6 ms·

But unfortunately, it always is. American life, and American citizenship is more precious than any other life. I know it's not the same issue, but throughout t

by sleepyK 13y ago

But unfortunately, it always is. American life, and American citizenship is more precious than any other life. I know it's not the same issue, but throughout the whole NSA snooping revelations, Americans have only been concerned by the legality of spying on their own citizens. All of us foreigners are fair game. This is similar. The value of an American life is much more than that of a foreigner's life.

RankingMember 13y ago
Rest assured that not all of us Americans think it's a-ok that the NSA is spying on other countries' citizens either.
sneak 13y ago
> All of us foreigners are fair game Americans feel this way, sure. But Americans are only 4% of humans, and soon 100% of humans will be on the Internet. This worldview is not an economic survival trait. I suggest relaxing, brewing some tea, and waiting for this to play out in the global market. Either they'll change, or they'll go out of business.
- hbags 13y ago
  > Americans feel this way, sure. I'm American. I don't feel that way at all.
- classicsnoot 13y ago
  7000000000 300000000 I never got passed pre-algebra, but i am having a hard time getting to 4%. I fully acknowledge i am shit at maths, but i would love an explanation (completely serious; i have heard this "4%" malarkey a few times now). I know these numbers are estimations at best, but they seem accepted so: >China: 1.3-1.5 billions >India: 1.3-1.4 billions >EU: 400 millions >US: 400 millions >sum total, all nations: 7.1 billions [1] I know this may seem like semantic silliness, but here of all places i expect accuracy within region. to the larger point, at this time, american minds are more valuable in terms of conviction, as it is our country that is so reckless in regards to others, be it in the realms of security, supply lines, manufacturing, etc. This is no an inherent value; the most important dude at the party is always the person with the weed. It is not because she is better than her peers, it is because of her relationship to here peers in the context of what they want and what she has. Before you charge up your righteous indignation cannons, this "importance" along with all the times i must sit through a harangue about why i need to be more respectful/appreciative of the greatest nation on earth drives me, and many other americans, completely nuts. i fucking hate it, but when i travel, my brothers and sisters from overseas will only let me be a shitty american. some of us over here are paying attention, you know. pass the tea, mate. this whole coffee thing needs to end as well. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
  - alepper 13y ago
    300,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = 3 / 70, or a little less than half (3.5 / 70) of 10% (7 / 70). About 4%.
    - sejje 13y ago
      Or: 300,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = 0.04285714285 4.28%
- bjelkeman-again 13y ago
  Reply to classicsnoot: in your referenced article the estimated US population is 317 million, and the world population is 7134 million. 317/7134=0.444 so the US population is then 4.4% of the world population.
  - classicsnoot 13y ago
    thanks to you and @alpeper, i appreciate you reserving judgement i used to be embarrassed of my poor maths skills, but now i do not have the time for silly feel.
  - st0p 13y ago
    317/7134 = 0.044, which is indeed 4.4%
    - bjelkeman-again 13y ago
      I blame a typo. :)
rgbrenner 13y ago
Americans should be more concerned about the NSA spying on US citizens than on foreigners. Here's why: When the US government decides a US citizen's communication patterns makes him a terrorist, the US government is free to knock down their door in the middle of the night and whisk them off to Guantanamo, and NO ONE except the US government can do anything to stop them. When the US government decides a foreigner is a terrorist, they have to ASK your government to cooperate, and if they don't, the US has to be ready to go to war to kill/capture him. The difference between the NSA spying on an American and a foreigner is that only the foreigner has a government that can protect them from the US government.
- Bahamut 13y ago
  > When the US government decides a US citizen's communication patterns makes him a terrorist, the US government is free to knock down their door in the middle of the night and whisk them off to Guantanamo, and NO ONE except the US government can do anything to stop them. While I dislike how the U. S. government has decided that who they classify as terrorists superceding the rights of a US citizen, this is just wrong. Communicating with terrorists on a typical basis isn't enough for the U. S. government to do so - the only cases where I have heard of this happening is when the US citizen in question has carried out actual violent terrorist actions such as armed combat. You have far less protection against the U. S. government if you are not a citizen, since there is nothing protecting you against broad actions. You can be assassinated in the middle of the night & your government wouldn't be able to do a damn thing to pre-empt that. There are also far less protections as to spying as well, but that has nothing to do with this article.
  - hackinthebochs 13y ago
    > Communicating with terrorists on a typical basis isn't enough for the U. S. government to do so For the time being. Do you think how the surveillance apparatus currently works is how it will always work in perpetuity?
- revelation 13y ago
  Arguably, if you are living in Pakistan or some other "near failed" state which gets military support from the US, you are at a much higher risk. Some B.A. in the NSA digs through your traffic and decides you are some terrorist mastermind, next thing you know a Hellfire blows up your home and family.
philwelch 13y ago
It's not an American thing. It's the human condition. I don't care where you live, if someone who lives down the street from you and looks like you gets killed, you care more about that than about someone on the other side of the world. That's how people work.
- Houshalter 13y ago
  But there is no reason it has to be that way. For most of human history we lived in small tribes of a hundred people or so, and everyone pretty much cared only for the people in their own tribe. But then we moved on to entire cities of thousands, where you likely didn't know everyone else, but it was still possible to care for strangers because they were still part of your "tribe". Then we moved on to nations with millions of people, and nationalism still proved to be effective. So maybe we can someday go to globalism. Putting the whole of humanity inside your circle of concern, not just your friends and members of your tribe.
  - philwelch 13y ago
    Maybe. It would be nice.
  - AndrewKemendo 13y ago
    The reality is, your brain cannot process that many close connections so you are inevitably limited.
    - Houshalter 13y ago
      Well the same is true for countries, but nationalism seems to work.
- madaxe_again 13y ago
  That's how people with an inadequate exposure to multiple cultures during childhood work.... such as most Americans, sadly, who remain fantastically insular. As a British kid in US school for a year, I was astounded to find that of this group of "elite" children, only two (other than myself) had ventured beyond Illinois, and one abroad - to Canada.

by sleepyK 13y ago

RankingMember 13y ago

Rest assured that not all of us Americans think it's a-ok that the NSA is spying on other countries' citizens either.

sneak 13y ago

> All of us foreigners are fair game Americans feel this way, sure. But Americans are only 4% of humans, and soon 100% of humans will be on the Internet. This worldview is not an economic survival trait. I suggest relaxing, brewing some tea, and waiting for this to play out in the global market. Either they'll change, or they'll go out of business.

hbags 13y ago
> Americans feel this way, sure. I'm American. I don't feel that way at all.
classicsnoot 13y ago
7000000000 300000000 I never got passed pre-algebra, but i am having a hard time getting to 4%. I fully acknowledge i am shit at maths, but i would love an explanation (completely serious; i have heard this "4%" malarkey a few times now). I know these numbers are estimations at best, but they seem accepted so: >China: 1.3-1.5 billions >India: 1.3-1.4 billions >EU: 400 millions >US: 400 millions >sum total, all nations: 7.1 billions [1] I know this may seem like semantic silliness, but here of all places i expect accuracy within region. to the larger point, at this time, american minds are more valuable in terms of conviction, as it is our country that is so reckless in regards to others, be it in the realms of security, supply lines, manufacturing, etc. This is no an inherent value; the most important dude at the party is always the person with the weed. It is not because she is better than her peers, it is because of her relationship to here peers in the context of what they want and what she has. Before you charge up your righteous indignation cannons, this "importance" along with all the times i must sit through a harangue about why i need to be more respectful/appreciative of the greatest nation on earth drives me, and many other americans, completely nuts. i fucking hate it, but when i travel, my brothers and sisters from overseas will only let me be a shitty american. some of us over here are paying attention, you know. pass the tea, mate. this whole coffee thing needs to end as well. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
- alepper 13y ago
  300,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = 3 / 70, or a little less than half (3.5 / 70) of 10% (7 / 70). About 4%.
  - sejje 13y ago
    Or: 300,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = 0.04285714285 4.28%
bjelkeman-again 13y ago
Reply to classicsnoot: in your referenced article the estimated US population is 317 million, and the world population is 7134 million. 317/7134=0.444 so the US population is then 4.4% of the world population.
- classicsnoot 13y ago
  thanks to you and @alpeper, i appreciate you reserving judgement i used to be embarrassed of my poor maths skills, but now i do not have the time for silly feel.
- st0p 13y ago
  317/7134 = 0.044, which is indeed 4.4%
  - bjelkeman-again 13y ago
    I blame a typo. :)

rgbrenner 13y ago

Americans should be more concerned about the NSA spying on US citizens than on foreigners. Here's why: When the US government decides a US citizen's communication patterns makes him a terrorist, the US government is free to knock down their door in the middle of the night and whisk them off to Guantanamo, and NO ONE except the US government can do anything to stop them. When the US government decides a foreigner is a terrorist, they have to ASK your government to cooperate, and if they don't, the US has to be ready to go to war to kill/capture him. The difference between the NSA spying on an American and a foreigner is that only the foreigner has a government that can protect them from the US government.

Bahamut 13y ago
> When the US government decides a US citizen's communication patterns makes him a terrorist, the US government is free to knock down their door in the middle of the night and whisk them off to Guantanamo, and NO ONE except the US government can do anything to stop them. While I dislike how the U. S. government has decided that who they classify as terrorists superceding the rights of a US citizen, this is just wrong. Communicating with terrorists on a typical basis isn't enough for the U. S. government to do so - the only cases where I have heard of this happening is when the US citizen in question has carried out actual violent terrorist actions such as armed combat. You have far less protection against the U. S. government if you are not a citizen, since there is nothing protecting you against broad actions. You can be assassinated in the middle of the night & your government wouldn't be able to do a damn thing to pre-empt that. There are also far less protections as to spying as well, but that has nothing to do with this article.
- hackinthebochs 13y ago
  > Communicating with terrorists on a typical basis isn't enough for the U. S. government to do so For the time being. Do you think how the surveillance apparatus currently works is how it will always work in perpetuity?
revelation 13y ago
Arguably, if you are living in Pakistan or some other "near failed" state which gets military support from the US, you are at a much higher risk. Some B.A. in the NSA digs through your traffic and decides you are some terrorist mastermind, next thing you know a Hellfire blows up your home and family.

philwelch 13y ago

It's not an American thing. It's the human condition. I don't care where you live, if someone who lives down the street from you and looks like you gets killed, you care more about that than about someone on the other side of the world. That's how people work.

Houshalter 13y ago
But there is no reason it has to be that way. For most of human history we lived in small tribes of a hundred people or so, and everyone pretty much cared only for the people in their own tribe. But then we moved on to entire cities of thousands, where you likely didn't know everyone else, but it was still possible to care for strangers because they were still part of your "tribe". Then we moved on to nations with millions of people, and nationalism still proved to be effective. So maybe we can someday go to globalism. Putting the whole of humanity inside your circle of concern, not just your friends and members of your tribe.
- philwelch 13y ago
  Maybe. It would be nice.
- AndrewKemendo 13y ago
  The reality is, your brain cannot process that many close connections so you are inevitably limited.
  - Houshalter 13y ago
    Well the same is true for countries, but nationalism seems to work.
madaxe_again 13y ago
That's how people with an inadequate exposure to multiple cultures during childhood work.... such as most Americans, sadly, who remain fantastically insular. As a British kid in US school for a year, I was astounded to find that of this group of "elite" children, only two (other than myself) had ventured beyond Illinois, and one abroad - to Canada.