3 ms·

I don't see why one would try to protect himself from the NSA. I understand privacy from my neighbor and criminals. But I want the government to spy on potent

by jokoon 2y ago

I don't see why one would try to protect himself from the NSA. I understand privacy from my neighbor and criminals. But I want the government to spy on potential criminals. I trust the courts and the process. If you don't, you're just paranoid.

hulitu 2y ago
> But I want the government to spy on potential criminals. > I trust the courts and the process. Good luck then. You _will_ need it.
- jokoon 2y ago
  Seriously, what are you so afraid of? We don't live in China or Russia, what matters is political culture, not hiding from the government. What is the worst that ever happened? Do you think corporations would use the NSA to influence the government? Or do you think the NSA would become a shadow government? I understand the fear of 1984, but 1984 described China and Russia, not the US. Assange and Snowden might sound like heroes to you, but to me they are not.
  - asudosandwich 2y ago
    Right on. People complained about the camera in my bathroom so I told them the same thing. If you’ve done nothing wrong you should have nothing to hide.
  - mdhb 2y ago
    You aren’t wrong for the most part. HN hive mind has a really bad habit of consistently acting incredibly paranoid while actually doing nothing to actually understand how any of this works either from a legal or technical perspective and then on top of all that they have no understanding of what their actual threat model looks like and anyone who dares to interrupt the paranoia is treated like they are some kind of moron. Honestly it’s like listening to a Q-Anon group in here sometimes.
  - aeonik 2y ago
    Snowden, Assange, China, Russia it's all uncorrelated and a distraction to the "Nothing to hide" argument. You can review it here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument I will also add: that hiding has a very successful track record (for all life forms) over time, because you don't ever really know what the future holds. I also have a pet theory that there is underlying physics/information theory here that explains this (similar to thermodynamics/entropy, might even be the same phenomenon) -> too much concentrated asymetric information becomes a single point of failure, and yields brittle systems. Stated a different way: As the dependencies on a single process rise, the probability of the entire system failing approaches 1.
    - jokoon 2y ago
      wow you're so smart
      - aeonik 2y ago
        Because I noticed that lying to people constantly, and mass surveillance controlled by a small parties is probably a bad strategy in the long run? I think evolution figured it out a few billion years before me. I think it's just easy to forget. Of course I could be entirely wrong. Just a hypothesis of mine.
  - Terretta 2y ago
    > Seriously, what are you so afraid of? The law changing, and by then the law enforcers have a family member's web searches for reproductive care and throw someone in jail for murder. People are going to jail for things this year that were legal last year. > We don't live in China or Russia Yet. Freedom takes work, and vigilance against its incremental loss. “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” -- early 1800s saying (https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/eternal-vigilance-price-liberty-spurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers...) “Freedom is a fragile thing and it's never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.” -- Reagan, 1967 (https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/january-5-1967-inaugural-address-public-ceremony https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/january-5-1967...)
kaliqt 2y ago
I don't even know where to begin on how incorrect that is.
hellojesus 2y ago
Just trust the courts, bro. Civil Asset Forfeiture totally doesn't violate due process or the 5th amendment, bro. Big brother knows best, bro.

by jokoon 2y ago

hulitu 2y ago

> But I want the government to spy on potential criminals. > I trust the courts and the process. Good luck then. You _will_ need it.

jokoon 2y ago
Seriously, what are you so afraid of? We don't live in China or Russia, what matters is political culture, not hiding from the government. What is the worst that ever happened? Do you think corporations would use the NSA to influence the government? Or do you think the NSA would become a shadow government? I understand the fear of 1984, but 1984 described China and Russia, not the US. Assange and Snowden might sound like heroes to you, but to me they are not.
- asudosandwich 2y ago
  Right on. People complained about the camera in my bathroom so I told them the same thing. If you’ve done nothing wrong you should have nothing to hide.
- mdhb 2y ago
  You aren’t wrong for the most part. HN hive mind has a really bad habit of consistently acting incredibly paranoid while actually doing nothing to actually understand how any of this works either from a legal or technical perspective and then on top of all that they have no understanding of what their actual threat model looks like and anyone who dares to interrupt the paranoia is treated like they are some kind of moron. Honestly it’s like listening to a Q-Anon group in here sometimes.
- aeonik 2y ago
  Snowden, Assange, China, Russia it's all uncorrelated and a distraction to the "Nothing to hide" argument. You can review it here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument I will also add: that hiding has a very successful track record (for all life forms) over time, because you don't ever really know what the future holds. I also have a pet theory that there is underlying physics/information theory here that explains this (similar to thermodynamics/entropy, might even be the same phenomenon) -> too much concentrated asymetric information becomes a single point of failure, and yields brittle systems. Stated a different way: As the dependencies on a single process rise, the probability of the entire system failing approaches 1.
  - jokoon 2y ago
    wow you're so smart
    - aeonik 2y ago
      Because I noticed that lying to people constantly, and mass surveillance controlled by a small parties is probably a bad strategy in the long run? I think evolution figured it out a few billion years before me. I think it's just easy to forget. Of course I could be entirely wrong. Just a hypothesis of mine.
- Terretta 2y ago
  > Seriously, what are you so afraid of? The law changing, and by then the law enforcers have a family member's web searches for reproductive care and throw someone in jail for murder. People are going to jail for things this year that were legal last year. > We don't live in China or Russia Yet. Freedom takes work, and vigilance against its incremental loss. “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” -- early 1800s saying (https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/eternal-vigilance-price-liberty-spurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers...) “Freedom is a fragile thing and it's never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.” -- Reagan, 1967 (https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/january-5-1967-inaugural-address-public-ceremony https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/january-5-1967...)

kaliqt 2y ago

I don't even know where to begin on how incorrect that is.

hellojesus 2y ago

Just trust the courts, bro. Civil Asset Forfeiture totally doesn't violate due process or the 5th amendment, bro. Big brother knows best, bro.