3 ms·

Morality is the difference. That's not exactly "norms" but somewhat on an adjacent path. But in terms of interest and participation in our club, they are us.

Morality is the difference. That's not exactly "norms" but somewhat on an adjacent path. But in terms of interest and participation in our club, *they are us*. That's the true terrible reality. A more accessible idea which is quite different but allows some truth to shine in similarly is to consider how many of us are utterly dependent on advertising in our careers but we all adblock personally.

Teknoman117 5y ago
I would say it's that the set of morals or beliefs are different. Believing that someone is without morals or immoral is just the perspective of the observer. Some of us don't agree with the intelligence gathering behaviors of our governments, but they certainly might not view it as an issue.
schoen 5y ago
> That's not exactly "norms" but somewhat on an adjacent path. But in terms of interest and participation in our club, they are us. That's the true terrible reality. I remember "Spot the Fed" at DEF CON where I thought it was reflecting this deep and kind of intractable antagonism between the hackers and the government. It turned out that the government was regularly recruiting people there and at other hacker conferences, fairly successfully, and still does. (First I thought that all computer nerds would be at least somewhat anti-military or anti-surveillance, and then I thought that at least those who actively associate themselves with computer culture and counterculture would be, and now I don't really think either of those.) The social distance between people working for spy agencies and people who vocally criticize and oppose the spy agencies is tiny. I worked at EFF and I've known socially, or kind-of-socially, four people I can immediately think of who worked directly for NSA at some point in their careers, and those are, of course, just the ones who chose to mention it. I've also seen someone unsuccessfully try to recruit someone for NSA face-to-face right in front of me, and had a boss whose next job was alongside an NSA alum. I also think that NSA alums are more likely to mention it because they're less likely to have worked under false pretenses in other countries (compared to, say, CIA alums). I had a relative who was a super-huge computer nerd (the biggest computer nerd in my whole family, possibly more than myself, and taught me a lot of my early Unix knowledge) who had previously held a clearance and worked in aerospace engineering (I think on radars or something). He didn't work for a spy agency, but did work on military projects. And nobody could hold a candle to his Unix expertise. It's pretty striking how diverse in our beliefs we all are (not just about surveillance and espionage, but kind of on every issue and question). Maybe we don't notice it because of social pressures to act like we agree more than we do. Being fascinated with surveillance and secrecy is a common trait in our circles, but it seems that might translate into trying to fight it, or into trying to do it.
- FeepingCreature 5y ago
  > The social distance between people working for spy agencies and people who vocally criticize and oppose the spy agencies is tiny. That sort of makes sense to me? The average member of the public doesn't generally think about what spy agencies do. If you assume that recruitment is based more on topical proximity than positive/negative opinion, that's what you'd expect to see.

Morality is the difference. That's not exactly "norms" but somewhat on an adjacent path. But in terms of interest and participation in our club, *they are us*.

Teknoman117 5y ago

I would say it's that the set of morals or beliefs are different. Believing that someone is without morals or immoral is just the perspective of the observer. Some of us don't agree with the intelligence gathering behaviors of our governments, but they certainly might not view it as an issue.

schoen 5y ago

> That's not exactly "norms" but somewhat on an adjacent path. But in terms of interest and participation in our club, they are us. That's the true terrible reality. I remember "Spot the Fed" at DEF CON where I thought it was reflecting this deep and kind of intractable antagonism between the hackers and the government. It turned out that the government was regularly recruiting people there and at other hacker conferences, fairly successfully, and still does. (First I thought that all computer nerds would be at least somewhat anti-military or anti-surveillance, and then I thought that at least those who actively associate themselves with computer culture and counterculture would be, and now I don't really think either of those.) The social distance between people working for spy agencies and people who vocally criticize and oppose the spy agencies is tiny. I worked at EFF and I've known socially, or kind-of-socially, four people I can immediately think of who worked directly for NSA at some point in their careers, and those are, of course, just the ones who chose to mention it. I've also seen someone unsuccessfully try to recruit someone for NSA face-to-face right in front of me, and had a boss whose next job was alongside an NSA alum. I also think that NSA alums are more likely to mention it because they're less likely to have worked under false pretenses in other countries (compared to, say, CIA alums). I had a relative who was a super-huge computer nerd (the biggest computer nerd in my whole family, possibly more than myself, and taught me a lot of my early Unix knowledge) who had previously held a clearance and worked in aerospace engineering (I think on radars or something). He didn't work for a spy agency, but did work on military projects. And nobody could hold a candle to his Unix expertise. It's pretty striking how diverse in our beliefs we all are (not just about surveillance and espionage, but kind of on every issue and question). Maybe we don't notice it because of social pressures to act like we agree more than we do. Being fascinated with surveillance and secrecy is a common trait in our circles, but it seems that might translate into trying to fight it, or into trying to do it.

FeepingCreature 5y ago
> The social distance between people working for spy agencies and people who vocally criticize and oppose the spy agencies is tiny. That sort of makes sense to me? The average member of the public doesn't generally think about what spy agencies do. If you assume that recruitment is based more on topical proximity than positive/negative opinion, that's what you'd expect to see.