5 ms·

What I'm about to say may be too unpopular on HackerNews. Have you considered the possibility that not everyone shares the same moral standard and ideology? Pe

What I'm about to say may be too unpopular on HackerNews. Have you considered the possibility that not everyone shares the same moral standard and ideology? People came from different backgrounds and have different experiences, and most things are not black and white, but different shades of gray in this world. I'm sure there are people who consider the Fourth Amendment to be obsolete just like there are people who consider the same for the Second Amendment. I'm not saying I agree with it, but for people who believe they are actually serving their country, and in this era's unique geopolitical landscape, all means are justified, they WOULD be proud of their work for the NSA. You came across as condescending due to the fact that you put yourself on a moral high ground from the phasing of the question.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
sharkweek 13y ago
No condescension intended, I am honestly just more curious -- I'd love to read some honest, uncensored interviews from people working on these things, mostly to just get their side of things. I totally agree that people have varying beliefs on this stuff and for some this might be just as noble as any other way of serving their country.
- DanBC 13y ago
  > I'd love to read some honest, uncensored interviews from people working on these things, That's very unlikely to happen, because it's all classified and secret or top secret or whatever. There are a few interviews around. Here's an ex-director (He stopped being director in 1978) http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b039vhp0 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b039vhp0 - this is the first time he speaks about his time at GCHQ Here's a radio documentary from 2010. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p007fqc4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p007fqc4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rmssw http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rmssw
  - dingaling 13y ago
    Just be aware that Gordon Correra's programmes about GCHQ ( and prior to that MI5 and MI6 ) are made with the co-operation of those agencies. I have written to the BBC and asked what conditions the agencies laid-down but I did not receive a reply.
- nether 13y ago
  > I'd love to read some honest, uncensored interviews from people working on these things, mostly to just get their side of things. Because losing their job and being charged with a felony for breaking a TS clearance is totally worth doing that for you. The NSA isn't a startup in stealthmode. I can guarantee you that some HNers know NSAers, and no doubt many HNers are NSAers, but there are very strong reasons why they're not participating in this dialogue.
  - wallio 13y ago
    Trust us we have really good reasons and arguments but we just can't tell you. lol
    - hackula1 13y ago
      Also, we will lie about what we are actually doing. I can understand taking some drastic measures to prevent epic disaster, however, I see no good reason to cover up what is actually going on; threats and countermeasures. By lying, they are forcing us to assume the worst.
      - sokoloff 13y ago
        And if you assume the worst, they don't (and shouldn't) care. This isn't a popularity contest for them, and the NSA operates as if there is a legitimate national security purpose to what they're doing. I don't like the fact that they're doing it, but presuming that they should operate in total transparency just so that the silicon valley "proper thinkers" won't assume the worst is fairly naive, IMO. They believe they're fighting a critical intelligence war, and secrecy is an integral and necessary part of that battle. I wouldn't work there, but I respect the people who do, both for their technical ability and for their patriotism. (I may not agree, but I can respect.) In particular, they're making significant individual sacrifices in order to do the work they do. It's not the same sacrifice as doing IED patrol in Afghanistan, but anyone doing high level crypto for NSA could likely make more money and have a cushier life in the private sector.
        13y ago
- 1031throwaway 13y ago
  Read this guy's tweets: https://twitter.com/justinschuh https://twitter.com/justinschuh I'm certainly not a fan of his ideology, but he gives an insight from someone who came from the NSA and is supportive of the executive branch's behavior.
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    Holy crap. He's exactly the type the government could recruit inside a company like Google.
  - jonny_eh 13y ago
    Is this a Google security engineer publicly stating that he sees nothing wrong with the NSA accessing all of Google's traffic? I can't believe that he'll stay employed by Google for long. At least, I hope he won't be.
  - justinschuh 13y ago
    I'm not surprised that I'm getting smeared by a sock puppet on HN, but I'll try to use it as a chance to clarify myself in more than 140 characters: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JustinSchuh/posts/SiSd4T9fgXH https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JustinSchuh/posts/SiSd4T9fgXH
- n09n 13y ago
  I don't work for the NSA, obviously, but I agree on the point of the fourth amendment's obsolescence. A world where information is universally available and infinitely reproducible with minimal cost is necessarily a world without privacy. We need to get used to it as a society. People who grew up under the old system will be resistant to change like on every other social issue in history, and will die out to make room for the new generation. My only objection to the NSA stuff is not the collection of information, but the asymmetry. Snooping on all my emails isn't wrong because email should be private, it's wrong because you have power over me by knowing my email without me knowing yours. Fortunately, things like facebook and twitter acclimatizing people to publishing everything about their lives which will eventually eliminate this asymmetry.
angersock 13y ago
Well, let's just admit the moral highground here, and take a stand: These people are Wrong. We are Right, because we stand for personal privacy and liberty--ideals incompatible with their ideals. There's the line in the sand.
- dasil003 13y ago
  Also, if they are Americans then they are benefitting from the history of the United States whose founding fathers shared our ideals. Certainly there's an argument to be made that without those ideas and conviction we would have ended up much more like Brazil. And being a Brazilian-American, let me be the first to say that the average American could not imagine a life as the average Brazilian and the type of systematic oppression that they have come to expect over generations.
- Cookingboy 13y ago
  No there isn't a line in the sand. It's a gray issue. Ideologies and society values change throughout the history, and there is not right or wrong answer in many of those cases. Like a poster above mentioned, what IF thousands of lives are saved by sacrificing the privacy of a few million people? Is that worth it? If you say no, then what if I ask you the lives could be that of your loved ones? Just want to stress from a different perspective, my family grew up poor in a 3rd world country, and they laugh at American's obsession with human rights and they just say "that's what people do if they never needed to worry about putting food on their table". It's all a matter of perspective actually, and you will NEVER have a productive conversation without being able to understand what the other side is coming from.
  - angersock 13y ago
    The other side is coming from fear. "Just want to stress from a different perspective, my family grew up poor in a 3rd world country, and they laugh at American's obsession with human rights and they just say "that's what people do if they never needed to worry about putting food on their table"." And you know why it's a 3rd world country? Because they lived how they had to and not how they ought to. Progress is not made by simply putting food on one's table. EDIT: Look, moral relativism has its place and all, but it lacks explanatory power. Waffling because there's no objective factual right way of doing things keeps you from doing anything meaningful--it's the cowards' way out.
clienthunter 13y ago
I would argue that this point is irrelevant. The leaked materials have shown complete disregard for the spirit of the law and the spirit of not being an asshole (see smiley-SSL-breaking-trollface): questioning the motives of those involved is not just acceptable but necessary.
jMyles 13y ago
My moral compass suggests (s)he has the high ground. If there's varying mileage, it seems like (s)he's simply asking for an explanation - a point-of-view paper. And obviously no such thing exists. Not one that can be taken seriously.
eli_gottlieb 13y ago
>Have you considered the possibility that not everyone shares the same moral standard and ideology? People came from different backgrounds and have different experiences, and most things are not black and white, but different shades of gray in this world. So what? By my standards, they're doing the wrong thing, and my standards are what count to me.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

sharkweek 13y ago

No condescension intended, I am honestly just more curious -- I'd love to read some honest, uncensored interviews from people working on these things, mostly to just get their side of things. I totally agree that people have varying beliefs on this stuff and for some this might be just as noble as any other way of serving their country.

DanBC 13y ago
> I'd love to read some honest, uncensored interviews from people working on these things, That's very unlikely to happen, because it's all classified and secret or top secret or whatever. There are a few interviews around. Here's an ex-director (He stopped being director in 1978) http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b039vhp0 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b039vhp0 - this is the first time he speaks about his time at GCHQ Here's a radio documentary from 2010. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p007fqc4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p007fqc4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rmssw http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rmssw
- dingaling 13y ago
  Just be aware that Gordon Correra's programmes about GCHQ ( and prior to that MI5 and MI6 ) are made with the co-operation of those agencies. I have written to the BBC and asked what conditions the agencies laid-down but I did not receive a reply.
nether 13y ago
> I'd love to read some honest, uncensored interviews from people working on these things, mostly to just get their side of things. Because losing their job and being charged with a felony for breaking a TS clearance is totally worth doing that for you. The NSA isn't a startup in stealthmode. I can guarantee you that some HNers know NSAers, and no doubt many HNers are NSAers, but there are very strong reasons why they're not participating in this dialogue.
- wallio 13y ago
  Trust us we have really good reasons and arguments but we just can't tell you. lol
  - hackula1 13y ago
    Also, we will lie about what we are actually doing. I can understand taking some drastic measures to prevent epic disaster, however, I see no good reason to cover up what is actually going on; threats and countermeasures. By lying, they are forcing us to assume the worst.
    - sokoloff 13y ago
      And if you assume the worst, they don't (and shouldn't) care. This isn't a popularity contest for them, and the NSA operates as if there is a legitimate national security purpose to what they're doing. I don't like the fact that they're doing it, but presuming that they should operate in total transparency just so that the silicon valley "proper thinkers" won't assume the worst is fairly naive, IMO. They believe they're fighting a critical intelligence war, and secrecy is an integral and necessary part of that battle. I wouldn't work there, but I respect the people who do, both for their technical ability and for their patriotism. (I may not agree, but I can respect.) In particular, they're making significant individual sacrifices in order to do the work they do. It's not the same sacrifice as doing IED patrol in Afghanistan, but anyone doing high level crypto for NSA could likely make more money and have a cushier life in the private sector.
      - 13y ago
1031throwaway 13y ago
Read this guy's tweets: https://twitter.com/justinschuh https://twitter.com/justinschuh I'm certainly not a fan of his ideology, but he gives an insight from someone who came from the NSA and is supportive of the executive branch's behavior.
- Zigurd 13y ago
  Holy crap. He's exactly the type the government could recruit inside a company like Google.
- jonny_eh 13y ago
  Is this a Google security engineer publicly stating that he sees nothing wrong with the NSA accessing all of Google's traffic? I can't believe that he'll stay employed by Google for long. At least, I hope he won't be.
- justinschuh 13y ago
  I'm not surprised that I'm getting smeared by a sock puppet on HN, but I'll try to use it as a chance to clarify myself in more than 140 characters: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JustinSchuh/posts/SiSd4T9fgXH https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JustinSchuh/posts/SiSd4T9fgXH
n09n 13y ago
I don't work for the NSA, obviously, but I agree on the point of the fourth amendment's obsolescence. A world where information is universally available and infinitely reproducible with minimal cost is necessarily a world without privacy. We need to get used to it as a society. People who grew up under the old system will be resistant to change like on every other social issue in history, and will die out to make room for the new generation. My only objection to the NSA stuff is not the collection of information, but the asymmetry. Snooping on all my emails isn't wrong because email should be private, it's wrong because you have power over me by knowing my email without me knowing yours. Fortunately, things like facebook and twitter acclimatizing people to publishing everything about their lives which will eventually eliminate this asymmetry.

angersock 13y ago

Well, let's just admit the moral highground here, and take a stand: These people are Wrong. We are Right, because we stand for personal privacy and liberty--ideals incompatible with their ideals. There's the line in the sand.

dasil003 13y ago
Also, if they are Americans then they are benefitting from the history of the United States whose founding fathers shared our ideals. Certainly there's an argument to be made that without those ideas and conviction we would have ended up much more like Brazil. And being a Brazilian-American, let me be the first to say that the average American could not imagine a life as the average Brazilian and the type of systematic oppression that they have come to expect over generations.
Cookingboy 13y ago
No there isn't a line in the sand. It's a gray issue. Ideologies and society values change throughout the history, and there is not right or wrong answer in many of those cases. Like a poster above mentioned, what IF thousands of lives are saved by sacrificing the privacy of a few million people? Is that worth it? If you say no, then what if I ask you the lives could be that of your loved ones? Just want to stress from a different perspective, my family grew up poor in a 3rd world country, and they laugh at American's obsession with human rights and they just say "that's what people do if they never needed to worry about putting food on their table". It's all a matter of perspective actually, and you will NEVER have a productive conversation without being able to understand what the other side is coming from.
- angersock 13y ago
  The other side is coming from fear. "Just want to stress from a different perspective, my family grew up poor in a 3rd world country, and they laugh at American's obsession with human rights and they just say "that's what people do if they never needed to worry about putting food on their table"." And you know why it's a 3rd world country? Because they lived how they had to and not how they ought to. Progress is not made by simply putting food on one's table. EDIT: Look, moral relativism has its place and all, but it lacks explanatory power. Waffling because there's no objective factual right way of doing things keeps you from doing anything meaningful--it's the cowards' way out.

clienthunter 13y ago

I would argue that this point is irrelevant. The leaked materials have shown complete disregard for the spirit of the law and the spirit of not being an asshole (see smiley-SSL-breaking-trollface): questioning the motives of those involved is not just acceptable but necessary.

jMyles 13y ago

My moral compass suggests (s)he has the high ground. If there's varying mileage, it seems like (s)he's simply asking for an explanation - a point-of-view paper. And obviously no such thing exists. Not one that can be taken seriously.

eli_gottlieb 13y ago

>Have you considered the possibility that not everyone shares the same moral standard and ideology? People came from different backgrounds and have different experiences, and most things are not black and white, but different shades of gray in this world. So what? By my standards, they're doing the wrong thing, and my standards are what count to me.