3 ms·

Evidence?

cracell 13y ago
The article is evidence of the capability. And if you look at other leaks you see a clear pattern of them vacuuming up all the data they possibly can. Then take into consideration their budget and various data centers and it seems that they are capable of doing this at any scale desired. So they've shown the desire and capability. It's not direct evidence but it's pretty strong.
- res0nat0r 13y ago
  Sure, but collecting and recording phone calls of US citizens is illegal and there hasn't been any evidence of this happening. Metadata of who you called and when has never been protected by the 4th Amendment so we can head that off...
  - bigiain 13y ago
    "Illegal" in the same way that saying "No" to congress when the real answer was "Yes" is. Then later explaining that iw was "the least possible untruthful answer". The NSA have twisted their use of language - to try and claim that "recording phone calls of US citizens" isn't an illegal act until a human being listens to one of those recordings. I'm 99.999% sure that a "jury of peers" would not interpret the law that way. (Which might be why the need "special courts" without juries…)
    - res0nat0r 13y ago
      There is no evidence of the NSA recording phone calls of US citizens, that is just speculation.
      - rbcgerard 13y ago
        Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence in this case.
        res0nat0r 13y ago
        Absence of evidence is not evidence.
        deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
      - CamperBob2 13y ago
        The NSA doesn't have to record phone calls of US citizens. They just get one of the other Five Eyes countries to do it for them, in a quid pro quo arrangement that circumvents the inconvenient rule of law in several places at once. You're carrying water for some seriously un-American people. The only reason you're not upset about it is that it doesn't seem to be affecting you, personally, at the moment.
        rdtsc 13y ago
        That is a very good point, this might not have been explicitly said (or I just didn't read about it yet) but I just kind of assumed it works this way. We spy on your people we spy on our people and then we share if we find something interesting. Other countries also might not have the same supposed privacy guarantees in their constitution so it doesn't even have to be symmetric (say Australians somehow spy both on us and their citizens).
lotsofmangos 13y ago
I have wondered about this with the whole damn thing, on those days when I am wearing my extra thick tinfoil hat. Think about it from the Dr Strangelove cold war perspective that a doomsday device would only be an effective deterrent if everyone knew about it. Perhaps they have put all the cables in, but really do not have the resources to back up or process 99% of it. This is not that much of a problem for them if they leak a load of powerpoint slides claiming that they do, as the result is an instant global version of Benway's panopticon, with people behaving as though they are surveilled, even when they are not. Perhaps Snowden never stopped working for the NSA. Then I remember that tinfoil hats were invented by the government to help focus radio waves onto the brain http://web.archive.org/web/20100708230258/http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/ http://web.archive.org/web/20100708230258/http://people.csai... and I decide to go and watch cartoons. On reflection, there is probably such a thing as reading too much Robert Anton Wilson.
CamperBob2 13y ago
Simple. You don't need a petabyte-scale data center if all you're doing is "storing metadata." If you want the truth about what these asshats are up to, just read their electric bill.
glitchdout 13y ago
Here's your fucking evidence: The FBI had access to the Boston bombers phone calls. * http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs-july-dec13-whistleblowers_08-01/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs-july-dec1... (important part at 2:10) * http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/04/telephone-calls-recorded-fbi-boston http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/04/telepho... I'll quote the slip up of Tim Clemente, a former FBI agent: > All digital communications are uh uh... There's a way to look at digital communications in the past. And I can't go into detail of how that's done or what's done but I can tell you that no digital communication is secure.
- res0nat0r 13y ago
  The FBI is tasked with cases on US soil involving US persons.
  - glitchdout 13y ago
    How does that that give the FBI legitimacy to record phone calls of US citizens?
    - res0nat0r 13y ago
      Ever hear about the mafia and RICO laws? It is 100% legal to listen to phone conversations with a warrant. If you have evidence of wholesale FBI phone call collection and eavesdropping I'd love to see it.
      - glitchdout 13y ago
        I already linked you the evidence in my previous post. Stop being purposely obtuse. At this point you just seem to be part of another NSA program. [1] I'll just quote the lead: > The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda. And more recently, GCHQ's JTRIG program. [2] Again, I'll quote: > (The core self-identified purposes of JTRIG is to) use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable [1]: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-ope... [2]: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipula...

Evidence?

The article is evidence of the capability. And if you look at other leaks you see a clear pattern of them vacuuming up all the data they possibly can. Then take into consideration their budget and various data centers and it seems that they are capable of doing this at any scale desired. So they've shown the desire and capability. It's not direct evidence but it's pretty strong.

res0nat0r 13y ago
Sure, but collecting and recording phone calls of US citizens is illegal and there hasn't been any evidence of this happening. Metadata of who you called and when has never been protected by the 4th Amendment so we can head that off...
- bigiain 13y ago
  "Illegal" in the same way that saying "No" to congress when the real answer was "Yes" is. Then later explaining that iw was "the least possible untruthful answer". The NSA have twisted their use of language - to try and claim that "recording phone calls of US citizens" isn't an illegal act until a human being listens to one of those recordings. I'm 99.999% sure that a "jury of peers" would not interpret the law that way. (Which might be why the need "special courts" without juries…)
  - res0nat0r 13y ago
    There is no evidence of the NSA recording phone calls of US citizens, that is just speculation.
    - rbcgerard 13y ago
      Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence in this case.
      - res0nat0r 13y ago
        Absence of evidence is not evidence.
        deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
    - CamperBob2 13y ago
      The NSA doesn't have to record phone calls of US citizens. They just get one of the other Five Eyes countries to do it for them, in a quid pro quo arrangement that circumvents the inconvenient rule of law in several places at once. You're carrying water for some seriously un-American people. The only reason you're not upset about it is that it doesn't seem to be affecting you, personally, at the moment.
      - rdtsc 13y ago
        That is a very good point, this might not have been explicitly said (or I just didn't read about it yet) but I just kind of assumed it works this way. We spy on your people we spy on our people and then we share if we find something interesting. Other countries also might not have the same supposed privacy guarantees in their constitution so it doesn't even have to be symmetric (say Australians somehow spy both on us and their citizens).

lotsofmangos 13y ago

I have wondered about this with the whole damn thing, on those days when I am wearing my extra thick tinfoil hat. Think about it from the Dr Strangelove cold war perspective that a doomsday device would only be an effective deterrent if everyone knew about it. Perhaps they have put all the cables in, but really do not have the resources to back up or process 99% of it. This is not that much of a problem for them if they leak a load of powerpoint slides claiming that they do, as the result is an instant global version of Benway's panopticon, with people behaving as though they are surveilled, even when they are not. Perhaps Snowden never stopped working for the NSA. Then I remember that tinfoil hats were invented by the government to help focus radio waves onto the brain http://web.archive.org/web/20100708230258/http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/ http://web.archive.org/web/20100708230258/http://people.csai... and I decide to go and watch cartoons. On reflection, there is probably such a thing as reading too much Robert Anton Wilson.

CamperBob2 13y ago

Simple. You don't need a petabyte-scale data center if all you're doing is "storing metadata." If you want the truth about what these asshats are up to, just read their electric bill.

glitchdout 13y ago

Here's your fucking evidence: The FBI had access to the Boston bombers phone calls. * http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs-july-dec13-whistleblowers_08-01/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs-july-dec1... (important part at 2:10) * http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/04/telephone-calls-recorded-fbi-boston http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/04/telepho... I'll quote the slip up of Tim Clemente, a former FBI agent: > All digital communications are uh uh... There's a way to look at digital communications in the past. And I can't go into detail of how that's done or what's done but I can tell you that no digital communication is secure.

res0nat0r 13y ago
The FBI is tasked with cases on US soil involving US persons.
- glitchdout 13y ago
  How does that that give the FBI legitimacy to record phone calls of US citizens?
  - res0nat0r 13y ago
    Ever hear about the mafia and RICO laws? It is 100% legal to listen to phone conversations with a warrant. If you have evidence of wholesale FBI phone call collection and eavesdropping I'd love to see it.
    - glitchdout 13y ago
      I already linked you the evidence in my previous post. Stop being purposely obtuse. At this point you just seem to be part of another NSA program. [1] I'll just quote the lead: > The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda. And more recently, GCHQ's JTRIG program. [2] Again, I'll quote: > (The core self-identified purposes of JTRIG is to) use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable [1]: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-ope... [2]: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipula...