Hacker News Coverage of the NSA Stories (IMG)(danielmiessler.com)
danielmiessler.com
Hacker News Coverage of the NSA Stories (IMG)
http://danielmiessler.com/blog/hacker-news-coverage-of-the-nsa-stories-img
15 comments
Exactly. Note that despite the plethora of articles, there is virtually no new content. The issue is an important one, both the breaking story and the details, but layers of political discourse on top of them don't strike me as particularly useful or what I used to consider "HN-worthy," nor do any of them seem likely to produce positive change (i.e. either a coordinated response to a large problem or an alternative system).
So at this point I am also considering leaving HN for good.
So at this point I am also considering leaving HN for good.
And no matter how smart the crowd here is when it comes to technology, discussing history or politics here is like talking to children. Many of the comments around here today sound like they came from the Drudge Report. It's embarrassing.
Completely agree. Every so often I promote hacker news through twitter, such that my own "brand image" is associated with Hacker News. Today I am completely ashamed to be associated with this twaddle. A couple of days ago a long discourse defending child pornography, today this stuff. Time to start with a new slate!
Well considering that a large portion of us are responsible for our user's data (from small to large) it's a very hot topic that is pertinent to what we do on a daily basis.
We may discuss business decisions over email, we might even exchange information via Facebook, even if we're sensible enough not to do this with critical information that doesn't mean our whole company knows the score.
It impacts the kind of promises we can make to our clients about the safety of their information and makes us have to consider the usage of these popular services.
As a brief example we have a facebook import function that enables a user to import some limited information about their friends. This means that if someone uses this function on our site then Facebook will probably track that access. That means that when someone is using our site someone else is tracking them. Sure that's not a big problems in most cases but it is in some. Do my terms and conditions even cover that? What if I've previously erroneously made the claim that we don't track usage on the site?
We may discuss business decisions over email, we might even exchange information via Facebook, even if we're sensible enough not to do this with critical information that doesn't mean our whole company knows the score.
It impacts the kind of promises we can make to our clients about the safety of their information and makes us have to consider the usage of these popular services.
As a brief example we have a facebook import function that enables a user to import some limited information about their friends. This means that if someone uses this function on our site then Facebook will probably track that access. That means that when someone is using our site someone else is tracking them. Sure that's not a big problems in most cases but it is in some. Do my terms and conditions even cover that? What if I've previously erroneously made the claim that we don't track usage on the site?
I think all these are interesting and relevant questions, but these aren't (typically) what are being discussed. Instead we're going down well worn paths about libertarianism and whatnot...
I understand that basically all I can really do is flag what I think should be flagged and whatnot, so this just falls into the category of "pointless whinging about HN degradation."
I understand that basically all I can really do is flag what I think should be flagged and whatnot, so this just falls into the category of "pointless whinging about HN degradation."
This story lies at the heart of many entrepreneurial technology matters. I disagree wholeheartedly that the story is 90% political. This is electronic surveilance on a broad scale, thus it impacts any startup that is handling user-data. Not to mention, it creates tons of opportunities for secure communications startups. This is an issue with one foot in politics and another foot in the IT industry. We'd all be well served to pay very, very close attention to how this plays out.
I agree with you, in principle. I would like to see less politics on HN as well. But I will admit to allowing myself to get sucked into a few of these debates... and this NSA one is a bit different in my mind. I mean, yeah, you're right that it doesn't necessarily need dozens of threads, but there are important aspects that link this to HN and our crowd. Especially the technological aspects of how to protect our data, and our users' data from PRISM and its ilk, and the sociological aspects of how to educate people on the importance of encryption and the like.
I think the topics have a place on here (and really, it's supply and demand, so I have a hard time complaining about what people decide to upvote). Regardless, I agree with you about that particular poster. The tone is incendiary, and the content is ignorant. It's feel-good, meaningless tripe. It's the lowest common denominator of critical thinking: "Oh look at how smart I am because I recognize the situation is 'bad' and when will you sheep all wake up?" This sophomoric argument is the most ignorant, because it sits in between admitting you don't know something and actually doing research to become informed.
[deleted]
Dude....it's the inet.
People say dumb shit all the time.
Just downvote it and move on. No need to get heated about it.
People say dumb shit all the time.
Just downvote it and move on. No need to get heated about it.
IMHO, the story is 90% politics.
To Americans, it is a politics-as-usual discussion. To the rest of the world, however, there has to be a strong question as to how rational it is to federate much of the world's data to American corporations that fall under the realm of American intelligence and legal purview. This is going to have much broader influence on the data practices of multinational organizations.
To Americans, it is a politics-as-usual discussion. To the rest of the world, however, there has to be a strong question as to how rational it is to federate much of the world's data to American corporations that fall under the realm of American intelligence and legal purview. This is going to have much broader influence on the data practices of multinational organizations.
Contrary to what this article states, this type of story domination has happened several times before; the most memorable one for me was the night that Steve Jobs died. For a period of time, every single link on the first three pages was about him.
While records of emails, telephone calls and social network connections of Americans' life histories are being categorized and stuffed into an inaccessible repository in Utah, does anyone else have vivid memories of previous exciting or maybe sad moments involving the front page of HN?
Aaron Swartz's death ended up taking over the entire front page at one point. There was an image showing that at the time, but I can't recall where it was off the top of my head.
This probably isn't the exact screenshot you saw, but I took a similar one: https://twitter.com/alecbrooks/status/290255929079898112/pho....
And the "Newest" page is being dominated by people complaining about the front page being dominated.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837616
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837672
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837837
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837852
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837884
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837916
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837957
Now, I admit that the last of these is mine, but at least with that I'm showing the movements of the stories over the past few hours, and as a side-effect showing off someone's tool for viewing the movement of stories on HN. At least that different. Several of the others are screenshots showing pretty much exactly the same thing.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837616
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837672
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837837
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837852
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837884
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837916
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5837957
Now, I admit that the last of these is mine, but at least with that I'm showing the movements of the stories over the past few hours, and as a side-effect showing off someone's tool for viewing the movement of stories on HN. At least that different. Several of the others are screenshots showing pretty much exactly the same thing.
This story should be a case study for virality in a niche community. It was 100% political (i.e. as captivating and informative as a car crash) and yet...it captured the attention of hackers the world over, apparently.
As someone who spent a number of years exposed to the world of spying during my time in Special Operations, it was clear that there was nothing new here. It was the same story replayed in a new format...a format that caught the attention of those who know what lies behind computer code. To me, that is what makes this entire thing ridiculous. The very people who know the technicalities behind hacking, the internet and all things to do with computing fell right into spreading a story that was dominated by fluff, lack of specificity and conspiracy theories.
I'll let you in on a secret...the coders who work for the NSA are not any different than the rest of the coding community. We did use Google...I mean we searched for people's name just like millions of other people do every single day. It's called open source information. Yet, apparently when the government uses it everyone wants to believe that it is a grave violation of our rights. What about a white supremacist group using it to track down a gay rights leader's physical address and harassing him? Is that not far worse? Shouldn't we be more worried about that?
I had thought that Wikileaks revealing the State Department reports and leaking reports from Aghanistan and Iraq would have convinced people that the government does not know significantly more than the rest of us. The way this story took over HN showed otherwise. Clearly, conspiracy theories still sell. They are urban myths. They have enough detail to stick in our minds but lack the specificity that would really answer the question: is this even realistically feasible or portrayed in a rational manner?
Unfortunately, I spent yesterday feeling as though there was nothing worth reading on HN. Every story was the same tired generalizations of the NSA. I learned nothing yesterday. Sad.
As someone who spent a number of years exposed to the world of spying during my time in Special Operations, it was clear that there was nothing new here. It was the same story replayed in a new format...a format that caught the attention of those who know what lies behind computer code. To me, that is what makes this entire thing ridiculous. The very people who know the technicalities behind hacking, the internet and all things to do with computing fell right into spreading a story that was dominated by fluff, lack of specificity and conspiracy theories.
I'll let you in on a secret...the coders who work for the NSA are not any different than the rest of the coding community. We did use Google...I mean we searched for people's name just like millions of other people do every single day. It's called open source information. Yet, apparently when the government uses it everyone wants to believe that it is a grave violation of our rights. What about a white supremacist group using it to track down a gay rights leader's physical address and harassing him? Is that not far worse? Shouldn't we be more worried about that?
I had thought that Wikileaks revealing the State Department reports and leaking reports from Aghanistan and Iraq would have convinced people that the government does not know significantly more than the rest of us. The way this story took over HN showed otherwise. Clearly, conspiracy theories still sell. They are urban myths. They have enough detail to stick in our minds but lack the specificity that would really answer the question: is this even realistically feasible or portrayed in a rational manner?
Unfortunately, I spent yesterday feeling as though there was nothing worth reading on HN. Every story was the same tired generalizations of the NSA. I learned nothing yesterday. Sad.
I'm torn on this one and would really like to see a "Here's what we know story" because the coverage seems to overstate what is happening. My thoughts, below. Please comment.
1. I assumed (and, honestly, thought it was public knowledge) that this was happening already.
2. The bulk of coverage (and reaction) seems to believe that NSA is listening to your conversations. In fact (if I am dissecting the news correctly) they are recording the key details (length of call, location, to whom) and the actual message or conversation (not sure about this one), but only using this information after a second warrant. Basically, they find a suspected terrorist by other means, get a warrant to access the records of his/her calls, and see who the suspected terrorist is in contact with.
3. If the system works as described above, I'm a bit squeamish, but don't see a huge issue. I mean, I'm okay with Facebook, Verizon, Amazon, Visa, etc all having loads of info on me in order to sell me stuff, but once the government (who is not out to make a profit) does it, I object? I'm not a fan of sacrificing freedom for security, but this logic doesn't really make sense.
I probably have some other thoughts floating around, but these are the ones I've been mulling over.
1. I assumed (and, honestly, thought it was public knowledge) that this was happening already.
2. The bulk of coverage (and reaction) seems to believe that NSA is listening to your conversations. In fact (if I am dissecting the news correctly) they are recording the key details (length of call, location, to whom) and the actual message or conversation (not sure about this one), but only using this information after a second warrant. Basically, they find a suspected terrorist by other means, get a warrant to access the records of his/her calls, and see who the suspected terrorist is in contact with.
3. If the system works as described above, I'm a bit squeamish, but don't see a huge issue. I mean, I'm okay with Facebook, Verizon, Amazon, Visa, etc all having loads of info on me in order to sell me stuff, but once the government (who is not out to make a profit) does it, I object? I'm not a fan of sacrificing freedom for security, but this logic doesn't really make sense.
I probably have some other thoughts floating around, but these are the ones I've been mulling over.
On your third point, I have few perspectives to offer.
The first is that because the companies you listed are out to make a profit, it is easier to understand how your data will be used. The very fact that the government has less clear motives is what makes their collection of data more unsettling.
Second, when a company is driven by profit and loss, they have incentives to secure data because the inability to trust a company with your data will lead to fewer customers. Sure, your data may get out in an attack, but over time, to the extent its valued by the consumer, more secure companies will stick around longer than those that are insecure. If the government loses your data, some people may be fired, but agencies as a whole will stick around and keep conducting business as usual. Third, along these same lines, a government data store means multiple sources of data collected into one target. To those with malicious intent, it seems logical that attempts to take that data will be more frequent.
Finally, those, familiar with the school of public choice, will recognize that government actors are out to "make a profit" just not in the traditional sense. As a former gov employee, I can tell you that while there are policies in place, the fact that many gov employees transition to private sector and vice-versa, data collected will in some way be used for profit and likely by someone you did not give permission to, as is the case with Amazon or Verizon.
The first is that because the companies you listed are out to make a profit, it is easier to understand how your data will be used. The very fact that the government has less clear motives is what makes their collection of data more unsettling.
Second, when a company is driven by profit and loss, they have incentives to secure data because the inability to trust a company with your data will lead to fewer customers. Sure, your data may get out in an attack, but over time, to the extent its valued by the consumer, more secure companies will stick around longer than those that are insecure. If the government loses your data, some people may be fired, but agencies as a whole will stick around and keep conducting business as usual. Third, along these same lines, a government data store means multiple sources of data collected into one target. To those with malicious intent, it seems logical that attempts to take that data will be more frequent.
Finally, those, familiar with the school of public choice, will recognize that government actors are out to "make a profit" just not in the traditional sense. As a former gov employee, I can tell you that while there are policies in place, the fact that many gov employees transition to private sector and vice-versa, data collected will in some way be used for profit and likely by someone you did not give permission to, as is the case with Amazon or Verizon.
I think this started when the NSA requested records on every American from Verizon, which then got leaked to a journalist named Greenwald. Greenwald then followed it up with an article on PRISM, the NSA's spying operation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/business/media/anti-survei...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/business/media/anti-survei...
>I’ve never seen a single story dominate the front page this convincingly.
When Aaron Swartz died, I remember being really surprised that the whole page was on that single topic. For some naive reason, I thought some variety of topics was an immutable law and could not disappear so quickly. I then checked reddit for comparison and I believe there was a single article about Swartz on the front page.
When Aaron Swartz died, I remember being really surprised that the whole page was on that single topic. For some naive reason, I thought some variety of topics was an immutable law and could not disappear so quickly. I then checked reddit for comparison and I believe there was a single article about Swartz on the front page.
I'm sure Obama will wake up today, check HN, and decide that, thanks to the front page being full of this stuff, that things are going to be different from here on out. All those upvotes will have changed the world for the better.
I think that's very cynical.
The mere fact that there are so many stories about it on the front-page and that the stories are getting so many votes & comments is a good enough proxy about the 'informed' populus.
Obama probably did not get much sleep last night - and he prollly won't get much sleep this weekend.
As much as I like him and supported his candidacy twice - this is an impeachable offense.
I doubt the pressure will subside easily though.
The mere fact that there are so many stories about it on the front-page and that the stories are getting so many votes & comments is a good enough proxy about the 'informed' populus.
Obama probably did not get much sleep last night - and he prollly won't get much sleep this weekend.
As much as I like him and supported his candidacy twice - this is an impeachable offense.
I doubt the pressure will subside easily though.
While I disagree about your view of the impact on Obama (most political issues are hot for only a very, very short time), I think even mentioning the impact it has on him is immaterial. The impact on us should be primary.
Personally? I've been on the wrong end of this trend for some time - from having my cellphone imaged at Ben Gurion to having my finger prints taken at Sea-Tac - both for no higher offense than deigning to visit a foreign country.
These things piss me off to the point where I'm writing a distributed database that securely syncs data between desktop, tablet and phone. It includes a form builder for flexibility, and multiple sync servers so that if one goes down (or is taken down), another steps in and continues.
We have skills. They give us the power to do things to change (or even just challenge) the status quo. And yet we're ok with patting ourselves on the back because Obama won't sleep for a night?
I think the real issue here is our belief system. Beliefs define values, which form the basis of our morals, on which we in turn base our ethics. While we believe what the US administration is doing is ethically and maybe even morally wrong, it doesn't challenge our values (the government provides public safety[1]) or beliefs (the US is the greatest nation on earth [2] - and by extension so are we, individually), so we let it slide.
[1] At what cost?
[2] Depending on your values, it isn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML3qYHWRIZk
Personally? I've been on the wrong end of this trend for some time - from having my cellphone imaged at Ben Gurion to having my finger prints taken at Sea-Tac - both for no higher offense than deigning to visit a foreign country.
These things piss me off to the point where I'm writing a distributed database that securely syncs data between desktop, tablet and phone. It includes a form builder for flexibility, and multiple sync servers so that if one goes down (or is taken down), another steps in and continues.
We have skills. They give us the power to do things to change (or even just challenge) the status quo. And yet we're ok with patting ourselves on the back because Obama won't sleep for a night?
I think the real issue here is our belief system. Beliefs define values, which form the basis of our morals, on which we in turn base our ethics. While we believe what the US administration is doing is ethically and maybe even morally wrong, it doesn't challenge our values (the government provides public safety[1]) or beliefs (the US is the greatest nation on earth [2] - and by extension so are we, individually), so we let it slide.
[1] At what cost?
[2] Depending on your values, it isn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML3qYHWRIZk
I hear you on the being monitored thing.
I am not a US citizen, but I lived there for 7 years. Being an immigrant was no fun. Every time I traveled it was 10 toes, 10 fingers being scanned, picture taken - as a matter of course. I don't even have an Arabic sounding name or fit any of the "terrorist" stereotypes that they probably look for - don't get me wrong, I am not saying they should, just saying that it's not as if that is the case. My name is Marc, and I am from Jamaica.
Not many red flags there - as far as I could see.
My Driver's license had a big red 'temporary' going across the bottom, and I had to renew it every year.
Needless to say, it was quite horrible.
It wasn't always like that for my entire stay, just in the last 3 - 4 years.
So I feel your pain.
As a matter of fact, it's the 1 major reason I wouldn't move to the Valley. As much as I love HN, YC, the tech scene - it's not worth it.
And now they are encroaching on the freedom of citizens. I feel your pain.
I am not a US citizen, but I lived there for 7 years. Being an immigrant was no fun. Every time I traveled it was 10 toes, 10 fingers being scanned, picture taken - as a matter of course. I don't even have an Arabic sounding name or fit any of the "terrorist" stereotypes that they probably look for - don't get me wrong, I am not saying they should, just saying that it's not as if that is the case. My name is Marc, and I am from Jamaica.
Not many red flags there - as far as I could see.
My Driver's license had a big red 'temporary' going across the bottom, and I had to renew it every year.
Needless to say, it was quite horrible.
It wasn't always like that for my entire stay, just in the last 3 - 4 years.
So I feel your pain.
As a matter of fact, it's the 1 major reason I wouldn't move to the Valley. As much as I love HN, YC, the tech scene - it's not worth it.
And now they are encroaching on the freedom of citizens. I feel your pain.
If I am trying to avoid sensitive information being imaged from my cell phone, why would I be syncing sensitive information from other devices to that phone?
It seems to me that a simpler way is to have a different phone (e.g. a dumb phone) for your trip through Ben Gurion.
It seems to me that a simpler way is to have a different phone (e.g. a dumb phone) for your trip through Ben Gurion.
First and foremost, because I need that information wherever I happen to be. Second, because it's a sync scenario I can delete everything while going through immigration/customs, and re-sync when through, and lastly, if I lose my phone, it's all encrypted.
I was actually surprised and disappointed by the response on reddit. It should have been the top story on the front page.
3-4 years ago Reddit cared about news, even prided themselves on being among the first to cover a breaking story. Now it's all about who can make the most pandering, mediocre jokes about any given topic.
Same here. It just shows how partisan Reddit really is.
HN is what reddit was 4-5 years ago. Full of technologists and also people who are outside the political mainstream (libertarian leaning). Also older.
Reddit is the body politic of the future. Lots of 19 year olds who assumed the NSA could see everything and don't have much in the way of privacy expectations.
Reddit is the body politic of the future. Lots of 19 year olds who assumed the NSA could see everything and don't have much in the way of privacy expectations.
You remember a different reddit than I do. Before /r/politics, reddit's front page would be covered with the most sensational partisan nonsense. I kid you not, the day after some hippies in a little Vermont town voted to impeach President Bush, there were at least half a dozen stories about it that got absurdly high up.
I don't agree with how you have portrayed this as a matter of 19-year-old immaturity. Every sentient adult who saw what was happening in the early 2000s and yet assumed the NSA would not have access to (say) call records was being naive. People who assumed they would have access to call records have seen that assumption vindicated. Internet companies suffer major compromises on such a regular basis that it is pretty foolish to have 'privacy expectations' about your use of the internet, even if the NSA did not exist at all.
there is a non NSA related story When Aaron Swartz killed himlself -> http://www.flickr.com/photos/cwmma/8377269212/sizes/o
And the death of Steve Jobs -> http://www.waybackletter.com/archive/20111005.html
I don't really understand the reaction!
I guess my conclusion is that in general Americans trust their politicians/government, whereas in the UK the general public assumes they're the enemy and not to be trusted, so this wouldn't be a major surprise.
I guess my conclusion is that in general Americans trust their politicians/government, whereas in the UK the general public assumes they're the enemy and not to be trusted, so this wouldn't be a major surprise.
[deleted]
I think it's a very European thing to love one's country and hate one's government. My impression is that americans often consider those two things inseperable.
Probably comes from our history of invading each other and generally having oppressive governments we don't recognise as our own. Kind of sticks with the culture even after countries start ruling themselves. I mean, even when we didn't have foreign rulers, they were of a different class and could as well be foreign for all the common traits they shared with their subjects.
Probably comes from our history of invading each other and generally having oppressive governments we don't recognise as our own. Kind of sticks with the culture even after countries start ruling themselves. I mean, even when we didn't have foreign rulers, they were of a different class and could as well be foreign for all the common traits they shared with their subjects.
As a European in the US, I can assure you there is very little love for the govt. here too. One big difference is the debate over whether one even needs a government, a question which seems self-evident and not worth considering in (most of) Europe.
I find it surprising that people are surprised by the NSA revelations. I sort of assumed the NSA is in everything electronic. Probably the Chinese too.
"We have always been at war with Eurasia"
I find it surprising that people are surprised by the NSA revelations. I sort of assumed the NSA is in everything electronic. Probably the Chinese too.
"We have always been at war with Eurasia"
Today has been a very productive day at work since I don't care about this NSA thing at all.
I do, but not so much that I want to read 22 different articles about it.
Not a U.S. citizen I take it?
Or maybe, as I read in some newspaper, one of those to whom this story equals someone announcing that water is wet.
I'm guessing this is news now because it's been on the "regular people" news, because otherwise I fail to see what makes this one different from all the other ones from the latest years. But then again, I'm not a US citizen, so there's that too.
I'm guessing this is news now because it's been on the "regular people" news, because otherwise I fail to see what makes this one different from all the other ones from the latest years. But then again, I'm not a US citizen, so there's that too.
Maybe he just has nothing to hide?
"Don't think Orwell, think Kafka"
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127...
I admit it... I tried to click on a story that looked interesting in the image.
We should fill the HN frontpage with Erlang again.
I took about the same screenshot: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7964705/nsa.png
[deleted]
Exhibit A, from yesterday:
"I hate to use this tone but, so be it. Maybe now you morons who continue to vote in the pieces of shit into our government who are bent on taking more and more power for themselves will wake up and figure it out? How much more proof do you need? Does this make you angry yet or is Obama still your diety? Oh, and Republicans don't get a pass either.
The point is that all of you morons voting like robots along party lines are destroying my country, from the inside, one fucking vote at a time."
This is the sort of tone that makes me want to leave this site for good. It's not that I'm not interested/concerned about this subject -- hell, hit me up for a beer and we can discuss politics all day long -- I just don't think that we need to discuss it here, in dozens of threads.