Edward Snowden Shines a Light on Who Mass Surveillance is Really Meant For

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
I prefer nothing. You think Clinton would have curtailed the surveillance state? Really?
No, I don't think that. But I do think that she wouldn't have expanded it at the rate that Trump is doing. I also think that if you're concerned about the growing police state, then the 'law and order' police candidate isn't the way to go. And if you're in agreement with Snowden's message in your OP, then I also think that the President who does little else publicly besides spreading fear of The Others, also isn't the way to go.
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
I agree this president has done nothing but expand it. Highly disappointing given the drain the swamp platform. Have I said otherwise?
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
I agree this president has done nothing but expand it. Highly disappointing given the drain the swamp platform. Have I said otherwise?
"Drain the swamp" was always just an euphemism for replacing Democrat-aligned civil service employees with GOP-aligned ones. Trump even said so at one time, that he wanted to bring back the Patronage aka "spoils" system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
27,650
26,749
136
I see several people have tried to honestly engage with the OP on this subject and he is choosing to focus basically on an all politicians are bad tack and completely ignoring the subject he claims to be so concerned about.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
UC is just doing his usual thing- spreading little fires of FUD so that his hoped for conflagration will burn it all down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
I see several people have tried to honestly engage with the OP on this subject and he is choosing to focus basically on an all politicians are bad tack and completely ignoring the subject he claims to be so concerned about.


Huh? The OP wasn’t focused on a single politician nor was Snowden’s comment. You want me to engage in only a "Trump is bad" conversation but ignore reality that the government police state apparatus and spying on US citizens has been around since 9/11 if not well before. It crosses party lines and yeah in this regard almost all politicians are bad. Either through lack of effort to dismantle or in many cases actively making it worse. I haven’t not engaged anybody.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
Huh? The OP wasn’t focused on a single politician nor was Snowden’s comment. You want me to engage in only a "Trump is bad" conversation but ignore reality that the government police state apparatus and spying on US citizens has been around since 9/11 if not well before. It crosses party lines and yeah in this regard almost all politicians are bad. Either through lack of effort to dismantle or in many cases actively making it worse. I haven’t not engaged anybody.
What other politicians tell us the tools of mass surveillance are intended for use only against the faraway Other; the foreign enemy, the terrorist, the criminal, and are currently in power so that, just a few years later, we realize precisely the same system secretly surrounds us at home.
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
What other politicians tell us the tools of mass surveillance are intended for use only against the faraway Other; the foreign enemy, the terrorist, the criminal, and are currently in power so that, just a few years later, we realize precisely the same system secretly surrounds us at home.


Every politician? What politician has come forth and said we are building this mass surveillance apparatus that yes tracks you the innocent civilian citizen of the US? None. No one. They aren’t truthful or forthright, the politicians work with and allow the alphabet agencies to build this thing and don’t tell us it’s to spy on us. If we even do hear about it which is doubtful it’s just lip service to protect against the "bad guys". In this regard yes Trump is bad, but to isolate the conversation solely to him is foolish.
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,235
136
Sort of with you.

Basically I’m such a patriot I’m going to head to Russia (one of the least free places) to talk about how much American freedom sucks.
Sorry something doesn’t compute.
Anyone who thinks Russia doesn’t pressure him to post crap and not post crap about Russia is a fool.
You're a fool if you think he really had a choice about where to go. Come the fuck on.
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,235
136
lol if you think Trump is the answer to this question.
I think it's obvious that's not what he was saying. He's saying they're all for big government.

I remember in the early primaries when the R candidates were all asked about net neutrality and they all got it wrong.

I remember when they were all asked about executing a US citizen by drone without a trial if he betrays his country. They all got it wrong.

I knew I could not and would not vote for any of them.
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,235
136
He did that is the point

Choice one come home & face the consequences, choice two Russia
He hasn't accomplished what he set out to do. He had a lot more to release, and some things that were contingent on how the government reacted to the release of prior information (or whether they try to deny it). The fact that he did it for us and now must live the rest of his life in hiding makes him a hero to me.
 
Last edited:

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,017
8,545
136
I agree this president has done nothing but expand it. Highly disappointing given the drain the swamp platform. Have I said otherwise?

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...ure-but-is-govt-really-at-risk-of-going-dark/

More expansion?. Now we have Bill Barr saying the US government needs encryption backdoor to prevent from "going dark". First of all, why would anyone listen to Bill Barr about encryption security. These people fail to realize you can't somehow make a door that can only be "legally exploited". Another door, another entrance eventually exploited.
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
He did that is the point

Choice one come home & face the consequences, choice two Russia


Why though. He knew he faced a life in prison if the US got hold of him. Russia certainly isn’t the ideal situation for him but it beats life in a cell for the remainder of his life. Yeah he commited a crime but it was for his country and we are all the better for it. He blew the whistle, why should he have to "face he consequences" of an unjust government out for retribution for showing the things they’ve done? If you were Snowden what would you have done?
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,246
16,716
136
Why though. He knew he faced a life in prison if the US got hold of him. Russia certainly isn’t the ideal situation for him but it beats life in a cell for the remainder of his life. Yeah he commited a crime but it was for his country and we are all the better for it. He blew the whistle, why should he have to "face he consequences" of an unjust government out for retribution for showing the things they’ve done? If you were Snowden what would you have done?

Again that’s the point. He chose Russia with Putin standing over him saying you haven’t tweeted in a while, I may need to...
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
Again that’s the point. He chose Russia with Putin standing over him saying you haven’t tweeted in a while, I may need to...


He didn’t choose Russia, circumstances dictated it. Yes I’m sure whatever he tweets is certainly done with an asterisks but that doesn’t negate all that he’s done for our country and it doesn’t mean what he tweeted in the OP is untrue.
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,213
671
136
This is one of those areas where I agree... I wouldn't say Snowden is always right, but he leaked info with good intentions and actual care (he vetted info to ensure it wouldn't endanger people). I don't think he's facing significant pressure from Russia given that he's criticized the country. There's no doubt that Russia likes him poking holes in the US image, but unlike WikiLeaks he's trying to make the US better, not take it down.

In that regard, he's the opposite of Julian Assange, who dumps data irresponsibly and and isn't above malicious, partisan agendas (such as trying to get Trump elected in 2016). While I think the particular US case against Assange has problematic implications for free speech, Assange himself doesn't deserve any real sympathy.

Where did the bolded part come from? From everything I've ever seen or heard, he just had a massive blob of info. I've never once heard of him going through it vetting anything. It's a nice version of the story, but I really question it's legitimacy.
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,215
6,818
136
Where did the bolded part come from? From everything I've ever seen or heard, he just had a massive blob of info. I've never once heard of him going through it vetting anything. It's a nice version of the story, but I really question it's legitimacy.

It's pretty well-established -- Snowden stressed that he "carefully evaluated" each document he leaked to both make sure it was actually in the public interest and that it wouldn't hurt others. Yeah, it's his version of events, but in hindsight I don't think we've ever seen him leak something he knew would compromise someone's safety, and he's been a thoughtful (though not flawless) commentator in the years since.

Let's put it this way: he's definitely not a Julian Assange type who thinks raw data dumps are a substitute for journalism.
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,213
671
136
It's pretty well-established -- Snowden stressed that he "carefully evaluated" each document he leaked to both make sure it was actually in the public interest and that it wouldn't hurt others. Yeah, it's his version of events, but in hindsight I don't think we've ever seen him leak something he knew would compromise someone's safety, and he's been a thoughtful (though not flawless) commentator in the years since.

Let's put it this way: he's definitely not a Julian Assange type who thinks raw data dumps are a substitute for journalism.

Fair enough I guess. I still have major doubts upon him 'carefully evaluating', but to each their own. I think he's just putting it out there to craft his "hero" narrative he desperately wants to have, which I don't personally buy into. I think he's an attention whore who did it mostly for the notoriety. Even the article you linked states

The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his identity at his request.

While later in the article quotes him

Despite his determination to be publicly unveiled, he repeatedly insisted that he wants to avoid the media spotlight. "I don't want public attention because I don't want the story to be about me. I want it to be about what the US government is doing."

I would still have to question why insist upon being revealed if you didn't want any attention. Like the "carefully evaluating" stuff, I think he's full of shit.
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,037
2,615
136
I would be ok with a pardon or a light jail sentence for him at this point.