6 ms·
So the country whose national security and intelligence agencies have gathered the largest database of sensitive information in the world is proposing to "safeg
by pulse7 6y ago
So the country whose national security and intelligence agencies have gathered the largest database of sensitive information in the world is proposing to "safeguard sensitive information from aggressive intrusions by malign actors"... If U.S. is some kind of role model / example for other countries to follow (in terms of freedoms, democracy, prosperity, etc) then other countries will also gather sensitive information to the largest extent possible... So this "we can, but you shouldn't" is just a shameless hypocrisy. What would the U.S. founding fathers say to all this? Is there any William Penn living in the U.S. today to give basic freedoms like privacy back to the people? Or will the "controlling party" take everything away - including the freedom to think and say?
- zepto 6y agoWe actually don’t know that the US has gathered the largest database of sensitive information. Only that it used to gather a lot before Snowden.
- remus 6y agoI'd bet a lot of money that the NSA didn't just turn off their servers and sit their twiddling their thumbs after the Snowden leaks.
- wahern 6y agoI think the intimation is that it's not only the NSA or the United States building such databases, and the assumption that the NSA would have the largest database may no longer be credible--not because they stopped gathering data but because they were surpassed.
- glenstein 6y agoThat's an unfair caricature. The steelman version of that argument is that China has likely amassed a more robust global surveillance database (to the extent that that's even the right word to use) than the U.S.
- 8note 6y agoI imagine they don't even need to. All they need to do is gain access to the American databases
- glenstein 6y agoI think it's just true in a literal sense that China has constructed it's own surveillance system that under any metric would be larger than that of the United States or any other nation.
- pulse7 6y agoSo why then are so many BigData job offerings at those US agencies? I am speaking of hundreds and thousands here...
- cscurmudgeon 6y agoSource on number of openings? You can also do a lot of data science/engineering on open data. There is a huge amount of open data out there. Edit: Downvoted for a question. Keep carrying on with the idiocy.
- edgyquant 6y agoAre there really that many job openings?
- pulse7 6y agoJust search for all current and past "data scientist" / BigData job offerings for those agencies on Google and Archive.org for the last 10 years. This data is freely available.
- booleandilemma 6y agoThe difference is the US is a liberal democracy and the Chinese Communist Party is a group of thugs.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- csb6 6y agoThe US is not a democracy for the vast majority of Americans. It is an oligarchy posing as a democracy.
- roca 6y agoCall it what you like, but the reality is that the USA is so much more free at every level of society than China under the CCP, and that's even ignoring the horrors of Xinjiang and Tibet. Even in this much-derided "Clean Network" document there is not a word about the sort of content-based censorship that is ubiquitous in China.
- csb6 6y agoI said nothing about China in my comment. All I said is that it is disingenuous and incorrect to call the U.S. a “liberal democracy” and use that to explain away the reasons that our surveillance state is “better” than theirs. I made no judgment about the comparison itself. Clinging to the judgment that we are the least worst, or “clothespin”, surveillance state, seems pretty grim to me.
- adventured 6y agoNearly every affluent liberal democracy on the planet qualifies as an oligarchy by the premise that gets floated about the US. Similarly qualified: Britain, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, Iceland. Have you looked at how many billionaires there are in Sweden and Norway? Oligarchy. Sweden has considerably more billionaires per capita than the US does. They're clearly not a democracy at all. The billionaires control the entire country including its government, obviously. Ever look at the perpetual old money dominance in Germany and France? Oligarchy. You're down to there only being a dozen or so liberal democracies that aren't in some way broken, severely tainted by money or entrenched power groups, etc. - if you use the same standard used against the US.