3 ms·

I am aware; being spied on by allies is still a world of difference than being spied on by China, or Russia, or Iran, or other adversarial nations. At the very

I am aware; being spied on by allies is still a world of difference than being spied on by China, or Russia, or Iran, or other adversarial nations. At the very least, citizens of Five Eyes nations can attempt to end it by contacting their representatives.

encryptluks2 5y ago
How is it worse? I also don't have a lot of faith in representatives passing the same legislation you'd be trying to argue against, especially with the near-trillion dollar lobbying industry.
- dleslie 5y ago
  Adversaries have malicious intent, or at least self-serving intent; our countries and their allies have a greater interest in preserving our well-being than malicious adversaries.
- adventured 5y ago
  It's worse because I'm an American and China is a superpower competing rival to the US, not an ally. My interests accordingly are aligned with China not being able to hoover up all US data and intellectual property. The US and China are closer to being at war than they are to being allies in the sense that the US and Britain or Germany are allies. The US and Germany, for example, have a more tense relationship at present than, say, 30 or 40 years ago. And yet we'd still send a million soldiers over there to help defend them if Russia decided to march west again with their eyes on Berlin. That's because they're an ally. The same is true of many other nations, like Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Poland, and so on. I don't believe for a second anyone in this thread is actually confused in the way in which they're pretending to be confused, when it comes to whether one would prefer the US or China to be the top dog of espionage globally. It almost entirely depends on whether you're in the US or in a liberal democracy allied with the US or in China (or one of its few allies).

3 ms·

I am aware; being spied on by allies is still a world of difference than being spied on by China, or Russia, or Iran, or other adversarial nations. At the very

by dleslie 5y ago

encryptluks2 5y ago
How is it worse? I also don't have a lot of faith in representatives passing the same legislation you'd be trying to argue against, especially with the near-trillion dollar lobbying industry.
- dleslie 5y ago
  Adversaries have malicious intent, or at least self-serving intent; our countries and their allies have a greater interest in preserving our well-being than malicious adversaries.
- adventured 5y ago
  It's worse because I'm an American and China is a superpower competing rival to the US, not an ally. My interests accordingly are aligned with China not being able to hoover up all US data and intellectual property. The US and China are closer to being at war than they are to being allies in the sense that the US and Britain or Germany are allies. The US and Germany, for example, have a more tense relationship at present than, say, 30 or 40 years ago. And yet we'd still send a million soldiers over there to help defend them if Russia decided to march west again with their eyes on Berlin. That's because they're an ally. The same is true of many other nations, like Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Poland, and so on. I don't believe for a second anyone in this thread is actually confused in the way in which they're pretending to be confused, when it comes to whether one would prefer the US or China to be the top dog of espionage globally. It almost entirely depends on whether you're in the US or in a liberal democracy allied with the US or in China (or one of its few allies).