4 ms·

No, because only those who were on the fence were swayed either way. As of right now, the Poll on how the HN community will respond ( https://news.ycombinator.c

by eksith 13y ago

No, because only those who were on the fence were swayed either way. As of right now, the Poll on how the HN community will respond ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5846564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5846564 ) is at : No, I'm ok with it 66 I'd like to do something but it's too difficult to avoid using cloud services 195 I'm going to try to use services from non-US companies hosted outside the US 99 I'm only going to use services that allow client side encryption. 37 I'm going to host all my own services. 47 I'm not changing anything because I already assumed all of my data was being monitored anyway. 151 A quick glance at what the rest of the public is thinking is quite illuminating as well. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0609/How-do-Americans-feel-about-NSA-surveillance-Ambivalent http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0609/How-do-Ame... Summary: People think in terms of "Privacy is a bit like oil. It's getting pricey, but I still like my SUV." If anything, it may give a much needed boost to an existing sector of internet industry, privacy and security. I see several companies springing up (some already have) that delivery end-to-end encrypted communication and storage over different media (of course, there would be plenty of Snake Oil as well). The real frontier of communication is the transmission of anonymized and encrypted data with services bought and paid for anonymously as well with no repercussions for the service providers.

nhebb 13y ago
I doubt it will have much of an impact, but I'd be reluctant to make a prediction about international growth based on an HN survey and a CS Monitor article that references American polling data.
- eksith 13y ago
  Fair enough. My gut feeling is about the same on impact of international growth. On one hand it may have been a blessing in disguise. The Internet is supposed to be global in the first place, but we have massive over-representation in pretty much every aspect of its commercial operation. The same services outside U.S. jurisdiction and influence are suddenly more alluring.
raganwald 13y ago
"Privacy is a bit like oil. It's getting pricey, but I still like my SUV." You do know that outside of the US, there are lots of people who don't drive SUVs because of the price of oil?
- eksith 13y ago
  Not having being born in the U.S. and still having family in several countries, Yes, I do. The implication is that U.S. Internet Industry is somehow "destroyed" as a result of this is hyperbole. If anything, all it did was give hope to those outside the U.S. that there's still a viable market for the same cloud services (sans FISA leash) even in smaller scales.
- jfoutz 13y ago
  Yeah, but there are also lots of people who would drive SUVs, but SUVs are impractical. Roads that are hundreds or thousands of years old tend to be very narrow.
EthanHeilman 13y ago
The danger is that foreign governments will recognize that the US is using gmail to spy on them. They may ban the use of gmail or other cloud providers within their national boundaries.
- eksith 13y ago
  I don't think most governments will go that far for casual usage, however I do see more restrictions on confidential, "official business" communication and storage through these (which, I hope is already the case). Think of how much disruption would be caused if Hotmail, for instance, was forbidden in addition to Gmail. Many of the early adopters of the web in these countries flocked to the most popular platforms (in addition to their ISP email of course). Having to print new business cards would hardly be the only inconvenience.
  - EthanHeilman 13y ago
    There are levels, but the danger is that some person with sensitive information may communicate the information using an insecure service. For instance someone might remark that the military appears to be building a large underground structure near their farm, the US could then use this information to locate a newly build ICBM silo. The levels of action that a nation could take to protect itself are: 1. They could train people who have access to sensitive information not to use any US service. This is what the US has done asking some members of the intelligence community to not use Skype and other services due to worries about its insecurity. This is probably common training for handling sensitive information in most nations. 2. They could filter such services at government offices, schools and sensitive sites. For instance no company can get defense contracts unless they have a policy that prevents their employees from using gmail. This is probably the most likely additional action that will taken and it will hurt US business. 3. They could filter such services at the national level. China (1 billion people) already does this, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia started. It's unlikely to happen on a global scale but each country that bans another US service hurts the economy. We saw this happen with US crypto export controls, the market spoke and companies began switching to non-US software.
arg01 13y ago
"If anything, it may give a much needed boost to an existing sector of internet industry, privacy and security. I see several companies springing up (some already have) that delivery end-to-end encrypted communication and storage over different media (of course, there would be plenty of Snake Oil as well)." I think it's worth pointing out that this sector growing as a result of this will mean that those 195 people who responded "I'd like to do something but it's too difficult to avoid using cloud services" will find it easier and easier to make the switch. Couple that opinion in the tech community with consumer protection laws that may technically forbid a business from storing customer data on these services and you do have a drive for foreign business to move away from US services. When your talking about a principle such as a right to privacy that's not something that will disappear from society quicker than the time it takes for businesses competing on this principle can be set up.
jmtame 13y ago
From the article you linked to: "With the latest revelations just days – in some cases, hours – old, it’s too soon to know for sure." I think it's still too early and I'd wait until all the facts are out. I can't speak for how people in other countries are feeling, but I can say this... As an American startup founder, I'd be very worried about what my international customers would think if they knew I was working secretly with the U.S. government, publicly denying it, subsequently being caught in my own misleading statements, and allowing the government access to all of their data after I told them it was private. As a customer, I'm happy if you can use that data to serve better ads that are relevant to me. But I would be very angry if it was being served to a foreign government which wants to profile me a certain way, potentially to justify killing or detaining me.
- eksith 13y ago
  True. We know so far that they've limited the original PRISM scope to major infrastructure providers and social media. This is obvious since that would cast the widest net. As a startup founder, if your operation does get popular enough to catch the eye of the NSA, realistically there's absolutely nothing you can do to fight it. That's how far ingrained the instruments of our own deconstruction are. And they're buried in plain sight in U.S. law. I don't see that changing overnight with a few amendments or acts introduced here and there. It would take an overhaul of the very principles of government we've taken for granted (and quite possibly never really existed). The fact that we're aware of this aspect of hopelessness will, in the end, be far more damaging to the U.S. economy than any foreign entities being aware of it. After all, why would American founders found and base anything on U.S. territory if they cannot do it freely and on their own terms? They'd rather found a startup in Hong Kong.
  - locusm 13y ago
    I wonder if Dropbox are caught up in this too?

by eksith 13y ago

nhebb 13y ago

I doubt it will have much of an impact, but I'd be reluctant to make a prediction about international growth based on an HN survey and a CS Monitor article that references American polling data.

eksith 13y ago
Fair enough. My gut feeling is about the same on impact of international growth. On one hand it may have been a blessing in disguise. The Internet is supposed to be global in the first place, but we have massive over-representation in pretty much every aspect of its commercial operation. The same services outside U.S. jurisdiction and influence are suddenly more alluring.

raganwald 13y ago

"Privacy is a bit like oil. It's getting pricey, but I still like my SUV." You do know that outside of the US, there are lots of people who don't drive SUVs because of the price of oil?

eksith 13y ago
Not having being born in the U.S. and still having family in several countries, Yes, I do. The implication is that U.S. Internet Industry is somehow "destroyed" as a result of this is hyperbole. If anything, all it did was give hope to those outside the U.S. that there's still a viable market for the same cloud services (sans FISA leash) even in smaller scales.
jfoutz 13y ago
Yeah, but there are also lots of people who would drive SUVs, but SUVs are impractical. Roads that are hundreds or thousands of years old tend to be very narrow.

EthanHeilman 13y ago

The danger is that foreign governments will recognize that the US is using gmail to spy on them. They may ban the use of gmail or other cloud providers within their national boundaries.

eksith 13y ago
I don't think most governments will go that far for casual usage, however I do see more restrictions on confidential, "official business" communication and storage through these (which, I hope is already the case). Think of how much disruption would be caused if Hotmail, for instance, was forbidden in addition to Gmail. Many of the early adopters of the web in these countries flocked to the most popular platforms (in addition to their ISP email of course). Having to print new business cards would hardly be the only inconvenience.
- EthanHeilman 13y ago
  There are levels, but the danger is that some person with sensitive information may communicate the information using an insecure service. For instance someone might remark that the military appears to be building a large underground structure near their farm, the US could then use this information to locate a newly build ICBM silo. The levels of action that a nation could take to protect itself are: 1. They could train people who have access to sensitive information not to use any US service. This is what the US has done asking some members of the intelligence community to not use Skype and other services due to worries about its insecurity. This is probably common training for handling sensitive information in most nations. 2. They could filter such services at government offices, schools and sensitive sites. For instance no company can get defense contracts unless they have a policy that prevents their employees from using gmail. This is probably the most likely additional action that will taken and it will hurt US business. 3. They could filter such services at the national level. China (1 billion people) already does this, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia started. It's unlikely to happen on a global scale but each country that bans another US service hurts the economy. We saw this happen with US crypto export controls, the market spoke and companies began switching to non-US software.

arg01 13y ago

"If anything, it may give a much needed boost to an existing sector of internet industry, privacy and security. I see several companies springing up (some already have) that delivery end-to-end encrypted communication and storage over different media (of course, there would be plenty of Snake Oil as well)." I think it's worth pointing out that this sector growing as a result of this will mean that those 195 people who responded "I'd like to do something but it's too difficult to avoid using cloud services" will find it easier and easier to make the switch. Couple that opinion in the tech community with consumer protection laws that may technically forbid a business from storing customer data on these services and you do have a drive for foreign business to move away from US services. When your talking about a principle such as a right to privacy that's not something that will disappear from society quicker than the time it takes for businesses competing on this principle can be set up.

jmtame 13y ago

From the article you linked to: "With the latest revelations just days – in some cases, hours – old, it’s too soon to know for sure." I think it's still too early and I'd wait until all the facts are out. I can't speak for how people in other countries are feeling, but I can say this... As an American startup founder, I'd be very worried about what my international customers would think if they knew I was working secretly with the U.S. government, publicly denying it, subsequently being caught in my own misleading statements, and allowing the government access to all of their data after I told them it was private. As a customer, I'm happy if you can use that data to serve better ads that are relevant to me. But I would be very angry if it was being served to a foreign government which wants to profile me a certain way, potentially to justify killing or detaining me.

eksith 13y ago
True. We know so far that they've limited the original PRISM scope to major infrastructure providers and social media. This is obvious since that would cast the widest net. As a startup founder, if your operation does get popular enough to catch the eye of the NSA, realistically there's absolutely nothing you can do to fight it. That's how far ingrained the instruments of our own deconstruction are. And they're buried in plain sight in U.S. law. I don't see that changing overnight with a few amendments or acts introduced here and there. It would take an overhaul of the very principles of government we've taken for granted (and quite possibly never really existed). The fact that we're aware of this aspect of hopelessness will, in the end, be far more damaging to the U.S. economy than any foreign entities being aware of it. After all, why would American founders found and base anything on U.S. territory if they cannot do it freely and on their own terms? They'd rather found a startup in Hong Kong.
- locusm 13y ago
  I wonder if Dropbox are caught up in this too?