Stop Freaking Out About the NSA(slate.com)
slate.com
Stop Freaking Out About the NSA
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/06/stop_the_nsa_surveillance_hysteria_the_government_s_scrutiny_of_verizon.html
9 comments
Still better than Google, though, who are actually reading the content of all my e-mails and documents, without so much as even notifying a judge, or even a "judge" as you refer to them. It is beyond me how Americans continue to believe in a political system so cynical and so corrupt that allows a corporation to gather so much data about private citizens without any oversight whatsoever.
What is Google doing with the data? Who has access to it? How do they make sure it doesn't fall into the wrong hands?
And if you say the difference is that you're surrendering your data to Google voluntarily, I'll say it's not that different from what you do with the phone companies. What you had here was lack of information. You simply didn't know the government was collecting your data. Well, now you do. Most Google users aren't aware that Google is actively scanning and analyzing their information either. The only difference is that the US government owes the people an explanation, while Google reports to no one, as long as its egregious widespread surveillance - which, BTW, is on a much bigger scale than this NSA business - is considered legal. The only reason Google gets away with it is because people either don't know, or would rather not know how their personal information is used by Google (I would add "against them", but that is a metter of opinion).
What is Google doing with the data? Who has access to it? How do they make sure it doesn't fall into the wrong hands?
And if you say the difference is that you're surrendering your data to Google voluntarily, I'll say it's not that different from what you do with the phone companies. What you had here was lack of information. You simply didn't know the government was collecting your data. Well, now you do. Most Google users aren't aware that Google is actively scanning and analyzing their information either. The only difference is that the US government owes the people an explanation, while Google reports to no one, as long as its egregious widespread surveillance - which, BTW, is on a much bigger scale than this NSA business - is considered legal. The only reason Google gets away with it is because people either don't know, or would rather not know how their personal information is used by Google (I would add "against them", but that is a metter of opinion).
I am reminded of the story linked on HN a few days ago detailing how many people were in solitary confinement in US prisons and how they ended up there.
Many of the people were in solitary because the bureaucracy had decided that they were associated with a gang. And even if the link was tenuous then into solitary they would go being allowed out of their cell for an hour a day.
I can imagine this dragnet of NSA data being used one day for similar automatic spurious bureaucratic purposes. If the wrong person rings your mobile phone asking about something you're selling on craigslist then say goodbye to your security clearance. And heaven help you if you get involved in the US criminal justice system.
Many of the people were in solitary because the bureaucracy had decided that they were associated with a gang. And even if the link was tenuous then into solitary they would go being allowed out of their cell for an hour a day.
I can imagine this dragnet of NSA data being used one day for similar automatic spurious bureaucratic purposes. If the wrong person rings your mobile phone asking about something you're selling on craigslist then say goodbye to your security clearance. And heaven help you if you get involved in the US criminal justice system.
This is clearly link-bait.
It’s limited and supervised.
Seven years of daily collections from every major telecommunication company in the United States is limited? I struggle to comprehend what William would consider excessive.
It’s limited and supervised.
Seven years of daily collections from every major telecommunication company in the United States is limited? I struggle to comprehend what William would consider excessive.
So can we freak out now? ::
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence...
The funny thing is this is about yesterdays story, dealing with just metadata. The article asserts that it's no big deal because it's just metadata.
With today's revelation that they're slurping everything from everywhere with no accountability, this article is now comedy.
With today's revelation that they're slurping everything from everywhere with no accountability, this article is now comedy.
Contrarian to be contrarian drives eyeballs, which drives ad revenue. Keep writing stupid articles Will.
We need this again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee
"Any senator who’s expressing shock about the program is a liar or a fool. "
Or a good politician. A Senator's purpose many times is just to play to the masses and appear to be outraged at what happens regardless of what the truth is. That's the way they operate so it can appear that they are concerned and getting to the bottom of protecting honest hard working Americans.
They do come off as jackasses frequently. But not everyone that votes for them sees it that way.
Or a good politician. A Senator's purpose many times is just to play to the masses and appear to be outraged at what happens regardless of what the truth is. That's the way they operate so it can appear that they are concerned and getting to the bottom of protecting honest hard working Americans.
They do come off as jackasses frequently. But not everyone that votes for them sees it that way.
> play to the masses and appear to be outraged at what happens
Exactly and typically they won't take a stand unless they can turn it into a wedge issue to rally their base into playing the red vs blue game.
Exactly and typically they won't take a stand unless they can turn it into a wedge issue to rally their base into playing the red vs blue game.
1. This is wiretapping, par excellence. Metadata in aggregate is shitloads of data, and tells a much more compelling story than the data.
2. Judicially supervised means the public needs to know about the process, and be able to challenge it. Some NSA agent visiting some "judge" who signs a piece of paper in the darkness is certainly not "judicial oversight".
3. US Congress is biased, and lubricated with money on a daily basis. It is beyond me how the US people continue to believe in a political system so cynical and so corrupt.
4. Quick expiration is irrelevant when these orders keep getting re-approved every single fucking time, and again, with no oversight whatsoever.
5. Um, yeah, so the NSA is apparently collecting data from 9 big internet companies. What's that about "further court orders"?
Congratulations, William Saletan, on the worst rebuttal ever of what is now, de facto and de jure, one of the largest surveillance states in the world.