4 ms·

Being angry is a normal reaction, but that doesn't mean spying on "friends" isn't the thing to do. It's not black and white. You don't just have "friends" on o

Being angry is a normal reaction, but that doesn't mean spying on "friends" isn't the thing to do. It's not black and white. You don't just have "friends" on one side and "enemies" on the others. It can also be understood as "Trust but verify" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As6y5eI01XE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As6y5eI01XE

Xylakant 13y ago
So you'd be fine if your partner breaks into your email account on the basis of "trust but verify"? [1] I'm not. The NSA/GCHQ are breaking into secured computer systems of other countries and the UN despite having signed treaties that forbid this practice. They use the information gained to undermine the negotiation position of their partners. Now, that this information gets published, it's "what everybody does", but back when american systems were hacked, it was "evil chinese hackers". I'm not willing to accept that "what everybody does" is always a good practice. The USA is currently loosing a lot of goodwill and trust with other countries due to the NSAs actions. Those actions might have provided a short-term benefit in some negotiation, but now that they're exposed do a tremendous damage. I might be a bit of a dreamer, but I always hoped that governments should be in for the long-term benefit and fostering reciprocal trust between allies is certainly better than spying on them. [1] trust but verify can be baked into treaties, as was done in the START treaties for example.
- shin_lao 13y ago
  If you wrongly entrust your partner, you might be cheated. If you wrongly entrust another country, millions of persons might die. Different consequences, different rules.
  - Xylakant 13y ago
    If you wrongly spy on your partner, you might loose him. If you wrongly spy on an ally, millions of persons might die. Different consequences, different rules. Your argument is a straw man. I never called for blind trust into all actions, but for trust in the countries you call your allies. Brasil is unlikely to start the next major war, as is Germany, France or the UN. Spying on those is all about leverage and financial benefits. Is that worth the loss of trust you're risking?

Xylakant 13y ago

So you'd be fine if your partner breaks into your email account on the basis of "trust but verify"? [1] I'm not. The NSA/GCHQ are breaking into secured computer systems of other countries and the UN despite having signed treaties that forbid this practice. They use the information gained to undermine the negotiation position of their partners. Now, that this information gets published, it's "what everybody does", but back when american systems were hacked, it was "evil chinese hackers". I'm not willing to accept that "what everybody does" is always a good practice. The USA is currently loosing a lot of goodwill and trust with other countries due to the NSAs actions. Those actions might have provided a short-term benefit in some negotiation, but now that they're exposed do a tremendous damage. I might be a bit of a dreamer, but I always hoped that governments should be in for the long-term benefit and fostering reciprocal trust between allies is certainly better than spying on them. [1] trust but verify can be baked into treaties, as was done in the START treaties for example.

shin_lao 13y ago
If you wrongly entrust your partner, you might be cheated. If you wrongly entrust another country, millions of persons might die. Different consequences, different rules.
- Xylakant 13y ago
  If you wrongly spy on your partner, you might loose him. If you wrongly spy on an ally, millions of persons might die. Different consequences, different rules. Your argument is a straw man. I never called for blind trust into all actions, but for trust in the countries you call your allies. Brasil is unlikely to start the next major war, as is Germany, France or the UN. Spying on those is all about leverage and financial benefits. Is that worth the loss of trust you're risking?