11 ms·

'Sending a message': what the US and UK are attempting to do

405 points by qubitsam 13y ago

yenoham 13y ago
When articles like this are submitted to HN, can we have a discussion on what us as individuals can actually do (if anything)? I'd rather drop 100 comments on general FEELING towards the news, for 1 or 2 comments suggesting 'Let's create a campaign site' or 'There is nothing we can do, lets just sit here in silence' Edit: For what it's worth my ONLY suggestion is that a campaign site similar to that for SOPA, etc. is put together - ideally on GitHub or similar so it can be rapidly put together.
- nwh 13y ago
  I don't really see a solution, and I'm assuming that nobody else does really. Citizens and foreigners (like me) have equally little power over what their governments do, just a mild decision between two parties come election time. The general population seems to be apathetic about it all, I don't think I know a single person who has any opinion other than the tired "nothing to hide" line.
  - padobson 13y ago
    Sounds like we need a campaign against the "Nothing to hide" line. You could probably point out to them that there are so many laws now, they probably broke 10 of them before they left for work in the morning.
    - dwiel 13y ago
      The path that seems to have worked best for me is to start with the argument that you can't have a democracy if the incumbent can spy on the opposing candidates to help dig dirt and that this data can and will be used for non-terrorist uses. The typical response is that they trust that they wont use it for non terrorist uses, to which I reply with the sharing of data between NSA and the DEA to arrest people as well as now the Miranda case.
      - padobson 13y ago
        That could work in a full conversation, but it needs to be packaged up more for our sound-byte/online-comments/tweet culture. You could circulate a hashtag on twitter like #things2hide to get popular conversation about it going.
    - lazyjones 13y ago
      We need more "leaks", especially of the kind that shows the politicians who repeat the "nothing to hide" line, that they themselves have plenty of things to hide ... So perhaps it's time to start digging through the private lives of some politicians.
    - TeddyLondon 13y ago
      Start the "Nothing to see" campaign!
    - aninhumer 13y ago
      One technique would be attaching typical "Nothing to hide" rhetoric to images/stories of people suffering as a result of surveillance? In addition to simply exposing these events, it also associates their own rhetoric with abuses.
    - crpatino 13y ago
      I propose the last verse of Martin Niemoller's poem: "Then they came after me..." It is as powerful a phrase as we can get!
  - davidw 13y ago
    > I don't really see a solution, and I'm assuming that nobody else does really Bullshit. There's plenty ordinary people can do. Look at the results here: http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/24/19658896-house-narrowly-votes-down-move-to-gut-nsa-data-collection-program?lite http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/24/19658896-hou... That's close enough that the right application of pressure, work and money would have made a difference. Perhaps in the Senate it would take other numbers, but no one said it'd be easy. Indeed, it's not. It'll take hard work, time, and money. Comments like yours are a complete and total waste of time - they accomplish nothing other than to suck energy out of people who might otherwise do something. I helped to get a law changed - every so slightly - in Italy, which is not an easy place to do politics. Tons of people basically laughed at me for even trying, but here it is: http://www.governo.it/Notizie/Presidenza/dettaglio.asp?d=69038 http://www.governo.it/Notizie/Presidenza/dettaglio.asp?d=690... - it's imperfect, but it's progress, at least. I'm not much of a fan of political articles like these on this site, but this poster at least has the right idea. Instead of hyperbolic, sophomoric babbling about how the US is "a terrorist state" he's asking "what can we DO?". That's the right first step. In terms of the 'nothing to hide' line, turn the thing on its head: if Snowden had that kind of access, think how many other people there are who could be paid to spy for the Chinese, Russians, or simply competing US companies. What if politicians lean on them to spy on ... [insert some movement the individual identifies with]. With very little oversight, it seems. You can't trust people when there are no checks and balances.
- hyperventilator 13y ago
  As a peaceful protest / 4th Amendment exercise, please consider attaching an encrypted file with EVERY email you send from now on. It's easy enough to do using TrueCrypt. It needn't be a file the recipient needs to decrypt, or keep. You needn't even remember the password. If everyone did this every time they send an email to anyone, it would flood the Internet with literally millions, then billions, of encrypted files, thereby demonstrating our resolve to maintain some level of privacy, and protecting most if not all of us "fish" in the "school" from the "sharks" who prefer to eat us one at a time (a la Edward Snowden and Ladar Levison). When fish in a massive school move together in coordinated ways, it frustrates predators. If this idea seems worthwhile PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE This accomplishes three things. 1) It makes you familiar with encryption for when you actually need it. 2) It increases the cost of surveillance and 3) It gives you an opening to discuss the topic with non-tech friends when they ask about your gibberish attachment.
- espeed 13y ago
  Google was founded on the principle of "Don't be evil", it has the power and influence to effect change, and it helped lead the charge against SOPA. Why is Google so silent now? "He who has the ability to act on an injustice, but who stands idly by, is just as guilty as he who holds the knife." How Google handles this will be its defining moment. This is could be an opportunity for Google to win the world over by showing it truly stands on its principles, or it could be its downfall, destroying its credibility, losing the trust of its users. Maybe Google is working behind the scenes putting a game plan together, or maybe it's getting something out of the situation -- let's hope it's the former. Like Eisenhower said, "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both."
  - uptown 13y ago
    'Google was founded on the principle of "Don't be evil"' I wish people would stop quoting this. It means nothing, and is not binding in any way. It sounded good, and it was a great marketing slogan - but it means absolutely nothing in reality.
    - espeed 13y ago
      "Don't be evil. We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served — as shareholders and in all other ways — by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains" -- Google's 2004 IPO Prospectus (http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/Courses/StratTech09/Lectures/Google/Articles/Google_IPO_letter.html http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/Courses/StratTech09/...). Binding or not, it's a social contract, and it could mean the world if Google stands by it.
    - Terretta 13y ago
      On the contrary, it lets Google use Crockford's jslint.
  - dredmorbius 13y ago
    "Don't be evil" wasn't a founding principle, but one suggested by an engineer early in the company's history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil I've got my own very grave reservations about the company, but it has done some good stuff. I'm hoping we'll hear from them eventually. Truth is, much of The System is the way it is because the various participants have one another by the balls.
- zby 13y ago
  There is this annual event "Freedom not Fear" - which is about fighting the Big Brother - and this year a huge coalition (http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/bundnispartner-2013/ http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/bundnispartner-2013/) in Germany and Austria plan demonstrations for the September 7, and other countries will join (Poland and Czech Republic are confirmed): http://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_2013#More_international_events_beside_Brussels http://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_2013... On September 27-30 in Brussels there will be workshops and hearings with MEPs: https://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_2013/Schedule https://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_201... Organize a local event - add it to the list - don't be afraid that it is small, even if not many people come locally - you'll be a part of a global crowd. Twitter hashtag: #fnf13 IRC: #fnf PirateIRC (irc.piratpartiet.se / irc.piraattipuolue.fi / irc.pirateparty.org.uk)
- keithpeter 13y ago
  "When articles like this are submitted to HN, can we have a discussion on what us as individuals can actually do (if anything)?" I think we need to start explaining the privacy/surveillance issue and how the advent of powerful technology makes universal surveillance possible and, as others have commented, rather banal. As one example of a possible 'hook':In the UK, there have been reports on the extent to which ordinary police officers are using the National Police Computer for purposes unrelated to police work (checking out boyfriends/girlfriends for instance). I imagine the potential for misuse is much higher with the comprehensive capturing of data from all communications. That might get people thinking.
kleiba 13y ago
Folks, take a step back and take a look what is going on here. When you were a child, would any of you have believed that one day in the early 21st century, you would wake up in a world where your own government spies on each and every single citizen, plus whoever is connected to them in another country, where they send agents to newspapers to oppress the freedom of the press? I mean, isn't this almost surreal? Like a cheap sci-fi novel has become reality? Who's the real terrorists in 2013? I for one am more scared, appaled by what has been bubbling to the surface every week, almost every day since Snowden.
- muyuu 13y ago
  The US and UK governments among others are textbook terrorist states at this point. The war on terror rhetoric is plain pathetic now. Any self defence measure taken by citizens would be classified as terror by these governments now.
- arethuza 13y ago
  I honestly believe that the "morals" (for lack of a better word) of the UK government haven't actually got any worse over the last 50 years or so - what has changed is that now technology allows so much more so they are quite happy to do it. For example, in the 1980s there was an almighty fuss because an excellent journalist found out that the UK government had wasted vast amounts of money on a failed spy satellite project - that had Special Branch raiding magazine offices and occupying the BBC offices in Glasgow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zircon_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zircon_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Campbell_%28journalist%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Campbell_%28journalist%2... [NB I can strongly recommend Duncan Campbell's "Secret Society" series from 1987 - some of them are on YouTube and they really are scary/tragic - a lot of his concerns are rather prophetic.]
  - api 13y ago
    As an outsider (American) it's long appeared to me that the British government thought 1984 was a utopian blueprint rather than a dystopian novel. :(
losethos 13y ago
Virtual-Notary.Org hereby notes that on Date: Wednesday August 21, 2013 08:11.29 EDT (UTC-0400) a random drawing in the range [1, 100000], inclusive, based on a hardware source of true randomness, yielded the following decision. Random Value: 85108 ---- 24:2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. 24:3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: 24:5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead? 24:6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, 24:7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. 24:8 And they remembered his words, 24:9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. 24:11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. 24:12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.
hans0l074 13y ago
I could sense anger wash all over Mr.Greenwald again, as he typed that one out (which might have resulted in the typo I noticed "...They threatened the Guardian with prior restrained(t?) and then forced the paper to physically smash their hard drives in a basement..."). Heck, I was upset just reading it.
a3n 13y ago
"Here is David Miranda explaining to BBC what it's like to be forced to turn over your passwords to security agents who have detained you under a terrorism law, so they can troll through your emails and Facebook account and Skype program while you are detained. Just watch that short video and judge for yourself." As I read this I tried to imagine how to reset my digital life, now that all my passwords are exposed. You just about have to become a brand new person, and abandon every account you currently have. Any change to a current account would be observed by the NSA and GCHQ. To the extent that this guy had any privacy or security at all, he's screwed for the rest of his life.
- lifeisstillgood 13y ago
  They already were reading his gmail, if he still used it. What they may have got were his PGP keys, which presumably he was using to talk to his boyfriend. I doubt however he had any real stuff on his laptop. That would be insane for a reporter who seems to have been as careful as Greenwald. Nope, straight forward intimidation. I cannot imagine how they thought it would work, so either we assume the security services are incompetant, or there is some other cunning plan. Sadly the latter is very unlikely these days.
  - ihsw 13y ago
    The difference is low-level thugs were able to get access rather than the automated collection services operated by the GCHQ, so now low-level thugs have his passwords. The most salient point is how regular individuals are authorized to receive user passwords, and they're able to use them too. The article clearly states that the low-level thugs checked his email within his presence rather than him communicating the passwords to more secure individuals.
- 6cxs2hd6 13y ago
  > forced to turn over your passwords Forced, how? Threat of detention beyond the 9 hour window? If so, it's easy to speculate I would call their bluff and refuse. But in the situation, probably not so easy. What about using a hidden volume in TrueCrypt for plausible deniability? [1] I suppose that would work effectively for documents. There's no plausible deniability for stuff like Facebook and Gmail. They can easily see if you gave them access to the real/full thing, or not. However given the revelations David Miranda of all people would have to assume his Gmail, FB, et al have _already_ been compromised.[2] So the only interesting, still-private stuff would be any documents. [1]: http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/plausible-deniability http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/plausible-deniability [2]: Not that this makes it right to demand the passwords at LHR.
api 13y ago
Oh they're sending a message alright. I'm just not sure it's the message they want to send.
autonomy77 13y ago
The policy of intimidation is working - it doesn't matter if the NSA/GCHQ really do have the technology which is actually capable of performing this scale of surveillance - something which I'm entirely unconvinced of, incidentally - they are spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) and being quite successful at it too. Are they capable of trawling so much data to the depth that is claimed? Probably not. Are they capable of intimidating individuals with wide reaching knock-on effects including among the general public? Absolutely. So which method is having the most impact? The threat is far more effective than the reality. Make people scared - it saves you having to actually do anything.
ohwp 13y ago
If you think there is nothing that can be done you should take a look at Gene Sharp's theory of nonviolent resistance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp
- ttt_ 13y ago
  " If subjects do not obey, rulers have no power."
- boi_v2 13y ago
  Gene Sharp is excellent, I am reading From Dictatorship to Democracy. On the subject, I think the biggest problem is how to make people understand how serious this is, make them see that the similarities between what is happening and totalitarianism and even fascism is to disturbing. Today I was speaking with a friend about faceCrap and he just doesn't care about it, he doesn't even try to get properly informed and said that no one would do anything against him because the information he shares is not relevant. I tried to explain the problems with the greed ones controlling the information (hence truth) of the planet, the political and economical advantages it brings to people that doesn't care about society and how his data could say a lot about him but at the end he told me I am paranoid :). So the political problem we are facing, in my opinion, is a consequence of lack of interest and even selfishness.
acheron 13y ago
Of course, remember that the Guardian was perfectly fine with the government harassing journalists as long as it was not them: http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/20/despite-its-battle-with-the-surveillance http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/20/despite-its-battle-with-th...
- alistair77 13y ago
  The Press Regulation Scheme is in no way similar to the use of MI5 and police resources to interrogate an individual who ,for all in intents and purposes, seems innocent of any terrorism related crime. I see no conflict here with the Guardian's stance on these issues.
- cabalamat 13y ago
  While dare say the Guardian isn't perfect (not that it's relevant) I would distrust anything coming from Spiked, a magazine whose modus operandi is to be contrarian on every issue. They are, in effect, professional trolls.
  - rahoulb 13y ago
    "Spiked" used to be "Living Marxism", which was the magazine of the Revolutionary Communist Party. The RCP members I used to know (only a handful) would revel in their own inconsistency - so since the demise of the RCP I can fully understand Spiked carrying on that particular tradition.
    - cabalamat 13y ago
      > The RCP members I used to know (only a handful) would revel in their own inconsistency That doesn't surprise me one bit.
- grey-area 13y ago
  Of course, remember that the Guardian was perfectly fine with the government harassing journalists It's fairly simple: Journalists who break the law to bribe police and others for information, hack voicemails of private individuals, and intrude on the privacy of individuals should be punished. These things are not in the public interest, there is no excuse for doing them just to make money by publishing the (often prurient) details of someone's life. Journalists who shed light on what the state is doing (even if that means publishing secret documents), if they can argue that is in the public interest, should not. Of course there are some grey areas between the two, but the constrast of Murdoch's News organisation bribing policemen and the Guardian publishing stories based on top-secret documents from a whistleblower is an edifying one I think.
wil421 13y ago
Lets condemn places like China, Russia, and Syria for they way they limit or monitor electronic communications but when the US and "Friends" do it its for mumble mumble TERRORISTS mumble mumble.... If the laws don't allow us to monitor our citizens lets just change the laws or interpret the words differently.
- rainsford 13y ago
  Except the US and friends aren't really "doing it" in the same sense that China, Russia, etc are. Those countries develop powerful surveillance capabilities and use them to target political dissent, among other anti-democratic things. Nothing that's been reported about the US comes even close to that sort of usage.
  - JackpotDen 13y ago
    >use them to target political dissent locking up a dissenter's partner doesn't count, right?
  - king_jester 13y ago
    While not specific to NSA programs, the US gov't at the city, state, and federal levels have targeted political organizations, including infiltrating such organizations and tracking the movements of members in such groups. For examples see the information about spying on leftist groups for the 2004 Republican National Convention or how the NYPD targeted and helped dismantle occupy wall street last year.
  - drzaiusapelord 13y ago
    If FISA makes it illegal to discuss who is getting threatened via secret court orders, how would you remotely know if there are or aren't any chilling affects? This is an important part of this argument. When we make it illegal to discuss the crime, the warrant, and have secret court proceedings, you can't just sit there on your high horse and tell us there is no abuse. You are not allowed to know of any abuse.
  - wil421 13y ago
    >Nothing that's been reported about the US comes even close to that sort of usage. Nothing that's been reported. Or Hasn't happened yet....
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
TausAmmer 13y ago
Government is us, when stomach tries to fight with brain over trivial details like food you or giving, amount, quality and so on. One day brain will kill stomach with all the control mechanisms, it dies too. "For the benefit of all". We already live in virtual reality where most of the things we do is just to numb our perception. Nothing to do with advancements in energy, space travel, consciousness. Going where no man has gone before. And we lough and down talk anyone daring to, so we create spying/regulatory system, government that picks oddities and puts them in place. It works well, very well, so well that now we are stuck in place where we want to be, beer Fridays, pizza Saturday, sunny ice cream Sundays, something to look forward after week long slavery you hate so much. It is so complicated and weaved trough all of us and all out needs/wishes/predicaments. To long and want something, you create opposite situation that makes that "something" so amazing. Sometimes I wonder, what would take this organism(humanity) to evolve/change. Searching for health(happiness) in cancer(fear)? Or total annihilation for something else to come in play.
- xradionut 13y ago
  We are semi-rational animals. Not many of us can handle the "Truth", it's fucking depressing.
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
Just pay attention to the messaging coming from some of these media sources. The gov't propaganda is growing less subtle; making it easier to identify who is working for whom.
ttt_ 13y ago
I can almost picture NSA analysts vulturing all over the private data collected of these enemies of the state. How soon utnil they send out the drones into the foreign lands where they have not so great a political strongarm? "Drone bombing in brazilian airport kills dozens" "Sadly it was necessary as one of the passangers carried terrorist intel that would put our free world at risk"
peteretep 13y ago
Controversial article that made me think: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-does-being-a-relative-of-glenn-greenwald-place-you-above-the-law/ http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-do...
- ganeumann 13y ago
  Straw man. Nobody argues he's above the law. They argue because: - The law is to detain suspected terrorists, nobody thinks the UK believed he is a terrorist, so they were abusing the law; - If, as the UK government now says, they just wanted any electronic devices he had so they could see what he was carrying, that would have taken less than an hour to confiscate them and ask for whatever passwords Miranda had, not the close to nine hours they held him. Nobody is above the law. I am sure the reason Miranda was travelling from Berlin back to Rio and not Greenwald was that Greenwald knew he would be detained and thought perhaps Miranda would not. But just like Miranda is not above the law, neither is the UK government. If they misuse a law to harass and intimidate then they should be held to account. There's always some jackass journalist who thinks they should take the other side, no matter how contrary to the facts, to get some attention. I am just surprised it's at outfits like The Telegraph and Reuters.
  - anon1385 13y ago
    >I am just surprised it's at outfits like The Telegraph I'm not sure why. David Cameron could literally murder a baby on live TV and Dan Hodges would describe it as a 'political headache for Miliband'. Nobody takes him seriously; his columns are just fodder for Telegraph readers looking to confirm what they already believe. Not to mention all the wacko conspiracy theories about climate change that they print.
  - koide 13y ago
    > There's always some jackass journalist who thinks they should take the other side, no matter how contrary to the facts, to get some attention. I am just surprised it's at outfits like The Telegraph and Reuters. Why would you be surprised? It's a given that NSA and friends have people to write stories for them on "reputable" sources. No need for jackass journalists.
smegel 13y ago
If they do succeed in "shutting the leaks down", I wonder if that would be enough for supporters to finally release all the docs publicly. Or for Assange to give out the key to one of his insurance files. I wouldn't get my hopes up though, these so called leakers seem more stringently against full pubic disclosure than the people they are leaking against.
jstalin 13y ago
I love his coining of the term "state-loyal journalists." Greenwald, Snowden, et al deserve Nobel Peace Prizes...
- TallGuyShort 13y ago
  Obama wins peace prize, Obama administration supports spying, Snowden leaks spying, Obama calls Snowden a traitor, Snowden wins peace prize? Wow.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
padobson 13y ago
Almost anything can be crowdsourced nowadays. 237 years ago, the founders of the US tried to crowdsource power. I don't see why we can't reboot that whole idea. Political candidates, lobbying initiatives and legislation can all be directly impacted, in the current framework they exist under, by crowdsourcing. While Kickstarter and Indiegogo have shown us it's possible with art and industrial design and dozens of other media, there's not a go-to place to do it for politics. So if this community really wants to change our dystopian future, then that's the answer. We could have the NSA completely defunded in a year if we wanted.
coldcode 13y ago
The one good thing I see is that cross-party-lines anger by some politicians is actually happening. The party leaderships are fighting it but for once they might be powerless to stop it.
frank_boyd 13y ago
There are people who've been planning these things all along, just to give you a hint: “The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.” Author: Zbigniew Brzezinski, United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. You can find this at: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162691-the-technotronic-era-involves-the-gradual-appearance-of-a-more http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162691-the-technotronic-era-...
- espeed 13y ago
  Brzezinski is Obama's advisor.
  - frank_boyd 13y ago
    Ok, now I really need to throw up.
nicholassmith 13y ago
The British government looks like a farcical bully in this. A playground bruiser that intimidates his way down the hall before promptly slipping over. Destroying the hard drives was an exercise in dominance, 'do as we say or face the consequences' which had no impact (aside from inconvenience and the cost of a couple of Macbook Pros) to The Guardian but has made the UK .gov look foolish. Pulling Miranda, abusing the terrorism laws, sending a message is another dominance play but it's back fired awfully. Brazil is annoyed, GG is annoyed, America has calmly washed it's hands and said "leave us out of it". In terms of strategic decisions it can't be described as an excellent one. What's the UK .gov gotten out of it? Some encrypted data and social network passwords, it's not a win. If you're in the UK and you think this is unacceptable for our government to be trying to intimidate the journalists who're revealing the uncomfortable level of surveillance we now live under, and what the security apparatus has become, then write to your MP. That's what they're there for. We can't just hope that it'll surge through the halls of Parliament, we need to be heard that we think it's not acceptable and not representative of what we want Britain to be.
- boi_v2 13y ago
  Honestly I don't think the "write to your MP" action would have any result, for me this is just another tool to make people think that Democracy is being exercised, anyway, I am not saying that you shouldn't do it, please do it, but don't stop your actions there because it is just not enough.
  - nicholassmith 13y ago
    It's a piece of the puzzle, it's a way for them to know what the concerns are and they can choose to act or ignore. You're right, it shouldn't just stop there but people should shout from every rooftop even if it's potentially ineffective.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jasonkolb 13y ago
This is taking quite a scary turn, but not, I think, in the direction that the governments are intending. Rather than intimidate people into silence they are actively creating a movement of people who are abhorred and appalled by these tactics. Kick that dog enough times and you're going to create an organized movement that can fight back. This is how unrest happens. What I don't think they realize is that the dog they're kicking is also the most technically capable one on the planet. They're not poking Al Qaeda with a stick, they're poking every programmer and hacker who cares about privacy with a stick. While they may have unlimited financial resources, I would pit unlimited technical resources and creativity against that any day of the week. If they manage to create an organized group of highly technical opposition I think they're going to be very surprised by how capable it is.
- xradionut 13y ago
  "While they may have unlimited financial resources, I would pit unlimited technical resources and creativity against that any day of the week." They are the ones with unlimited technical resources. You don't have armed drones nor biological nor nuclear weapons. You are an hostage like everyone else. You might as well accept that fact for now and just enjoy life.
  - jasonkolb 13y ago
    I have to respectfully disagree. They have unlimited financial resources, which translates into unlimited storage capacity etc. But NOT (IMO) unlimited technical resources in the sense of brainpower and creativity. When I say technical resources I'm referring to the ability to create new tools. For example, I know for a fact that a large number of intelligence tools are written on top of open source projects. That base did not come from the technical resources of the government (in most cases) but rather the collective ingenuity of the hackers and programmers that built it for various reasons. You can already see projects springing up with the intent of circumventing government technical oversight. This is going to result in an endless game of technical whack-a-mole where one side is motivated by a paycheck and the other is motivated by ideals and the desire for liberty.
FELICIA-JOY 13y ago
The US government spying on citizens is not new at all. It has happened for as long as our nation has been one. It may be more insidious now because the technology to aggregate spying on "we the people" is available. Welcome to the truly post-privacy era. Furthermore, the average person is not outraged by this. Cue the shock and awe for one to ten minutes after the biggest breaking stories about it and after that, for the common (wo)man, its all yawns. Plus, it is quite a dilemma. How does the government protect against terrorism while trying to protect the citizens' privacy when a citizen, or anyone moving among us citizens, could be a terrorist or sympathizer? The intent is not bad but what could come of this kind of stealthy access is bad if it falls into the wrong hands or becomes guided by ill-intent.
- EthanHeilman 13y ago
  >The US government spying on citizens is not new at all. It has happened for as long as our nation has been one. The mission and organisational capability of the government as changed dramatically. Nations in the late 18th Century (1776+) didn't have intelligence agencies per se. Some had military intelligence that was focused outward and they had various figures and organisations that would informally engage in domestic espionage usually in an extremely targeted fashion. Remember that formal police departments didn't exist until the 20th Century. Most of what we think of as the Government didn't exist in your Great-Grandfathers time. None the following existed in the US in my Great-Grandfathers time: 1. Intelligence agencies CIA/NSA/CSS/NRO, 2. Dept. of Defense, 3. Welfare, 4. Police Local, State, FBI, DHS, 5. FDA (Drugs were unregulated), 6. Income Tax/IRS, 7. EPA and consumer protection agencies, 8. Public Education in its present form, 9. Federal Reserve Bank The US Federal Government was the Postal Service to most citizens. It is really important to understand that we are living at the height of Federal power in the history of the US. The closest thing that Europe pre-18th Century had to the NSA was the Inquisition and it was more focused on "investigation".
baggachipz 13y ago
Presumably, the Snowden leak files are distributed among Guardian employees. In order to insure against the destruction of all copies of these files due to a worst-case scenario, wouldn't it be a good idea to distribute the files globally? If the Guardian wants to maintain control of the divulgence of leaks, they could encrypt the leaks as a series of files in a bundle and distribute it over, say, BitTorrent. They could then release the key to decrypt each leak file as they see fit.
eeeeaaii 13y ago
"sending a message" == getting you to doubt, think twice == instilling fear == creating terror == being a terrorist Fighting terror with terror. How can it be that no one in the UK government agencies responsible for this can see the irony? How can it be that they don't understand their actions are degrading society just as much as those of the terrorists?
Malstrond 13y ago
>the remains of the hard disc and Macbook Yet the picture shows a (PCIe?) extension card, which can not be found in Macbooks. The green PCB isn't a Macbook part either. And no part of a HDD is shown at all.
b8sell 13y ago
fuck the NSA

405 points by qubitsam 13y ago

When articles like this are submitted to HN, can we have a discussion on what us as individuals can actually do (if anything)? I'd rather drop 100 comments on general FEELING towards the news, for 1 or 2 comments suggesting 'Let's create a campaign site' or 'There is nothing we can do, lets just sit here in silence' Edit: For what it's worth my ONLY suggestion is that a campaign site similar to that for SOPA, etc. is put together - ideally on GitHub or similar so it can be rapidly put together.

nwh 13y ago
I don't really see a solution, and I'm assuming that nobody else does really. Citizens and foreigners (like me) have equally little power over what their governments do, just a mild decision between two parties come election time. The general population seems to be apathetic about it all, I don't think I know a single person who has any opinion other than the tired "nothing to hide" line.
- padobson 13y ago
  Sounds like we need a campaign against the "Nothing to hide" line. You could probably point out to them that there are so many laws now, they probably broke 10 of them before they left for work in the morning.
  - dwiel 13y ago
    The path that seems to have worked best for me is to start with the argument that you can't have a democracy if the incumbent can spy on the opposing candidates to help dig dirt and that this data can and will be used for non-terrorist uses. The typical response is that they trust that they wont use it for non terrorist uses, to which I reply with the sharing of data between NSA and the DEA to arrest people as well as now the Miranda case.
    - padobson 13y ago
      That could work in a full conversation, but it needs to be packaged up more for our sound-byte/online-comments/tweet culture. You could circulate a hashtag on twitter like #things2hide to get popular conversation about it going.
  - lazyjones 13y ago
    We need more "leaks", especially of the kind that shows the politicians who repeat the "nothing to hide" line, that they themselves have plenty of things to hide ... So perhaps it's time to start digging through the private lives of some politicians.
  - TeddyLondon 13y ago
    Start the "Nothing to see" campaign!
  - aninhumer 13y ago
    One technique would be attaching typical "Nothing to hide" rhetoric to images/stories of people suffering as a result of surveillance? In addition to simply exposing these events, it also associates their own rhetoric with abuses.
  - crpatino 13y ago
    I propose the last verse of Martin Niemoller's poem: "Then they came after me..." It is as powerful a phrase as we can get!
- davidw 13y ago
  > I don't really see a solution, and I'm assuming that nobody else does really Bullshit. There's plenty ordinary people can do. Look at the results here: http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/24/19658896-house-narrowly-votes-down-move-to-gut-nsa-data-collection-program?lite http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/24/19658896-hou... That's close enough that the right application of pressure, work and money would have made a difference. Perhaps in the Senate it would take other numbers, but no one said it'd be easy. Indeed, it's not. It'll take hard work, time, and money. Comments like yours are a complete and total waste of time - they accomplish nothing other than to suck energy out of people who might otherwise do something. I helped to get a law changed - every so slightly - in Italy, which is not an easy place to do politics. Tons of people basically laughed at me for even trying, but here it is: http://www.governo.it/Notizie/Presidenza/dettaglio.asp?d=69038 http://www.governo.it/Notizie/Presidenza/dettaglio.asp?d=690... - it's imperfect, but it's progress, at least. I'm not much of a fan of political articles like these on this site, but this poster at least has the right idea. Instead of hyperbolic, sophomoric babbling about how the US is "a terrorist state" he's asking "what can we DO?". That's the right first step. In terms of the 'nothing to hide' line, turn the thing on its head: if Snowden had that kind of access, think how many other people there are who could be paid to spy for the Chinese, Russians, or simply competing US companies. What if politicians lean on them to spy on ... [insert some movement the individual identifies with]. With very little oversight, it seems. You can't trust people when there are no checks and balances.
hyperventilator 13y ago
As a peaceful protest / 4th Amendment exercise, please consider attaching an encrypted file with EVERY email you send from now on. It's easy enough to do using TrueCrypt. It needn't be a file the recipient needs to decrypt, or keep. You needn't even remember the password. If everyone did this every time they send an email to anyone, it would flood the Internet with literally millions, then billions, of encrypted files, thereby demonstrating our resolve to maintain some level of privacy, and protecting most if not all of us "fish" in the "school" from the "sharks" who prefer to eat us one at a time (a la Edward Snowden and Ladar Levison). When fish in a massive school move together in coordinated ways, it frustrates predators. If this idea seems worthwhile PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE This accomplishes three things. 1) It makes you familiar with encryption for when you actually need it. 2) It increases the cost of surveillance and 3) It gives you an opening to discuss the topic with non-tech friends when they ask about your gibberish attachment.
espeed 13y ago
Google was founded on the principle of "Don't be evil", it has the power and influence to effect change, and it helped lead the charge against SOPA. Why is Google so silent now? "He who has the ability to act on an injustice, but who stands idly by, is just as guilty as he who holds the knife." How Google handles this will be its defining moment. This is could be an opportunity for Google to win the world over by showing it truly stands on its principles, or it could be its downfall, destroying its credibility, losing the trust of its users. Maybe Google is working behind the scenes putting a game plan together, or maybe it's getting something out of the situation -- let's hope it's the former. Like Eisenhower said, "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both."
- uptown 13y ago
  'Google was founded on the principle of "Don't be evil"' I wish people would stop quoting this. It means nothing, and is not binding in any way. It sounded good, and it was a great marketing slogan - but it means absolutely nothing in reality.
  - espeed 13y ago
    "Don't be evil. We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served — as shareholders and in all other ways — by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains" -- Google's 2004 IPO Prospectus (http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/Courses/StratTech09/Lectures/Google/Articles/Google_IPO_letter.html http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/Courses/StratTech09/...). Binding or not, it's a social contract, and it could mean the world if Google stands by it.
  - Terretta 13y ago
    On the contrary, it lets Google use Crockford's jslint.
- dredmorbius 13y ago
  "Don't be evil" wasn't a founding principle, but one suggested by an engineer early in the company's history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_evil I've got my own very grave reservations about the company, but it has done some good stuff. I'm hoping we'll hear from them eventually. Truth is, much of The System is the way it is because the various participants have one another by the balls.
zby 13y ago
There is this annual event "Freedom not Fear" - which is about fighting the Big Brother - and this year a huge coalition (http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/bundnispartner-2013/ http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/bundnispartner-2013/) in Germany and Austria plan demonstrations for the September 7, and other countries will join (Poland and Czech Republic are confirmed): http://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_2013#More_international_events_beside_Brussels http://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_2013... On September 27-30 in Brussels there will be workshops and hearings with MEPs: https://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_2013/Schedule https://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_201... Organize a local event - add it to the list - don't be afraid that it is small, even if not many people come locally - you'll be a part of a global crowd. Twitter hashtag: #fnf13 IRC: #fnf PirateIRC (irc.piratpartiet.se / irc.piraattipuolue.fi / irc.pirateparty.org.uk)
keithpeter 13y ago
"When articles like this are submitted to HN, can we have a discussion on what us as individuals can actually do (if anything)?" I think we need to start explaining the privacy/surveillance issue and how the advent of powerful technology makes universal surveillance possible and, as others have commented, rather banal. As one example of a possible 'hook':In the UK, there have been reports on the extent to which ordinary police officers are using the National Police Computer for purposes unrelated to police work (checking out boyfriends/girlfriends for instance). I imagine the potential for misuse is much higher with the comprehensive capturing of data from all communications. That might get people thinking.

kleiba 13y ago

Folks, take a step back and take a look what is going on here. When you were a child, would any of you have believed that one day in the early 21st century, you would wake up in a world where your own government spies on each and every single citizen, plus whoever is connected to them in another country, where they send agents to newspapers to oppress the freedom of the press? I mean, isn't this almost surreal? Like a cheap sci-fi novel has become reality? Who's the real terrorists in 2013? I for one am more scared, appaled by what has been bubbling to the surface every week, almost every day since Snowden.

muyuu 13y ago
The US and UK governments among others are textbook terrorist states at this point. The war on terror rhetoric is plain pathetic now. Any self defence measure taken by citizens would be classified as terror by these governments now.
arethuza 13y ago
I honestly believe that the "morals" (for lack of a better word) of the UK government haven't actually got any worse over the last 50 years or so - what has changed is that now technology allows so much more so they are quite happy to do it. For example, in the 1980s there was an almighty fuss because an excellent journalist found out that the UK government had wasted vast amounts of money on a failed spy satellite project - that had Special Branch raiding magazine offices and occupying the BBC offices in Glasgow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zircon_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zircon_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Campbell_%28journalist%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Campbell_%28journalist%2... [NB I can strongly recommend Duncan Campbell's "Secret Society" series from 1987 - some of them are on YouTube and they really are scary/tragic - a lot of his concerns are rather prophetic.]
- api 13y ago
  As an outsider (American) it's long appeared to me that the British government thought 1984 was a utopian blueprint rather than a dystopian novel. :(

losethos 13y ago

Virtual-Notary.Org hereby notes that on Date: Wednesday August 21, 2013 08:11.29 EDT (UTC-0400) a random drawing in the range [1, 100000], inclusive, based on a hardware source of true randomness, yielded the following decision. Random Value: 85108 ---- 24:2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. 24:3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: 24:5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead? 24:6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, 24:7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. 24:8 And they remembered his words, 24:9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. 24:11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. 24:12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

hans0l074 13y ago

I could sense anger wash all over Mr.Greenwald again, as he typed that one out (which might have resulted in the typo I noticed "...They threatened the Guardian with prior restrained(t?) and then forced the paper to physically smash their hard drives in a basement..."). Heck, I was upset just reading it.

a3n 13y ago

"Here is David Miranda explaining to BBC what it's like to be forced to turn over your passwords to security agents who have detained you under a terrorism law, so they can troll through your emails and Facebook account and Skype program while you are detained. Just watch that short video and judge for yourself." As I read this I tried to imagine how to reset my digital life, now that all my passwords are exposed. You just about have to become a brand new person, and abandon every account you currently have. Any change to a current account would be observed by the NSA and GCHQ. To the extent that this guy had any privacy or security at all, he's screwed for the rest of his life.

lifeisstillgood 13y ago
They already were reading his gmail, if he still used it. What they may have got were his PGP keys, which presumably he was using to talk to his boyfriend. I doubt however he had any real stuff on his laptop. That would be insane for a reporter who seems to have been as careful as Greenwald. Nope, straight forward intimidation. I cannot imagine how they thought it would work, so either we assume the security services are incompetant, or there is some other cunning plan. Sadly the latter is very unlikely these days.
- ihsw 13y ago
  The difference is low-level thugs were able to get access rather than the automated collection services operated by the GCHQ, so now low-level thugs have his passwords. The most salient point is how regular individuals are authorized to receive user passwords, and they're able to use them too. The article clearly states that the low-level thugs checked his email within his presence rather than him communicating the passwords to more secure individuals.
6cxs2hd6 13y ago
> forced to turn over your passwords Forced, how? Threat of detention beyond the 9 hour window? If so, it's easy to speculate I would call their bluff and refuse. But in the situation, probably not so easy. What about using a hidden volume in TrueCrypt for plausible deniability? [1] I suppose that would work effectively for documents. There's no plausible deniability for stuff like Facebook and Gmail. They can easily see if you gave them access to the real/full thing, or not. However given the revelations David Miranda of all people would have to assume his Gmail, FB, et al have _already_ been compromised.[2] So the only interesting, still-private stuff would be any documents. [1]: http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/plausible-deniability http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/plausible-deniability [2]: Not that this makes it right to demand the passwords at LHR.

api 13y ago

Oh they're sending a message alright. I'm just not sure it's the message they want to send.

autonomy77 13y ago

The policy of intimidation is working - it doesn't matter if the NSA/GCHQ really do have the technology which is actually capable of performing this scale of surveillance - something which I'm entirely unconvinced of, incidentally - they are spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) and being quite successful at it too. Are they capable of trawling so much data to the depth that is claimed? Probably not. Are they capable of intimidating individuals with wide reaching knock-on effects including among the general public? Absolutely. So which method is having the most impact? The threat is far more effective than the reality. Make people scared - it saves you having to actually do anything.

ohwp 13y ago

If you think there is nothing that can be done you should take a look at Gene Sharp's theory of nonviolent resistance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp

ttt_ 13y ago
" If subjects do not obey, rulers have no power."
boi_v2 13y ago
Gene Sharp is excellent, I am reading From Dictatorship to Democracy. On the subject, I think the biggest problem is how to make people understand how serious this is, make them see that the similarities between what is happening and totalitarianism and even fascism is to disturbing. Today I was speaking with a friend about faceCrap and he just doesn't care about it, he doesn't even try to get properly informed and said that no one would do anything against him because the information he shares is not relevant. I tried to explain the problems with the greed ones controlling the information (hence truth) of the planet, the political and economical advantages it brings to people that doesn't care about society and how his data could say a lot about him but at the end he told me I am paranoid :). So the political problem we are facing, in my opinion, is a consequence of lack of interest and even selfishness.

acheron 13y ago

Of course, remember that the Guardian was perfectly fine with the government harassing journalists as long as it was not them: http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/20/despite-its-battle-with-the-surveillance http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/20/despite-its-battle-with-th...

alistair77 13y ago
The Press Regulation Scheme is in no way similar to the use of MI5 and police resources to interrogate an individual who ,for all in intents and purposes, seems innocent of any terrorism related crime. I see no conflict here with the Guardian's stance on these issues.
cabalamat 13y ago
While dare say the Guardian isn't perfect (not that it's relevant) I would distrust anything coming from Spiked, a magazine whose modus operandi is to be contrarian on every issue. They are, in effect, professional trolls.
- rahoulb 13y ago
  "Spiked" used to be "Living Marxism", which was the magazine of the Revolutionary Communist Party. The RCP members I used to know (only a handful) would revel in their own inconsistency - so since the demise of the RCP I can fully understand Spiked carrying on that particular tradition.
  - cabalamat 13y ago
    > The RCP members I used to know (only a handful) would revel in their own inconsistency That doesn't surprise me one bit.
grey-area 13y ago
Of course, remember that the Guardian was perfectly fine with the government harassing journalists It's fairly simple: Journalists who break the law to bribe police and others for information, hack voicemails of private individuals, and intrude on the privacy of individuals should be punished. These things are not in the public interest, there is no excuse for doing them just to make money by publishing the (often prurient) details of someone's life. Journalists who shed light on what the state is doing (even if that means publishing secret documents), if they can argue that is in the public interest, should not. Of course there are some grey areas between the two, but the constrast of Murdoch's News organisation bribing policemen and the Guardian publishing stories based on top-secret documents from a whistleblower is an edifying one I think.

wil421 13y ago

Lets condemn places like China, Russia, and Syria for they way they limit or monitor electronic communications but when the US and "Friends" do it its for mumble mumble TERRORISTS mumble mumble.... If the laws don't allow us to monitor our citizens lets just change the laws or interpret the words differently.

rainsford 13y ago
Except the US and friends aren't really "doing it" in the same sense that China, Russia, etc are. Those countries develop powerful surveillance capabilities and use them to target political dissent, among other anti-democratic things. Nothing that's been reported about the US comes even close to that sort of usage.
- JackpotDen 13y ago
  >use them to target political dissent locking up a dissenter's partner doesn't count, right?
- king_jester 13y ago
  While not specific to NSA programs, the US gov't at the city, state, and federal levels have targeted political organizations, including infiltrating such organizations and tracking the movements of members in such groups. For examples see the information about spying on leftist groups for the 2004 Republican National Convention or how the NYPD targeted and helped dismantle occupy wall street last year.
- drzaiusapelord 13y ago
  If FISA makes it illegal to discuss who is getting threatened via secret court orders, how would you remotely know if there are or aren't any chilling affects? This is an important part of this argument. When we make it illegal to discuss the crime, the warrant, and have secret court proceedings, you can't just sit there on your high horse and tell us there is no abuse. You are not allowed to know of any abuse.
- wil421 13y ago
  >Nothing that's been reported about the US comes even close to that sort of usage. Nothing that's been reported. Or Hasn't happened yet....

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

TausAmmer 13y ago

Government is us, when stomach tries to fight with brain over trivial details like food you or giving, amount, quality and so on. One day brain will kill stomach with all the control mechanisms, it dies too. "For the benefit of all". We already live in virtual reality where most of the things we do is just to numb our perception. Nothing to do with advancements in energy, space travel, consciousness. Going where no man has gone before. And we lough and down talk anyone daring to, so we create spying/regulatory system, government that picks oddities and puts them in place. It works well, very well, so well that now we are stuck in place where we want to be, beer Fridays, pizza Saturday, sunny ice cream Sundays, something to look forward after week long slavery you hate so much. It is so complicated and weaved trough all of us and all out needs/wishes/predicaments. To long and want something, you create opposite situation that makes that "something" so amazing. Sometimes I wonder, what would take this organism(humanity) to evolve/change. Searching for health(happiness) in cancer(fear)? Or total annihilation for something else to come in play.

xradionut 13y ago
We are semi-rational animals. Not many of us can handle the "Truth", it's fucking depressing.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

Just pay attention to the messaging coming from some of these media sources. The gov't propaganda is growing less subtle; making it easier to identify who is working for whom.

ttt_ 13y ago

I can almost picture NSA analysts vulturing all over the private data collected of these enemies of the state. How soon utnil they send out the drones into the foreign lands where they have not so great a political strongarm? "Drone bombing in brazilian airport kills dozens" "Sadly it was necessary as one of the passangers carried terrorist intel that would put our free world at risk"

peteretep 13y ago

Controversial article that made me think: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-does-being-a-relative-of-glenn-greenwald-place-you-above-the-law/ http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231711/why-do...

ganeumann 13y ago
Straw man. Nobody argues he's above the law. They argue because: - The law is to detain suspected terrorists, nobody thinks the UK believed he is a terrorist, so they were abusing the law; - If, as the UK government now says, they just wanted any electronic devices he had so they could see what he was carrying, that would have taken less than an hour to confiscate them and ask for whatever passwords Miranda had, not the close to nine hours they held him. Nobody is above the law. I am sure the reason Miranda was travelling from Berlin back to Rio and not Greenwald was that Greenwald knew he would be detained and thought perhaps Miranda would not. But just like Miranda is not above the law, neither is the UK government. If they misuse a law to harass and intimidate then they should be held to account. There's always some jackass journalist who thinks they should take the other side, no matter how contrary to the facts, to get some attention. I am just surprised it's at outfits like The Telegraph and Reuters.
- anon1385 13y ago
  >I am just surprised it's at outfits like The Telegraph I'm not sure why. David Cameron could literally murder a baby on live TV and Dan Hodges would describe it as a 'political headache for Miliband'. Nobody takes him seriously; his columns are just fodder for Telegraph readers looking to confirm what they already believe. Not to mention all the wacko conspiracy theories about climate change that they print.
- koide 13y ago
  > There's always some jackass journalist who thinks they should take the other side, no matter how contrary to the facts, to get some attention. I am just surprised it's at outfits like The Telegraph and Reuters. Why would you be surprised? It's a given that NSA and friends have people to write stories for them on "reputable" sources. No need for jackass journalists.

smegel 13y ago

If they do succeed in "shutting the leaks down", I wonder if that would be enough for supporters to finally release all the docs publicly. Or for Assange to give out the key to one of his insurance files. I wouldn't get my hopes up though, these so called leakers seem more stringently against full pubic disclosure than the people they are leaking against.

jstalin 13y ago

I love his coining of the term "state-loyal journalists." Greenwald, Snowden, et al deserve Nobel Peace Prizes...

TallGuyShort 13y ago
Obama wins peace prize, Obama administration supports spying, Snowden leaks spying, Obama calls Snowden a traitor, Snowden wins peace prize? Wow.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

padobson 13y ago

Almost anything can be crowdsourced nowadays. 237 years ago, the founders of the US tried to crowdsource power. I don't see why we can't reboot that whole idea. Political candidates, lobbying initiatives and legislation can all be directly impacted, in the current framework they exist under, by crowdsourcing. While Kickstarter and Indiegogo have shown us it's possible with art and industrial design and dozens of other media, there's not a go-to place to do it for politics. So if this community really wants to change our dystopian future, then that's the answer. We could have the NSA completely defunded in a year if we wanted.

coldcode 13y ago

The one good thing I see is that cross-party-lines anger by some politicians is actually happening. The party leaderships are fighting it but for once they might be powerless to stop it.

frank_boyd 13y ago

There are people who've been planning these things all along, just to give you a hint: “The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.” Author: Zbigniew Brzezinski, United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. You can find this at: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162691-the-technotronic-era-involves-the-gradual-appearance-of-a-more http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162691-the-technotronic-era-...

espeed 13y ago
Brzezinski is Obama's advisor.
- frank_boyd 13y ago
  Ok, now I really need to throw up.

nicholassmith 13y ago

The British government looks like a farcical bully in this. A playground bruiser that intimidates his way down the hall before promptly slipping over. Destroying the hard drives was an exercise in dominance, 'do as we say or face the consequences' which had no impact (aside from inconvenience and the cost of a couple of Macbook Pros) to The Guardian but has made the UK .gov look foolish. Pulling Miranda, abusing the terrorism laws, sending a message is another dominance play but it's back fired awfully. Brazil is annoyed, GG is annoyed, America has calmly washed it's hands and said "leave us out of it". In terms of strategic decisions it can't be described as an excellent one. What's the UK .gov gotten out of it? Some encrypted data and social network passwords, it's not a win. If you're in the UK and you think this is unacceptable for our government to be trying to intimidate the journalists who're revealing the uncomfortable level of surveillance we now live under, and what the security apparatus has become, then write to your MP. That's what they're there for. We can't just hope that it'll surge through the halls of Parliament, we need to be heard that we think it's not acceptable and not representative of what we want Britain to be.

boi_v2 13y ago
Honestly I don't think the "write to your MP" action would have any result, for me this is just another tool to make people think that Democracy is being exercised, anyway, I am not saying that you shouldn't do it, please do it, but don't stop your actions there because it is just not enough.
- nicholassmith 13y ago
  It's a piece of the puzzle, it's a way for them to know what the concerns are and they can choose to act or ignore. You're right, it shouldn't just stop there but people should shout from every rooftop even if it's potentially ineffective.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

jasonkolb 13y ago

This is taking quite a scary turn, but not, I think, in the direction that the governments are intending. Rather than intimidate people into silence they are actively creating a movement of people who are abhorred and appalled by these tactics. Kick that dog enough times and you're going to create an organized movement that can fight back. This is how unrest happens. What I don't think they realize is that the dog they're kicking is also the most technically capable one on the planet. They're not poking Al Qaeda with a stick, they're poking every programmer and hacker who cares about privacy with a stick. While they may have unlimited financial resources, I would pit unlimited technical resources and creativity against that any day of the week. If they manage to create an organized group of highly technical opposition I think they're going to be very surprised by how capable it is.

xradionut 13y ago
"While they may have unlimited financial resources, I would pit unlimited technical resources and creativity against that any day of the week." They are the ones with unlimited technical resources. You don't have armed drones nor biological nor nuclear weapons. You are an hostage like everyone else. You might as well accept that fact for now and just enjoy life.
- jasonkolb 13y ago
  I have to respectfully disagree. They have unlimited financial resources, which translates into unlimited storage capacity etc. But NOT (IMO) unlimited technical resources in the sense of brainpower and creativity. When I say technical resources I'm referring to the ability to create new tools. For example, I know for a fact that a large number of intelligence tools are written on top of open source projects. That base did not come from the technical resources of the government (in most cases) but rather the collective ingenuity of the hackers and programmers that built it for various reasons. You can already see projects springing up with the intent of circumventing government technical oversight. This is going to result in an endless game of technical whack-a-mole where one side is motivated by a paycheck and the other is motivated by ideals and the desire for liberty.

FELICIA-JOY 13y ago

The US government spying on citizens is not new at all. It has happened for as long as our nation has been one. It may be more insidious now because the technology to aggregate spying on "we the people" is available. Welcome to the truly post-privacy era. Furthermore, the average person is not outraged by this. Cue the shock and awe for one to ten minutes after the biggest breaking stories about it and after that, for the common (wo)man, its all yawns. Plus, it is quite a dilemma. How does the government protect against terrorism while trying to protect the citizens' privacy when a citizen, or anyone moving among us citizens, could be a terrorist or sympathizer? The intent is not bad but what could come of this kind of stealthy access is bad if it falls into the wrong hands or becomes guided by ill-intent.

EthanHeilman 13y ago
>The US government spying on citizens is not new at all. It has happened for as long as our nation has been one. The mission and organisational capability of the government as changed dramatically. Nations in the late 18th Century (1776+) didn't have intelligence agencies per se. Some had military intelligence that was focused outward and they had various figures and organisations that would informally engage in domestic espionage usually in an extremely targeted fashion. Remember that formal police departments didn't exist until the 20th Century. Most of what we think of as the Government didn't exist in your Great-Grandfathers time. None the following existed in the US in my Great-Grandfathers time: 1. Intelligence agencies CIA/NSA/CSS/NRO, 2. Dept. of Defense, 3. Welfare, 4. Police Local, State, FBI, DHS, 5. FDA (Drugs were unregulated), 6. Income Tax/IRS, 7. EPA and consumer protection agencies, 8. Public Education in its present form, 9. Federal Reserve Bank The US Federal Government was the Postal Service to most citizens. It is really important to understand that we are living at the height of Federal power in the history of the US. The closest thing that Europe pre-18th Century had to the NSA was the Inquisition and it was more focused on "investigation".

baggachipz 13y ago

Presumably, the Snowden leak files are distributed among Guardian employees. In order to insure against the destruction of all copies of these files due to a worst-case scenario, wouldn't it be a good idea to distribute the files globally? If the Guardian wants to maintain control of the divulgence of leaks, they could encrypt the leaks as a series of files in a bundle and distribute it over, say, BitTorrent. They could then release the key to decrypt each leak file as they see fit.

eeeeaaii 13y ago

"sending a message" == getting you to doubt, think twice == instilling fear == creating terror == being a terrorist Fighting terror with terror. How can it be that no one in the UK government agencies responsible for this can see the irony? How can it be that they don't understand their actions are degrading society just as much as those of the terrorists?

Malstrond 13y ago

>the remains of the hard disc and Macbook Yet the picture shows a (PCIe?) extension card, which can not be found in Macbooks. The green PCB isn't a Macbook part either. And no part of a HDD is shown at all.

b8sell 13y ago

fuck the NSA