4 ms·
A bunch of people posting here seem to be misreading the point of the article. The point is not that he died old but that he died in obscurity in the midst of i
by spodek 13y ago
A bunch of people posting here seem to be misreading the point of the article. The point is not that he died old but that he died in obscurity in the midst of issues that came to light in part following his work decades ago.
The article suggests he was ahead of his time in finding and exposing problems with the NSA (and CIA, FBI, etc), which seem egregious then and poignant now. The article suggests the NSA worked against him, contributing to his obscurity.
I found the article interesting, informative, and relevant.
- res0nat0r 13y agoThe headline itself lays out why he was relegated to obscurity: The first congressman to battle the NSA is dead. No-one noticed, no-one cares. The echo chamber that is HN and Reddit /r/politics does not make the USA as a whole. No matter how egregious the things you think Snowden reveals over the next year: the majority of the USA doesn't give a damn.
- cafard 13y agoThe Washington Post and The New York Times both carried fair-sized obituaries, for what that's worth. I'd bet that quite a few papers got it from AP.
- ArbitraryLimits 13y agoWhile I agree, I have to point out that all former congressmen die in obscurity, unless they went on to a cabinet post or the Senate.