8 ms·

Agreed. He worked with journalists to try the make the leak safe. Let’s focus on impact- Now everyone is at least aware that digital activities are under surve

Agreed. He worked with journalists to try the make the leak safe. Let’s focus on impact- Now everyone is at least aware that digital activities are under surveillance including phone call metadata. We have made that trade off for some security. Thank you Snowden.

anonym29 3y ago
Perhaps the most horrifying aspect of the whole Snowden ordeal was not discovering hard proof we've been living in a borderline-Orwellian surveillance state, but the utter indifference of the American people at this revelation.
- pif 3y ago
  While foreign allies showed a lot of interest in his revelations. Notwithstanding his morally high intentions, it's debatable whether the USA as a whole got a positive outcome from his actions.
  - SQueeeeeL 3y ago
    What do you mean it's debatable? The govt was literally spying on the whole country without any disclosure. The actual people who live and were being spied on have at least an idea of their true circumstances now.
    - pif 3y ago
      At the same time, foreign allies had a formal proof they were being spied as well. Domestically, it was a win; internationally, it was a catastrophe.
      - mixmastamyk 3y ago
        Yeah, a “catastrophe” for innocent people everywhere.
    - anonym29 3y ago
      "it's debatable whether the USA as a whole got a positive outcome from his actions." I could make the case that while what Snowden did was heroic, and praiseworthy in a just and educated nation, the US is ultimately neither a just nor educated nation, and too little changed as a result of his whistleblowing. Go ask 100 truly random people what they think of Snowden's revelations and you may find yourself quite disappointed. John Oliver did an episode on this and it was more than a little depressing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M
- kornhole 3y ago
  Ohwellian: When you know you are living in a dystopia but couldn't be bothered to change anything.
  - heresie-dabord 3y ago
    Egowellian: When multitudes of people around you are suffering but you are profiting so you ensure that they continue to suffer.
    - bourbonorgin 3y ago
      Fauxwellian: When multitudes of people around you are suffering and you fabricate evidence as proof of it and then no one believes you because of the fraud
- somenameforme 3y ago
  Look at literally any poll on this issue. Here [1] is one from late 2019 from Pew. 66% of Americans think the risks of government data collection outweigh the benefits, fewer than 25% think they benefit from such behavior. And almost nobody knows what the government is doing with all of this information they're collecting. It's certainly not indifference, it's that our media and democracy aren't really functioning properly. I can go look at any news site and regardless of the site's political bias - there's a recurring theme. You'll see lots of pro war stuff and lots stuff on topics that makes people really dislike each other. But these sort of issues where people overwhelmingly feel one way, and the political establishment feels another? Yeah, those are all strangely absent. And come next year? These same topics will receive about as much coverage as COBOL at a hot trends in computing conference. Instead we'll get two people each telling you to vote for them because the other guy's awful. The one bright side is we can safely say that they're both right. [1] - https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/11/15/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-about-privacy-surveillance-and-data-sharing/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/11/15/key-takea...
  - mandmandam 3y ago
    > these sort of issues where people overwhelmingly feel one way, and the political establishment feels another? Yeah, those are all strangely absent. I feel that Sanders' nomination campaigns epitomized this divide: He spoke for the people. Many more people donated for him than any other candidate, his supporters were diverse and enthusiastic. He was the number one most popular politician in the entire country. Yet media - quite openly - gave him far less coverage, were 3x more negative in the coverage they did give, studiously ignored the attacks and cheating from the political establishment, systematically smeared his supporters, and then blamed him when Hilary (number one disliked Democrat in America) lost. And smart people, rational people with functioning memories, apparently, seemed to just... not want to talk about it. And then it happened again, with even more obvious collusion, four years later. And we talked about it even less, just relieved that we wouldn't have another 4 years of that. Bringing it all up now feels like you're reopening someone else's closed scab. People are auto-rewriting their own version history to help themselves feel less abused, it seems. They don't want to hear it. And this is (many of) the people who were even clued in to it all in the first place. Only Sanders wanted Snowden to be honored for his actions. Hilary wanted him to "face the music". It could all hardly be more obvious. And yet...
3pt14159 3y ago
And yet, it is not journalists that are privy to classified material, it is lawmakers, military staff, intelligence staff, and their contractors and consultants. What makes a journalist a better place to whistle to than an elected politician on the intelligence committee or any one of a number of other options. My basic position on this is that secret holders never have the full picture, but at least they have the trust of the state they serve. A journalist is not always just a journalist. Now, before you disregard my opinion completely please add to your consideration the following facts: - I dated and lived with a nationally renowned journalist and editor, so I know a bit about journalists. - I worked for CSIS and currently work for the CIA as an NOC Agent. AKA a spy. - I have been in situations where I deeply felt the right thing to do was not to list to the people above my command. What I did in one particular situation was contact a politician I deeply trust who has high level clearance and left a vague message for that politician. - I think some good has come out of the Snowden leaks, even though I don't think he did it the right way. It's a nuanced discussion and the public doesn't know everything. This work is tough.
- bippihippi1 3y ago
  State employees are financially incentivized not to disobey, while journalists are, ideally.
- yarg 3y ago
  You have not provided (and cannot provide) any proof to back those additional assertions, as such they do nothing to improve your argument. > What makes a journalist a better place to whistle to than an elected politician on the intelligence committee or any one of a number of other options? A history of actually doing their jobs in this regard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate)
- imwillofficial 3y ago
  - I worked for CSIS and currently work for the CIA as an NOC Agent. AKA a spy. Bro this is Reddit tier lying.
- kennend3 3y ago
drewcoo 3y ago
> Now everyone is at least aware that digital activities are under surveillance including phone call metadata. We have made that trade off for some security. Thank you Snowden. We've traded away privacy, but whether that increases security remains to be seen. It certainly increases the money we spend on alleged security. And "creates jobs" or whatever other euphemism we have for pork barrel decision-making today.

anonym29 3y ago

Perhaps the most horrifying aspect of the whole Snowden ordeal was not discovering hard proof we've been living in a borderline-Orwellian surveillance state, but the utter indifference of the American people at this revelation.

pif 3y ago
While foreign allies showed a lot of interest in his revelations. Notwithstanding his morally high intentions, it's debatable whether the USA as a whole got a positive outcome from his actions.
- SQueeeeeL 3y ago
  What do you mean it's debatable? The govt was literally spying on the whole country without any disclosure. The actual people who live and were being spied on have at least an idea of their true circumstances now.
  - pif 3y ago
    At the same time, foreign allies had a formal proof they were being spied as well. Domestically, it was a win; internationally, it was a catastrophe.
    - mixmastamyk 3y ago
      Yeah, a “catastrophe” for innocent people everywhere.
  - anonym29 3y ago
    "it's debatable whether the USA as a whole got a positive outcome from his actions." I could make the case that while what Snowden did was heroic, and praiseworthy in a just and educated nation, the US is ultimately neither a just nor educated nation, and too little changed as a result of his whistleblowing. Go ask 100 truly random people what they think of Snowden's revelations and you may find yourself quite disappointed. John Oliver did an episode on this and it was more than a little depressing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M
kornhole 3y ago
Ohwellian: When you know you are living in a dystopia but couldn't be bothered to change anything.
- heresie-dabord 3y ago
  Egowellian: When multitudes of people around you are suffering but you are profiting so you ensure that they continue to suffer.
  - bourbonorgin 3y ago
    Fauxwellian: When multitudes of people around you are suffering and you fabricate evidence as proof of it and then no one believes you because of the fraud
somenameforme 3y ago
Look at literally any poll on this issue. Here [1] is one from late 2019 from Pew. 66% of Americans think the risks of government data collection outweigh the benefits, fewer than 25% think they benefit from such behavior. And almost nobody knows what the government is doing with all of this information they're collecting. It's certainly not indifference, it's that our media and democracy aren't really functioning properly. I can go look at any news site and regardless of the site's political bias - there's a recurring theme. You'll see lots of pro war stuff and lots stuff on topics that makes people really dislike each other. But these sort of issues where people overwhelmingly feel one way, and the political establishment feels another? Yeah, those are all strangely absent. And come next year? These same topics will receive about as much coverage as COBOL at a hot trends in computing conference. Instead we'll get two people each telling you to vote for them because the other guy's awful. The one bright side is we can safely say that they're both right. [1] - https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/11/15/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-about-privacy-surveillance-and-data-sharing/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/11/15/key-takea...
- mandmandam 3y ago
  > these sort of issues where people overwhelmingly feel one way, and the political establishment feels another? Yeah, those are all strangely absent. I feel that Sanders' nomination campaigns epitomized this divide: He spoke for the people. Many more people donated for him than any other candidate, his supporters were diverse and enthusiastic. He was the number one most popular politician in the entire country. Yet media - quite openly - gave him far less coverage, were 3x more negative in the coverage they did give, studiously ignored the attacks and cheating from the political establishment, systematically smeared his supporters, and then blamed him when Hilary (number one disliked Democrat in America) lost. And smart people, rational people with functioning memories, apparently, seemed to just... not want to talk about it. And then it happened again, with even more obvious collusion, four years later. And we talked about it even less, just relieved that we wouldn't have another 4 years of that. Bringing it all up now feels like you're reopening someone else's closed scab. People are auto-rewriting their own version history to help themselves feel less abused, it seems. They don't want to hear it. And this is (many of) the people who were even clued in to it all in the first place. Only Sanders wanted Snowden to be honored for his actions. Hilary wanted him to "face the music". It could all hardly be more obvious. And yet...

3pt14159 3y ago

And yet, it is not journalists that are privy to classified material, it is lawmakers, military staff, intelligence staff, and their contractors and consultants. What makes a journalist a better place to whistle to than an elected politician on the intelligence committee or any one of a number of other options. My basic position on this is that secret holders never have the full picture, but at least they have the trust of the state they serve. A journalist is not always just a journalist. Now, before you disregard my opinion completely please add to your consideration the following facts: - I dated and lived with a nationally renowned journalist and editor, so I know a bit about journalists. - I worked for CSIS and currently work for the CIA as an NOC Agent. AKA a spy. - I have been in situations where I deeply felt the right thing to do was not to list to the people above my command. What I did in one particular situation was contact a politician I deeply trust who has high level clearance and left a vague message for that politician. - I think some good has come out of the Snowden leaks, even though I don't think he did it the right way. It's a nuanced discussion and the public doesn't know everything. This work is tough.

bippihippi1 3y ago
State employees are financially incentivized not to disobey, while journalists are, ideally.
yarg 3y ago
You have not provided (and cannot provide) any proof to back those additional assertions, as such they do nothing to improve your argument. > What makes a journalist a better place to whistle to than an elected politician on the intelligence committee or any one of a number of other options? A history of actually doing their jobs in this regard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate)
imwillofficial 3y ago
- I worked for CSIS and currently work for the CIA as an NOC Agent. AKA a spy. Bro this is Reddit tier lying.
kennend3 3y ago

drewcoo 3y ago

> Now everyone is at least aware that digital activities are under surveillance including phone call metadata. We have made that trade off for some security. Thank you Snowden. We've traded away privacy, but whether that increases security remains to be seen. It certainly increases the money we spend on alleged security. And "creates jobs" or whatever other euphemism we have for pork barrel decision-making today.