7 ms·

I agree that it's best to assume earnestness in opinions, I disagree with your opening. There absolutely is a reason for the NSA to give a fuck what you or I th

I agree that it's best to assume earnestness in opinions, I disagree with your opening. There absolutely is a reason for the NSA to give a fuck what you or I think. They are an intelligence and security agency, operating covertly with plausible deniability is what they do. More importantly, there are laws trying to be passed that can strengthen or weaken their funding and power. Making people at home feel that the agency needs to keep up the good work is not a waste of funds to that end. They just got caught with their pants down spying on the American people. If they don't try to take hold of the narrative they might see themselves at the shit end of the political stick.

diminoten 12y ago
There is no political stick for them to be on, because every decision-maker in the US government knows how important the NSA is.
- srj 12y ago
  Where's your evidence for that? The hearings in congress I think have shown that there are doubts from decision-makers.
  - diminoten 12y ago
    The lack of traction any of those movements get, and the general disconnect that every. single. congressperson. has when it comes to cyber security.
  - higherpurpose 12y ago
    Also almost half of the House tried to pass a bill to cut NSA's funding in 2013.
- zipwitch 12y ago
  Unimportant, because they neither provide useful intel nor prevent terror attacks. Or very important, because they have lots of blackmail material?
  - diminoten 12y ago
    How would you know if they provide useful intel or prevent terror attacks?
    - AnthonyMouse 12y ago
      Do you have an actual answer to that question? Because it seems like a bad plan to spend trillions of dollars on something if you can't even show that it works.
      - diminoten 12y ago
        Show to who? You?
        AnthonyMouse 12y ago
        If by "me" you mean "the voters" then yes of course. What was that Russian proverb Ronald Regan was always so found of? Trust but verify? The verify part is very, very important. Blind trust with no accountability is totally insane. There has to come a point, during the lives of the people who have to be held accountable for what they've done, that what they've done comes to light. Or how do you propose we hold them to account?
        diminoten 12y ago
        You pick representatives, and they are shown the effectiveness of programs, because they are the ones who vote for the programs. This isn't about you, or me, or any individual, that's not how this country works. Some things that are not very popular are absolutely necessary nonetheless.
        AnthonyMouse 12y ago
        > You pick representatives, and they are shown the effectiveness of programs, because they are the ones who vote for the programs. They aren't always given the information either. Recall Diane Feinstein being quite displeased about being lied to recently. And we still have to elect "them" on the basis of something. By what process is a corrupt politician supposed to be held accountable if the fact of their corruption is a government secret? > Some things that are not very popular are absolutely necessary nonetheless. How do you propose to ensure that only the "absolutely necessary" things are occurring?

diminoten 12y ago

There is no political stick for them to be on, because every decision-maker in the US government knows how important the NSA is.

srj 12y ago
Where's your evidence for that? The hearings in congress I think have shown that there are doubts from decision-makers.
- diminoten 12y ago
  The lack of traction any of those movements get, and the general disconnect that every. single. congressperson. has when it comes to cyber security.
- higherpurpose 12y ago
  Also almost half of the House tried to pass a bill to cut NSA's funding in 2013.
zipwitch 12y ago
Unimportant, because they neither provide useful intel nor prevent terror attacks. Or very important, because they have lots of blackmail material?
- diminoten 12y ago
  How would you know if they provide useful intel or prevent terror attacks?
  - AnthonyMouse 12y ago
    Do you have an actual answer to that question? Because it seems like a bad plan to spend trillions of dollars on something if you can't even show that it works.
    - diminoten 12y ago
      Show to who? You?
      - AnthonyMouse 12y ago
        If by "me" you mean "the voters" then yes of course. What was that Russian proverb Ronald Regan was always so found of? Trust but verify? The verify part is very, very important. Blind trust with no accountability is totally insane. There has to come a point, during the lives of the people who have to be held accountable for what they've done, that what they've done comes to light. Or how do you propose we hold them to account?
        diminoten 12y ago
        You pick representatives, and they are shown the effectiveness of programs, because they are the ones who vote for the programs. This isn't about you, or me, or any individual, that's not how this country works. Some things that are not very popular are absolutely necessary nonetheless.
        AnthonyMouse 12y ago
        > You pick representatives, and they are shown the effectiveness of programs, because they are the ones who vote for the programs. They aren't always given the information either. Recall Diane Feinstein being quite displeased about being lied to recently. And we still have to elect "them" on the basis of something. By what process is a corrupt politician supposed to be held accountable if the fact of their corruption is a government secret? > Some things that are not very popular are absolutely necessary nonetheless. How do you propose to ensure that only the "absolutely necessary" things are occurring?