Ask HN: Why has nobody else 'defected' from NSA/GCHQ since the Snowden incident?
15 comments
Consider the possibility that others have come forward and leaked documents, which have then gone on to be published (perhaps even by Greenwald et al) with sources listed as "NSA documents obtained by $publication". Everyone would assume they came from Snowden without much question giving excellent cover for other leakers who want these things to be known but aren't willing to give up drastically above average salaries in tropical locations to do so.
Snowden wasn't the first NSA whistleblower. Wikipedia lists 4 other NSA employee whistleblowers. And every one of them was investigated by the FBI, subject to armed raids, or otherwise persecuted. Surely NSA employees know what they're dealing with better than we do (and I don't mean that in a good way).
Greenwald et al haven't finished their run yet, and have done a good job of keeping the story in the news. A second leaker probably wouldn't change the trajectory of the story right now. They may want to stay and see if things change. If real reforms happen, there's plenty of fun stuff to work on at NSA. If some programs are continued despite those reforms, then it's time to blow the whistle.
And if only bogus reforms happen, then they would be in a good position to leak Feinstein's phone calls from last week.
And if only bogus reforms happen, then they would be in a good position to leak Feinstein's phone calls from last week.
Its not the same thing at all. The people coming forward about a sex offender have absolutely nothing to fear; they weren't the ones that broke the law.
On the other hand, revealing classified information will send you to prison for decades. Depending on what you do for a living, it could even result in the death penalty. Best case scenario, you will spend the rest of your life living in a country with a government worse than your own, wondering when a member of the intelligence community is going to murder you.
The comparison really doesn't hold up.
Also, think of how badly this has damaged not only the U.S. government, but also the private sector. No company in its right mind, foreign or domestic, still wants their data to traverse networks from the United States. They might not be able to avoid it, but that's besides the point. By the time all is said and done, tens of billions, if not trillions of dollars in damages will have been done to the U.S. economy. The NSA's shenanigans have been the most detrimental thing to happen to the United States in at least a decade. Unfortunately, the government doesn't blame themselves, they blame Edward Snowden. And so you can be sure that billions of dollars and tens of thousands of man-hours are being dedicated to the task of closing any holes that allowed Snowden to leave the country with large amounts of classified information.
On the other hand, revealing classified information will send you to prison for decades. Depending on what you do for a living, it could even result in the death penalty. Best case scenario, you will spend the rest of your life living in a country with a government worse than your own, wondering when a member of the intelligence community is going to murder you.
The comparison really doesn't hold up.
Also, think of how badly this has damaged not only the U.S. government, but also the private sector. No company in its right mind, foreign or domestic, still wants their data to traverse networks from the United States. They might not be able to avoid it, but that's besides the point. By the time all is said and done, tens of billions, if not trillions of dollars in damages will have been done to the U.S. economy. The NSA's shenanigans have been the most detrimental thing to happen to the United States in at least a decade. Unfortunately, the government doesn't blame themselves, they blame Edward Snowden. And so you can be sure that billions of dollars and tens of thousands of man-hours are being dedicated to the task of closing any holes that allowed Snowden to leave the country with large amounts of classified information.
Pedophilia is a taboo in the entire western world. Especially, homosexual pedophilia is something that you never get away with. When you can't win an argument against bitcoin or TOR for example, all you have to do is drop the sentence 'pedophiles use it to [...]' and you're able to see even the most liberal people taking a step back.
That's to say that pedophilia is something unacceptable by 99,9999% of UK's (and probably large part of the world's) population.
What Snowden did, was eventually hailed by some newspapers, but not without very cautious words. No one in the 'establishment' called him a Hero. Keith Alexander is still there IIRC the Obama administration didn't accept any sort of discussion about bringing him back without penalties, etc. Most importantly, the political hypocrisy is backed by the sentiment of betrayal which is strong even among the US population. Even in this thread you can see people arguing that it was planned - which IMHO is stupid and doesn't make sense but anyway - or it was a mistaken move, etc.
So while the one situation finds all parts aligned the other, even after the revelations came true and minor actions where taken in the right direction, doesn't. And if the IT community understands the repercussions of his actions, so much that you compared the two situations, most people don't know enough to understand and care about what's going on and how important online privacy will be in the future. But give them a pedophile and people will burn him alive (maybe, just maybe... rightly so).
That's to say that pedophilia is something unacceptable by 99,9999% of UK's (and probably large part of the world's) population.
What Snowden did, was eventually hailed by some newspapers, but not without very cautious words. No one in the 'establishment' called him a Hero. Keith Alexander is still there IIRC the Obama administration didn't accept any sort of discussion about bringing him back without penalties, etc. Most importantly, the political hypocrisy is backed by the sentiment of betrayal which is strong even among the US population. Even in this thread you can see people arguing that it was planned - which IMHO is stupid and doesn't make sense but anyway - or it was a mistaken move, etc.
So while the one situation finds all parts aligned the other, even after the revelations came true and minor actions where taken in the right direction, doesn't. And if the IT community understands the repercussions of his actions, so much that you compared the two situations, most people don't know enough to understand and care about what's going on and how important online privacy will be in the future. But give them a pedophile and people will burn him alive (maybe, just maybe... rightly so).
cus he still can't go home, or see his family, friends or anyone, and is in a precarious position with another super power and occasionally has to pawn along basically for his survival now. I doubt too many other people want to sacrifice their entire lives. He has shown us how it's down, and the price and I don't think anyone else wants to pay (and that's if they are lucky, there is still large risk it could go much worse)
"To Arendt’s mind, Eichmann willingly did his part to organize the Holocaust — and an instrumental part it was — out of neither anti-semitism nor pure malice, but out of a non-ideological, entirely more prosaic combination of careerism and obedience."
http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/hannah_arendts_original_a...
And the original book,"Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil" in PDF -
http://platypus1917.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/arendt_ei...
http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/hannah_arendts_original_a...
And the original book,"Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil" in PDF -
http://platypus1917.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/arendt_ei...
You're taught that ethics mortality legality are someone else's job to worry about.
People tend to adapt their personal set of ethics to suit the things that pay them. See almost every website that runs advertizements, and/or sells user's data.
Plus all the legal and financial risk.
People tend to adapt their personal set of ethics to suit the things that pay them. See almost every website that runs advertizements, and/or sells user's data.
Plus all the legal and financial risk.
It's an interesting question. I think most people wouldn't have the combination of courage, access to sensitive info, and be able to uproot their life potentially forever.
I kind of hope they wait until we get proper "reform" which is treated like a piece of toilet paper at the agency and they continue business as usual.
Snowden himself might not have left the NSA if someone like himself had blown the whistle as effectively.
you should check out Frontline's The United States of Secrets
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/united-states-of-sec...
Who says snowden has "defected"?
Maybe it was on purpose..
Maybe it was on purpose..
because they like their jobs? because they're afraid of retribution?
Yet, within the fun world of NSA/GCHQ, nobody has came forward since Snowden to tell the world what it is that the spies are really up to or even how the Snowden stories affected morale in Peeping-Tom-Land.
Clearly there are penalties for speaking out, i.e. jail terms, however Snowden also showed how it is done. Why haven't any other NSA/GCHQ persons booked themselves a 'holiday' in some place like Bolivia/China/Russia?
This is a genuine question.
-EDIT-
Compare the situation with the sex abuse scandal that has gone on at the BBC. (Where, for many decades, many of the BBC's top presenters/DJs were able to rape/abuse children/young adults on BBC premises 'safe' in the knowledge that they would never get caught.)
Nothing is said until a year after the BBC's most voracious paedophile dies, then the whistle gets blown. Thereafter, all of a sudden hundreds of people that never had the courage beforehand come forward. Previously they did not think they would be believed, now they know they will, so, for them it is desirable to speak up even though they are still taking on powerful people.
A similar thing of 'disbelief' has gone on with spying. Before Snowden nobody would have believed that the government taps everything, now we know. So claims that might once have sounded ludicrous could now be taken seriously. You would think others would be incentivised to speak up, surely?