4 ms·

Everything I've seen has been a consistent effort by the NSA to eviscerate the intent of fundamental laws through clever loopholes of various implementations an

Everything I've seen has been a consistent effort by the NSA to eviscerate the intent of fundamental laws through clever loopholes of various implementations and rulings, often from completely different contexts. They covered their asses to keep from going down for actual criminal activity, but I'm not willing to say that they seem to have placed any emphasis on the fundamental liberties or protections that the Constitution is supposed to afford. Even their secret court has pointed out that they're crossing the line (likely, more than once). I mean, it's at the point that they're having to lie to a secret, relatively unaccountable court because even that won't buy their bullshit.

rayiner 13y ago
Smith v. Maryland squarely says that your privacy interest in your phone calls ends to the extent that your phone call metadata is exposed to third parties. That's not a "loophole" it's a delineation of the boundary of the right. And leveraging Smith v. Maryland isn't taking advantage of a loophole in a "completely different context" but rather applying the reasoning of the case in the same context in which the case arose: is it a search to collect the meta-data of a phone call from the phone company? You may think Smith v. Maryland needs to be overturned, but for now, the NSA is entitled to rely on it. As for the "intent of fundamental laws" the intent of the 4th amendment was to prevent customs officials from trespassing on private property. The founders never talked about the "right of privacy" as a coherent concept. The "right to privacy" was conjured from the "penumbras" of the Constitution (i.e. thin air) just a couple of decades before Smith v. Maryland was decided.
- glitchdout 13y ago
  What exactly is the point you're trying to make here? That this is all legal? They have at least violated the SPIRIT of the law. Also, you are ignoring all other reports that the NSA is storing CONTENT of every means of communication. Just this week, it was revealed that they store hundreds of millions of text messages: * http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/16/nsa-collects-millions-text-messages-daily-untargeted-global-sweep http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/16/nsa-collects-mi... They also store every single phone call made in the US: * http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs/july-dec13/whistleblowers_08-01.html http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs/july-dec1... * http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-spying-flap-extends-to-contents-of-u.s-phone-calls/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-spying-fla... Oh, and thinking about using Skype? Also tapped: * http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/nsa-taps-skype-chats-newly-published-snowden-leaks-confirm/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/nsa-taps-skype-ch...
  - rayiner 13y ago
    > What exactly is the point you're trying to make here? That this is all legal? They have at least violated the SPIRIT of the law. The "spirit" of the law is to keep government agents from trespassing on your property looking for contraband. The "right of privacy" wasn't conjured out of thin air by the Supreme Court until the 1960's. Collecting information under the Third Party Doctrine violates neither the letter nor the spirit of the 4th amendment. > Just this week, it was revealed that they store hundreds of millions of text messages: Are they the text messages of Americans? > They also store every single phone call made in the US: If they store every phone call made in the U.S. that would definitely be illegal. But the evidence that they do this is much flimsier than for the other things we know they do.
  - knowaveragejoe 13y ago
    I think his point is that ultimately what matters is whether these abilities are being abused, particularly for something like political ends - so far we've seen only a few isolated cases towards personal ends(and the nsa did not protect those people). Given the size of the organization I think it's safe to say that that is within the bounds of statistical probability.

rayiner 13y ago

Smith v. Maryland squarely says that your privacy interest in your phone calls ends to the extent that your phone call metadata is exposed to third parties. That's not a "loophole" it's a delineation of the boundary of the right. And leveraging Smith v. Maryland isn't taking advantage of a loophole in a "completely different context" but rather applying the reasoning of the case in the same context in which the case arose: is it a search to collect the meta-data of a phone call from the phone company? You may think Smith v. Maryland needs to be overturned, but for now, the NSA is entitled to rely on it. As for the "intent of fundamental laws" the intent of the 4th amendment was to prevent customs officials from trespassing on private property. The founders never talked about the "right of privacy" as a coherent concept. The "right to privacy" was conjured from the "penumbras" of the Constitution (i.e. thin air) just a couple of decades before Smith v. Maryland was decided.

glitchdout 13y ago
What exactly is the point you're trying to make here? That this is all legal? They have at least violated the SPIRIT of the law. Also, you are ignoring all other reports that the NSA is storing CONTENT of every means of communication. Just this week, it was revealed that they store hundreds of millions of text messages: * http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/16/nsa-collects-millions-text-messages-daily-untargeted-global-sweep http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/16/nsa-collects-mi... They also store every single phone call made in the US: * http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs/july-dec13/whistleblowers_08-01.html http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs/july-dec1... * http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-spying-flap-extends-to-contents-of-u.s-phone-calls/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-spying-fla... Oh, and thinking about using Skype? Also tapped: * http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/nsa-taps-skype-chats-newly-published-snowden-leaks-confirm/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/nsa-taps-skype-ch...
- rayiner 13y ago
  > What exactly is the point you're trying to make here? That this is all legal? They have at least violated the SPIRIT of the law. The "spirit" of the law is to keep government agents from trespassing on your property looking for contraband. The "right of privacy" wasn't conjured out of thin air by the Supreme Court until the 1960's. Collecting information under the Third Party Doctrine violates neither the letter nor the spirit of the 4th amendment. > Just this week, it was revealed that they store hundreds of millions of text messages: Are they the text messages of Americans? > They also store every single phone call made in the US: If they store every phone call made in the U.S. that would definitely be illegal. But the evidence that they do this is much flimsier than for the other things we know they do.
- knowaveragejoe 13y ago
  I think his point is that ultimately what matters is whether these abilities are being abused, particularly for something like political ends - so far we've seen only a few isolated cases towards personal ends(and the nsa did not protect those people). Given the size of the organization I think it's safe to say that that is within the bounds of statistical probability.