dagblog - Comments for "The Keystone Cops in "NSA Story""

This is why Obama was

rmrd0000 — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 20:56:28 +0000

In reply to New in Der Spiegel today, he

This is why Obama was comfortable saying that the US was not doing anything the Europeans weren't doing. The European bluster may have bee to get US concessions from upcoming trade talks.

I've actually thought about

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 20:48:21 +0000

In reply to Some thoughts when I re-read

I've actually thought about Michael in knowing my email, whatever other details. Made the conscious decision I didn't care or that I trusted him as far as I needed to trust him. No, I don't think he'd go through waterboarding to keep it confidential.

The main point is that I make conscious decisions who I share info with, and they have terms & conditions I can read and agree to or refuse. If I don't like Facebook, I can refrain from using it. I pulled out of Quora as being one of the more ridiculous social media sites.

If the government wants to tell me how giving them all my data fits the greatest good, helps the fight against terrorism, I'm all ears. Really. We get vaccinations with the idea that it may not specifically help in every case but in the aggregate it raises resistance. So break it to us - what's the actual principle that government needs all this data for, what are the realistic expectations that the data will be used for the purposes they say they will be? And if these people handling this are so grown up, how come they stripped Manning down in his cell for months and put him through 24 hours a day hazing just to show their superiority and break him in some way - where's the believability in that? Where's the seriousness about terror and security when they act like a bunch of dipshit frat boys giving high fives over cretin abuse? And that one went all the way up to Obama who responded "appropriate and meeting our basic standards."

If Michael had liked to me a dozen times, no, I wouldn't trust him with any info.

New in Der Spiegel today, he

artappraiser — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 20:39:49 +0000

In reply to Right, but it does explain

New in Der Spiegel today, he spilled more of the international stuff while in Hong Kong, including that Germany is no innocent victim:

Snowden Claims: NSA Ties Put German Intelligence in Tight Spot

Spiegel Online, July 7, 2013

The German foreign intelligence service knew more about the activities of the NSA in Germany than previously known. "They're in bed together," Edward Snowden claims in an interview in SPIEGEL. The whistleblower also lodges fresh allegations against the British.

[....] In an interview published by SPIEGEL in its latest issue, Snowden provides additional details, describing the closeness between the US and German intelligence services as well as Britain's acquisitiveness when it comes to collecting data.

In Germany, reports of the United States' vast espionage activities have surprised and upset many, including politicians. But Snowden isn't buying the innocence of leading German politicians and government figures, who say that they were entirely unaware of the spying programs. On the contrary, the NSA people are "in bed together with the Germans," the whistleblower told American cryptography expert Jacob Appelbaum and documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras in an interview conducted with the help of encrypted emails shortly before Snowden became a globally recognized name.

Snowden describes the intelligence services partnerships in detail. The NSA even has a special department for such cooperation, the Foreign Affairs Directorate, he says. He also exposes a noteworthy detail about how government decision-makers are protected by these programs. [.....]

A tech writer told of how

rmrd0000 — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 19:46:31 +0000

In reply to Some thoughts when I re-read

A tech writer told of how Facebook obtains demographic information on his followers.In addition Facebook misuses the "like" option to suggest to his followers that he approved of websites he had never visited through very liberal use of the "like" option.

I'm not sure if the

rmrd0000 — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 17:33:22 +0000

In reply to They may be incompetent, but

I'm not sure if the incompetence in that case was at the electronic level or due to on the ground observation. A Spanish official said European nations were told Snowden was aboard the jet.

Police departments have financial incentives to go after low-level drug offenders.

why would where someone's

artappraiser — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 17:24:22 +0000

In reply to Read a story a week or so ago

why would where someone's cell phone was located constitute any sort of proof or alibi?

I was pointing out the same thing with the license plate photo tickets, when discussing the tracking of license plates on another thread. that the laws are set up that the driver of the car is supposed to be responsible for driving violations, not the owner of the car.

And that the photo of the one I got did not show who is driving the car. And that the ticket I got was obviously not defensible that way, but they make the fine low enough (and without any record that insurance can see,) that you'll pay rather than fight.

But then Lulu said a relative got a photo ticket in CA that clearly showed the face of the driver of the car as well. Clearly a more expensive system.

Donal later posted a link to a story showing how the kind of system that captured me going through a yellow-to-red light (in a borrowed car, with ticket sent to the registered owner) is basically sold and run by for-profit private companies as a way for communities to ~~get~~ extort some extra dough.

While it sounded like the program that caught Lulu's relative might have been set up and run by the local government with intent to catch violators and therefore more attentive to the legal considerations.....

The same issues are brought up with EZ Pass toll cards or credit cards. You can always claim that it was not you using your EZ pass or not you using your credit card.

But then, most of the stuff done by law enforcement when researching a case, perhaps especially when trying to prevent crime rather than find a perp after one has been committed, is not trying to build a prosecutor's case. They use a lot of the info on the street, stuff that is not included in the court case, not considered for making a case, just for research, trying to get leads, etc.

Read a story a week or so ago

EmmaZahn — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 17:00:13 +0000

In reply to The Keystone Cops in "NSA Story"

Read a story a week or so ago about a court case where the prosecution was using the GPS tracking of a defendant's cell phone as proof he was at the crime site when it occurred. A co-defendant asked them to track his cell phone to prove he wasn't but since he used a different carrier who did not retain his records.

Apart from that situation creating enough reasonable doubt to render its cell phone evidence useless, why would where someone's cell phone was located constitute any sort of proof or alibi?

They may be incompetent, but

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 16:43:16 +0000

In reply to You are proving my point.

They may be incompetent, but that doesn't mean they're not dangerous.

Blocking the plane in Austria only to find Snowden wasn't on it? Wow. Look ineffective and petty and rather thin-skinned all at the same time.

But since they find it easier to focus on drug busts (even with medical marijuana legal), it's no suprise they'd rather hassle hippies than find terrorists. Should the hippies relax & enjoy it?

Some thoughts when I re-read

artappraiser — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 16:20:17 +0000

In reply to The NYT article that I just

Some thoughts when I re-read this all, is it comes down to this:

We never really had control over our own data of this type, the communications companies do. The government decided that they should have this control too, for quicker access than the communications companies might give.

To argue that the communications companies have greater incentive to care about privacy is in reality and in essence the same argument that those who advocate privatization of government make. If communications were a state-owned monopoly, there'd be no question. Of course, some socialist systems have done this in the past precisely in order to control communication and/or spy on citizens.

One can't get away from the anti-government libertarianism here. Either you trust government more or you trust large corporations more. To think you have control of your privacy when you use a system that you cannot create, own and run yourself is an illusion. Other people have control of your data when you are a user of such a system.

We all trust Wolraich not to divulge our IP and email addresses. Why? Do you really think he would fight it if he got a Federal subpoena to give an ID up?

Do you believe it when a website it says: give us your email address, we will never share it? Why? Because you figure you could sue them if they were lying? That that deters them from lying?

It's mainly a privatization argument that the incentive to keep customers happy works better than laws regulating government spying.

You are proving my point.

rmrd0000 — Sun, 07 Jul 2013 15:56:59 +0000

In reply to These people have lied to

You are proving my point. They are incompetent. They focus on nonsense. The NSA has trouble pointing directly to a success If the NSA was a fire department, they would be in the plant cafeteria because they detected heat coming from a hot dog stand while totally ignoring the fire and billowing smoke coming from the tanks filled with hazardous materials just yards away.