4 ms·

You're ridiculous. This comment is a spectacular example of the faulty politicizing and black and white mentality being tossed about willy-nilly since the NSA s

You're ridiculous. This comment is a spectacular example of the faulty politicizing and black and white mentality being tossed about willy-nilly since the NSA scandal. First of all - this is not indicative of Russia. This is just one Russian national giving him a job, and his stated reasons in the press may not be the real reasons why. Second, Russia gave him asylum yes, but instead of echo chambering your preconceived beliefs about the NSA, why don't you apply the same critical skepticism to news coming out of Russia? Why don't you examine why Russia might want to grant asylum to an American refugee like Snowden instead of just saying, "Oh, they just get it man. They get it." Third, there isn't anything concrete to get - the NSA isn't an evil, demonic institution sent here as a harbinger of the apocalypse. It's an institution whose abuses were wildly exaggerated and need to be corrected, not something to be burned to the ground. The country would not be better off without the agency in its entirety. You're just applying this naive sense of cops and robbers to the entire dilemma and not critically examining all the evidence/stories. Your bias allows you to over-criticize one side and over-praise the other.

danenania 13y ago
Sorry, secretly storing and analyzing the private communications and browsing history of everyone on the planet absolutely is evil. Doesn't matter what the reason is. If you don't understand this, there is something severely wrong with your moral compass.
- dylangs1030 13y ago
  This is one of the few times I've seen a genuine ad hominem on Hacker News...thank you for attacking my "moral compass" instead of the substance of my argument. Now, to counter what you said - you're reaching by claiming the NSA "secretly stores and analyzes" the private communications of everyone on the planet. One interpretation of the materials originally leaked purports this, but there is also data contesting this view which is equally valid. Again - the echo chamber and bias allows you to just unilaterally suppose the NSA is capable of retrieving all data everywhere, but you're not examining counter evidence. X-Keyscore allows email and web content surveillance, yes, but it isn't even practical to mine all data at once - it is much more practical (and probable) that this allows for finding and assembling an entry point to see where you should really begin looking in depth as an NSA analyst[1]. But, no, your traffic is not being viewed universally or entirely without someone at least believing there's a reason. [1]: http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jul/31/nsa-xkeyscore-program-full-presentation http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jul/31/nsa...
  - monsterix 13y ago
    Not to dissuade or disagree with your thoughts, but your opinion about evilness of this program will change over time. For example, when you get stuck (God forbid) in an unwarranted situation or a legal hassle and then the same NSA program you passively protect now is used to check back on your past data/behavior and then pull out useful subjective information and taint you with phrases like "infamous former contractor" and so on ... Have you thought about this? Objectivity is a logical illusion.
    - dylangs1030 13y ago
      Well...I agree personal experience can be a powerful motivator for changing opinions. But what I'm saying is what I have found through researching it. As to my feelings for whether or not the NSA should be preserved vs. destroyed entirely - yes, I could see how personal experience could skew this. I, thankfully, haven't had such interference in my life. But I also want to point out I'm not protecting the NSA's PRISM et al. programs. I think they're too strong, and too obscured. But I do believe the NSA can replace them with more functional, transparent tools that will achieve the same goals. I also believe people are being swayed by big headlines and pathos arguments that prevent them from examining the NSA critically instead of passionately - I don't think it's as bad as everyone makes it seem.
      - D9u 13y ago
        (Ad hominems?) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6178980 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6178980 You're assuming that I haven't actually done my homework and am making an off-the-cuff statement based upon media exposure, when the facts of this matter are that I have done my homework on this topic. (Obama on domestic surveillance, 2007) http://youtu.be/ZVUwUCe1e-A http://youtu.be/ZVUwUCe1e-A (Why we don't trust the government) https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/08/restoring_trust.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/08/restoring_tru... (The Terrorism Delusion) http://politicalscience.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/absisfin.pdf http://politicalscience.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/absisfin.pd... As the facts are, and looking at the situation objectively, the sustained reaction to the 9/11 incident is uncalled for, especially when the US has gone through previous decades which had seen exponentially more terrorist (lots of bombs) activity on US soil than any time since, yet back then the government didn't overreact and implement such excessive measures as we see today, in commercial airports where passengers are treated like criminals in a prison, in our electronic communications, and our financial records. I, personally, have never called for the abolition of the NSA, but rather would like to see less intrusive measures employed instead of what they're doing now. Where is the probable cause for the interception, collection, and storage of my electronic communications? Where is the probable cause showing that I might be a terrorist? There are conditions which are supposed to be met when the government wants to violate my 4th Amendment rights, and to add an exception for "National Security," where no exception exists, equates to denial of civil rights, so when it's done on as massive a scale as we see case now it's a gross breach of the public trust and people have a right to voice their displeasure with the actions of their government. To simply sweep this under the rug would be the most unpatriotic thing you could do, and justifying this obviously unpopular program by citing terrorism is disingenuous when viewed from a chronological perspective.
- aurelius83 13y ago
  What exactly is your definition of evil? This seems like such a hyperbolic statement.
  - danenania 13y ago
    "The moment someone keeps an eye on what we do, we involuntarily make allowances for that eye, and nothing we do is truthful. Having a public, keeping a public in mind, means living in lies." -Milan Kundera I think this form of societal corruption is one of the greatest and most insidious evils a government can undertake. You should read some accounts by people who have lived under similar monitoring regimes.
- davvolun 13y ago
  Didn't necessarily disagree with you until "If you don't understand this, there is something severely wrong with your moral compass." Personal attack and severe hyperbole wrapped into one, comments are about encouraging debate, so if you can't do that, just...shhhhh...

danenania 13y ago

Sorry, secretly storing and analyzing the private communications and browsing history of everyone on the planet absolutely is evil. Doesn't matter what the reason is. If you don't understand this, there is something severely wrong with your moral compass.

dylangs1030 13y ago
This is one of the few times I've seen a genuine ad hominem on Hacker News...thank you for attacking my "moral compass" instead of the substance of my argument. Now, to counter what you said - you're reaching by claiming the NSA "secretly stores and analyzes" the private communications of everyone on the planet. One interpretation of the materials originally leaked purports this, but there is also data contesting this view which is equally valid. Again - the echo chamber and bias allows you to just unilaterally suppose the NSA is capable of retrieving all data everywhere, but you're not examining counter evidence. X-Keyscore allows email and web content surveillance, yes, but it isn't even practical to mine all data at once - it is much more practical (and probable) that this allows for finding and assembling an entry point to see where you should really begin looking in depth as an NSA analyst[1]. But, no, your traffic is not being viewed universally or entirely without someone at least believing there's a reason. [1]: http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jul/31/nsa-xkeyscore-program-full-presentation http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jul/31/nsa...
- monsterix 13y ago
  Not to dissuade or disagree with your thoughts, but your opinion about evilness of this program will change over time. For example, when you get stuck (God forbid) in an unwarranted situation or a legal hassle and then the same NSA program you passively protect now is used to check back on your past data/behavior and then pull out useful subjective information and taint you with phrases like "infamous former contractor" and so on ... Have you thought about this? Objectivity is a logical illusion.
  - dylangs1030 13y ago
    Well...I agree personal experience can be a powerful motivator for changing opinions. But what I'm saying is what I have found through researching it. As to my feelings for whether or not the NSA should be preserved vs. destroyed entirely - yes, I could see how personal experience could skew this. I, thankfully, haven't had such interference in my life. But I also want to point out I'm not protecting the NSA's PRISM et al. programs. I think they're too strong, and too obscured. But I do believe the NSA can replace them with more functional, transparent tools that will achieve the same goals. I also believe people are being swayed by big headlines and pathos arguments that prevent them from examining the NSA critically instead of passionately - I don't think it's as bad as everyone makes it seem.
    - D9u 13y ago
      (Ad hominems?) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6178980 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6178980 You're assuming that I haven't actually done my homework and am making an off-the-cuff statement based upon media exposure, when the facts of this matter are that I have done my homework on this topic. (Obama on domestic surveillance, 2007) http://youtu.be/ZVUwUCe1e-A http://youtu.be/ZVUwUCe1e-A (Why we don't trust the government) https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/08/restoring_trust.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/08/restoring_tru... (The Terrorism Delusion) http://politicalscience.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/absisfin.pdf http://politicalscience.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/absisfin.pd... As the facts are, and looking at the situation objectively, the sustained reaction to the 9/11 incident is uncalled for, especially when the US has gone through previous decades which had seen exponentially more terrorist (lots of bombs) activity on US soil than any time since, yet back then the government didn't overreact and implement such excessive measures as we see today, in commercial airports where passengers are treated like criminals in a prison, in our electronic communications, and our financial records. I, personally, have never called for the abolition of the NSA, but rather would like to see less intrusive measures employed instead of what they're doing now. Where is the probable cause for the interception, collection, and storage of my electronic communications? Where is the probable cause showing that I might be a terrorist? There are conditions which are supposed to be met when the government wants to violate my 4th Amendment rights, and to add an exception for "National Security," where no exception exists, equates to denial of civil rights, so when it's done on as massive a scale as we see case now it's a gross breach of the public trust and people have a right to voice their displeasure with the actions of their government. To simply sweep this under the rug would be the most unpatriotic thing you could do, and justifying this obviously unpopular program by citing terrorism is disingenuous when viewed from a chronological perspective.
aurelius83 13y ago
What exactly is your definition of evil? This seems like such a hyperbolic statement.
- danenania 13y ago
  "The moment someone keeps an eye on what we do, we involuntarily make allowances for that eye, and nothing we do is truthful. Having a public, keeping a public in mind, means living in lies." -Milan Kundera I think this form of societal corruption is one of the greatest and most insidious evils a government can undertake. You should read some accounts by people who have lived under similar monitoring regimes.
davvolun 13y ago
Didn't necessarily disagree with you until "If you don't understand this, there is something severely wrong with your moral compass." Personal attack and severe hyperbole wrapped into one, comments are about encouraging debate, so if you can't do that, just...shhhhh...