3 ms·

> Why do you feel it needed to be exposed? Well because it is basically at scale warrantless wiretapping, of almost every major communication platform(technica

by stale2002 3y ago

> Why do you feel it needed to be exposed? Well because it is basically at scale warrantless wiretapping, of almost every major communication platform(technically its on the internet, and not the phone system, I know). You can feel free not to care if the government has backdoor access, without a warrant, to every major US tech company, I guess. But a lot of people did not know that the government had this, and thus why they are glad that it was exposed. If you don't care about at scale warrentless wiretapping, feel free to just say so. Just say "I don't care if the government has a warrant or not, before they spy on every major communication platform". Other people, though, actually care about warrants and privacy protections, from the government.

lern_too_spel 3y ago
> You can feel free not to care if the government has backdoor access, without a warrant, to every major US tech company, I guess. How many ways do people need to tell you that it doesn't? It can send wiretap requests for specific accounts to tech companies, which needs to approve each individual request. > But a lot of people did not know that the government had this, It doesn't. > and thus why they are glad that it was exposed. Where? Which document says they have backdoor access to the tech companies. I'll give you a hint: none of them do. Snowden and Greenwald were both too stupid to read the documents they had obtained and claimed otherwise, but all the rest of the tech media, like CNET and the NYT, reported it correctly. > Other people, though, actually care about warrants and privacy protections, from the government. This is something I care deeply about. That's why I'm glad Snowden's documents and the declassified documents both agree the law is being followed.
- stale2002 3y ago
  So then no warrants required for them to make these requests, got it. > both agree the law is being followed. Notice how I didn't say that anything was illegal. The fact that it was legal, is entirely the problem! I think it is very important for the government to get a warrant, before making these requests. You can feel free to not care about warrants for these types of requests, but I care about them.
  - lern_too_spel 3y ago
    > So then no warrants required for them to make these requests, got it. Not for people who aren't US citizens who live outside the US, no. Is this really news to you? Do you know of any country in the world that requires its intelligence agencies to obtain a warrant for surveilling non-citizens outside its borders?
    - stale2002 3y ago
      > no Ok, well a lot of people care about warrants. You can feel free to not care! But a lot of other people care about warrants. Therefore, it is good that this stuff was exposed, according to the people who care about warrants.
      - lern_too_spel 3y ago
        > Ok, well a lot of people care about warrants. Including me. > Therefore, it is good that this stuff was exposed, according to the people who care about warrants. Once again, no country in the world requires its intelligence agencies to get a warrant to surveil a foreigner outside its borders who has information relevant to national security. This is both legal and something we all expect, and we already knew this before Snowden's leaks. To reveal the code names of systems that ingest this data, Snowden also leaked compromised Chinese computer systems. Is that something we should celebrate? Even Snowden (and probably 99.9% of all people) would disagree with your position. His statements show he thought he was revealing something other than what his documents actually said.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]

lern_too_spel 3y ago

> You can feel free not to care if the government has backdoor access, without a warrant, to every major US tech company, I guess. How many ways do people need to tell you that it doesn't? It can send wiretap requests for specific accounts to tech companies, which needs to approve each individual request. > But a lot of people did not know that the government had this, It doesn't. > and thus why they are glad that it was exposed. Where? Which document says they have backdoor access to the tech companies. I'll give you a hint: none of them do. Snowden and Greenwald were both too stupid to read the documents they had obtained and claimed otherwise, but all the rest of the tech media, like CNET and the NYT, reported it correctly. > Other people, though, actually care about warrants and privacy protections, from the government. This is something I care deeply about. That's why I'm glad Snowden's documents and the declassified documents both agree the law is being followed.

stale2002 3y ago
So then no warrants required for them to make these requests, got it. > both agree the law is being followed. Notice how I didn't say that anything was illegal. The fact that it was legal, is entirely the problem! I think it is very important for the government to get a warrant, before making these requests. You can feel free to not care about warrants for these types of requests, but I care about them.
- lern_too_spel 3y ago
  > So then no warrants required for them to make these requests, got it. Not for people who aren't US citizens who live outside the US, no. Is this really news to you? Do you know of any country in the world that requires its intelligence agencies to obtain a warrant for surveilling non-citizens outside its borders?
  - stale2002 3y ago
    > no Ok, well a lot of people care about warrants. You can feel free to not care! But a lot of other people care about warrants. Therefore, it is good that this stuff was exposed, according to the people who care about warrants.
    - lern_too_spel 3y ago
      > Ok, well a lot of people care about warrants. Including me. > Therefore, it is good that this stuff was exposed, according to the people who care about warrants. Once again, no country in the world requires its intelligence agencies to get a warrant to surveil a foreigner outside its borders who has information relevant to national security. This is both legal and something we all expect, and we already knew this before Snowden's leaks. To reveal the code names of systems that ingest this data, Snowden also leaked compromised Chinese computer systems. Is that something we should celebrate? Even Snowden (and probably 99.9% of all people) would disagree with your position. His statements show he thought he was revealing something other than what his documents actually said.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]