resentment of the fact that this often meant that the civil service in Eastern states is dominated by 'Wessies'. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3j90ua/what_happened_to_members_of_the_stasi_east_german/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3j90ua/what_...
Barrin92 6y ago
>Pretty shocking in a state that has such strict privacy laws. Not sure how the two can come from the same mouth, and even be in public view. Because they're not necessarily contradictory. This doesn't just give secret services a blank cheque to spy on everyone, it just provides intelligence agencies with a tool. I'm German and I don't object in principle to the fact that intelligence, under supervision of the government, has the ability to say, infiltrate criminal networks using software like this. Under certain circumstances the police was always able to wiretap a phone, I don't see the difference here other than this taking into account the changing circumstances of internet communication. Also from a cultural standpoint if anything people in Germany are more sceptic of erosion of privacy by private power than by the state, we're not the US. The former is pretty much unconstrained, the latter is so tightly limited in scope by law it's not really a practical issue. The scary thing about the Stasi wasn't that they were inteliigence, every country has intelligence officers who can bug someone's home, it was that the GDR was an autocratic regime.
- phnofive 6y ago
  They can wiretap, sure, but they can’t practically compel you to give up your book cipher.
  - Barrin92 6y ago
    Sure, but a police operation surely could attempt to swap the book cipher out for a compromised one, no? I think the idea that communication ought to be categorically out of reach of intelligence is very novel. I don't think it was even conceivable decades ago that, with legal justification, intelligence could not hack or be completely locked out of the communication of some network. For criminals who are savy enough, tech has made it much harder, not easier for the government to do their job. I think there is also a very paradoxical side-effect. A harmstrung government may resort to outsourcing its intelligence work. I read a story about private firms in the US collecting license plate information and selling it back to the police. Clearview AI is certainly another example. If the agencies are limited, there is a real chance of both ineffective policing and a huge unregulated surveillance grey market. I would rather equip the government with enough capacity, but strong legal checks.
bserge 6y ago
Some other shocking stuff from Germany: far right supporters in the military stealing ammunition/weapons (and an alleged plot to assassinate someone): https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53237685 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53237685 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_X_plot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_X_plot Someone said that's a result of constant under-funding and treating your military with no respect - when it's only seen as a choice for those who can't "do any better", you'll get extremists among the ranks. Sounds plausible, at least in the US soldiers seem to be highly respected and in turn, they respect the country and its people.
kodablah 6y ago
> Pretty shocking in a state that has such strict privacy laws If viewed from the different perspective of government intrusion on tech, it can appear less shocking. A government encouraged by its citizenry to use its leverage over tech companies will continue to do so, and not always in the same ways.

qwertox 6y ago

By no means. The Stasi was active in the GDR (German Democratic Republic, "East Germany"), and it is not as if those from the east are particularly watchful for state-instigated surveillance. This predates the wall, but the wall only confirmed what was going on beforehand.

azinman2 6y ago
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/11/19/world/stasi-legacy-gives-germans-different-view-on-nsa-spying/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/11/19/world/stasi-leg...

durnygbur 6y ago

There is something hilarious and schizoid in how Germany is perceived and the realities about this country. They have strict privacy laws? First Nazi personel in the first half then Stasi personel in the second half of the 20th century were simply requalified and rehired, each bloody time. How do you think? They are top environmentally-friendly country? Highest polluting coal power plants in EU are located in Germany.

jejay 6y ago
These are both known and highly controversial issues in Germany. The first one is widely accepted as without any alternative. You can't just replace a whole bureaucracy and in retrospect it worked out to only change key positions. But obviously it was a healing and cleaning process over time. The other thing is to be attributed to the fact the we were very quick to abandon atomic power even before climate change issues were that popular. Its a hilarious contradiction. We now actually also have a plan to also get rid of the coal power plants but it will be hard, maybe we need to reintroduce the candle as a source of light. There is no lack of willingness and intent but reality has us all in its tight grip.
rurban 6y ago
You forgot the Nazi personal in the 2nd half. The BND is a NAZI organization. Lookup Gehlen. Didn't change much after they died, if you look at the various BND scandals since.
kleiba 6y ago
<redacted> Obviously, the OP was talking about the perception of Germany today and I think we can safely assume that no Ex-Nazi personnel is currently working at the German secret service. And coming to think of it, why wouldn't someone whose qualified to spy on others be rehired to do the same job in Germany after the end of GDR? What do you think secret services do? Regarding "environmentally friendly", this point is correct but you're omitting that Germany just recently passed a law to get out of coal until 2038. The energy produced in Germany will then be pretty much exclusively renewable which is not a small feat for a country with such a large population.
- durnygbur 6y ago
  > Hilarious and schizoid are adjectives that I would assign to your post. Sorry but you are rude. > I think we can safely assume that no Ex-Nazi personnel is currently working at the German secret service Stasi personel though? Are you expecting that people using such nuanced and subtle techniques like Zersetzung against domestic population [1] will suddently become ethical towards anyone they perceive as threat? or as undesirable? On the facade Germans get some show off initiatives (no Street View!), behind the scenes is business as usual. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zersetzung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zersetzung
  - kleiba 6y ago
    > Sorry but you are rude. Yes, you are right. I apologize, I clearly went overboard. > Stasi personel though? [...] I think it's just an over-generalization. Just because you worked for the Stasi automatically makes you a bad fit for a certain job. It really depends.
    - levleontiev 6y ago
      >Just because you worked for the Stasi automatically makes you a bad fit for a certain job. I am sorry, I am from Russia initially, the KGB-land. No, it's not an over-generalization.
chalst 6y ago
Nazis were indeed rehired to senior positions, but sensitive parts of the civil service were purged of Stasi operatives, although this did take a long time, especially in Saxony. There has been some resentment of the fact that this often meant that the civil service in Eastern states is dominated by 'Wessies'. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3j90ua/what_happened_to_members_of_the_stasi_east_german/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3j90ua/what_...

Barrin92 6y ago

>Pretty shocking in a state that has such strict privacy laws. Not sure how the two can come from the same mouth, and even be in public view. Because they're not necessarily contradictory. This doesn't just give secret services a blank cheque to spy on everyone, it just provides intelligence agencies with a tool. I'm German and I don't object in principle to the fact that intelligence, under supervision of the government, has the ability to say, infiltrate criminal networks using software like this. Under certain circumstances the police was always able to wiretap a phone, I don't see the difference here other than this taking into account the changing circumstances of internet communication. Also from a cultural standpoint if anything people in Germany are more sceptic of erosion of privacy by private power than by the state, we're not the US. The former is pretty much unconstrained, the latter is so tightly limited in scope by law it's not really a practical issue. The scary thing about the Stasi wasn't that they were inteliigence, every country has intelligence officers who can bug someone's home, it was that the GDR was an autocratic regime.

phnofive 6y ago
They can wiretap, sure, but they can’t practically compel you to give up your book cipher.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  Sure, but a police operation surely could attempt to swap the book cipher out for a compromised one, no? I think the idea that communication ought to be categorically out of reach of intelligence is very novel. I don't think it was even conceivable decades ago that, with legal justification, intelligence could not hack or be completely locked out of the communication of some network. For criminals who are savy enough, tech has made it much harder, not easier for the government to do their job. I think there is also a very paradoxical side-effect. A harmstrung government may resort to outsourcing its intelligence work. I read a story about private firms in the US collecting license plate information and selling it back to the police. Clearview AI is certainly another example. If the agencies are limited, there is a real chance of both ineffective policing and a huge unregulated surveillance grey market. I would rather equip the government with enough capacity, but strong legal checks.

bserge 6y ago

Some other shocking stuff from Germany: far right supporters in the military stealing ammunition/weapons (and an alleged plot to assassinate someone): https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53237685 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53237685 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_X_plot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_X_plot Someone said that's a result of constant under-funding and treating your military with no respect - when it's only seen as a choice for those who can't "do any better", you'll get extremists among the ranks. Sounds plausible, at least in the US soldiers seem to be highly respected and in turn, they respect the country and its people.

kodablah 6y ago

> Pretty shocking in a state that has such strict privacy laws If viewed from the different perspective of government intrusion on tech, it can appear less shocking. A government encouraged by its citizenry to use its leverage over tech companies will continue to do so, and not always in the same ways.