5 ms·

AT&T Room 641A has entered the chat. [1] Our government already spies on all of our telecom, the private companies are also complicit (be it by force or by ch

by ProAm 4y ago

AT&T Room 641A has entered the chat. [1] Our government already spies on all of our telecom, the private companies are also complicit (be it by force or by choice (ex Oracle). I do not think the US is much different that China with the exception of the government not owning the companies at hand. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

kube-system 4y ago
When this happens in a room in the west, it gets a Wikipedia page and people regularly post about it online and argue about whether the scope of the collection under law is appropriate. When this happens in an authoritarian state, it is business as usual, the scope of collection is not considered, and dissenting opinions quickly disappear. That’s the difference.
- ProAm 4y ago
  Im not sure I follow. I think this happens to every company in an authoritarian state currently, not having a room like this would be the oddity? They collect everything by default, like we do, we just try to keep it secret?
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Western democracies discuss, legislate, and impose limitations on those collections powers in great detail.
    - ProAm 4y ago
      I disagree with this in practice. Look at the data collection of the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc.... No one is willing to legislate or limit that.
      - kube-system 4y ago
        That is simply not true, there are tens of thousands of pages of law and regulation governing how those agencies must collect data. The most notable and relevant to this discussion is FISA which has been amended by Congress at least a dozen times. This is certainly not a topic that doesn’t come up in Congress.
        ProAm 4y ago
        I counter this with what Snowden leaked. And watching the head of the NSA lie to congress about data collection. [A] FISA is a rubber stamp, no one will give up this power (and I don't blame them). [1] [2] [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/05/foriegn-intelligence-surveillance-court-rubber-stamps-mass-surveillance-under https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/05/foriegn-intelligence-s... [2] https://www.npr.org/2013/06/13/191226106/fisa-court-appears-to-be-rubberstamp-for-government-requests https://www.npr.org/2013/06/13/191226106/fisa-court-appears-... [A] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/01/27/darrell-issa-james-clapper-lied-to-congress-about-nsa-and-should-be-fired/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/01/27...
- cwkoss 4y ago
  I think you'd be surprised at how effective Chinese people are at discussing the things they aren't allowed to without getting spotted by the censors. Lots of slang terms get used, and the discussion continues.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    I’m aware, but this delegitimizes the conversations and forces them out of mainstream discussion. Mark Klein told the world about Room 641A on freekin PBS.
justapassenger 4y ago
It's VERY different - not only corporations know about it, but they fight with that form of a passive surveillance. At any major tech company, not even internal networks are considered to be safe, and things are encrypted to sometimes paranoid levels, that's costing A LOT (not only in processing power, that's nowadays less of an concern, but with a much increased complexity of their infrastructure). And before you ask - major threat model they target is governments sponsored hacking.
- ProAm 4y ago
  I think these companies speak out of both sides of their mouth on this topic. And varies greatly depending on the level you are speaking with. An example I would state is Eric Schmidt, I believe he had a very cooperative relationship with the US Government, but also spoke against mass surveillance. (I also think that is just the nature of the role when you are in his shoes.)
- cwkoss 4y ago
  Do you think that the tech companies that give deep access to US intelligence services are going to advertise it?

by ProAm 4y ago

kube-system 4y ago

When this happens in a room in the west, it gets a Wikipedia page and people regularly post about it online and argue about whether the scope of the collection under law is appropriate. When this happens in an authoritarian state, it is business as usual, the scope of collection is not considered, and dissenting opinions quickly disappear. That’s the difference.

ProAm 4y ago
Im not sure I follow. I think this happens to every company in an authoritarian state currently, not having a room like this would be the oddity? They collect everything by default, like we do, we just try to keep it secret?
- kube-system 4y ago
  Western democracies discuss, legislate, and impose limitations on those collections powers in great detail.
  - ProAm 4y ago
    I disagree with this in practice. Look at the data collection of the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc.... No one is willing to legislate or limit that.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      That is simply not true, there are tens of thousands of pages of law and regulation governing how those agencies must collect data. The most notable and relevant to this discussion is FISA which has been amended by Congress at least a dozen times. This is certainly not a topic that doesn’t come up in Congress.
      - ProAm 4y ago
        I counter this with what Snowden leaked. And watching the head of the NSA lie to congress about data collection. [A] FISA is a rubber stamp, no one will give up this power (and I don't blame them). [1] [2] [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/05/foriegn-intelligence-surveillance-court-rubber-stamps-mass-surveillance-under https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/05/foriegn-intelligence-s... [2] https://www.npr.org/2013/06/13/191226106/fisa-court-appears-to-be-rubberstamp-for-government-requests https://www.npr.org/2013/06/13/191226106/fisa-court-appears-... [A] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/01/27/darrell-issa-james-clapper-lied-to-congress-about-nsa-and-should-be-fired/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/01/27...
cwkoss 4y ago
I think you'd be surprised at how effective Chinese people are at discussing the things they aren't allowed to without getting spotted by the censors. Lots of slang terms get used, and the discussion continues.
- kube-system 4y ago
  I’m aware, but this delegitimizes the conversations and forces them out of mainstream discussion. Mark Klein told the world about Room 641A on freekin PBS.

justapassenger 4y ago

It's VERY different - not only corporations know about it, but they fight with that form of a passive surveillance. At any major tech company, not even internal networks are considered to be safe, and things are encrypted to sometimes paranoid levels, that's costing A LOT (not only in processing power, that's nowadays less of an concern, but with a much increased complexity of their infrastructure). And before you ask - major threat model they target is governments sponsored hacking.

ProAm 4y ago
I think these companies speak out of both sides of their mouth on this topic. And varies greatly depending on the level you are speaking with. An example I would state is Eric Schmidt, I believe he had a very cooperative relationship with the US Government, but also spoke against mass surveillance. (I also think that is just the nature of the role when you are in his shoes.)
cwkoss 4y ago
Do you think that the tech companies that give deep access to US intelligence services are going to advertise it?