4 ms·

While I don't disagree that it is a strong political move, and an appropriate one, I have seen no proof that any of the NSA's operations have made the USA mater

While I don't disagree that it is a strong political move, and an appropriate one, I have seen no proof that any of the NSA's operations have made the USA materially safer.

aylons 11y ago
"Being safe" does not matter as much as "having power" does.
- MrZongle2 11y ago
  Well, once you're one of the people in power...you'll have a staff of people whose sole job is to ensure you stay safe. Everybody else? Something about eating cake, I think...
cryoshon 11y ago
I agree, but I like to think about these things in the terms the government does, which includes a lot of paranoid fear produced by false and frequently cynically malicious assumptions. Like I said, the difference in actual security here is abstract, difficult to quantify, and potentially nothing practically speaking.
saiya-jin 11y ago
there has been an attack - look how understaffed we are! we need more budget! and more control and surveillance! there has been no attack - look at how good we're doing our job of protecting you. but just to be sure, we need more surveillance.
- flyryan 11y ago
  What about the other side of the coin though? there has been an attack -see! the NSA can't even prevent single incident X and are doing NOTHING to protect us! there hasn't been a large scale terrorist attack in north america in 13 1/2 years -there is no evidence that NSA is doing anything to protect America!
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > there hasn't been a large scale terrorist attack in north america in 13 1/2 years -there is no evidence that NSA is doing anything to protect America! 0 in 13.5 years is not (especially considering that "large scale terrorist attacks" can only occur in integer units) substantially below the long-run historical average. So, yeah, that, in and of itself, is not really any kind of evidence of any success of any changed policy since the last attack.
  - DamnYuppie 11y ago
    Large scale no, but there was the bombings at the Boston Marathon in 2014.
    - flyryan 11y ago
      Here's the problem with the Boston Marathon attack; it was planned and conducted by US citizens in the USA without any planning with any foreigners. When someone says "the NSA couldn't even stop the Boston Marathon bombing", they are implying that the NSA SHOULD have been able to. But for the NSA to be able to stop it, they would have to be collecting data on US citizens inside the USA. You can't have it both ways. You can't blast the NSA for not being able to stop Boston but then also be against them doing domestic collection. The fact that they couldn't stop Boston shows that they weren't spying on Americans (even though one was on watchlists).
viccuad 11y ago
this game is not about being safer (that's what the USA government sells to their citizens), it's about political and industrial espionage, and building a database of dissenters for the future.

While I don't disagree that it is a strong political move, and an appropriate one, I have seen no proof that any of the NSA's operations have made the USA materially safer.

aylons 11y ago

"Being safe" does not matter as much as "having power" does.

MrZongle2 11y ago
Well, once you're one of the people in power...you'll have a staff of people whose sole job is to ensure you stay safe. Everybody else? Something about eating cake, I think...

cryoshon 11y ago

I agree, but I like to think about these things in the terms the government does, which includes a lot of paranoid fear produced by false and frequently cynically malicious assumptions. Like I said, the difference in actual security here is abstract, difficult to quantify, and potentially nothing practically speaking.

saiya-jin 11y ago

there has been an attack - look how understaffed we are! we need more budget! and more control and surveillance! there has been no attack - look at how good we're doing our job of protecting you. but just to be sure, we need more surveillance.

flyryan 11y ago
What about the other side of the coin though? there has been an attack -see! the NSA can't even prevent single incident X and are doing NOTHING to protect us! there hasn't been a large scale terrorist attack in north america in 13 1/2 years -there is no evidence that NSA is doing anything to protect America!
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > there hasn't been a large scale terrorist attack in north america in 13 1/2 years -there is no evidence that NSA is doing anything to protect America! 0 in 13.5 years is not (especially considering that "large scale terrorist attacks" can only occur in integer units) substantially below the long-run historical average. So, yeah, that, in and of itself, is not really any kind of evidence of any success of any changed policy since the last attack.
- DamnYuppie 11y ago
  Large scale no, but there was the bombings at the Boston Marathon in 2014.
  - flyryan 11y ago
    Here's the problem with the Boston Marathon attack; it was planned and conducted by US citizens in the USA without any planning with any foreigners. When someone says "the NSA couldn't even stop the Boston Marathon bombing", they are implying that the NSA SHOULD have been able to. But for the NSA to be able to stop it, they would have to be collecting data on US citizens inside the USA. You can't have it both ways. You can't blast the NSA for not being able to stop Boston but then also be against them doing domestic collection. The fact that they couldn't stop Boston shows that they weren't spying on Americans (even though one was on watchlists).

viccuad 11y ago

this game is not about being safer (that's what the USA government sells to their citizens), it's about political and industrial espionage, and building a database of dissenters for the future.