4 ms·

No. You need to understand what you are comparing to. The question is comparing US and Russia. No. It’s not the same. But you turned this question into compari

No. You need to understand what you are comparing to. The question is comparing US and Russia. No. It’s not the same. But you turned this question into comparing US to perfection. Yes, you are right. US is not perfection. But there is a big difference between 70 to 10, even both are not 100. What Snowden revealed does not make 70 to 10. If you think that way, you don’t understand how bad an authoritarian regime is.

rat9988 5y ago
I put both russia and us at 10. Why would I rate it any better, given its past?
- jiscariot 5y ago
  In the US the press can be openly antagonistic toward the government without reprisal beyond maybe having a WH press-core pass tossed. This provides a path for whistleblowers. Could the Russian press behave toward Putin as the US press toward Trump? If so, then you can have your 10s.
  - rat9988 5y ago
    Snowden and assange have been used as example. Although, there are probably more people shut by the Russian government than by the us, by far. The thing is, the US secret services are secretive enough that non one can complain about, independently of the ability of the people to complain.
  - juanani 5y ago
DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
Putting a numeric value on this is silly. The fact is that the United States government can compel companies to aid in its surveillance (just recall when they forced Snowden's email provider to install a backdoor). Even if a company does not want to participate or is not compelled to do so, the US government has very significant capacity to break into and co-opt systems (all the way from targeted surveillance of individuals by intercepting and bugging hardware to tapping undersea cables to indiscriminately hoover up communications). So when people say that Kaspersky might be forced to go along with Russian intelligence, the same goes for American tech companies and US intelligence. There is indeed a 4th Amendment that is supposed to protect Americans, but the last two decades have shown that the government is perfectly willing to ignore that legal restriction. The US has the most extensive global surveillance system in the world. US intelligence services receive about as much funding as the entire Russian military. I have no doubt that Russia tries very hard to engage in extensive foreign surveillance, but its not in the same league as the US.
- paulryanrogers 5y ago
  Isn't the difference that the government cannot permanently keep such compromises secret? They have to have a warrant for a limited period of time and limited scope? Illegal NSA dragnets and perjury in front of Congress notwithstanding.
- Master_Odin 5y ago
  Yeah, I remember when the US government took Apple to court to get them to allow FBI to have a backdoor through the encryption and Apple did not capitulate, though the cases were eventually dropped. While US agencies certainly do crooked things, they do not have the capacity to force companies to do stuff under threat of violence and otherwise that Russia does with Kaspersky.
  - DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
    I also remember when: * The NSA secretly obtained access to every Verizon customer's entire call log. This was blatantly illegal (the 4th Amendment forbids general warrants), and it only came to light because of Snowden's leaks.[0] * Snowden's email provider, Lavabit, was compelled to install a backdoor that allowed the US government to read the emails of all of the provider's users. The process was supposed to be secret: the company was under a gag order. The public only found out because the founder spoke out.[1] There are many examples like this from the US (just look up "National Security Letter," or take a look at Snowden's leaks). You're citing one example in which a company successfully refused a request, but we also know from Snowden that there was mass collection on most Americans that went on for years in secret, despite the fact that it was blatantly illegal. The scale of surveillance conducted globally by US intelligence agencies is unparalleled. I'm sure Russia wishes it could collect information on the same scale, but it simply does not have the ability to do so. 0. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-reco... 1. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/20/why-did-lavabit-shut-down-snowden-email https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/20/why-di...

rat9988 5y ago

I put both russia and us at 10. Why would I rate it any better, given its past?

jiscariot 5y ago
In the US the press can be openly antagonistic toward the government without reprisal beyond maybe having a WH press-core pass tossed. This provides a path for whistleblowers. Could the Russian press behave toward Putin as the US press toward Trump? If so, then you can have your 10s.
- rat9988 5y ago
  Snowden and assange have been used as example. Although, there are probably more people shut by the Russian government than by the us, by far. The thing is, the US secret services are secretive enough that non one can complain about, independently of the ability of the people to complain.
- juanani 5y ago

DiogenesKynikos 5y ago

Putting a numeric value on this is silly. The fact is that the United States government can compel companies to aid in its surveillance (just recall when they forced Snowden's email provider to install a backdoor). Even if a company does not want to participate or is not compelled to do so, the US government has very significant capacity to break into and co-opt systems (all the way from targeted surveillance of individuals by intercepting and bugging hardware to tapping undersea cables to indiscriminately hoover up communications). So when people say that Kaspersky might be forced to go along with Russian intelligence, the same goes for American tech companies and US intelligence. There is indeed a 4th Amendment that is supposed to protect Americans, but the last two decades have shown that the government is perfectly willing to ignore that legal restriction. The US has the most extensive global surveillance system in the world. US intelligence services receive about as much funding as the entire Russian military. I have no doubt that Russia tries very hard to engage in extensive foreign surveillance, but its not in the same league as the US.

paulryanrogers 5y ago
Isn't the difference that the government cannot permanently keep such compromises secret? They have to have a warrant for a limited period of time and limited scope? Illegal NSA dragnets and perjury in front of Congress notwithstanding.
Master_Odin 5y ago
Yeah, I remember when the US government took Apple to court to get them to allow FBI to have a backdoor through the encryption and Apple did not capitulate, though the cases were eventually dropped. While US agencies certainly do crooked things, they do not have the capacity to force companies to do stuff under threat of violence and otherwise that Russia does with Kaspersky.
- DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
  I also remember when: * The NSA secretly obtained access to every Verizon customer's entire call log. This was blatantly illegal (the 4th Amendment forbids general warrants), and it only came to light because of Snowden's leaks.[0] * Snowden's email provider, Lavabit, was compelled to install a backdoor that allowed the US government to read the emails of all of the provider's users. The process was supposed to be secret: the company was under a gag order. The public only found out because the founder spoke out.[1] There are many examples like this from the US (just look up "National Security Letter," or take a look at Snowden's leaks). You're citing one example in which a company successfully refused a request, but we also know from Snowden that there was mass collection on most Americans that went on for years in secret, despite the fact that it was blatantly illegal. The scale of surveillance conducted globally by US intelligence agencies is unparalleled. I'm sure Russia wishes it could collect information on the same scale, but it simply does not have the ability to do so. 0. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-reco... 1. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/20/why-did-lavabit-shut-down-snowden-email https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/20/why-di...