4 ms·

The goal is to have an answer on record.

ProAm 13y ago
It's pretty clear they do not care about being honest on record. Nor do we do anything about it when we find them in a lie.
- saraid216 13y ago
  I said the point was to have an answer on record. The point is not to have the truth on record; that has never been useful.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
    So then, how is having an answer on record going to be useful?
    - saraid216 13y ago
      If the answer is yes, > Acknowledgement that it has collected the communications records of American lawmakers and other officials is likely to make it harder for the NSA to argue that it needs such broad collection powers to defend against terrorism. If the answer is no, > The letter’s authors include surveillance skeptics like Sensenbrenner as well as those who voted against an earlier curtailment of NSA authorities, like Franks and Issa, the chairman of the House oversight committee. > “There can be no disagreement, however, on the basic premise that congressional witnesses must answer truthfully,” read the letter, which requested a reply by 10 January.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
        You are saying that an answer of "no" is just not credible. I agree with that.
        saraid216 13y ago
        That's not remotely what I'm saying. I'm saying that getting a lie on record is valuable because it makes it more likely that desirable consequences will occur.
        SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
        > I'm saying that getting a lie on record But you are certain that it would be a lie? Then it is implicit in this that the "no" is not credible. You're not being very clear.
        saraid216 13y ago
        What would you like me to clarify? If the no is true, then there isn't actually an issue. The point of such a request is to have someone give a public statement committing themselves to a position. Is this really so challenging to grasp?
        SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
        > The point of such a request is to have someone give a public statement committing themselves to a position. That's clearer, thanks, though a "public statement committing themselves to a position" is not in itself useful unless it has consequences. It seems that you can only state the usefulness by enumerating the possible outcomes. The link to "denial and lie on record" to positive consequences is a tenuous one. The consequences of "truthful denial on record" are that the status quo of widespread scepticism continues, i.e. no new consequences. > Is this really so challenging to grasp? it is not useful for you to get upset and offensive when you aren't being understood. It would be useful for you to be clearer.
        saraid216 13y ago
        > a "public statement committing themselves to a position" is not in itself useful This is how contracts work. This is how courts work. This is what people mean when they say, "Get it in writing." This is why we force confrontations. This is what Sun Tzu meant by picking your battleground. This is an essential utility that pervades the entirety of history and daily life. > It seems that you can only state the usefulness by enumerating the possible outcomes. I enumerated the possible outcomes when you asked how it would be useful. It is not terribly surprising that utility is explained by listing the ways in which it is used. > it is not useful for you to get upset and offensive when you aren't being understood. It would be useful for you to be clearer. Honestly, I am having a hard time deciding whether or not you're a troll. That I'm responding at all is giving you the benefit of the doubt. I've discussed challenging concepts on here before, and I recognize when I'm being unclear or when I have an inadequate grasp on the subject to give a clear answer. That is not the case here. This is not a challenging concept. It is a core part of social interactions for anyone who has access to HN.
    - a3n 13y ago
      Slowly accumulating outrage on the part of Congress and the people, one could hope.

ProAm 13y ago

It's pretty clear they do not care about being honest on record. Nor do we do anything about it when we find them in a lie.

saraid216 13y ago
I said the point was to have an answer on record. The point is not to have the truth on record; that has never been useful.
- SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
  So then, how is having an answer on record going to be useful?
  - saraid216 13y ago
    If the answer is yes, > Acknowledgement that it has collected the communications records of American lawmakers and other officials is likely to make it harder for the NSA to argue that it needs such broad collection powers to defend against terrorism. If the answer is no, > The letter’s authors include surveillance skeptics like Sensenbrenner as well as those who voted against an earlier curtailment of NSA authorities, like Franks and Issa, the chairman of the House oversight committee. > “There can be no disagreement, however, on the basic premise that congressional witnesses must answer truthfully,” read the letter, which requested a reply by 10 January.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
      You are saying that an answer of "no" is just not credible. I agree with that.
      - saraid216 13y ago
        That's not remotely what I'm saying. I'm saying that getting a lie on record is valuable because it makes it more likely that desirable consequences will occur.
        SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
        > I'm saying that getting a lie on record But you are certain that it would be a lie? Then it is implicit in this that the "no" is not credible. You're not being very clear.
        saraid216 13y ago
        What would you like me to clarify? If the no is true, then there isn't actually an issue. The point of such a request is to have someone give a public statement committing themselves to a position. Is this really so challenging to grasp?
        SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
        > The point of such a request is to have someone give a public statement committing themselves to a position. That's clearer, thanks, though a "public statement committing themselves to a position" is not in itself useful unless it has consequences. It seems that you can only state the usefulness by enumerating the possible outcomes. The link to "denial and lie on record" to positive consequences is a tenuous one. The consequences of "truthful denial on record" are that the status quo of widespread scepticism continues, i.e. no new consequences. > Is this really so challenging to grasp? it is not useful for you to get upset and offensive when you aren't being understood. It would be useful for you to be clearer.
        saraid216 13y ago
        > a "public statement committing themselves to a position" is not in itself useful This is how contracts work. This is how courts work. This is what people mean when they say, "Get it in writing." This is why we force confrontations. This is what Sun Tzu meant by picking your battleground. This is an essential utility that pervades the entirety of history and daily life. > It seems that you can only state the usefulness by enumerating the possible outcomes. I enumerated the possible outcomes when you asked how it would be useful. It is not terribly surprising that utility is explained by listing the ways in which it is used. > it is not useful for you to get upset and offensive when you aren't being understood. It would be useful for you to be clearer. Honestly, I am having a hard time deciding whether or not you're a troll. That I'm responding at all is giving you the benefit of the doubt. I've discussed challenging concepts on here before, and I recognize when I'm being unclear or when I have an inadequate grasp on the subject to give a clear answer. That is not the case here. This is not a challenging concept. It is a core part of social interactions for anyone who has access to HN.
  - a3n 13y ago
    Slowly accumulating outrage on the part of Congress and the people, one could hope.