3 ms·
It seems pretty clear that the NSA engages in bulk collection of databases which _might_ someday contain something interesting, and only considers it "intercept
by navyrain 13y ago
It seems pretty clear that the NSA engages in bulk collection of databases which _might_ someday contain something interesting, and only considers it "interception" when they query their own DBs.
These creative redefinitions of seemingly benign terms are at the root of the problem.
- pyre 13y agoIt's possible to lie without directly lying here: - "Verizon intercepts the calls, we only collect them" - "Verison only gives us call meta data (who called whom? when? how long?)." - "We don't intercept the emails, Google just gives us all of the emails sitting on their servers." ... etc
- jongraehl 13y ago"we don't - our contractors do" "we don't - our interception devices do" :(
- larrys 13y ago"It seems pretty clear that the NSA engages in bulk collection of databases which _might_ someday contain something interesting, and only considers it "interception" when they query their own DBs." Interesting. Along those lines then if you were to make a clone of someone's hard drive but you actually didn't boot or access any of the information on the hard drive I wonder what law that may or may not break? You seem to be guilty of cloning a hard drive which may not be the same as stealing anything in particular that is covered by the way a law is written.
- brown9-2 13y agoIsn't the specific terminology used very important to help differentiate exactly what type of surveillance is being done? Language matters.