6 ms·

Jaw: on floor. The mood toughened just over a month ago, when I received a phone call from the centre of government telling me: "You've had your fun. Now we wa

by swombat 13y ago

Jaw: on floor. The mood toughened just over a month ago, when I received a phone call from the centre of government telling me: "You've had your fun. Now we want the stuff back." There followed further meetings with shadowy Whitehall figures. The demand was the same: hand the Snowden material back or destroy it. I explained that we could not research and report on this subject if we complied with this request. The man from Whitehall looked mystified. "You've had your debate. There's no need to write any more."

breckinloggins 13y ago
"You've had your fun. [...]" That line is particularly infuriating.
- VladRussian2 13y ago
  in some way it is the key to understanding the situation - the government people live in another world, and things look differently from their perspective. Like it is not a useful reporting and public debate about government's abuse of power, it is a fun some pests have at the government expense. It is a reality distortion field of Power.
  - CmdrKrool 13y ago
    Mmm. Or rather, it's all fun to them being as they make the rules and can never ultimately lose the game. They seem to forget that for the rest of us it's not quite so discretionary.
  - joe_the_user 13y ago
    It will indeed, sadly turn out to be the truth unless the reporting on Snowden's material turns to change current policy - something that is not at all certain.
  - moocowduckquack 13y ago
    Is the golden wall.[1] It isn't power, it is the illusion of power and the attempt to keep it up that corrupts. Is all the lies you have to tell people about the things you claim to control and all the fakes you have to pull all the fucking time, just to make people think that you genuinely have some clue about what is going on so that you can retain authority. But you never do. No one can. For all the technology in the world, nobody can do more than the amount of time they have and their ability to comprehend, and after a while the amount of information becomes a hindrance and you wish you could plug the flow, and you would in a moment, apart from the fact that if people thought you were not watching it for even a second, forever trapped in watching it with far too much to understand, that you wouldn't know what was going on and you can never let that happen. [1] I nicked this phrase from Harry Mulisch, from his book "The Discovery of Heaven". Is a good book.
  - stevenbedrick 13y ago
    Thank you. This is an important point, and one that I haven't seen nearly enough of on HN lately. It is very difficult to overstate the extent to which "government people" live in a bubble. In many ways, they are working from an entirely different set of first principles than those used by most of the HN-reading world. As such, it is difficult for "us" to understand why "they" do what they do, and very easy for us to come up with our own (usually incorrect, or at the very least, incomplete) explanations for their behavior. Of course, the converse is generally true: the laughably incorrect explanations that "government people" always seem to come up with for "our" behavior often are the result of them interpreting events, statements, etc. through their lens- a lens informed by a completely different set of optical principles than the ones that we are used to using (to abuse the figure of speech a little bit). In other words, when you read or hear about a "government person" doing or saying something head-deskingly stupid, the odds are very good that the statement or action made perfect sense in the context of that government person's world. It's not that they're (necessarily) stupid, or even ignorant- just that they're not living in our world, and so have dramatically different motivations, constraints, first principles, etc. etc. Their actions may be perfectly follow an internal logic- but it's not our logic, and so we have a hard time making sense of it. And all of this goes double or triple when we're talking about military or IC people. The classified nature of their work, with its attendant organizational, cultural, technical, political, and psychological distortions, makes their "bubble" look more like a bathysphere.
    - spin 13y ago
      This is useful for trying to understand other people. You should always try to figure out how/why a person came to their particular worldview. But in a government "of the people, by the people, for the people", it is The People who have final say. (edit: yes, I am aware that this particular incident happened in England, not the U.S....)
    - w_t_payne 13y ago
      I remember having a conversation in a pub with a junior Whitehall civil servant a number of years ago. Only half jokingly, he quipped that "of course the civil service runs the country", noting the relative powerlessness of parliament. Interestingly enough, the more senior (and experienced) civil servants that I have had the opportunity to talk to have been very careful to emphasise that the department answers to the minister. Of course, the relationship between the civil service, ministers and the media is an unnatural, strained and stressful one -- I do not envy any of these parties, although I think that the media has the most (effective) power out of these three, given the proportion of central government activity (60-70%?) that is driven by whatever happened to be in the headlines that week.
jmduke 13y ago
Unless I'm misinterpreting this, those are paraphrases and not quotes. There's no feasible reason to believe a government official is overtly villainous or foolish enough to say something like "You've had your fun."
- UVB-76 13y ago
  It does sound exactly like the type of goading comment a government official would make to a journalist off the record.
  - dylangs1030 13y ago
    All of this controversy aside, do you have any real reference point for what a conversation between a government official and a journalist sounds like, let alone a goading one at that?
    - bdamm 13y ago
      Yes; take what happens at the local politics level, and amplify it up several orders of magnitude.
- dabeeeenster 13y ago
  I'm not quite sure the editor of one of the most important newspapers of record right now is into "paraphrasing"
  - jmduke 13y ago
    There followed two meetings in which he demanded the return or destruction of all the material we were working on. That is, by definition, paraphrasing the meeting. I'm not accusing Rusbridger of mischaracterizing the interaction, I'm clarifying that this is probably isn't a direct quote. Note that this is an op/ed.
    - trauco 13y ago

by swombat 13y ago

breckinloggins 13y ago

"You've had your fun. [...]" That line is particularly infuriating.

VladRussian2 13y ago
in some way it is the key to understanding the situation - the government people live in another world, and things look differently from their perspective. Like it is not a useful reporting and public debate about government's abuse of power, it is a fun some pests have at the government expense. It is a reality distortion field of Power.
- CmdrKrool 13y ago
  Mmm. Or rather, it's all fun to them being as they make the rules and can never ultimately lose the game. They seem to forget that for the rest of us it's not quite so discretionary.
- joe_the_user 13y ago
  It will indeed, sadly turn out to be the truth unless the reporting on Snowden's material turns to change current policy - something that is not at all certain.
- moocowduckquack 13y ago
  Is the golden wall.[1] It isn't power, it is the illusion of power and the attempt to keep it up that corrupts. Is all the lies you have to tell people about the things you claim to control and all the fakes you have to pull all the fucking time, just to make people think that you genuinely have some clue about what is going on so that you can retain authority. But you never do. No one can. For all the technology in the world, nobody can do more than the amount of time they have and their ability to comprehend, and after a while the amount of information becomes a hindrance and you wish you could plug the flow, and you would in a moment, apart from the fact that if people thought you were not watching it for even a second, forever trapped in watching it with far too much to understand, that you wouldn't know what was going on and you can never let that happen. [1] I nicked this phrase from Harry Mulisch, from his book "The Discovery of Heaven". Is a good book.
- stevenbedrick 13y ago
  Thank you. This is an important point, and one that I haven't seen nearly enough of on HN lately. It is very difficult to overstate the extent to which "government people" live in a bubble. In many ways, they are working from an entirely different set of first principles than those used by most of the HN-reading world. As such, it is difficult for "us" to understand why "they" do what they do, and very easy for us to come up with our own (usually incorrect, or at the very least, incomplete) explanations for their behavior. Of course, the converse is generally true: the laughably incorrect explanations that "government people" always seem to come up with for "our" behavior often are the result of them interpreting events, statements, etc. through their lens- a lens informed by a completely different set of optical principles than the ones that we are used to using (to abuse the figure of speech a little bit). In other words, when you read or hear about a "government person" doing or saying something head-deskingly stupid, the odds are very good that the statement or action made perfect sense in the context of that government person's world. It's not that they're (necessarily) stupid, or even ignorant- just that they're not living in our world, and so have dramatically different motivations, constraints, first principles, etc. etc. Their actions may be perfectly follow an internal logic- but it's not our logic, and so we have a hard time making sense of it. And all of this goes double or triple when we're talking about military or IC people. The classified nature of their work, with its attendant organizational, cultural, technical, political, and psychological distortions, makes their "bubble" look more like a bathysphere.
  - spin 13y ago
    This is useful for trying to understand other people. You should always try to figure out how/why a person came to their particular worldview. But in a government "of the people, by the people, for the people", it is The People who have final say. (edit: yes, I am aware that this particular incident happened in England, not the U.S....)
  - w_t_payne 13y ago
    I remember having a conversation in a pub with a junior Whitehall civil servant a number of years ago. Only half jokingly, he quipped that "of course the civil service runs the country", noting the relative powerlessness of parliament. Interestingly enough, the more senior (and experienced) civil servants that I have had the opportunity to talk to have been very careful to emphasise that the department answers to the minister. Of course, the relationship between the civil service, ministers and the media is an unnatural, strained and stressful one -- I do not envy any of these parties, although I think that the media has the most (effective) power out of these three, given the proportion of central government activity (60-70%?) that is driven by whatever happened to be in the headlines that week.

jmduke 13y ago

Unless I'm misinterpreting this, those are paraphrases and not quotes. There's no feasible reason to believe a government official is overtly villainous or foolish enough to say something like "You've had your fun."

UVB-76 13y ago
It does sound exactly like the type of goading comment a government official would make to a journalist off the record.
- dylangs1030 13y ago
  All of this controversy aside, do you have any real reference point for what a conversation between a government official and a journalist sounds like, let alone a goading one at that?
  - bdamm 13y ago
    Yes; take what happens at the local politics level, and amplify it up several orders of magnitude.
dabeeeenster 13y ago
I'm not quite sure the editor of one of the most important newspapers of record right now is into "paraphrasing"
- jmduke 13y ago
  There followed two meetings in which he demanded the return or destruction of all the material we were working on. That is, by definition, paraphrasing the meeting. I'm not accusing Rusbridger of mischaracterizing the interaction, I'm clarifying that this is probably isn't a direct quote. Note that this is an op/ed.
  - trauco 13y ago