11 ms·

Reddit co-founder on NSA snooping [video]

370 points by kn0thing 13y ago

josh2600 13y ago
Goddamn right. Every now and then we have defining moments of global consciousness. This has the potential to be one of those moments and we should never let a good crisis go to waste. The danger here is that if we do nothing, that will be seen as tacit acceptance of the world's largest spying apparatus. While I acknowledge there's some necessity globally, domestic spying through secret courts is more synonymous with the Gulag than the American dream. Stand up for what you believe in; this is one time you can.
- twoodfin 13y ago
  Specifically, what "domestic spying" are you talking about? I'm curious where the line is you're trying to draw.
  - grey-area 13y ago
    Specifically, what "domestic spying" are you talking about? Since you ask: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-n... In particular see the 3rd slide down for the type of information the NSA claims it can collect. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-record... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-in... http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-surveillance-subverting-constitution http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-... http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-partisanship-propaganda-prism http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-part... I'm curious where the line is you're trying to draw. Can't speak for the OP, but I imagine for most people that line is somewhere well before the mass surveillance of phone records etc which the US is currently engaging in. Are you genuinely confused about why people might oppose that or care about it?
    - josh2600 13y ago
      OP here: as many of you know I work in the bowels of the Internet on very large telecom networks and have for most of my career. It has always been assumed that the traffic that leaves the US border was being monitored; I don't think anyone can or will dispute that. The difference is forcing private businesses to place unmarked rooms inside of buildings with vampire fiber taps at All of the major domestic interconnects. That's a problem and completely unnecessary. I object to dragnets, I do not object to lawful intercepts. The distinction might be moot, but if there wasn't a secret fisa court signing all of these documents the monitored parties could even sue. Remember when the NSA got caught monitoring those Arabic students when they sent them their own call records? The students sued the NSA but the court case was thrown out because the NSA argued that even though the students had possession of the call records, they couldn't use them in court because they were classified. What I want is security through tireless effort not through dragnet expediency. It's hard to be the NSA. It's hard to stop terrorists. I believe our country has enough skilled intelligence officials to deliver security without sacrificing liberty. Is that cynical?
      - lifeisstillgood 13y ago
        > I believe our country has enough skilled intelligence officials to deliver security without sacrificing liberty. Just wonderful :-) Have all the up votes I can give you
        josh2600 13y ago
        Give the EFF your up votes :). https://supporters.eff.org/donate https://supporters.eff.org/donate
        lifeisstillgood 13y ago
        A very cool response. I can only regretfully say I have joined the Openrightsgroup as they and I are based in the UK. Same sh*t, different politicians.
    - twoodfin 13y ago
- ihsw 13y ago
  > The danger here is that if we do nothing, that will be seen as tacit acceptance of the world's largest spying apparatus. Your acceptance is not required for the spying programs to continue operating. The sooner you realize that is the sooner you'll realize that your choices are currently very limited.
  - einhverfr 13y ago
    There are two issues that I think that are important to keep in mind though. The first big story here is the extent to which the US government has been (and continues to) compel big internet businesses and telco's to do their spying for them. This is an important thing to keep in mind, and I think that it is important when we look at what products we as founders develop. One of the huge threats that Google poses is the degree to which disparate sources of tracking information are tied together. With Android, for example, your cell phone is connected to an email address. The second is the degree to which companies are being forced to make things intelligence-friendly. Here I think another point here is to build products which are intelligence-unfriendly as a way of pushing back. I have some ideas for start-ups I would be interested in participating in, in this area. My time availability is less than I would like but.... The first would be a verifiable secure telephony platform, resistant to in the middle eavesdropping, ideally incorporated in a country with strong protections for such things (Switzerland sounds nice). The second would be decentralized cryptography services of some sort. All projects I think would have to be open source because this would help put pressure on governments not to interfere.
  - famousactress 13y ago
    I disagree, they work for us. The sooner you realize that is the sooner we get this fixed.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
      - sillysaurus 13y ago
        They do work for us. Look at SOPA. Once it became clear that it had the potential to be a national issue (i.e. might cost them votes), various senators and representatives began to publicly voice concerns about passing it. Change isn't easy, but it can be effected.
- daywalker 13y ago
  You've just been added to the "List".
  - josh2600 13y ago
    I work for 2600hz, which is literally the number 1 keyword on the CyberTerrorism watch list. I guarantee I'm already on every list.
    - michaelwww 13y ago
      I think you're making a good assumption. I think any one of us who "fits the profile" can assume that they're on a list.
      - josh2600 13y ago
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hundreds-words-avoid-using-online-dont-want-government-spying-you.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hun... I think I use a lot of those words every day. It's hilarious to me that 2600 and Phreaking are both on there when they haven't been a serious threat since the 5ESS switches hit back in the 70's and 80's...
        noir_lord 13y ago
        I can't imagine they will ever take stuff off the list. The funnier thing to do would be for people who are likely on the list to begin using language the way the political class do.
        MichaelGG 13y ago
        That list also contains "Social media", so I think it's fair to say it's an irrelevant list that flags everyone in the world.
- theklub 13y ago
  It's time for a new political party. Forget the people who say it can't be done. Now is the time. We are stuck in a rut and its time to get out. You have a choice, be lazy and accept what is happening or step up and make change. Its clear our current system is rotten.
  - pstuart 13y ago
    Please share your vision of that party's platform.
    - m_myers 13y ago
      In multiparty systems, it is possible to have a single-issue party which is actually electable (see the Pirate Party in Sweden and Germany). But in the US, any party must have a completely defined platform which is acceptable to a majority - or at least a plurality - of voters. That is why the Libertarian and Green parties, both of which receive quite a few votes, are never elected. And that is why the proposed new party has very little chance. If its platform is defined by San Francisco hackers, there's a good chance that I will agree with half of the platform and strongly disagree with the other half, and most of the country will have the same reaction.
      - Androsynth 13y ago
        it doesnt have to be a national party initially. If you took a pro-privacy, socially-liberal, fiscally conservative platform you could make a strong push in large urban centers across the nation. I know that the bay area would be accepting of this (accepting != elected, but it wouldnt get laughed at by the voters, only by the national media). you just cant name it pirate party. In the us that would probably work against you.
    - theklub 13y ago
      The vision that I have includes allowing web based voting on party issues for party members. Complete financial transparency. Debate and decide what the party should support from within. Decide what issues are most important and attempt to tackle those first. I think the platform is that there is no real platform and the members decide what is important. Forget about gay marriage there are real problems in America. (education, war, privacy) I could go on and on about what I think are the issues in America but the point is we need to have a place to discuss these issues and have a group of people that can decide what should be done and then do something about it. Leaving it to a group of old men who are constantly lobbied is no longer an option.
- marquis 13y ago
  This discussion has propelled us internally to completely review all our networking infrastructure, both of us and for our customers. We will definitely be letting everyone one know when we feel 'compliant' for privacy, and where we can't be, and allow for users to opt-out or permanently delete any history we may keep. I think it's been great for us to make this happen and I hope other businesses also look to this as an opportunity. On that note - it should also be an opportunity for any experts here who do security reviews to get some exposure.
- parasubvert 13y ago
  I grew up in the Bush v1- Clinton era with Operation Sundevil, the Steve Jackson Games raid, NSA clipper chip, DMCA, Communications Decency Act, PGP legal battles, etc. The movie Sneakers from 1992 was a great example of the NSA paranoia that existed at the time. The result? Won some, lost some, and the world moved on. What's different now is that this surveillance is legal at scale because the majority of the populace wants it to be. They're more afraid of terrorists than having privacy. Look at the polls: Hacker News (and techies in general) seem to be in quite a bubble in this regard. We have more clout than we did in the 90s, but the difference now is that there's a big Terrorism counter argument to anything we say. A majority of the USA prefers to have the electric eye of Sauron to watch over them, because the alternative -- more freedom that might lead to more terror attacks -- is too scary for them to accept. In that sense, the terrorists have won. There are two viable paths going forward, in my view: (a) Work to convince people they want privacy, and don't want Brin's transparent society - this slows what appears to be the inevitable; (b) Work to ensure accountable oversight of surveillance. No more FISA secret courts, but real public courts and judges and warrants. What's not likely viable is (a) encouraging people to stop using social networks -- they won't, we broadly LIKE being noticed by others, it gives meaning to our otherwise alienated capitalistic existence; (b) encouraging government to stop tracking people -- they're just getting into the game that Google and Facebook is in. If a company can track people, so will the government. The key is that government can and must be held accountable to a degree that companies don't have to be. The US public has chosen not to exercise this power to date out of ignorance, laziness, and/or lack of desire. The likely outcome of all of this is a resurrection and growth in the "darknet", where younger techies go to hide.
  - paganel 13y ago
    > the majority of the USA prefers to have the electric eye of Sauron to watch over them, because the alternative -- more freedom that might lead to more terror attacks -- is too scary for them to accept. As a guy who has never set foot in the States I found it strange when I first heard Dakota Fanning asking Tom Cruise "Is that the terrorists?" in Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" (when an airplane falls over the house they're in), I was asking to myself "why does the Americans' first instinct in case of unknown danger focus on terrorists?". And talking about "the eye of Sauron", there is of course this scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kytDzjuBGJI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kytDzjuBGJI , which still gives me the chills. An under-estimated movie, IMHO.
sp332 13y ago
What is to be done? The answer is easy. It has always been easy. Stop saying "not in my name" and start saying "over my dead body". That's what we did. It works. Do it. --Julian Assange, receiving the Global Exchange Human Rights Award http://wlcentral.org/node/2818 http://wlcentral.org/node/2818
gonvaled 13y ago
This is all nice and good. Unfortunately, it means absolutely nothing. Since we know that lying is (by law) part of what corporations are forced to do when addressing questions of "national security", no amount of denies, press releases, public outrage or congressional talk will restore trust. Even new legislation specifically forbidding snooping will not help, since we can never be sure that there is no "secret legislation" specifically allowing it - and forcing companies to comply. I am sure lots of people want to genuinely change the situation in the US. Unfortunately, we can not believe it. For all the talk that the reddit co-founder will, as a private person, make, the simple question to reddit-the-company: "are you snooping on me" has no meaning whatsoever. Either the answer will be a "no comment", or it will always be perceived to be lie.
- jacobparker 13y ago
  > Since we know that lying is (by law) part of what corporations are forced to do when addressing questions of "national security", no amount of denies, press releases, public outrage or congressional talk will restore trust. What law are you referring to? The FISA gag orders do not mandate lying.
  - gonvaled 13y ago
    Corporations have been denying participation for years because acknowledging being part of the program was a crime.
    - jacobparker 13y ago
      What law are you talking about? Google has hardly been denying participation with NSL gag orders; they've been pretty vocal about it. What they aren't legally allowed to do is to disclose details about them or inform the subjects of them. They publish aggregate numbers of the non-secret ones here, by the way: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US/ http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US...
      - 13y ago
btipling 13y ago
Nice ddg plug at the end there. Always be closing. :P
- kn0thing 13y ago
  You'd think I were an investor! Just a superfan.
  - rexreed 13y ago
    That's great! Do you get down to Philly or Baltimore much? We've got a big fan base here that would love to chat with you at a TechBreakfast in Philly or Baltimore - let me know.
    - kn0thing 13y ago
      I was raised in Columbia, MD and my dad lives outside of Towson these days, so yes. I'd love to stop by on the http:/withouttheirpermission.com book tour! Details will be on the site soon, but I'm planning a legendary 100 stop tour :) and will definitely be hitting both cities...
      - bostonvaulter2 13y ago
        Will you hit Hawaii/Honolulu on your book tour? We'd love to have you!
        kn0thing 13y ago
        Well, the plan was to do it all via RV :) what's the best university to do it at? I could always use another excuse to go back to Hawaii....
        bostonvaulter2 13y ago
        The best university would be The University Of Hawaii. And then get some general community members involved as well.
hawkharris 13y ago
Alexis is a good speaker. It's refreshing to see a founder talk about his startup in down-to-earth terms instead of being egotistical and speaking in platitudes.
- Nrsolis 13y ago
  He's actually improved over time. I saw him on a panel and he was rolled over by a MPAA/RIAA shill. I'm glad he's grown more confident and poised on screen.
  - kn0thing 13y ago
    I've been doing public speaking for a while now (e.g., my TED talk was back in '09 http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash_in_social_media.html http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash...) but live TV 'debate' is a whole 'nother beast. You're talking about my first 'debate' on MSNBC (it pains me to link to it but....) http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.com/_news/2012/01/15/10161056-debating-sopa http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.com/_news/2012/01/15/10161056-... Yeah, I was totally unprepared for that format (my first 'debate') and it was covered in failsauce. I just couldn't believe he'd so brazenly lie like that, interrupt, etc. The feedback on reddit and HN was pretty helpful, though, and the day of the blackout I was on literally every other network much better armed. (shameless plug: I write about all of this in great detail in my forthcoming book, Without Their Permission) http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/01/18/exp-point-ohanian-sopa-pipa.cnn?iref=allsearch http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/01/18/exp-poi... http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/ol56z/reddit_founder_alexis_ohanian_on_cnbc_why_is_it/ http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/ol56z/reddit_found... (never do an interview on a cell phone) http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1400506693001/websites-go-dark-to-protest-anti-piracy-bills http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1400506693001/websites-go-dar... http://www.bloomberg.com/video/83688294-reddit-com-opposition-to-stop-online-piracy-act.html http://www.bloomberg.com/video/83688294-reddit-com-oppositio... The next time I was invited for a debate (fast company conference in NY) it was a different story, imho: http://www.fastcompany.com/1834779/reddit-cofounder-bands-ex-tour-manager-debate-sopa-antipiracy-and-levon-helms-legacy-video http://www.fastcompany.com/1834779/reddit-cofounder-bands-ex...
xtc 13y ago
Glossing over the data that you could glean from reddit was a mistake. Even if there isn't that much valuable data directly from reddit's back-end it's probably more useful to tie it to data from the same users extracted from other websites. You shouldn't have down-played that.
Kiro 13y ago
Off-topic but I wish there was a way to filter out all these NSA stories. It has really destroyed Hacker News for me and I hope it doesn't go on for too long.
- gzavitz 13y ago
  So you're cool with what the NSA is doing?
  - jpreiland 13y ago
    He probably just wants to read about development without 70% of the front page being about NSA stuff. I'm pretty new here, but as far as I know this isn't National Security News, it's Hacker News. Not wanting to see it on HN specifically doesn't mean you're okay with it. I know it's a big deal, but it's getting annoying to me too.
    - Terretta 13y ago
      > as far as I know this isn't National Security News, it's Hacker News For many of us, data information and national security stories inspired our early devops years. For example, The Cuckoo's Egg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cuckoo's_Egg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cuckoo's_Egg This NSA story and all the discussions around its implications go to the heart of thinking around access to the world's information and how all humans relate to it, our work, and each other as global citizens. I can think of nothing of more compelling interest than who has custody of our future, whether as info entrepreneurs, devops hackers, or "end users" growing up in this apprehensive new world.
  - maxerickson 13y ago
    I don't think discussion here is particularly going to contribute to the voice of the public that would actually do something to change it. Sorry for the fuzzy expression there, nothing better jumped to mind.
    - michaelwww 13y ago
aaronsnoswell 13y ago
Why the hell does CNN's video player play on load?
- driverdan 13y ago
  Use click to play for all plugins. Problem (and many other problems) solved.
omd 13y ago
I think it's time we give up on the idea of communicating privately over a centralized network. Wiretapping was invented only a few years after the invention of the telephone[1]. It won't be stopped by technology and certainly not by legislation. People need to get used treating the Internet as a public space: cover your mouth when you cough, don't pick your nose in public and don't communicate sensitive information over the Internet. The next big thing (hopefully soon) will be communication through a decentralized, infrastructure-less device. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_tapping#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_tapping#History
- draggnar 13y ago
  The outgoing chairman of the FCC was interviewed recently [1] and alluded to new ad hoc networks created by cell phone users, to be used in times of emergencies where networks get overloaded. [1] http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12968 http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12968
- electrograv 13y ago
  It seems like no matter what you do, it will always be possible for someone to tap into a wire or node between point A and point B (unless some revolutionary point-to-point information teleportation is invented). So isn't the next big thing just the strengthening (or proper application) of encryption? Otherwise, how can a "decentralized, infrastructure-less" system really guarantee any privacy beyond simply making it more of a hassle to wiretap?
rkuester 13y ago
Thank you, Alexis. Well done.
- kn0thing 13y ago
  You're quite welcome! Thanks!
brador 13y ago
The entire conecept of pre-crime is everyone is a suspect, and you can never be proven innocent because you haven't yet committed the crime you are alleged to eventually commit. It's scary stuff yet surprisingly innevitable given the direction of AI.
iuguy 13y ago
I have some ideas and some plans in mind for getting around this. If anyone in particular would be interested in helping to set up or back a privacy-oriented startup aimed at defeating a lot of what's been going on, then please get in touch via my profile.
robomartin 13y ago
Perhaps the number one priority of those in tech should be to educate the public about the potential intrusiveness of data surveillance. Politicians and idiot TV hosts have made statements akin to "all they are collecting are phone numbers, times and cell tower data". Ha! Give me that and access to other sources such as LinkedIn, Facebook, your email on Gmail, your Google docs, IRS and state tax filings, court documents, vehicle registration, travel records, Amazon, Ebay, college and university records and a myriad of other publicly and not-so-publicly available data and those phone numbers become powerful unique identifiers through which I can learn just about everything about you, your family, your friends, colleagues, occupation, hobbies, history and more. There's nothing innocent or insignificant about "just collecting phone numbers".
g8oz 13y ago
Tangentially ontopic: I remember an offhand comment from someone in the intel community a few years ago that went along the lines of "you can't really have privacy unless you run your own DNS servers". Can they really store all dns lookups?
eggnet 13y ago
Reddit has information that can be used to identify the author of a submission or comment. I was a disappointed to hear the soft stance on protecting reddit user data.
- scarlson 13y ago
  Hanging out in /r/redditdev and /r/ideasfortheadmins, you'd be surprised how often ideas come up that could potentially harm users that some admins will either champion or agree with. I guess it's the same as any small company in that everyone is going to have an opinion, I just wish they had someone more anal about protecting users first on their staff. I do my best to speak out against anything that could compromise user privacy/security, but in the end it's not up to me!
  - bornhuetter 13y ago
    Have you got any examples of this? There are plenty of terrible ideas on /r/ideasfortheadmins, but I don't remember seeing Admins agree with them very often.
notdrunkatall 13y ago
Kind of surprised this isn't on the front page of reddit right now.
- octatone2 13y ago
  Well it's not a .gif ... so...
- kn0thing 13y ago
  Hmm, yeah, it did so-so on /r/politics, maybe it'll have more luck on /r/technology -- most of the time I'm happy there isn't a Kevin Rose <-> digg relationship between me <-> reddit, but every now and then it'd be helpful.
makerops 13y ago
I think one of the ways this bullshit is solved is liquid democracy. Allow people to transfer votes to people they feel are experts via a bitcoin like system. 90% of people have only an interest in a very small subset of topics that they vote on. They aren't qualified to cast a vote, why not allow them to delegate to an expert? Of course buying votes would be highly illegal.
- greedo 13y ago
  I think that's what's known as a representative democracy...
  - makerops 13y ago
    Kind of, but not really. In a representative democracy, you are voting a professional politician into office, who's sole existence is to stay in office. They are beholden to money, and outside interests. With a liquid democracy, it is essentially a direct democracy, without all the headaches. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegative_democracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegative_democracy
payomdousti 13y ago
Couldn't get past the fact that the interviewer probably did 0 prep work for this.
stevetursi 13y ago
Hastily-transcribed transcript for those who can't watch the video: Q "NSA and PRISM - what's the sentiment in the valley?" A "Maybe this is indicative of the fact that I live in New York; that I've never really been part of that herd. We are as citizens I think really upset, really frustrated because we have an expectation that whether it is our private property offline or online, that it will be respected, and that's what the Fourth Amendment protects. And needless to say it was rather disappointing to see all this news come out and apparently much more on the way." Q "You're building a startup that could become the next Reddit or Facebook: At what point do you say, 'I think I got to get a Lawyer?'" A "Yeah it will certainly come up a lot sooner for founders and founders who were maybe thinking, 'move fast and break things' will now think 'move fast and break things but don't break the constitution.' And this is an opportunity for us as citizens to start to draw a line in the sand for what is off-limits and private in the digital age." Q "If the government asked you for information, what information could you give them?" A "Well there really isn't any. When people use reddit as a platform to publicly share links and publicly have discussions. So the primary use of the site is that is in public so there really isn't a ton of useful data there." Q "What advice do you give these young folks who are building these companies and this is becoming a reality?" A "There's my investor hat, my founder hat, and my citizen hat - and that citizen hat trumps everything else. And I want to make sure that the environment we are starting companies in has a government that respects the our right to privacy so that these kinds of discussions going forward aren't even a factor or an issue and I think the ability for us to use this technology has sort of outpaced - unfortunately - some of our legislator's understanding of what kind of laws they should be writing. Whether it's making sure our elected officials understand the internet and understand technology is just as important though as making sure we get more of these people who inherently and innately understand this technology into office. I think the other interesting thing is more and more founders are really rallying behind companies now that are themselves built on a model of respecting privacy. One that I know rather well is called duckdduckgo and it's a venture backed by USV here in New York - a search engine competitor to google and their core business proposition is 'we don't track anything you search for on our site.' And so I imagine more startups to kind of take that lead."
- kn0thing 13y ago
CurtMonash 13y ago
Good piece. His personal concern is for "chilling effect". His public concern beyond that is for blackmail of national leaders. That actually worries me less, as the public is becoming much more tolerant of "vice" in its leaders. (For example -- President Obama is an admitted cocaine and pot user; President Bush was an admitted drunkard and widely-suspected cocaine user; President Clinton was a widely-suspected adulterer and pot user.)

370 points by kn0thing 13y ago

Goddamn right. Every now and then we have defining moments of global consciousness. This has the potential to be one of those moments and we should never let a good crisis go to waste. The danger here is that if we do nothing, that will be seen as tacit acceptance of the world's largest spying apparatus. While I acknowledge there's some necessity globally, domestic spying through secret courts is more synonymous with the Gulag than the American dream. Stand up for what you believe in; this is one time you can.

twoodfin 13y ago
Specifically, what "domestic spying" are you talking about? I'm curious where the line is you're trying to draw.
- grey-area 13y ago
  Specifically, what "domestic spying" are you talking about? Since you ask: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-n... In particular see the 3rd slide down for the type of information the NSA claims it can collect. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-record... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-in... http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-surveillance-subverting-constitution http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-... http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-partisanship-propaganda-prism http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-part... I'm curious where the line is you're trying to draw. Can't speak for the OP, but I imagine for most people that line is somewhere well before the mass surveillance of phone records etc which the US is currently engaging in. Are you genuinely confused about why people might oppose that or care about it?
  - josh2600 13y ago
    OP here: as many of you know I work in the bowels of the Internet on very large telecom networks and have for most of my career. It has always been assumed that the traffic that leaves the US border was being monitored; I don't think anyone can or will dispute that. The difference is forcing private businesses to place unmarked rooms inside of buildings with vampire fiber taps at All of the major domestic interconnects. That's a problem and completely unnecessary. I object to dragnets, I do not object to lawful intercepts. The distinction might be moot, but if there wasn't a secret fisa court signing all of these documents the monitored parties could even sue. Remember when the NSA got caught monitoring those Arabic students when they sent them their own call records? The students sued the NSA but the court case was thrown out because the NSA argued that even though the students had possession of the call records, they couldn't use them in court because they were classified. What I want is security through tireless effort not through dragnet expediency. It's hard to be the NSA. It's hard to stop terrorists. I believe our country has enough skilled intelligence officials to deliver security without sacrificing liberty. Is that cynical?
    - lifeisstillgood 13y ago
      > I believe our country has enough skilled intelligence officials to deliver security without sacrificing liberty. Just wonderful :-) Have all the up votes I can give you
      - josh2600 13y ago
        Give the EFF your up votes :). https://supporters.eff.org/donate https://supporters.eff.org/donate
        lifeisstillgood 13y ago
        A very cool response. I can only regretfully say I have joined the Openrightsgroup as they and I are based in the UK. Same sh*t, different politicians.
  - twoodfin 13y ago
ihsw 13y ago
> The danger here is that if we do nothing, that will be seen as tacit acceptance of the world's largest spying apparatus. Your acceptance is not required for the spying programs to continue operating. The sooner you realize that is the sooner you'll realize that your choices are currently very limited.
- einhverfr 13y ago
  There are two issues that I think that are important to keep in mind though. The first big story here is the extent to which the US government has been (and continues to) compel big internet businesses and telco's to do their spying for them. This is an important thing to keep in mind, and I think that it is important when we look at what products we as founders develop. One of the huge threats that Google poses is the degree to which disparate sources of tracking information are tied together. With Android, for example, your cell phone is connected to an email address. The second is the degree to which companies are being forced to make things intelligence-friendly. Here I think another point here is to build products which are intelligence-unfriendly as a way of pushing back. I have some ideas for start-ups I would be interested in participating in, in this area. My time availability is less than I would like but.... The first would be a verifiable secure telephony platform, resistant to in the middle eavesdropping, ideally incorporated in a country with strong protections for such things (Switzerland sounds nice). The second would be decentralized cryptography services of some sort. All projects I think would have to be open source because this would help put pressure on governments not to interfere.
- famousactress 13y ago
  I disagree, they work for us. The sooner you realize that is the sooner we get this fixed.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
    - sillysaurus 13y ago
      They do work for us. Look at SOPA. Once it became clear that it had the potential to be a national issue (i.e. might cost them votes), various senators and representatives began to publicly voice concerns about passing it. Change isn't easy, but it can be effected.
daywalker 13y ago
You've just been added to the "List".
- josh2600 13y ago
  I work for 2600hz, which is literally the number 1 keyword on the CyberTerrorism watch list. I guarantee I'm already on every list.
  - michaelwww 13y ago
    I think you're making a good assumption. I think any one of us who "fits the profile" can assume that they're on a list.
    - josh2600 13y ago
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hundreds-words-avoid-using-online-dont-want-government-spying-you.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hun... I think I use a lot of those words every day. It's hilarious to me that 2600 and Phreaking are both on there when they haven't been a serious threat since the 5ESS switches hit back in the 70's and 80's...
      - noir_lord 13y ago
        I can't imagine they will ever take stuff off the list. The funnier thing to do would be for people who are likely on the list to begin using language the way the political class do.
      - MichaelGG 13y ago
        That list also contains "Social media", so I think it's fair to say it's an irrelevant list that flags everyone in the world.
theklub 13y ago
It's time for a new political party. Forget the people who say it can't be done. Now is the time. We are stuck in a rut and its time to get out. You have a choice, be lazy and accept what is happening or step up and make change. Its clear our current system is rotten.
- pstuart 13y ago
  Please share your vision of that party's platform.
  - m_myers 13y ago
    In multiparty systems, it is possible to have a single-issue party which is actually electable (see the Pirate Party in Sweden and Germany). But in the US, any party must have a completely defined platform which is acceptable to a majority - or at least a plurality - of voters. That is why the Libertarian and Green parties, both of which receive quite a few votes, are never elected. And that is why the proposed new party has very little chance. If its platform is defined by San Francisco hackers, there's a good chance that I will agree with half of the platform and strongly disagree with the other half, and most of the country will have the same reaction.
    - Androsynth 13y ago
      it doesnt have to be a national party initially. If you took a pro-privacy, socially-liberal, fiscally conservative platform you could make a strong push in large urban centers across the nation. I know that the bay area would be accepting of this (accepting != elected, but it wouldnt get laughed at by the voters, only by the national media). you just cant name it pirate party. In the us that would probably work against you.
  - theklub 13y ago
    The vision that I have includes allowing web based voting on party issues for party members. Complete financial transparency. Debate and decide what the party should support from within. Decide what issues are most important and attempt to tackle those first. I think the platform is that there is no real platform and the members decide what is important. Forget about gay marriage there are real problems in America. (education, war, privacy) I could go on and on about what I think are the issues in America but the point is we need to have a place to discuss these issues and have a group of people that can decide what should be done and then do something about it. Leaving it to a group of old men who are constantly lobbied is no longer an option.
marquis 13y ago
This discussion has propelled us internally to completely review all our networking infrastructure, both of us and for our customers. We will definitely be letting everyone one know when we feel 'compliant' for privacy, and where we can't be, and allow for users to opt-out or permanently delete any history we may keep. I think it's been great for us to make this happen and I hope other businesses also look to this as an opportunity. On that note - it should also be an opportunity for any experts here who do security reviews to get some exposure.
parasubvert 13y ago
I grew up in the Bush v1- Clinton era with Operation Sundevil, the Steve Jackson Games raid, NSA clipper chip, DMCA, Communications Decency Act, PGP legal battles, etc. The movie Sneakers from 1992 was a great example of the NSA paranoia that existed at the time. The result? Won some, lost some, and the world moved on. What's different now is that this surveillance is legal at scale because the majority of the populace wants it to be. They're more afraid of terrorists than having privacy. Look at the polls: Hacker News (and techies in general) seem to be in quite a bubble in this regard. We have more clout than we did in the 90s, but the difference now is that there's a big Terrorism counter argument to anything we say. A majority of the USA prefers to have the electric eye of Sauron to watch over them, because the alternative -- more freedom that might lead to more terror attacks -- is too scary for them to accept. In that sense, the terrorists have won. There are two viable paths going forward, in my view: (a) Work to convince people they want privacy, and don't want Brin's transparent society - this slows what appears to be the inevitable; (b) Work to ensure accountable oversight of surveillance. No more FISA secret courts, but real public courts and judges and warrants. What's not likely viable is (a) encouraging people to stop using social networks -- they won't, we broadly LIKE being noticed by others, it gives meaning to our otherwise alienated capitalistic existence; (b) encouraging government to stop tracking people -- they're just getting into the game that Google and Facebook is in. If a company can track people, so will the government. The key is that government can and must be held accountable to a degree that companies don't have to be. The US public has chosen not to exercise this power to date out of ignorance, laziness, and/or lack of desire. The likely outcome of all of this is a resurrection and growth in the "darknet", where younger techies go to hide.
- paganel 13y ago
  > the majority of the USA prefers to have the electric eye of Sauron to watch over them, because the alternative -- more freedom that might lead to more terror attacks -- is too scary for them to accept. As a guy who has never set foot in the States I found it strange when I first heard Dakota Fanning asking Tom Cruise "Is that the terrorists?" in Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" (when an airplane falls over the house they're in), I was asking to myself "why does the Americans' first instinct in case of unknown danger focus on terrorists?". And talking about "the eye of Sauron", there is of course this scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kytDzjuBGJI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kytDzjuBGJI , which still gives me the chills. An under-estimated movie, IMHO.

sp332 13y ago

What is to be done? The answer is easy. It has always been easy. Stop saying "not in my name" and start saying "over my dead body". That's what we did. It works. Do it. --Julian Assange, receiving the Global Exchange Human Rights Award http://wlcentral.org/node/2818 http://wlcentral.org/node/2818

gonvaled 13y ago

This is all nice and good. Unfortunately, it means absolutely nothing. Since we know that lying is (by law) part of what corporations are forced to do when addressing questions of "national security", no amount of denies, press releases, public outrage or congressional talk will restore trust. Even new legislation specifically forbidding snooping will not help, since we can never be sure that there is no "secret legislation" specifically allowing it - and forcing companies to comply. I am sure lots of people want to genuinely change the situation in the US. Unfortunately, we can not believe it. For all the talk that the reddit co-founder will, as a private person, make, the simple question to reddit-the-company: "are you snooping on me" has no meaning whatsoever. Either the answer will be a "no comment", or it will always be perceived to be lie.

jacobparker 13y ago
> Since we know that lying is (by law) part of what corporations are forced to do when addressing questions of "national security", no amount of denies, press releases, public outrage or congressional talk will restore trust. What law are you referring to? The FISA gag orders do not mandate lying.
- gonvaled 13y ago
  Corporations have been denying participation for years because acknowledging being part of the program was a crime.
  - jacobparker 13y ago
    What law are you talking about? Google has hardly been denying participation with NSL gag orders; they've been pretty vocal about it. What they aren't legally allowed to do is to disclose details about them or inform the subjects of them. They publish aggregate numbers of the non-secret ones here, by the way: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US/ http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US...
    - 13y ago

btipling 13y ago

Nice ddg plug at the end there. Always be closing. :P

kn0thing 13y ago
You'd think I were an investor! Just a superfan.
- rexreed 13y ago
  That's great! Do you get down to Philly or Baltimore much? We've got a big fan base here that would love to chat with you at a TechBreakfast in Philly or Baltimore - let me know.
  - kn0thing 13y ago
    I was raised in Columbia, MD and my dad lives outside of Towson these days, so yes. I'd love to stop by on the http:/withouttheirpermission.com book tour! Details will be on the site soon, but I'm planning a legendary 100 stop tour :) and will definitely be hitting both cities...
    - bostonvaulter2 13y ago
      Will you hit Hawaii/Honolulu on your book tour? We'd love to have you!
      - kn0thing 13y ago
        Well, the plan was to do it all via RV :) what's the best university to do it at? I could always use another excuse to go back to Hawaii....
        bostonvaulter2 13y ago
        The best university would be The University Of Hawaii. And then get some general community members involved as well.

hawkharris 13y ago

Alexis is a good speaker. It's refreshing to see a founder talk about his startup in down-to-earth terms instead of being egotistical and speaking in platitudes.

Nrsolis 13y ago
He's actually improved over time. I saw him on a panel and he was rolled over by a MPAA/RIAA shill. I'm glad he's grown more confident and poised on screen.
- kn0thing 13y ago
  I've been doing public speaking for a while now (e.g., my TED talk was back in '09 http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash_in_social_media.html http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash...) but live TV 'debate' is a whole 'nother beast. You're talking about my first 'debate' on MSNBC (it pains me to link to it but....) http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.com/_news/2012/01/15/10161056-debating-sopa http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.com/_news/2012/01/15/10161056-... Yeah, I was totally unprepared for that format (my first 'debate') and it was covered in failsauce. I just couldn't believe he'd so brazenly lie like that, interrupt, etc. The feedback on reddit and HN was pretty helpful, though, and the day of the blackout I was on literally every other network much better armed. (shameless plug: I write about all of this in great detail in my forthcoming book, Without Their Permission) http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/01/18/exp-point-ohanian-sopa-pipa.cnn?iref=allsearch http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/01/18/exp-poi... http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/ol56z/reddit_founder_alexis_ohanian_on_cnbc_why_is_it/ http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/ol56z/reddit_found... (never do an interview on a cell phone) http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1400506693001/websites-go-dark-to-protest-anti-piracy-bills http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1400506693001/websites-go-dar... http://www.bloomberg.com/video/83688294-reddit-com-opposition-to-stop-online-piracy-act.html http://www.bloomberg.com/video/83688294-reddit-com-oppositio... The next time I was invited for a debate (fast company conference in NY) it was a different story, imho: http://www.fastcompany.com/1834779/reddit-cofounder-bands-ex-tour-manager-debate-sopa-antipiracy-and-levon-helms-legacy-video http://www.fastcompany.com/1834779/reddit-cofounder-bands-ex...

xtc 13y ago

Glossing over the data that you could glean from reddit was a mistake. Even if there isn't that much valuable data directly from reddit's back-end it's probably more useful to tie it to data from the same users extracted from other websites. You shouldn't have down-played that.

Kiro 13y ago

Off-topic but I wish there was a way to filter out all these NSA stories. It has really destroyed Hacker News for me and I hope it doesn't go on for too long.

gzavitz 13y ago
So you're cool with what the NSA is doing?
- jpreiland 13y ago
  He probably just wants to read about development without 70% of the front page being about NSA stuff. I'm pretty new here, but as far as I know this isn't National Security News, it's Hacker News. Not wanting to see it on HN specifically doesn't mean you're okay with it. I know it's a big deal, but it's getting annoying to me too.
  - Terretta 13y ago
    > as far as I know this isn't National Security News, it's Hacker News For many of us, data information and national security stories inspired our early devops years. For example, The Cuckoo's Egg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cuckoo's_Egg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cuckoo's_Egg This NSA story and all the discussions around its implications go to the heart of thinking around access to the world's information and how all humans relate to it, our work, and each other as global citizens. I can think of nothing of more compelling interest than who has custody of our future, whether as info entrepreneurs, devops hackers, or "end users" growing up in this apprehensive new world.
- maxerickson 13y ago
  I don't think discussion here is particularly going to contribute to the voice of the public that would actually do something to change it. Sorry for the fuzzy expression there, nothing better jumped to mind.
  - michaelwww 13y ago

aaronsnoswell 13y ago

Why the hell does CNN's video player play on load?

driverdan 13y ago
Use click to play for all plugins. Problem (and many other problems) solved.

omd 13y ago

I think it's time we give up on the idea of communicating privately over a centralized network. Wiretapping was invented only a few years after the invention of the telephone[1]. It won't be stopped by technology and certainly not by legislation. People need to get used treating the Internet as a public space: cover your mouth when you cough, don't pick your nose in public and don't communicate sensitive information over the Internet. The next big thing (hopefully soon) will be communication through a decentralized, infrastructure-less device. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_tapping#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_tapping#History

draggnar 13y ago
The outgoing chairman of the FCC was interviewed recently [1] and alluded to new ad hoc networks created by cell phone users, to be used in times of emergencies where networks get overloaded. [1] http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12968 http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12968
electrograv 13y ago
It seems like no matter what you do, it will always be possible for someone to tap into a wire or node between point A and point B (unless some revolutionary point-to-point information teleportation is invented). So isn't the next big thing just the strengthening (or proper application) of encryption? Otherwise, how can a "decentralized, infrastructure-less" system really guarantee any privacy beyond simply making it more of a hassle to wiretap?

rkuester 13y ago

Thank you, Alexis. Well done.

kn0thing 13y ago
You're quite welcome! Thanks!

brador 13y ago

The entire conecept of pre-crime is everyone is a suspect, and you can never be proven innocent because you haven't yet committed the crime you are alleged to eventually commit. It's scary stuff yet surprisingly innevitable given the direction of AI.

iuguy 13y ago

I have some ideas and some plans in mind for getting around this. If anyone in particular would be interested in helping to set up or back a privacy-oriented startup aimed at defeating a lot of what's been going on, then please get in touch via my profile.

robomartin 13y ago

Perhaps the number one priority of those in tech should be to educate the public about the potential intrusiveness of data surveillance. Politicians and idiot TV hosts have made statements akin to "all they are collecting are phone numbers, times and cell tower data". Ha! Give me that and access to other sources such as LinkedIn, Facebook, your email on Gmail, your Google docs, IRS and state tax filings, court documents, vehicle registration, travel records, Amazon, Ebay, college and university records and a myriad of other publicly and not-so-publicly available data and those phone numbers become powerful unique identifiers through which I can learn just about everything about you, your family, your friends, colleagues, occupation, hobbies, history and more. There's nothing innocent or insignificant about "just collecting phone numbers".

g8oz 13y ago

Tangentially ontopic: I remember an offhand comment from someone in the intel community a few years ago that went along the lines of "you can't really have privacy unless you run your own DNS servers". Can they really store all dns lookups?

eggnet 13y ago

Reddit has information that can be used to identify the author of a submission or comment. I was a disappointed to hear the soft stance on protecting reddit user data.

scarlson 13y ago
Hanging out in /r/redditdev and /r/ideasfortheadmins, you'd be surprised how often ideas come up that could potentially harm users that some admins will either champion or agree with. I guess it's the same as any small company in that everyone is going to have an opinion, I just wish they had someone more anal about protecting users first on their staff. I do my best to speak out against anything that could compromise user privacy/security, but in the end it's not up to me!
- bornhuetter 13y ago
  Have you got any examples of this? There are plenty of terrible ideas on /r/ideasfortheadmins, but I don't remember seeing Admins agree with them very often.

notdrunkatall 13y ago

Kind of surprised this isn't on the front page of reddit right now.

octatone2 13y ago
Well it's not a .gif ... so...
kn0thing 13y ago
Hmm, yeah, it did so-so on /r/politics, maybe it'll have more luck on /r/technology -- most of the time I'm happy there isn't a Kevin Rose <-> digg relationship between me <-> reddit, but every now and then it'd be helpful.

makerops 13y ago

I think one of the ways this bullshit is solved is liquid democracy. Allow people to transfer votes to people they feel are experts via a bitcoin like system. 90% of people have only an interest in a very small subset of topics that they vote on. They aren't qualified to cast a vote, why not allow them to delegate to an expert? Of course buying votes would be highly illegal.

greedo 13y ago
I think that's what's known as a representative democracy...
- makerops 13y ago
  Kind of, but not really. In a representative democracy, you are voting a professional politician into office, who's sole existence is to stay in office. They are beholden to money, and outside interests. With a liquid democracy, it is essentially a direct democracy, without all the headaches. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegative_democracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegative_democracy

payomdousti 13y ago

Couldn't get past the fact that the interviewer probably did 0 prep work for this.

stevetursi 13y ago

Hastily-transcribed transcript for those who can't watch the video: Q "NSA and PRISM - what's the sentiment in the valley?" A "Maybe this is indicative of the fact that I live in New York; that I've never really been part of that herd. We are as citizens I think really upset, really frustrated because we have an expectation that whether it is our private property offline or online, that it will be respected, and that's what the Fourth Amendment protects. And needless to say it was rather disappointing to see all this news come out and apparently much more on the way." Q "You're building a startup that could become the next Reddit or Facebook: At what point do you say, 'I think I got to get a Lawyer?'" A "Yeah it will certainly come up a lot sooner for founders and founders who were maybe thinking, 'move fast and break things' will now think 'move fast and break things but don't break the constitution.' And this is an opportunity for us as citizens to start to draw a line in the sand for what is off-limits and private in the digital age." Q "If the government asked you for information, what information could you give them?" A "Well there really isn't any. When people use reddit as a platform to publicly share links and publicly have discussions. So the primary use of the site is that is in public so there really isn't a ton of useful data there." Q "What advice do you give these young folks who are building these companies and this is becoming a reality?" A "There's my investor hat, my founder hat, and my citizen hat - and that citizen hat trumps everything else. And I want to make sure that the environment we are starting companies in has a government that respects the our right to privacy so that these kinds of discussions going forward aren't even a factor or an issue and I think the ability for us to use this technology has sort of outpaced - unfortunately - some of our legislator's understanding of what kind of laws they should be writing. Whether it's making sure our elected officials understand the internet and understand technology is just as important though as making sure we get more of these people who inherently and innately understand this technology into office. I think the other interesting thing is more and more founders are really rallying behind companies now that are themselves built on a model of respecting privacy. One that I know rather well is called duckdduckgo and it's a venture backed by USV here in New York - a search engine competitor to google and their core business proposition is 'we don't track anything you search for on our site.' And so I imagine more startups to kind of take that lead."

kn0thing 13y ago

CurtMonash 13y ago

Good piece. His personal concern is for "chilling effect". His public concern beyond that is for blackmail of national leaders. That actually worries me less, as the public is becoming much more tolerant of "vice" in its leaders. (For example -- President Obama is an admitted cocaine and pot user; President Bush was an admitted drunkard and widely-suspected cocaine user; President Clinton was a widely-suspected adulterer and pot user.)