4 ms·
That argument is not very convincing when he revealed classified information and either confirming or refuting any of it would also require release of classifie
by LLWM 12y ago
That argument is not very convincing when he revealed classified information and either confirming or refuting any of it would also require release of classified information.
- jacquesm 12y agoOn the contrary, I find the fact that Snowden is on the 'wanted' list and that presidential planes are diverted in order to attempt to arrest him proof positive that what he released was genuine, after all, if he made it all up then there would be no issue.
- LLWM 12y agoI don't doubt that it's genuine. But a deliberately selected subset of true information can still be misleading.
- jacquesm 12y agoI'm well aware of that. But that does not mean that a subset of true information can't be informative either. It can be misleading, it does not have to be. And if it is misleading then there are plenty of people in a position to correct that perception, it's only a matter of time before that will happen.
- LLWM 12y agoIf you are aware of that, it doesn't make a lot of sense to respond by talking about how you believe the leaks were actually genuine data. I don't expect that we will see the truth be declassified here. As I recall, they usually wait until 50 years after everyone involved is dead.
- jacquesm 12y ago> If you are aware of that, it doesn't make a lot of sense to respond by talking about how you believe the leaks were actually genuine data. It actually makes perfect sense, if the data was not genuine we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place, so we use what data is publicly available and hope for more. Think about the alternative, if Snowden would have released all of it then it would be argued that releasing all of the data was irresponsible (see previous leaks). That's one you can't win as a leaker and so I don't blame Snowden for that (though personally I'd have preferred if he leaked all of the data without any intermediaries). > I don't expect that we will see the truth be declassified here. I'm pretty sure very few people expected the leaks in the first place, and yet, they happened. > As I recall, they usually wait until 50 years after everyone involved is dead. Yes, so the guilty are beyond reach of the law and safely forgotten. And so we are trying as hard as we can to stave off meaningful progress. If it can't stand the light of day it is probably nothing good. Sunlight is the best des-infectant and Snowden provided quite a bit of it.
- LLWM 12y agoIt's a bit hard to tell who the "we" is referring to there, but if you mean that privacy advocates are trying to stave off meaningful progress, I wholeheartedly agree. If you mean that government classification programs are trying to stave off meaningful progress, I don't think it's an intentional effort, just a natural consequence of being run by a large committee of competing interests.