4 ms·

Perfect. And then when they lose and need to pay a bunch of lawyers $3B, someone will go shake the money tree and a bunch of tax payers will fall out to foot th

Perfect. And then when they lose and need to pay a bunch of lawyers $3B, someone will go shake the money tree and a bunch of tax payers will fall out to foot the bill.

ParkerK 13y ago
No, ideally when they lose, the judicial branch will call for the closure of the PRISM program and citizen's rights will be restored.
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  Sure. But closure of PRISM and restored rights have no bearing on who pays the $3B or the fact that lawyers will see most of it (which is the case with most class actions).
  - ParkerK 13y ago
    PRISM costs $20 billion USD per year, if I recall correctly. So that $3 billion, which is already minuscule in comparison to the federal budget, could actually be $17 billion saved.
    - rayiner 13y ago
      $20 million, not billion.
      - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
        so a $3B judgement would be enough to run PRISM for 150 years. Well... let's say 100 years to account for inflation and adding more backdoors and secret decoder rings.
jlgreco 13y ago
If that bothers the taxpayers, then perhaps they should be more careful in the voting booths next time.
- gohrt 13y ago
  I don't see where Director of the NSA appears on the ballot in my jurisdiction.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    If only the problem were so limited...
  - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
    ...or anyone at the DoJ ...or the guy from Verizon. Basically the only person in there anyone voted for was Obama. And even then it was barely 50% of the country. I'm beginning to think this isn't a voter issue.
- alan_cx 13y ago
  I'd love to know which party would have axed this.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Neither of course. "All major parties supported this bullshit" is no reason to drop a lawsuit.
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  The same could be said to all those uncomfortable with the NSA snooping. Why make it worse by inflicting a tax burden on everyone with it? Just be more careful next time. ;) You seem to imply that the only people to blame here are those NOT opposed to it. Like there was some magic that discounts all the votes of the people really freaked out by this.
  - jlgreco 13y ago

Perfect. And then when they lose and need to pay a bunch of lawyers $3B, someone will go shake the money tree and a bunch of tax payers will fall out to foot the bill.

ParkerK 13y ago

No, ideally when they lose, the judicial branch will call for the closure of the PRISM program and citizen's rights will be restored.

jack-r-abbit 13y ago
Sure. But closure of PRISM and restored rights have no bearing on who pays the $3B or the fact that lawyers will see most of it (which is the case with most class actions).
- ParkerK 13y ago
  PRISM costs $20 billion USD per year, if I recall correctly. So that $3 billion, which is already minuscule in comparison to the federal budget, could actually be $17 billion saved.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    $20 million, not billion.
    - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
      so a $3B judgement would be enough to run PRISM for 150 years. Well... let's say 100 years to account for inflation and adding more backdoors and secret decoder rings.

jlgreco 13y ago

If that bothers the taxpayers, then perhaps they should be more careful in the voting booths next time.

gohrt 13y ago
I don't see where Director of the NSA appears on the ballot in my jurisdiction.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  If only the problem were so limited...
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  ...or anyone at the DoJ ...or the guy from Verizon. Basically the only person in there anyone voted for was Obama. And even then it was barely 50% of the country. I'm beginning to think this isn't a voter issue.
alan_cx 13y ago
I'd love to know which party would have axed this.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  Neither of course. "All major parties supported this bullshit" is no reason to drop a lawsuit.
jack-r-abbit 13y ago
The same could be said to all those uncomfortable with the NSA snooping. Why make it worse by inflicting a tax burden on everyone with it? Just be more careful next time. ;) You seem to imply that the only people to blame here are those NOT opposed to it. Like there was some magic that discounts all the votes of the people really freaked out by this.
- jlgreco 13y ago