However, I want to quickly point out one omission in the discussion of the risks of allowing this kind of activity to continue:
If the NSA is effectively spying on everybody who communicates with a server outside the US, it is trivial for them (or another government agency) to fabricate traffic (presumably child pornography) in order to target someone.
The ACLU (and others similarly positioned to criticize this conduct) always rightly point to the risks to journalists and human rights activists of having their communications intercepted and accurately portrayed, but what about the ease of lying about it in order to target dissidents?
This seems like an obvious vector and deserves more attention and discussion.
Unfortunately, the people I know who need to read this the most consider "aclu" is a dirty word.
Strictly speaking, it's not a requirement. But it gives incredible cover. It makes everyone think, "well, it's possible - they know everything that goes on."
In other words, absent this sort of mass vacuuming, the individual targeting of a dissident might seem much more suspicious.
Yes, we can! Don't use Google, or use certain settings in the applications which enhance your privacy. The default settings are not always the best settings for the user.
Don't use Google Search. Use a search engine which respects your privacy such as the scraper DuckDuckGo (DDG).
Don't use Gmail. Use an e-mail provider which doesn't scan through your e-mail. Where you got IMAP access. Use a device where you can use GPG. Or use alternative methods of communication.
Don't use Google Maps. Use a maps application which respects your privacy such as OpenStreetMap or (arguably) Apple Maps.
Don't use Google Fit. [...]
And so on, so forth. Ask yourself the following: do I really need this? The answer is often: "not really."
You have the option to use neither. If the choice is Android or iOS you pay more for iOS devices but your privacy generally suffers less. [Ignoring the option of dumbphones] there's a third option: don't take your phone with you. It is a choice to take your Android or iOS device with you. Among others, Bruce Schneier wrote about this in his book Data And Goliath.
Google is one of the many tentacles of the NSA. Worth reading 'How the CIA made Google': https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-goo...
Also noteworthy: 'DARPA director Regina Dugan takes job as Google senior executive':
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/13/business/la-fi-tn-fr...
1. https://theintercept.com/2017/01/13/obama-opens-nsas-vast-tr...
More discussion here - https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/5o1ovy/with_only...
If you believe the article misrepresents the state of affairs, say so -- but whataboutism doesn't cut it. It steers the discussion off course.
Use the "show dead" function to find it.
The long and short of it is that the word is simply a code for pejorative insults.
I mean, if the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration and Department of Homeland Security weren't in this group of 16, wouldn't the discussion be completely different?
Lastly, who says the minimization that the NSA had been doing itself so far didn't just consist of removing noise? The requests have been and will continue to be confidential after all.
Obama is a proponent of very strong intelligence agencies which certainly must be criticized, but the hysteria and fear-mongering that's happening right now completely misses the issues that have to be solved first, imho.
It's worth noting that U.S. Post Office also records meta data of all snail mail:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/03/us/postal-service-confirms...
The last paragraph in the above link being completely laughable if course.
For the 1000th time. He didn't (and it's amazing how often this gets repeated) 'invite' them. He said they should release the documents if they already had them.
Note the story line and then the exact quote here:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-putin-no-relatio...
"I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing".
Is not "hack Hillary Clinton". It's "if you've hacked Hillary Clinton release the emails". Key difference.
The direct quote is as follows:
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,”
It's hardly a stretch to read this as an invitation, despite the later claims of his handlers.
It's an interesting Rorschach test.
What would be fascinating is to do an experiment where someone didn't have an emotional attachment to the issue and see how this is interpreted by different parties.
For that matter do the same with this issue merely see what people who fell on either side (or in the middle) thought.
People are now under the assumption that US agencies are collecting all calls, emails, anything electronic for all citizens as it's technically possible and confirmation is slowly being revealed.
If a crime was committed to a citizen, how would said citizen legally make a request for information the NSA or any agency has that would be useful as evidence. Shouldn't all citizens be able to use what is being collected in court as the government is for the people? How would a person in court go about requesting anything if the possibility exists.
This was part of what happened to Ladar Levison, owner of Lavabit which was served with an NSL. He couldn't easily shop for a lawyer because he could only contact lawyers that were authorized to handle top secret material. And he had to appear at one specific court venue in Virginia even though he was from Texas.
No turn back possible anymore.
Maybe in fifty or hundred years we can talk about it again. For now. It will just get worse.
Frankly, elsewhere people get jailed for speaking their mind, and you know what some of them do? Speak their mind. We face pretty much no repercussions other than it not being so fun to discuss it, some people pouting because it holds up the mirror to their cowardice, so we.. don't? Nah. This is the only way worms can get power, by giants lying down and falling asleep. So maybe just don't.
