6 ms·

He's treading on thin ice here. It's one thing to whistleblow the NSA illegally/unconstitutionally spying on Americans in America, but he risks losing popular

He's treading on thin ice here. It's one thing to whistleblow the NSA illegally/unconstitutionally spying on Americans in America, but he risks losing popular support when he goes on to expose the NSA spying on foreigners overseas. I think a majority of US citizens recognize that's the NSA's job, and are aware the same is being done to the US (esp by China), and hence are more ambivalent, if not supportive, of that role, even if it annoys our allies. I don't know what Snowden thinks he can gain from this, especially now that Russia has extended his stay indefinitely. I would hate for the tide of public opinion to turn decisively against him for something like this. Stick to exposing only illegal intelligence activities on US soil against US citizens, imho.

dantheman 13y ago
I think that the majority of US Citizens are against industrial espionage and think that spending government money and resources to spy on foreign companies to benefit select US companies is wrong.
- tptacek 13y ago
  Why do you think the majority of US citizens are "against industrial espionage"? That's a surprising claim. Can you marshal evidence to support it?
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    Rationally, the people should be against a security agency conducting industrial espionage against friendly nations' industries because we have more to lose from loss of credibility - from our tech companies being suspected collaborators - than we have to gain from, say, submitting a lower bid for Brazilian oil. Instead of subverting security, we ought to be securing both personal and commercial communications against all spying.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      I understand that there are arguments against industrial espionage. I am wondering what would make anyone believe that the majority of US citizens oppose industrial espionage. Polling on foreign policy issues of much more significance --- for instance, military incursions --- does not lead me to think that most people in the US have your "rationalist" take on this subject.
      - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
        Do they oppose it when it is used against them? For instance when Americans hear: A recent report to the US government, by aerospace and defense company Northrop Grumman, describes Chinese economic espionage as comprising 'the single greatest threat to U.S. technology' Do they simply say "Eh. Who cares?" If they do not like the PRC doing it, why should they like their government doing it? In a general sense I think its a pretty defensible claim to say that the majority of X country's citizens oppose industrial espionage. When you ask specifically if they oppose their own government (as opposed to agents of a company or the idea in general) the waters likely get a lot muddier due to nationalism and other factors.
        tptacek 13y ago
        This is a silly question. It's like saying, "Do US citizens support their troops? Well, do they support Iranian troops? If they don't support the Iranians, why should they support their own troops?" It's the kind of argument that only makes sense in the airless vacuum of a message board.
        ItendToDisagree 13y ago
        Except that 'supporting the troops' is held to be a positive thing and can be expected of any group toward their own, be them Americans, Martians, Nazis, etc. While 'Industrial Espionage', or Espionage in general, has a negative connotation (in the same way theft has a negative connotation). The analogy you suggest is not strictly similar.
  - 1457389 13y ago
    The implicit assumption in your question here is that the government is entitled to do whatever it wants except when people can organise to the extent that a formal censure, through voting or other means, can be devised. A state subject to popular veto rather than a popular mandate. This view gives far too much leeway for governmental over-reach, and goes against the spirit of documents like the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. The State is given a mandate by, for and of the People, and it should execute that mandate without overreach. A system where the government can do whatever they want subject only to rare popular veto (recall votes, impeachments, revolutions) is unstable and undemocratic, given the level of voter disenfranchisement we see today. Before you ask for proof of a popular veto against the NSA's activities, you should first support your assumption that these activities support the popular mandate in any way. I would submit that such a proof is impossible, given the total secrecy of these programs and lack of accountability. If people don't know what the government is doing in their name, even in broad terms (that don't harm operational secrecy), how can the government's actions be justified or permissible?
    - tptacek 13y ago
      No, the implicit assumption in my question is that US-sourced industrial espionage tends, at least at some remove, to benefit US citizens.
      - 1457389 13y ago
        From a constitutional standpoint, that is irrelevant. In a benevolent dictatorship that would be justification enough for any policy,no matter how restrictive or oppressive. If that is in fact the sole assumption you base your views on, there are larger problems in your argument than I anticipated. The real question in what is meant to be a constitutional democracy is whether there is a popular mandate for industrial espionage enabled by mass telecommunications surveillance. If you can't establish a clear connection between the popular will and a government policy then that policy shouldn't exist. As Snowden has stated repeatedly: >The consent of the governed is not consent if it is not informed.
        13y ago
  - dantheman 13y ago
    I have no good evidence, only anecdotal. In all my discussions with family and friends none have ever come out in support of industrial espionage, and many have come out against it especially when they think of other countries doing it to us. No they may be hypocrites, but in general they understand spying for national security - i.e. understanding military capabilities, troop formations, political shifts, etc and make arguments for some level of support of those activities and understand that other nations would of course want to do that to us.
- krapp 13y ago
  Even the ones who aren't necessarily against industrial espionage would probably agree the government has no business getting involved in it.
- meddlepal 13y ago
  I disagree. I think most Americans see stealing from companies IP as a mostly victimless crime... I doubt they are concerned about stealing from a foreign company which they see if interact with little or never; see piracy for a small scale example of this. Not to mention American companies benefit from it and it can have a positive effect on the economy if revolutionary tech is discovered this way.
  - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
    But would they have the same viewpoint of Industrial Espionage committed against the USA by a foreign government? The parent mentions it generally (it seems to me) and that it is not something that a government should be part of. The stealing of secrets by one company or another is vastly different than a concerted effort by a government (USA/France/China) to do such things.
    - meddlepal 13y ago
      No I don't think they would be ok with the inverse but that is why this is espionage... It's dirty business. Also I wouldn't assume people have an internally consistent view of these things. It will likely boil down to "it's ok because it might benefit me, but screw the others for trying the same thing"
  - betterunix 13y ago
    Most people I have met see copyright infringement as a victimless crime only when it is being done by "little people" and only when there is no profit involved. When a large company is profiting from copyright or patent infringement, people generally think that company is in the wrong and the the artist/author/inventor should be paid.
wereHamster 13y ago
Please take a minute to think about what the 'S' in NSA stands for, and how industrial espionage relates to that.
- SkyMarshal 13y ago
  Ask China the same question, they believe it's one and the same.
  - betterunix 13y ago
    Yeah, and the US government is highly critical of China's industrial espionage campaign.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      And Germany is highly critical of France's industrial espionage. And Korea is highly critical of Israel's industrial espionage. Wherever you look, if you're seeing a highly advanced economy, there's a web of industrial espionage connecting it to every other economy.
      - betterunix 13y ago
        That does not mean it is right -- at the very least it is extremely hypocritical for the US, which is aggressively pursuing stronger copyright/patent/trade secrets in various trade agreements.
      - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
        But is this espionage carried out specifically by the Governments of these nations by and large? Or by agents of companies which reside in these countries? I'm not aware in these cases to be honest. The point being that the difference between companies committing industrial espionage, and a government instituted policy of said behavior, seems vastly different.
        13y ago
coldtea 13y ago
>* He's treading on thin ice here. It's one thing to whistleblow the NSA illegally/unconstitutionally spying on Americans in America, but he risks losing popular support when he goes on to expose the NSA spying on foreigners overseas. I think a majority of US citizens recognize that's the NSA's job* If they recognize its doing industrial espionage and accept it, that's disgusting. Until now it was only "we just do it for the bad guys", not "to fuck France and Sweden businesses over". >and are aware the same is being done to the US (esp by China), and hence are more ambivalent, if not supportive, of that role, even if it annoys our allies. The "we're just as much a victim" oft repeated line is BS. For one, it's not only China. It's EU and other "allies" they're taking advantage of. Second, China mostly BUILDS stuff for US companies. Doesn't compete directly with them in most tech areas (Lenovo was bought from IBM, wasn't created based on stolen IP). And no, France or Germany or even Russia don't have 1/10 the spying resources to spy on the US, nor the diplomatic and economic might to take advantage of such spying even if they could do it. Much less smaller countries. Anyone who thinks Italy or Portugal or Hungary etc have the same kind of access to industrial espionage on the US (or would do it, if they could, despite the 100 pound gorilla being ready to pound on them if they were caught) is delluded. Heck, there are European countries that in past decades had government policy being dictated by the US -- or even had dictatorships established.
- tptacek 13y ago
  France is actively and aggressively involved in industrial espionage against US companies. Be careful any time you try to draw a moral line between EU countries and the US. It's not popular to acknowledge it, but we're far, far more alike than different.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >France is actively and aggressively involved in industrial espionage against US companies. Yeah, I already covered that: with 1/10 the resources to take advantage of it. And 1/100 the scale. What's France and the US's GDP again? How many French companies compete in the same sector and at the same level as US multinationals? How much political pressure can France assert to a third country to take advantage of it for its own interests compared to the US? There are only few French companies playing in the big leagues. And France is an old colonial power -- with some illusions of grandeur still and active secret agencies. It's not a representative of most European countries -- there's tens of European and EU countries with less than half the resources of France.
fit2rule 13y ago
It is highly specious to consider that the opinion of the US public matters at all to Snowden at this point. The American military-industrial religion can justify its heinous criminal acts against humanity all it likes - there are still, nevertheless, some of us out here who would rather not live in fear of American tyranny. Who would like to actually build companies to compete with American concerns, and defeat them in the marketplace before it becomes too late. What of this not-insignificant portion of the world who do not share the American privilege, yet nevertheless must labor under its hegemony? Do you think the subjects of American abuse care much if the American people deny their citizen, Edward Snowden, his due? Certainly, to a majority of people in the world, Edward Snowden - and people like him, selflessly working to deconstruct the heinous machine built by maniacs and death-worshippers - is a hero.
- SkyMarshal 13y ago
  All true. I wrote my OP under the assumption Snowden would still like to be pardonned/granted clemency and return home one day. But if he has decided that is no longer a possibility, ever, and wants to devote the rest of his life to opposing the global surveillance state, then yes, hero indeed.

dantheman 13y ago

I think that the majority of US Citizens are against industrial espionage and think that spending government money and resources to spy on foreign companies to benefit select US companies is wrong.

tptacek 13y ago
Why do you think the majority of US citizens are "against industrial espionage"? That's a surprising claim. Can you marshal evidence to support it?
- Zigurd 13y ago
  Rationally, the people should be against a security agency conducting industrial espionage against friendly nations' industries because we have more to lose from loss of credibility - from our tech companies being suspected collaborators - than we have to gain from, say, submitting a lower bid for Brazilian oil. Instead of subverting security, we ought to be securing both personal and commercial communications against all spying.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    I understand that there are arguments against industrial espionage. I am wondering what would make anyone believe that the majority of US citizens oppose industrial espionage. Polling on foreign policy issues of much more significance --- for instance, military incursions --- does not lead me to think that most people in the US have your "rationalist" take on this subject.
    - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
      Do they oppose it when it is used against them? For instance when Americans hear: A recent report to the US government, by aerospace and defense company Northrop Grumman, describes Chinese economic espionage as comprising 'the single greatest threat to U.S. technology' Do they simply say "Eh. Who cares?" If they do not like the PRC doing it, why should they like their government doing it? In a general sense I think its a pretty defensible claim to say that the majority of X country's citizens oppose industrial espionage. When you ask specifically if they oppose their own government (as opposed to agents of a company or the idea in general) the waters likely get a lot muddier due to nationalism and other factors.
      - tptacek 13y ago
        This is a silly question. It's like saying, "Do US citizens support their troops? Well, do they support Iranian troops? If they don't support the Iranians, why should they support their own troops?" It's the kind of argument that only makes sense in the airless vacuum of a message board.
        ItendToDisagree 13y ago
        Except that 'supporting the troops' is held to be a positive thing and can be expected of any group toward their own, be them Americans, Martians, Nazis, etc. While 'Industrial Espionage', or Espionage in general, has a negative connotation (in the same way theft has a negative connotation). The analogy you suggest is not strictly similar.
- 1457389 13y ago
  The implicit assumption in your question here is that the government is entitled to do whatever it wants except when people can organise to the extent that a formal censure, through voting or other means, can be devised. A state subject to popular veto rather than a popular mandate. This view gives far too much leeway for governmental over-reach, and goes against the spirit of documents like the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. The State is given a mandate by, for and of the People, and it should execute that mandate without overreach. A system where the government can do whatever they want subject only to rare popular veto (recall votes, impeachments, revolutions) is unstable and undemocratic, given the level of voter disenfranchisement we see today. Before you ask for proof of a popular veto against the NSA's activities, you should first support your assumption that these activities support the popular mandate in any way. I would submit that such a proof is impossible, given the total secrecy of these programs and lack of accountability. If people don't know what the government is doing in their name, even in broad terms (that don't harm operational secrecy), how can the government's actions be justified or permissible?
  - tptacek 13y ago
    No, the implicit assumption in my question is that US-sourced industrial espionage tends, at least at some remove, to benefit US citizens.
    - 1457389 13y ago
      From a constitutional standpoint, that is irrelevant. In a benevolent dictatorship that would be justification enough for any policy,no matter how restrictive or oppressive. If that is in fact the sole assumption you base your views on, there are larger problems in your argument than I anticipated. The real question in what is meant to be a constitutional democracy is whether there is a popular mandate for industrial espionage enabled by mass telecommunications surveillance. If you can't establish a clear connection between the popular will and a government policy then that policy shouldn't exist. As Snowden has stated repeatedly: >The consent of the governed is not consent if it is not informed.
      - 13y ago
- dantheman 13y ago
  I have no good evidence, only anecdotal. In all my discussions with family and friends none have ever come out in support of industrial espionage, and many have come out against it especially when they think of other countries doing it to us. No they may be hypocrites, but in general they understand spying for national security - i.e. understanding military capabilities, troop formations, political shifts, etc and make arguments for some level of support of those activities and understand that other nations would of course want to do that to us.
krapp 13y ago
Even the ones who aren't necessarily against industrial espionage would probably agree the government has no business getting involved in it.
meddlepal 13y ago
I disagree. I think most Americans see stealing from companies IP as a mostly victimless crime... I doubt they are concerned about stealing from a foreign company which they see if interact with little or never; see piracy for a small scale example of this. Not to mention American companies benefit from it and it can have a positive effect on the economy if revolutionary tech is discovered this way.
- ItendToDisagree 13y ago
  But would they have the same viewpoint of Industrial Espionage committed against the USA by a foreign government? The parent mentions it generally (it seems to me) and that it is not something that a government should be part of. The stealing of secrets by one company or another is vastly different than a concerted effort by a government (USA/France/China) to do such things.
  - meddlepal 13y ago
    No I don't think they would be ok with the inverse but that is why this is espionage... It's dirty business. Also I wouldn't assume people have an internally consistent view of these things. It will likely boil down to "it's ok because it might benefit me, but screw the others for trying the same thing"
- betterunix 13y ago
  Most people I have met see copyright infringement as a victimless crime only when it is being done by "little people" and only when there is no profit involved. When a large company is profiting from copyright or patent infringement, people generally think that company is in the wrong and the the artist/author/inventor should be paid.

wereHamster 13y ago

Please take a minute to think about what the 'S' in NSA stands for, and how industrial espionage relates to that.

SkyMarshal 13y ago
Ask China the same question, they believe it's one and the same.
- betterunix 13y ago
  Yeah, and the US government is highly critical of China's industrial espionage campaign.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    And Germany is highly critical of France's industrial espionage. And Korea is highly critical of Israel's industrial espionage. Wherever you look, if you're seeing a highly advanced economy, there's a web of industrial espionage connecting it to every other economy.
    - betterunix 13y ago
      That does not mean it is right -- at the very least it is extremely hypocritical for the US, which is aggressively pursuing stronger copyright/patent/trade secrets in various trade agreements.
    - ItendToDisagree 13y ago
      But is this espionage carried out specifically by the Governments of these nations by and large? Or by agents of companies which reside in these countries? I'm not aware in these cases to be honest. The point being that the difference between companies committing industrial espionage, and a government instituted policy of said behavior, seems vastly different.
      - 13y ago

coldtea 13y ago

>* He's treading on thin ice here. It's one thing to whistleblow the NSA illegally/unconstitutionally spying on Americans in America, but he risks losing popular support when he goes on to expose the NSA spying on foreigners overseas. I think a majority of US citizens recognize that's the NSA's job* If they recognize its doing industrial espionage and accept it, that's disgusting. Until now it was only "we just do it for the bad guys", not "to fuck France and Sweden businesses over". >and are aware the same is being done to the US (esp by China), and hence are more ambivalent, if not supportive, of that role, even if it annoys our allies. The "we're just as much a victim" oft repeated line is BS. For one, it's not only China. It's EU and other "allies" they're taking advantage of. Second, China mostly BUILDS stuff for US companies. Doesn't compete directly with them in most tech areas (Lenovo was bought from IBM, wasn't created based on stolen IP). And no, France or Germany or even Russia don't have 1/10 the spying resources to spy on the US, nor the diplomatic and economic might to take advantage of such spying even if they could do it. Much less smaller countries. Anyone who thinks Italy or Portugal or Hungary etc have the same kind of access to industrial espionage on the US (or would do it, if they could, despite the 100 pound gorilla being ready to pound on them if they were caught) is delluded. Heck, there are European countries that in past decades had government policy being dictated by the US -- or even had dictatorships established.

tptacek 13y ago
France is actively and aggressively involved in industrial espionage against US companies. Be careful any time you try to draw a moral line between EU countries and the US. It's not popular to acknowledge it, but we're far, far more alike than different.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >France is actively and aggressively involved in industrial espionage against US companies. Yeah, I already covered that: with 1/10 the resources to take advantage of it. And 1/100 the scale. What's France and the US's GDP again? How many French companies compete in the same sector and at the same level as US multinationals? How much political pressure can France assert to a third country to take advantage of it for its own interests compared to the US? There are only few French companies playing in the big leagues. And France is an old colonial power -- with some illusions of grandeur still and active secret agencies. It's not a representative of most European countries -- there's tens of European and EU countries with less than half the resources of France.

fit2rule 13y ago

It is highly specious to consider that the opinion of the US public matters at all to Snowden at this point. The American military-industrial religion can justify its heinous criminal acts against humanity all it likes - there are still, nevertheless, some of us out here who would rather not live in fear of American tyranny. Who would like to actually build companies to compete with American concerns, and defeat them in the marketplace before it becomes too late. What of this not-insignificant portion of the world who do not share the American privilege, yet nevertheless must labor under its hegemony? Do you think the subjects of American abuse care much if the American people deny their citizen, Edward Snowden, his due? Certainly, to a majority of people in the world, Edward Snowden - and people like him, selflessly working to deconstruct the heinous machine built by maniacs and death-worshippers - is a hero.

SkyMarshal 13y ago
All true. I wrote my OP under the assumption Snowden would still like to be pardonned/granted clemency and return home one day. But if he has decided that is no longer a possibility, ever, and wants to devote the rest of his life to opposing the global surveillance state, then yes, hero indeed.