|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 18 2014 11:04 Nyxisto wrote:
It's nothing new that oneofthem takes the same elitist stance on every goddamn topic just for the sake of it. Claiming that the problem about spying is that the spies are getting caught is just insane.
Agreed in the context of spying on your own people, disagree when talking about spying on foreign nations.
|
On November 18 2014 11:36 Chewbacca. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2014 11:04 Nyxisto wrote:
It's nothing new that oneofthem takes the same elitist stance on every goddamn topic just for the sake of it. Claiming that the problem about spying is that the spies are getting caught is just insane. Agreed in the context of spying on your own people, disagree when talking about spying on foreign nations.
I'd say it depends. Sure foreign espionage is going to be less restricted than domestic surveillance, but especially when it comes to long-term allies it's probably smart not to piss them off too much.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
wats elitist about this?
simple fact is the reaction to the NSA stuff is disproportionate and rely on simplistic dichotomies that never hold up under more thinking
|
|
|
On November 18 2014 11:36 Chewbacca. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2014 11:04 Nyxisto wrote:
It's nothing new that oneofthem takes the same elitist stance on every goddamn topic just for the sake of it. Claiming that the problem about spying is that the spies are getting caught is just insane. Agreed in the context of spying on your own people, disagree when talking about spying on foreign nations.
Pretty sure this makes you a racist.
|
United States43991 Posts
On November 18 2014 15:11 Vegetarian wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2014 11:36 Chewbacca. wrote:On November 18 2014 11:04 Nyxisto wrote:
It's nothing new that oneofthem takes the same elitist stance on every goddamn topic just for the sake of it. Claiming that the problem about spying is that the spies are getting caught is just insane. Agreed in the context of spying on your own people, disagree when talking about spying on foreign nations. Pretty sure this makes you a racist.
Nations are not the same things as races.
|
But it makes him a Nationalist?
Which is basically a facist.. so...
|
Stop misusing terminology.
|
Terminology aside, this does raise a question which has confused me for a while. Why is spying on the population of other countries become swallowable, but your own population not? It cannot be because it's traditional - there's a difference between spying on governments and spying on populations. It cannot be because it means the population metadata won't be abused by its country - data can be traded.
Is it simply because 'it's not us, so fuck 'em'?
|
Pretty sure that is the case.
See the whole drone strike situation. Noone in america gives a fuck if you bomb thousands of brown people in the middle east. But there was a gigantic situation when they wanted to kill an american in the middle east doing the same stuff as the other people they had constantly been bombing. Basically, in american politics, the only people who have rights are americans. Everyone else has basically no rights whatsoever, and noone cares about him. It's really disgusting.
With the whole NSA situation, i am pretty sure you are spot on on how that is going to end up. People might get annoyed by their own government spying on them and there might be laws against it at some point (hopefully), so two governments will partner up and spy on each others citizens and just shovel the data over, until someone leaks that stuff again.
|
On November 18 2014 18:56 plated.rawr wrote:
Is it simply because 'it's not us, so fuck 'em'?
I would say that's mostly it. A government is primarily answerable to its own population (at least in theory).
Also for a state/intelligence agengy spying on foreign people is obviously way less interesting than spying on their domestic population.
|
On November 18 2014 19:06 Simberto wrote:
With the whole NSA situation, i am pretty sure you are spot on on how that is going to end up. People might get annoyed by their own government spying on them and there might be laws against it at some point (hopefully), so two governments will partner up and spy on each others citizens and just shovel the data over, until someone leaks that stuff again.
Uh, that is already standard practice. The 5eyes countries customarily exchange their intelligence to get around local privacy protection and constitutional safeguards. There are strong hints that the German BND is also part of their trade ring and probably a lot of other countries agencies too.
|
On November 18 2014 12:09 oneofthem wrote:
wats elitist about this?
simple fact is the reaction to the NSA stuff is disproportionate and rely on simplistic dichotomies that never hold up under more thinking
It's your schemes of perception that are too simple. You think the NSA is only a government agency, but it's not the "state". It's an institution that can have different interests from the "common good" at times. There are also plenty of people, firm, institutions, that could benefit from the data that the NSA collect. Information is a good too, and it has a lot of value, from industrial competition, to consumption practice or political matters.
The problem is that an instutition, being part of the state or not, that is not controlled by something above - another institution, a constitution, or anything else - tend to use its power for its own interests.
Lately the CIA leaked a letter that they sent to Luther King, pushing him to suicide and menacing him to leak detail about its private life. If the CIA in the 60s can do that, what can the NSA do in 2010 ?
So the reaction is not "disproportionate" : it is lead by a fear of not knowing what exactly the NSA can or cannot do with the data, and the idea that no institutions, directly or indirectly controlled by the public, has the charge to control and judge the NSA role and actions in the US and outside of the US.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
my understanding of the nsa is more informed than the people who would scream bloody murder at anything short of total encryption. look at the various statement i gave of the divergence between privacy perception and intended govt aim, apparently that hasn't sunk in yet
|
On November 18 2014 22:27 oneofthem wrote:
my understanding of the nsa is more informed than the people who would scream bloody murder at anything short of total encryption. look at the various statement i gave of the divergence between privacy perception and intended govt aim, apparently that hasn't sunk in yet
not sure whose perception is skewed here.
recommend the laura poitras interview with jon stewart. rather tame but gets the points across pretty well.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/extended-interviews/ryk2p8/laura-poitras-extended-interview
|
On November 18 2014 22:27 oneofthem wrote:
my understanding of the nsa is more informed than the people who would scream bloody murder at anything short of total encryption. look at the various statement i gave of the divergence between privacy perception and intended govt aim, apparently that hasn't sunk in yet
But it's about power, not about neutral information. The NSA has power, because it has access to data on the privacy of people. The intended aim from the government is irrelevant : the problem is about what could be done with the power the NSA has, and which institutions exist to control that power.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
governments, even the most benign ones, are still powerful and thats what defines them really. so no shit the nsa has power. they also are better cordoned than an executive arm like the cia.
|
On November 18 2014 23:06 oneofthem wrote:
governments, even the most benign ones, are still powerful and thats what defines them really. so no shit the nsa has power. they also are better cordoned than an executive arm like the cia.
Yeah, but maybe you don't know it, but our government's power are also limited by institutions : the vote, the constitution and its legal arms, the media, etc. It's at the basis of our political system. That's even the basis of democracy itself.
Since the NSA is a new and shady institutions, it is not controlled (it's the opposite, since the NSA arguably destroyed political carreers of people who were trying to question their behaviors).
|
On November 18 2014 18:56 plated.rawr wrote:
Terminology aside, this does raise a question which has confused me for a while. Why is spying on the population of other countries become swallowable, but your own population not? It cannot be because it's traditional - there's a difference between spying on governments and spying on populations. It cannot be because it means the population metadata won't be abused by its country - data can be traded.
Is it simply because 'it's not us, so fuck 'em'?
Well simply because countries hold different standards and ideologies and as long as separate nations will exist this will probably be the case. There are human rights though which albeit being violated quite often at least are in some way universal. Still the nationalism comparison is silly. Simply accepting the concept of national law and nation states doesn't make you a nationalist by any common definition of the word. I think though that the US has really gone overboard in the way they're treating their allies in regards to espionage.
|
LONDON (AP) — The U.S. State Department has identified three Americans among those killed in an attack Tuesday at a synagogue in Israel.
Spokeswoman Jen Psaki named the three U.S. citizens as Mosheh Twersky, Aryeh Kupinsky and Cary William Levine.
Secretary of State John Kerry, traveling in London, condemned the attack on "innocent people who had come to worship."
Kerry demanded that the Palestinian leadership take immediate steps to end incitement to violence as Israeli-Palestinian tensions soared.
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
