4 ms·

So, discuss. Why shouldn't we know about our own governments spying on us? Why shouldn't we be informed about how our government is governing? The US Constitu

So, discuss. Why shouldn't we know about our own governments spying on us? Why shouldn't we be informed about how our government is governing? The US Constitution, at least, was written in remembrance of the privations of an occupying army. The country was founded on the belief that the people are sovereign. If the people are to be sovereign, then they need to know what the government is doing. This is why we have freedom of the press, etc., and why this right is more important than any short-term goal. The governments of the US and UK are acting like occupying armies. They disregard the rule of law, act arbitrarily, arrogantly, and without accountability. Fixing this is more important than any marginal security the NSA's secrecy provides. It's probably worth more than everything the NSA provides altogether.

euroclydon 13y ago
It's been said here on HN, that if the anti-surveillance crowd were really serious, and constituted a good chunk of the voting public, then they would get organized like: Pro-Lifers, the Pro-Choice, Pro Gun, Civil Rights, etc. But it sounds like you are saying that your adversaries are agencies who by definition must act in secret, and there is no amount of political advocacy that can engage them on their level. It's only through some type of hacker-war, which you analogize to the revolution, that your concerns can be addressed?
- mikeash 13y ago
  Does the existence of entities like the ACLU and EFF not count as "organized"?
- ganeumann 13y ago
  I wasn't advocating a revolution, I think we can fix this inside the system we have. But I think that because we do have the means to allow us to fix it, like freedom of the press. This episode bothers me in a different way than most violations of basic human rights. Because the violation is around privacy/secrecy, the violating entities have to attack the very means we have set up to correct violations. It's like a virus that attacks the immune system, something to be taken more seriously than the actual damage done, because it destroys the ecosystem's ability to correct other violations. In any case, I was simply encouraging you to actually say something, rather than just say what sorts of things we should say, and then demonstrating what I meant.
  - euroclydon 13y ago
    I don't see any progress toward fixing this from within the system. Snowden and WikiLeaks are more analogous to an exiled resistance group than to people trying to work within the system. MLK stayed right here and got arrested and murdered. Surveillance won't be a major political issue unless it tangibly affects a lot of people in a negative way. That's just not happening now. Most people don't care. But there are other things they do care about because they feel the effects.

euroclydon 13y ago

It's been said here on HN, that if the anti-surveillance crowd were really serious, and constituted a good chunk of the voting public, then they would get organized like: Pro-Lifers, the Pro-Choice, Pro Gun, Civil Rights, etc. But it sounds like you are saying that your adversaries are agencies who by definition must act in secret, and there is no amount of political advocacy that can engage them on their level. It's only through some type of hacker-war, which you analogize to the revolution, that your concerns can be addressed?

mikeash 13y ago
Does the existence of entities like the ACLU and EFF not count as "organized"?
ganeumann 13y ago
I wasn't advocating a revolution, I think we can fix this inside the system we have. But I think that because we do have the means to allow us to fix it, like freedom of the press. This episode bothers me in a different way than most violations of basic human rights. Because the violation is around privacy/secrecy, the violating entities have to attack the very means we have set up to correct violations. It's like a virus that attacks the immune system, something to be taken more seriously than the actual damage done, because it destroys the ecosystem's ability to correct other violations. In any case, I was simply encouraging you to actually say something, rather than just say what sorts of things we should say, and then demonstrating what I meant.
- euroclydon 13y ago
  I don't see any progress toward fixing this from within the system. Snowden and WikiLeaks are more analogous to an exiled resistance group than to people trying to work within the system. MLK stayed right here and got arrested and murdered. Surveillance won't be a major political issue unless it tangibly affects a lot of people in a negative way. That's just not happening now. Most people don't care. But there are other things they do care about because they feel the effects.