4 ms·

> So I take it you're totally OK with an adversary of yours spying on you, then? Adversary of your government, not necessarily of yours. If at least your gover

> So I take it you're totally OK with an adversary of yours spying on you, then? Adversary of your government, not necessarily of yours. If at least your government kept the spying within its borders, you could reduce this to "us vs them", but USA spies overseas too, and brokes that information with its partner countries who also spy internationally. Accusing any other country of spying is ridiculous when everyone is doing it.

tivert 2y ago
>> So I take it you're totally OK with an adversary of yours spying on you, then? > Adversary of your government, not necessarily of yours. You badly misunderstood what I wrote. > Accusing any other country of spying is ridiculous when everyone is doing it. There you go, literally making the same interpretive mistake I was trying to correct. I don't know what the issue is here, but I suspect it has something to do with not actually paying attention to what's being said here, and instead shoehorning the article/conversation into a canned script of a different conversation (one that apparently provides the opportunity for some moral posturing).
- ASalazarMX 2y ago
  > So I take it you're totally OK with an adversary of yours spying on you, then? I think this part is what triggered my response, but I did ignore the second half of your comment. I saw no value on mixing the actual act of recklessly spying domestic and foreign citizens, and the particular legal definition of some government that justifies their own spying. Sure, governments can make laws to spy on their own citizens, but who are they to make laws to spy on the citizens of other governments? Moreso, governments won't respect the letter or the spirit of even their own laws if that suits them. The 21st century has become a clusterfuck of gratuitous spying and profiling, I wonder how the history books will portray this era if humanity somehow recovers from it.

tivert 2y ago

>> So I take it you're totally OK with an adversary of yours spying on you, then? > Adversary of your government, not necessarily of yours. You badly misunderstood what I wrote. > Accusing any other country of spying is ridiculous when everyone is doing it. There you go, literally making the same interpretive mistake I was trying to correct. I don't know what the issue is here, but I suspect it has something to do with not actually paying attention to what's being said here, and instead shoehorning the article/conversation into a canned script of a different conversation (one that apparently provides the opportunity for some moral posturing).

ASalazarMX 2y ago
> So I take it you're totally OK with an adversary of yours spying on you, then? I think this part is what triggered my response, but I did ignore the second half of your comment. I saw no value on mixing the actual act of recklessly spying domestic and foreign citizens, and the particular legal definition of some government that justifies their own spying. Sure, governments can make laws to spy on their own citizens, but who are they to make laws to spy on the citizens of other governments? Moreso, governments won't respect the letter or the spirit of even their own laws if that suits them. The 21st century has become a clusterfuck of gratuitous spying and profiling, I wonder how the history books will portray this era if humanity somehow recovers from it.