Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Bay12 Presidential Focus Polling 2016

Ted Cruz
- 7 (6.5%)
Rick Santorum
- 16 (14.8%)
Michelle Bachmann
- 13 (12%)
Chris Christie
- 23 (21.3%)
Rand Paul
- 49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107


Pages: 1 ... 508 509 [510] 511 512 ... 667

Author Topic: Bay12 Election Night Watch Party  (Read 832785 times)

GlyphGryph

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7635 on: July 07, 2014, 09:39:08 am »

In other news, the FBI officially decided a while back that domestic law enforcement is no longer a primary concern for them.

Supposedly, this is hurting the agency, as a lot of skilled people only got into the FBI to take down organized crime, catch criminals, and put bad people behind bars. And investigators are generally garnered a lot less respect internally than "analysts", meaning the FBI's actual reach and power as a law enforcement agency is diminished.

http://www.vnews.com/opinion/6780499-95/column-how-robert-mueller-transformed-the-fbi-into-a-counterterrorism-agency
Logged

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7636 on: July 07, 2014, 07:31:19 pm »

Snowdon put a hell of a lot of trust in those he handed the leak to.

What do you believe is the difference between trusting journalist organizations with this information and trusting government organizations?

I can tell you what two differences I see: 
First, while journalists can be irresponsible with information, the harm that a government can do with it is far worse, and no comparable surveillance effort in history has ever been benevolent. 
Second, trusting journalists with this information serves some purpose as a step towards addressing these issues.

What else could anyone aware of the truth do differently to expand that awareness to the public?  Even if you believe that the surveillance programs are justified and productive, I frankly think that anyone who argues the public doesn't have a right to know the existence and scale of these programs and how it relates to them must be insane.  And before evidence like this was put out there, few would believe it.
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

Rolepgeek

  • Bay Watcher
  • They see me rollin' they savin'~
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7637 on: July 07, 2014, 07:54:54 pm »

I think he may have been referring to the people that now have access to that information who aren't journalists and aren't the government. Whether it be other governments looking to get an edge, corporations seeking more money and more power, or terrorist groups, the info can be dangerous in the wrong hands.

That's not to say that the NSA are the right hands. They're just as bad as anyone else, if not worse.
Logged
Sincerely, Role P. Geek

Optimism is Painful.
Optimize anyway.

palsch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7638 on: July 08, 2014, 05:56:39 am »

What do you believe is the difference between trusting journalist organizations with this information and trusting government organizations?

We (or rather, the USA) don't trust government with such information. Or rather, there are extensive regulations and laws governing its use.

We expect the information government holds or has access to to be more sensitive than the information that private groups hold (although that may be slowly changing with the Googles and Facebooks of the world, but certainly holds true in this case) and that comes with stricter protections that we apply to private groups.

We can't deny the government access to all that data unless we want to fundamentally change the role of government, eliminating many functions. We can't have an NSA that spies on accepted targets (with warrants) which doesn't incidentally collect information about other individuals (as I said, I'm surprised it's only 9/10 given the nature of modern communications).

We can and should push for tighter controls and regulations, and a more effective system of review of the procedures. Either than or openly call for the US to give up on national security targeted surveillance at all. But people seem uniquely unwilling to actually engage in a debate over what is an acceptable role for the NSA.

As for not trusting journalists, I have no idea who actually has access to the information any more, how much was given to Chinese or Russian groups, how much has been trusted to Greenwald, etc. I don't know the procedures these groups and individuals use to decide what to publish, their technical security or ability to protect sensitive data from openly hostile groups, etc. In short, I have no sodding idea how much to trust them. My full expectation is that all of the information will end up published in the end, just given the nature of such leaks and previous examples.

I was also specifically talking about the national security information the Post said was in the leaks, not the privacy information. But why we trust governments and not journalists with that stuff should be obvious enough.



One of the problems with this leak in particular is that I can't see it accomplishing anything beyond what has already happened. There are already reviews and reforms of the minimisation procedures underway. The public already has a vague sense of rage about the NSA violating their privacy. This leak, which is uniquely violating individual's privacy, doesn't really add anything to either of those.

As I said, it does suggest a couple of points to me, mostly about how much Snowden actually had access to, but you can be sure the NSA is already reviewing those areas after the leak and didn't need the extra push.


As to the wider debate, can we maybe lock down what people view as an acceptable role for surveillance in modern society? Quick set of questions;

1) Should the NSA (or a similar body) be legally allowed to conduct secret surveillance against individuals? If so what conditions are the minimum requirement for doing so?

2) If any such surveillance is allowed it will obviously gather information about those who aren't the target. How can such information be handled? Can it be shared at all with other agencies who may have an interest in such people? Can it be used in support of an argument that such individuals should be new targets?

3) Should bulk metadata collection have stronger protections than traditional metadata collection (such as pen registers)? What protections should be required on any such big data collections? What protections should be placed on the searches of such collections?
Logged

GreatJustice

  • Bay Watcher
  • ☭The adventure continues (refresh)☭
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7639 on: July 08, 2014, 08:33:05 am »


Quote
1) Should the NSA (or a similar body) be legally allowed to conduct secret surveillance against individuals? If so what conditions are the minimum requirement for doing so?

Nope. NSA shouldn't exist for that matter.
Logged
The person supporting regenerating health, when asked why you can see when shot in the eye justified it as 'you put on an eyepatch'. When asked what happens when you are then shot in the other eye, he said that you put an eyepatch on that eye. When asked how you'd be able to see, he said that your first eye would have healed by then.

Professional Bridge Toll Collector?

Angle

  • Bay Watcher
  • 39 Indigo Spear Questions the Poor
    • View Profile
    • Agora Forum Demo!
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7640 on: July 08, 2014, 10:02:46 am »

...I find myself in agreement. Really, I don't think governments should be allowed to have secrets.
Logged

Agora: open-source platform to facilitate complicated discussions between large numbers of people. Now with test site!

The Temple of the Elements: Quirky Dungeon Crawler

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7641 on: July 08, 2014, 11:23:21 am »

Nuclear weapon blueprints on Google Scholar, then? It would save a hell of a lot of money for Iran, that's for sure.
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7642 on: July 08, 2014, 11:29:37 am »

...I find myself in agreement. Really, I don't think governments should be allowed to have secrets.

I doubt you really think that.  Do you think that we shouldn't be allowed to have secret informants about organized crime or the north korean government or terrorist groups?  Would you rather that the FDIC (for whom secrecy is essential) hadn't protected everyone's bank account back in 2007-2009?  The question shouldn't be should there be secret surveillance, it should be what secret surveillance is acceptable.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

palsch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7643 on: July 08, 2014, 11:48:04 am »

Nope. NSA shouldn't exist for that matter.
No individuals ever? For any reason? In any context?

I'm going to assume you are only talking about the collection, foreign intelligence and counterintelligence side of the NSA and don't mean to say that the US government should not be allowed to have an agency "charged with protection of U.S. government communications and information systems against penetration and network warfare."

...I find myself in agreement. Really, I don't think governments should be allowed to have secrets.
No secrets ever? As low hanging fruit, how about the identities of people in witness protection programs? Or the personal records of people who take part in government programs, receiving medicare/aid or other social aid? There is going to be some category of information that the government has to collect to carry out its functions but which can't be made public without violating individuals privacy, even if we completely abolish the cases of NSA collected data.

And what, in this context, counts as government? Does that extend to the lives of government actors (who may, after all, be receiving in-kind benefits from lobbyists, official or unofficial, in their spare time)? How much privacy can we grant congresspeople in this context? How about appointment members of the administration?

Could the CIA or FBI or any other agency have covert agents? Could they keep source's identities secret? Do military branches have to file publicly visible flight plans ahead of operations? How far are we going with this?
Logged

Mictlantecuhtli

  • Bay Watcher
  • Grinning God of Death
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7644 on: July 08, 2014, 11:57:16 am »

Nuances! The bane of all-or-nothing approaches
Logged
I am surrounded by flesh and bone, I am a temple of living. Maybe I'll maybe my life away.

Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth,
Card-carrying Liberaltarian

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7645 on: July 08, 2014, 11:59:23 am »

While reasonable exceptions can be made (not including national security, a worthless catch-all), all actions taken and data gathered by the government should be declassified and publicized within say, a year.

Sunlight can sting, but I think in the end it will do much more good than harm.
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

Descan

  • Bay Watcher
  • [HEADING INTENSIFIES]
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7646 on: July 08, 2014, 11:59:27 am »

I wouldn't call that government secrets, though. I'd call government secrets, things that are kept secret BY the government, FOR the government, to PROTECT the government. Witness protection records fail because those are kept by the government, but not (only) for the government, and not to protect the government.

I think a good step in the right direction is the government can have secrets, but they can't make secret the category, to whatever extent. I.E. we know OF witness protection, we don't know who's in it.

Of course, that get's a little iffy with the NSA. At what point do you cut off the knowledge? And how do you know the government is keeping it's word? Third-party audits? Who do you trust in that case?
Logged
Quote from: SalmonGod
Your innocent viking escapades for canadian social justice and immortality make my flagellum wiggle, too.
Quote from: Myroc
Descan confirmed for antichrist.
Quote from: LeoLeonardoIII
I wonder if any of us don't love Descan.

GavJ

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7647 on: July 08, 2014, 12:04:03 pm »

Quote
While reasonable exceptions can be made (not including national security, a worthless catch-all), all actions taken and data gathered by the government should be declassified and publicized within say, a year.
There are a bunch of coutnerexamples to this listed immediately above you.

For example everyone's social security numbers who has filled out their taxes. And how much they earn and which deductions. And the full medical history of anybody applying for social security stuff. And blah blah

No thanks on government aided identity theft...
Logged
Cauliflower Labs – Geologically realistic world generator devblog

Dwarf fortress in 50 words: You start with seven alcoholic, manic-depressive dwarves. You build a fortress in the wilderness where EVERYTHING tries to kill you, including your own dwarves. Usually, your chief imports are immigrants, beer, and optimism. Your chief exports are misery, limestone violins, forest fires, elf tallow soap, and carved kitten bone.

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7648 on: July 08, 2014, 12:06:02 pm »

Descan, that's still very ill-defined - care to elaborate further?
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

GavJ

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: John Galt's Freedom Appreciation Megathread
« Reply #7649 on: July 08, 2014, 12:06:13 pm »

Quote
I wouldn't call that government secrets, though. I'd call government secrets, things that are kept secret BY the government, FOR the government, to PROTECT the government. Witness protection records fail because those are kept by the government, but not (only) for the government, and not to protect the government.
This is just as ambiguous as "for national security" in my opinion. You offer no means of guaranteeing anybody in charge will use common sense interpretations of any of these. Assuming there ARE common sense clear interpretations, which I'm not at all sure of. Thinking about specifics may reveal many issues.
Logged
Cauliflower Labs – Geologically realistic world generator devblog

Dwarf fortress in 50 words: You start with seven alcoholic, manic-depressive dwarves. You build a fortress in the wilderness where EVERYTHING tries to kill you, including your own dwarves. Usually, your chief imports are immigrants, beer, and optimism. Your chief exports are misery, limestone violins, forest fires, elf tallow soap, and carved kitten bone.
Pages: 1 ... 508 509 [510] 511 512 ... 667