4 ms·

> government-corporate propaganda aimed at expanding the surveillance state I'm one of those people who believes very strongly that Snowden was a hero for exp

> government-corporate propaganda aimed at expanding the surveillance state I'm one of those people who believes very strongly that Snowden was a hero for exposing grossly illegal and immoral activity, and should be pardoned. But I do not feel this way about this case. Why? Because the leak did not expose government malfeasance, and therefore wasn't in the interest of the American people. Ordinary anti-espionage rules can and should apply.

scythe 4y ago
You don't have to support the leaker to oppose expanded social media monitoring back-channels for the intelligence services.
- javajosh 4y ago
  I think ICs are already in all the major social media back-ends that a nation hosts. I think that allies (like Israel and the US) regularly trade access to circumvent laws preventing surveillance of own citizens. Meanwhile LEOs of all stripes are already in social media, through the front-door. The former is abhorrent and should be a big scandal, but it won't be. Snowden showed that Americans simply don't care. Given that signal, why stop? The latter is actually good, in general. LEOs doing actual police work, joining groups that might be extremist...that's the online equivalent of undercover work, and I think it's good when it's human work. So, basically I agree that proactive, general IC infiltration of back-ends is wrong, but I think its already happening and won't stop without change of sentiment. LEOs can and should do more human investigation, join groups, get involved, see what they are about - and then leave them alone if they aren't a physical threat. Obviously this can be super problematic (e.g. the FBI vs MLK) but the only alternative is to just sit there and wait for an attack. That's no bueno, either.
  - mjreacher 4y ago
    If ICs were already all over major social media like Discord, then how did these leaks sit spread around unnoticed for almost half a year? I swear every time this comes up people's critical thinking just vanishes into thin air. Mythologizing intelligence agencies as these omniscient entities only benefits them.
    - javajosh 4y ago
      Having access, using access, using access to detect threats, and using access to detect leaks are 4 different capabilities. If I was NSA chief I personally would rank "proactive leak detection" far below "proactive threat detection". As an aside, if lack of critical thinking skills sets you off easily, you are in for a rough ride. It's particularly dangerous because directed at others, it gives you clout in with the wrong people, and directed at yourself contempt can lead to self-loathing and depression.
      - mjreacher 4y ago
        Parent post doesn't distinguish between those. It just annoys to see people always talking about governmental or corporate bureaucracy but when it comes to intelligence agencies suddenly it's like they're immune to it and become perfect panopticons of information gathering and analysis.
        dang 4y ago
        Sorry for the offtopicness but could you please email me at hn@ycombinator.com? I want to send you a repost invite for https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34556378 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34556378.
ihatepython 4y ago
> But I do not feel this way about this case. Why? Because the leak did not expose government malfeasance, and therefore wasn't in the interest of the American people. Ordinary anti-espionage rules can and should apply. It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian. With that knowledge, it seems that continuing to fund this war with a blank check to Ukraine is not in the interests of the American people. So I feel that this leak was a good thing, from the perspective of the American people, especially if it ends the US funding of this war.
- cannabis_sam 4y ago
  >It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian. Are you referring to the picture with 17k russians vs 71k ukrainians? I thought that was the one that had been edited/falsified…
  - ihatepython 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - cannabis_sam 4y ago
      No, I’ve seen two versions of that image. The one with 71/17 looked most obviously edited to me, but I was asking to get any more substantial confirmation either way.
- polio 4y ago
  I don't see how the ratio of dead Ukrainians to dead Russians is relevant to the utility of winning this war. It can also be construed as an argument for increased funding, because the Ukrainians are losing so badly. In my view, curtailing Russian expansion is the point of the war, and Ukrainian lives are unfortunately one cost of doing so. It's important that Ukrainians are participating in the war of their own volition; the US is not paying Ukrainians to join the battle, unlike the scenario with the ANA in Afghanistan. Even if the leak produces good outcomes, it should still be prosecuted as espionage, since there was no good faith motivation for the leak.

scythe 4y ago

You don't have to support the leaker to oppose expanded social media monitoring back-channels for the intelligence services.

javajosh 4y ago
I think ICs are already in all the major social media back-ends that a nation hosts. I think that allies (like Israel and the US) regularly trade access to circumvent laws preventing surveillance of own citizens. Meanwhile LEOs of all stripes are already in social media, through the front-door. The former is abhorrent and should be a big scandal, but it won't be. Snowden showed that Americans simply don't care. Given that signal, why stop? The latter is actually good, in general. LEOs doing actual police work, joining groups that might be extremist...that's the online equivalent of undercover work, and I think it's good when it's human work. So, basically I agree that proactive, general IC infiltration of back-ends is wrong, but I think its already happening and won't stop without change of sentiment. LEOs can and should do more human investigation, join groups, get involved, see what they are about - and then leave them alone if they aren't a physical threat. Obviously this can be super problematic (e.g. the FBI vs MLK) but the only alternative is to just sit there and wait for an attack. That's no bueno, either.
- mjreacher 4y ago
  If ICs were already all over major social media like Discord, then how did these leaks sit spread around unnoticed for almost half a year? I swear every time this comes up people's critical thinking just vanishes into thin air. Mythologizing intelligence agencies as these omniscient entities only benefits them.
  - javajosh 4y ago
    Having access, using access, using access to detect threats, and using access to detect leaks are 4 different capabilities. If I was NSA chief I personally would rank "proactive leak detection" far below "proactive threat detection". As an aside, if lack of critical thinking skills sets you off easily, you are in for a rough ride. It's particularly dangerous because directed at others, it gives you clout in with the wrong people, and directed at yourself contempt can lead to self-loathing and depression.
    - mjreacher 4y ago
      Parent post doesn't distinguish between those. It just annoys to see people always talking about governmental or corporate bureaucracy but when it comes to intelligence agencies suddenly it's like they're immune to it and become perfect panopticons of information gathering and analysis.
      - dang 4y ago
        Sorry for the offtopicness but could you please email me at hn@ycombinator.com? I want to send you a repost invite for https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34556378 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34556378.

ihatepython 4y ago

> But I do not feel this way about this case. Why? Because the leak did not expose government malfeasance, and therefore wasn't in the interest of the American people. Ordinary anti-espionage rules can and should apply. It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian. With that knowledge, it seems that continuing to fund this war with a blank check to Ukraine is not in the interests of the American people. So I feel that this leak was a good thing, from the perspective of the American people, especially if it ends the US funding of this war.

cannabis_sam 4y ago
>It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian. Are you referring to the picture with 17k russians vs 71k ukrainians? I thought that was the one that had been edited/falsified…
- ihatepython 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - cannabis_sam 4y ago
    No, I’ve seen two versions of that image. The one with 71/17 looked most obviously edited to me, but I was asking to get any more substantial confirmation either way.
polio 4y ago
I don't see how the ratio of dead Ukrainians to dead Russians is relevant to the utility of winning this war. It can also be construed as an argument for increased funding, because the Ukrainians are losing so badly. In my view, curtailing Russian expansion is the point of the war, and Ukrainian lives are unfortunately one cost of doing so. It's important that Ukrainians are participating in the war of their own volition; the US is not paying Ukrainians to join the battle, unlike the scenario with the ANA in Afghanistan. Even if the leak produces good outcomes, it should still be prosecuted as espionage, since there was no good faith motivation for the leak.