Slashdot Mirror
Total Information Awareness still Running
gordm writes "National Journal reports that, instead of being shut down 2 years ago, the Total Information Awareness program is still datamining away. Must be effective. What else could explain Morrissey's latest adventure?" Just posting this story probably puts me on their radar.
If black projects cant get funding in public view, they work behind the scenes and find money elsewhere.
The danger with TIA, as with any collection of information with or without the consent of the subjects of the information, is that the power will eventually fall into the hands of someone who will abuse it. Not "might", not "will unless we're careful" -- WILL, as inevitably and certainly as death. The failure to understand this certainty is what enables this kind of creeping infringement of power. Every generation thinks that it has the savvy and the tools to prevent the abuses -- when in reality prevention of abuse is impossible.
/.'ers -- The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist -- apply to more than just the "military-industrial complex". Any power will be "misplaced" as soon as just one unethical person gets his hands on it.
Eisenhower's words, quoted by several other
The only way to limit (not prevent) abuses is to severely curtail the amount of power out there to be abused.
How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Well, there we've got our problem.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
What doesn't make sense is how this is tied to "Total Information Awareness". It sounds from the link that the only information they had was his public statements, not any information gained from spying of any type. Oh sorry forgot that facts arn't supposed to get in the way of any good scare stories.
With all the other stories that've been breaking in the past few months of the NSA wholesale spying on American civilians, the real news here isn't just that the TIA is around. It's that the Senate ordered it shut down, and it wasn't.
Lets look at the past couple of years. The Executive branch has claimed the powers to: declare people including American citizens "enemy combatants" and hold them incommunicado overseas for however long they wish with no access to the US court system, wiretap American citizens within the United States without a court order or indeed any judicial review. Recently the Vice President has also claimed to power to unilaterally declassify anything that he wants.
The CIA has been caught running torture flights through allied countries without their apparent knowledge, running secret prisons in EU member states without EU knowledge, and to top it off, they were caught kidnapping people on the streets of Milan without the knowledge of the Italian government.
The Pentagon, the FBI and the California National Guard have all been caught spying on peaceful protesters on American soil, in spite of a law that specifically forbids this.
A few months ago... Congress passed a law banning torture. The President grudgingly signed this into law, but reiterated his belief that he wasn't personally bound by the ban.
Now we find out that while the Senate ordered a domestic surveillance operation shut down years ago because it was a threat to the privacy of the average American... the Executive branch has decided to keep it going anyhow, without anyone's knowledge.
What's the point of even having a Legislative or Judicial branch anymore? They have no real powers at this point.
The Executive branch can just arbitrarily declare people outside the judicial branch's jurisdiction to keep them out of the courts, and the whole notion of getting a court order for federal law enforcement action is now considered "obsolete".
The Legislature still theoretically gets to pass laws, but the executive branch can basically break them at will... and since the power of enforcing those laws falls within the executive branch's domain, is it any wonder that all these overt violations of the laws of Congress never amount to any meaningful charges?
In fact, we don't even know how far the executive branch's power goes at this point... nobody new the President had the power to wiretap without warrants. The Constitution never mentions it... in fact, federal law specifically prohibits it. Indeed, when the press first found out about this power, they were pressured to keep it a secret (which they did for over a year), and when the existance of this power was revealed to thew general public, members of the executive branch denounced the revelation of the power itself as unlawful.
You can go as far away from democracy as you want, as long as you can yell the loudest, and can come up with the most insidious plots to undermine your 'terror loving opponents.'
Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
Not that anyone will read this or if you do, actually do something about it, but this is the problem. As a teacher (and researcher), I can educate your children to foster this type of society, but you must help me. You must
1) voice to your children _every day_ that critical thinking and intelligent discourse are desirable. This is critical, since we are competing with media outlets that would rather have your children be mindless consumers (we won't discuss the political factors).
2) demand that your government fund education. Education is a service provided by (ideally) domain experts whose skills are in demand in other areas. You must pay for it, or you get only the most idealistic and motivated or the least qualified folks doing it.
Your choice.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
So you say that the citizens of the united states should shut up, bend over and calmly take what's coming their way?
I find it very sad indeed that the apologists for the current administration don't even refute the fact that the nation is becoming a totalitarian regime. Instead they just tell dissidents to shut up or face the consequences.
Keep your eyes to the sky.
1) I believe the language most commonly used is that they "are becoming" fascist states. This imples that the speaker is making a point in order to prevent a complete transition to fascism or totalitarianism from occurring. Surely you think this is a nice aim?
2) Critics are being silenced, hassled, and pressured, and yes are even disappearing and it would seem being tortured. So you have made their point for them: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it is likely a duck. And the United States in particular is behaving precisely as a fledgling totalitarian state might be expected to behave.
3) Neither in China nor in the former Soviet Union would you necessarily disappear if you merely spoke against the government, though you might. You may just as easily, however, have disappeared or more likely, been arrested and charged with some cover crime and imprisoned or had your livelihood ruined and your personal life destroyed if anyone actually listened to your speaking and took it to be serious and public-minded. That is precisely the state of state of affairs in the U.S. right now.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
It's not retirement insurance. It's not a retirement program. It effects far more people than required to be insurance, it's not need-based, and it doesn't pay enough to be useful as a retirement program. Frankly, to me it looks like a sneaky way for the US government to borrow money at below market rates from future tax revenue to spend today.
While on one level, I see the validity of your post, on another, I know there is another alternative. What we need to do is recognize how they have achieved this. They have divided us along as many lines as they can. Athiests hate believers, believers hate athiests and you get large segments on each side of that coin thinking the other is the big threat. Then you move to abortion, which is an even more powerful split. The pro-choice and pro-life camps hate each other, and large segments on each side have construed the other to be the big threat. Then there is the gun debate, two sides hating each other seeing the other as the big threat. Then there is the classic left right BS, where both sides think they are supporting real change, etc... both sides hating each other as "the big threat".
The list goes on and on and on. How hard is it to let go of such surface shallowness to work together for the common goal of reclamation of our government? All these issues are all secondary to what is going on now. These politicians have exploited these issues and encouraged the divisions for a very very specific reason. It takes peoples eyes off of what they are working towards. I've said this so many times around the net and I'll say it again, read the Pentagon Papers. It tells the story of two political parties working towards the same goal, while using these other shallow "issues" to keep peoples eyes off of what was really going on.
And by the time a democrat or republican is done reading something like I just typed, instead of actually doing some info into the Pentagon Papers, they are going with their programming, and thinking about justifications for how their party is somehow better. And that's bullshit. That's how we got here. That's how we're in this mess.
Abortion is a non-issue. Gun ownership is a non-issue. Everything other than government corruption and politician ownership by special interest is a non-issue, until these other things are addressed. Who the fuck cares if abortion is legal or not, if your every move is monitored? Who the fuck cares if you can own a gun or not, if the government begins questioning you every time you crticize it? At that point, which is where we are heading, these other things will be like complaining about a fly in the soup when the base of the soup is urine!
People have to be shown clearly, that it isn't one or the other party, that both parties need to removed from office, and that we need to put people in office who don't owe their political careers to political head giving. It really is not that hard. It's a lot easier than a violent revolution.
Are you insane? Do you honestly think that government schools will teach against the government? No, because they are part of the government. Just as Catholic priests don't preach against the Pope, so will government schools not speak against the government.
Whatever.
I went to public school. Maybe things have changed in the decade since I finished high school, but plenty of my teachers taught us to question the government and its policies, had us read 1984/F451/We, etc.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
FTA:
We will be describing this new effort as "Basketball"
Basketball??? Does this remind anyone else of Rumsfeld's assertion that we should no longer refer to the insurgents as "insurgents?" And the subsequent joke that W. would rename the deficit "cake." Because, really, who doesn't like cake?
It's as though Orwell suddenly took an absurd turn... next, we'll see the Department of Tennis, the Department of Impressionist Paintings, &c. &c.; the former will run Guantanamo Bay, the latter, Abu Ghraib.
Ike represented the USA that fought in the two World Wars; the USA that was admired by so many people and nations.
Compare his brains, character, principles, and understanding of the world beyond US borders to every single US president since Ike. But if it makes you sad, don't show it. TIA is watching you.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Do you realy belive the military WANTS to capture Bin Laden? Its an ethics question, simular to cancer research. If you are a cancer researcher, and this is all you have done for 15 years, and you discover a cure, but risk loosing all of your funding, and having to persue another medical problem, do you release it to the masses? Some people will, some people will not.
War drives our economy. Without Bin Laden, we are loose jobs at weapons plants, the reserves come back, and either return to their old jobs, or look for new ones. If they return to their old jobs, someone that replaced them is going to have to leave, or put a burden on the company. Plus, Haliburton/B&R will have to slow down their money hoarding.
-William
God is everything science has yet to explain.
We simply can not pay for domain experts to be teaching our kids, even if the cost wouldn't skyrocket as demand went up. Swiping such experts from industry would cause serious problems for industry, so there goes the economy. Besides, most of these people don't have the patience and clarity required to teach well.
We have 2 serious obstacles:
1. The teacher's union blocks reform. It would be great if we could reward teachers who make students learn. Instead, we reward teachers for years of experience.
2. Normal and dim-witted people don't like seeing most of the money go to where it will do the most good. Bright kids are bored out of their mind while the teacher struggles to control the idiots. We can't give special treatment to the bright kids, kick out the dumb kids, or effectively punish the troublemakers.
If you are a cancer researcher, and this is all you have done for 15 years, and you discover a cure, but risk loosing all of your funding, and having to persue another medical problem, do you release it to the masses? Some people will, some people will not.
Holy shit, of course you do! Then you go get funding for the next thing by saying 'My team cured Cancer, fuck you'. Do you really think Bruce Willis auditions anymore?
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
"While there may be something to criticise in this program (part of which was able to spot the 9-11 terrorists before the act, but was prohibited from using the information), the response on /. is so automatic as to make it painful."
... everything he eats, etc. Having good intentions doesn't always translate to sound actions to that end.
... we have carefully considered it ... thus the posts. The fact that there is a general concensus should clue you in to the fact that many people, much more informed, educated, and smarter than you, understand the issue and universally agree that this is a BadThing(tm.)
... I see where you are going with this. It's like the Copernicus slant on reality. Everyone agrees that the Earth is round and revolves around the sun. This indicates that people have not thought about it very well, and it would be much better if half the population of Slashdot would contend that it is Flat and stationary ;-)
... how will we solve this problem? OH! I have an idea! Maybe we can invent some sort of system of checks and balances! Nah ... forget it. That will never work, and besides that is exactly what terrorists are trying to get to happen. They would not be happy if they knew we had systems in place to check abuse of
There was already a report in the White House containing all necessary information. It was ignored because there was already too much information through which to sift. Slashdot is frequented by a lot of well educated people who understand technology. They are aware of how it can be beneficial, and how it can be abused. They also understand goverment enough to know what about the system of checks and balances, what principles were conveyed by the founding fathers when they penned the US constitution, and how far off track today's government is from what those in power claim it is.
"Does anyone out there ever consider that there might be people in government that might actually be trying to protect us? Does anyone consider that some programs are not as bad as described in the main stream press (i.e. spying on international phone calls to terrorist suspects has been morphed into "wholesale domestic wiretaps")?"
We have little doubt that many are trying to protect us. One way to protect a child is to lock him in a cellar and control his every move
"Has anyone considered that liberty can never be absolute in a world of real human beings, and that the issue is not *whether* you give up some privacy, but *when* giving it up is appropriate and when it is not?
Yes
"I'd just like to see a slight bit of balance here. The monotone is becoming boring."
Oh
"Ben Franklin's quote about protection and liberty is absolutist, and he himself, by being involved in a government which provided protection at the cost of liberty proved that, so please don't raise that old quote as a response."
If you knew what the definition of proof was, you probably wouldn't have an issue with the quote, and I am certain you would understand the problem. A pedophile may claim that the Earth is spherical. The fact that he is a pedophile does not prove that the earth is flat. Your logic fails you.
"Yes, the measures might be abused. The same logic applies to all government powers - so the simple assertion that they may be abused and therefore are wrong is without value. It applies just as well to prosecutors, police departments and DOD. An argument based on this assertion has to be a lot more specific - it needs to show the cost of the abuses vs the cost of not implementing the program, or make an alternative recommendation."
So in other words, it applies to members of the executive branch, members of the executive branch, and memebers of the executive branch. Hmmm
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Does anyone out there ever consider that there might be people in government that might actually be trying to protect us?
No, not really. Having worked for government I'd say I have a better chance of winning the lottery than for your (rhetorical) question to ever be answered in the affirmative.
Ben Franklin's quote about protection and liberty is absolutist, and he himself, by being involved in a government which provided protection at the cost of liberty proved that, so please don't raise that old quote as a response
If by "absolutist" you mean "perfectly correct" then I guess so. But I gather that for some strange reason you actually think that you're the intellectual equal of ol' Ben, something I find about as likely as the idea of the NSA spying on me 'for my own good'.
Has anyone considered that liberty can never be absolute in a world of real human beings
Geez, I don't remember anyone talking about 'absolute liberty'. That little strawman you made up all on your own. What I do remember is our Founding Fathers drawing a line in the sand for government and saying "thou shalt not cross - EVER!"
Too fucking bad the whole experiment didn't work out.
Yes, the measures might be abused
No, they *will* be abused. That's a given. The solution is to make government as weak as possible while still having enough power to do the job it's tasked to do. That way WHEN someone abuses power, they'll never have enough to do more than local harm, and certainly not enough to cover up the abuse or to flaunt it (aka Bush and spying) without fear of retaliation.
For a representative government to be truly representative, you need your Congresscritters to constantly fear what will be done to them should they ever cross the people they represent. Not only that, but regular and firm reminders that they are not leaders, but SERVANTS. They are in Congress for one and only one purpose: to do our bidding, within the constraints of the Constitution. They have no other value in office.
If it were not for some perhaps over-zealous protections enacted by civil libertarian fundamentalists, the World Trade Center towers might still be standing.
What a crock of shit. Yep, let's blame the destruction of the Twin Towers on people who actually *champion liberty* instead of, well, *the criminal fucks who crashed the planes into them*. Your inability to exercise even the basics of logic would astound me if I weren't a Slashdot semi-regular.
Look, if you're so fucking convinced that fascism is such a dandy thing there are countries *all over the world* that would fit the bill perfectly. You'd be much, much happier living in one of them. I'd be happier if you were living in one of them, too.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?