5 ms·

I think it's almost certain the guy will have some problems not long in the future. One question that comes to mind is how a supposed intelligence organization

I think it's almost certain the guy will have some problems not long in the future. One question that comes to mind is how a supposed intelligence organization allowed someone who subscribes to EFF thinking even come to know about this surveillance. Shouldn't the NSA be doing some kind of screening to make sure the people they hire don't have ideals diametrically opposed to their practices?

EthanHeilman 13y ago
Try hiring 10,000 good CNE people with support of the EFF as a red flag. Who works in this field and doesn't support the EFF?
tome 13y ago
It's weird. On the one hand he makes them sound all-knowing. On the other hand they sound completely incompetent.
- rhizome 13y ago
  He makes the point that a chief purpose is, to repurpose a previously-ridiculous term, "backtracing." They are all-having, but that says nothing about what they currently know, which, as the existence of surveillance practices in recent history shows, didn't help with respect to e.g. the Boston Marathon bombers.
- dnautics 13y ago
  these are not mutually incompatible. Ever heard of idiot savants (I understand this is historically a derogatory term for autistic people).
- MarciaPetros 13y ago
  This is the nature of all corporate endeavour. The corporate style of organization is very good at certain things and very bad at others. It can't be compared to a human being. It's a different animal.
laumars 13y ago
I'm fairly sure they will now be screening for that in the future.
- codygman 13y ago
  I predict they'll have a lot fewer hiring options.
toufka 13y ago
Almost an inevitable consequence of growing too large. You have to start hiring people farther and farther from your core. If you want to spy on everyone, you need everyone's help. But if even a single person isn't willing, you risk the entire endeavor.
Nrsolis 13y ago
Uh, I think you're confusing "ideals" with "lawful behavior". You can be a supporter of the EFF and believe that the work the NSA is doing is necessary and good for the country. I worked on Lawful Interception systems and I had no problem with their use as long as a COMPETENT COURT was the one regulating it.
- rossjudson 13y ago
  This seems to be the critical component, to me. The intercepts must go through a competent court, which must create some form of public record that will eventually be released. There have to be enough judges to handle the load. And if the load is huge, for these intercepts we need to look at why that is, and ensure it's not just fishing. On the other hand, maybe big data fishing is the most effective method.
  - Nrsolis 13y ago
    So, David Simon (of The Wire/Treme fame) wrote this up: http://davidsimon.com/we-are-shocked-shocked/ http://davidsimon.com/we-are-shocked-shocked/ I think he makes some good points.
rdtsc 13y ago
You see, there is an overlap amongst the qualities that would make one support EFF and also work for CIA -- and that is patriotism and devotion to their country. CIA for example looks for devoted and patriotic people more than they look for capable people. They figure they can teach whatever is needed as a special internal course but they can't teach patriotism. So for example they love to hire ex Marines, they are considered patriotic. Now patriotism is a double edged sword. It works well if the government and agencies are honest and transparent. Patriotic people working in such systems might accept a lower pay but they know they are helping their country. When that start to go south and they start seeing shady things going on they have a choice: 1) Rationalize participating in un-patriotic things (illegal search for ex) 2) Fight against it by leaving the agency or 3) Fight against it by going public and exposing it Most people probably end up choosing 1). Few choose 2) and only select individuals choose 3).
- toyg 13y ago
  You are, of course, talking about US patriotism, which is quite exceptional. As the only country to enshrine actual Enlightenment ideals in its original, still-upheld Constitution, and with a population entirely made of immigrants from different countries and ethnicities (with apologies to Native Americans), US patriotism is one of the very few versions that can actually generate anti-nationalistic or universalistic views with a certain regularity. In more conventional settings, standard patriotism is intrinsically nationalistic and often based on race, which makes things easier for operative agencies (so to speak). Here in Europe, "patriotism" could hardly ever be invoked as basis for subversive acts or whistleblowing in a security setting.
e12e 13y ago
You're aware US Intelligence is behind the development of Tor, right? I don't think the NSA views itself as a facilitator for "turnkey tyranny", just yet. If you think you're fighting for freedom, then why wouldn't you hire people that feel the same? Maybe this whole thing will help wake people across all levels of the CIA and the NSA, and there just might be some actual change. I know, I'm dreaming. But clearly I'm not the only one.

EthanHeilman 13y ago

Try hiring 10,000 good CNE people with support of the EFF as a red flag. Who works in this field and doesn't support the EFF?

tome 13y ago

It's weird. On the one hand he makes them sound all-knowing. On the other hand they sound completely incompetent.

rhizome 13y ago
He makes the point that a chief purpose is, to repurpose a previously-ridiculous term, "backtracing." They are all-having, but that says nothing about what they currently know, which, as the existence of surveillance practices in recent history shows, didn't help with respect to e.g. the Boston Marathon bombers.
dnautics 13y ago
these are not mutually incompatible. Ever heard of idiot savants (I understand this is historically a derogatory term for autistic people).
MarciaPetros 13y ago
This is the nature of all corporate endeavour. The corporate style of organization is very good at certain things and very bad at others. It can't be compared to a human being. It's a different animal.

laumars 13y ago

I'm fairly sure they will now be screening for that in the future.

codygman 13y ago
I predict they'll have a lot fewer hiring options.

toufka 13y ago

Almost an inevitable consequence of growing too large. You have to start hiring people farther and farther from your core. If you want to spy on everyone, you need everyone's help. But if even a single person isn't willing, you risk the entire endeavor.

Nrsolis 13y ago

Uh, I think you're confusing "ideals" with "lawful behavior". You can be a supporter of the EFF and believe that the work the NSA is doing is necessary and good for the country. I worked on Lawful Interception systems and I had no problem with their use as long as a COMPETENT COURT was the one regulating it.

rossjudson 13y ago
This seems to be the critical component, to me. The intercepts must go through a competent court, which must create some form of public record that will eventually be released. There have to be enough judges to handle the load. And if the load is huge, for these intercepts we need to look at why that is, and ensure it's not just fishing. On the other hand, maybe big data fishing is the most effective method.
- Nrsolis 13y ago
  So, David Simon (of The Wire/Treme fame) wrote this up: http://davidsimon.com/we-are-shocked-shocked/ http://davidsimon.com/we-are-shocked-shocked/ I think he makes some good points.

rdtsc 13y ago

You see, there is an overlap amongst the qualities that would make one support EFF and also work for CIA -- and that is patriotism and devotion to their country. CIA for example looks for devoted and patriotic people more than they look for capable people. They figure they can teach whatever is needed as a special internal course but they can't teach patriotism. So for example they love to hire ex Marines, they are considered patriotic. Now patriotism is a double edged sword. It works well if the government and agencies are honest and transparent. Patriotic people working in such systems might accept a lower pay but they know they are helping their country. When that start to go south and they start seeing shady things going on they have a choice: 1) Rationalize participating in un-patriotic things (illegal search for ex) 2) Fight against it by leaving the agency or 3) Fight against it by going public and exposing it Most people probably end up choosing 1). Few choose 2) and only select individuals choose 3).

toyg 13y ago
You are, of course, talking about US patriotism, which is quite exceptional. As the only country to enshrine actual Enlightenment ideals in its original, still-upheld Constitution, and with a population entirely made of immigrants from different countries and ethnicities (with apologies to Native Americans), US patriotism is one of the very few versions that can actually generate anti-nationalistic or universalistic views with a certain regularity. In more conventional settings, standard patriotism is intrinsically nationalistic and often based on race, which makes things easier for operative agencies (so to speak). Here in Europe, "patriotism" could hardly ever be invoked as basis for subversive acts or whistleblowing in a security setting.

e12e 13y ago

You're aware US Intelligence is behind the development of Tor, right? I don't think the NSA views itself as a facilitator for "turnkey tyranny", just yet. If you think you're fighting for freedom, then why wouldn't you hire people that feel the same? Maybe this whole thing will help wake people across all levels of the CIA and the NSA, and there just might be some actual change. I know, I'm dreaming. But clearly I'm not the only one.