6 ms·

1.) ... 2.) Isn't this like saying python doesn't add any new programming capabilities over hand written assembly? Having full-take data in a database, all in

1.) ... 2.) Isn't this like saying python doesn't add any new programming capabilities over hand written assembly? Having full-take data in a database, all in one place under the hands on one agency DOES constitute new surveillance. Also to be clear the XKEYSCORE program uses metadata to search but will return full content in the query response. It is a database with full-take data. 3.) http://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fisc0912.pdf&ved=0CB4QFjAB&usg=AFQjCNHOnLiH-z9ZCtai5B8Py1RnXu0rcQ&sig2=mxzyVWOwvKtNKaPJFzpycQ http://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fisc0912.pdf&ved=0CB4QFjA... resolves to http://fas.org/404-not-found/ http://fas.org/404-not-found/ for me. From what I can tell, however, lots of upstream collection has happened during the Obama administration. Would you care to provide another link? 4.) Covered in 2. 5.) Agreed about his link. Let's talk about this one. http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/dec/18/nsa-review-panel-report-document http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/dec/18/nsa... 6.) They are recording the data. But they presumably delete it if it isn't related to their case. It is known that there are no formal safeguards - the deletion of data is enforced merely by policy. 7.) Again we need a new link. But I don't understand how shutting down of upstream data collection could imply no assistance in parallel construction. Could you expand? 8.) ... 9.) You can use the threat to persecute journalists, which is what I believe the parent is talking about. Furthermore other laws are used in its place (e.g. Risen). 10.) > The Obama Administration continued to lie about the programs. The Obama Administration continued to refuse to admit their existence. This is all continuing right now. Do you agree with these sentences? > The Obama Administration massively expanded all surveillance programs. I think the parent is speaking generally about the growth of the budget and capabilities of the NSA during the Obama Administration including the Utah Facility, the renewal of the spying programs and Patriot Act by the administration, and legislature that would have (had it passed) expanded the NSA's ability to look directly at content without having to make requests to corporations. 11.) Back to 6.

lern_too_spel 12y ago
I remember you. You're the paranoid conspiracy theorist who shows up in every surveillance post making wildly inaccurate claims. I'll humor you again and stick to one of your stupendous claims: that the stingray devices record all the data sent from every connecting device. Where is your evidence? All the released documents show that it is used to home in on the location of a targeted subscriber, which can be done without recording anybody else's data. Why would they have added the extra technical and legal complexity of doing what you so nonsensically claim?
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  > I remember you. You're the paranoid conspiracy theorist who shows up in every surveillance post making wildly inaccurate claims. I encourage anyone reading this thread to look up lern_too_spel and my previous encounters and decide for yourself. I would suggest this one in particular (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8513528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8513528). I would add the "Biden Bill" S.266 to the list of things in the top comment. "It is the sense of Congress that providers of electronic communications services and manufacturers of electronic communications service equipment shall ensure that communications systems permit the government to obtain the plain text contents of voice, data, and other communications when appropriately authorized by law." - http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c102:1:./temp/~c102y44iie:e30624 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c102:1:./temp/~c102y44...: I would also add 18 U.S.C. § 2703(f): "Required disclosure of customer communications or records" - http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2703 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2703 > I'll humor you again and stick to one of your stupendous claims How about replying to all of them? In previous threads it was very common for you to pick one fact and fixate on it ignoring the others. I would much rather have a discussion about all of these points. > All the released documents show that it is used to home in on the location of a targeted subscriber, which can be done without recording anybody else's data. Please link to said released documents. The Wall Street Journal, which broke the story: http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/americans-cellphones-targeted-in-secret-u-s-spy-program-1415917533-lMyQjAxMTI0NTEwMzAxMTMwWj http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/americans-cellphone... "The technology is aimed at locating cellphones linked to individuals under investigation by the government, including fugitives and drug dealers, but it collects information on cellphones belonging to people who aren’t criminal suspects, these people said. They said the device determines which phones belong to suspects and “lets go” of the non-suspect phones." "Also unknown are the steps taken to ensure data collected on innocent people isn’t kept for future examination by investigators." "Within the Marshals Service, some have questioned the legality of such operations and the internal safeguards, these people said. They say scooping up of large volumes of information, even for a short period, may not be properly understood by judges who approve requests for the government to locate a suspect’s phone. Some within the agency also question whether people scanning cellphone signals are doing enough to minimize intrusions into the phones of other citizens, and if there are effective procedures in place to safeguard the handling of that data."

lern_too_spel 12y ago

I remember you. You're the paranoid conspiracy theorist who shows up in every surveillance post making wildly inaccurate claims. I'll humor you again and stick to one of your stupendous claims: that the stingray devices record all the data sent from every connecting device. Where is your evidence? All the released documents show that it is used to home in on the location of a targeted subscriber, which can be done without recording anybody else's data. Why would they have added the extra technical and legal complexity of doing what you so nonsensically claim?

xnull2guest 12y ago
> I remember you. You're the paranoid conspiracy theorist who shows up in every surveillance post making wildly inaccurate claims. I encourage anyone reading this thread to look up lern_too_spel and my previous encounters and decide for yourself. I would suggest this one in particular (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8513528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8513528). I would add the "Biden Bill" S.266 to the list of things in the top comment. "It is the sense of Congress that providers of electronic communications services and manufacturers of electronic communications service equipment shall ensure that communications systems permit the government to obtain the plain text contents of voice, data, and other communications when appropriately authorized by law." - http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c102:1:./temp/~c102y44iie:e30624 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c102:1:./temp/~c102y44...: I would also add 18 U.S.C. § 2703(f): "Required disclosure of customer communications or records" - http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2703 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2703 > I'll humor you again and stick to one of your stupendous claims How about replying to all of them? In previous threads it was very common for you to pick one fact and fixate on it ignoring the others. I would much rather have a discussion about all of these points. > All the released documents show that it is used to home in on the location of a targeted subscriber, which can be done without recording anybody else's data. Please link to said released documents. The Wall Street Journal, which broke the story: http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/americans-cellphones-targeted-in-secret-u-s-spy-program-1415917533-lMyQjAxMTI0NTEwMzAxMTMwWj http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/americans-cellphone... "The technology is aimed at locating cellphones linked to individuals under investigation by the government, including fugitives and drug dealers, but it collects information on cellphones belonging to people who aren’t criminal suspects, these people said. They said the device determines which phones belong to suspects and “lets go” of the non-suspect phones." "Also unknown are the steps taken to ensure data collected on innocent people isn’t kept for future examination by investigators." "Within the Marshals Service, some have questioned the legality of such operations and the internal safeguards, these people said. They say scooping up of large volumes of information, even for a short period, may not be properly understood by judges who approve requests for the government to locate a suspect’s phone. Some within the agency also question whether people scanning cellphone signals are doing enough to minimize intrusions into the phones of other citizens, and if there are effective procedures in place to safeguard the handling of that data."