Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Now Pulling Out of DEF CON In Response To Anti-Fed Position
darthcamaro writes "Earlier today it, Slashdot had a story about DEF CON's position on not allowing U.S. Federal agents to attend the annual hacking conference. We're now starting to see the backlash from the hacker community itself with at least two well respected hackers pulling out of the DEF CON speaking sessions so far: "'The issue we are struggling with, and the basis of our decision, is that we feel strongly that DEF CON has always presented a neutral ground that encouraged open communication among the community, despite the industry background and diversity of motives to attend,' security researcher Kevin Johnson wrote. 'We believe the exclusion of the "feds" this year does the exact opposite at a critical time.'"
Meanwhile, Black Hat welcomes Federal attendees; this year's conference will feature as a speaker former NSA head Keith Alexander.
Door, arse, etc.
It's one thing to be neutral towards those who are vaguely threatening, but it's simply naive to be neutral towards those who are actively undermining you.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
I can't speak for the people who have chosen not to participate or their reasons for doing so.
I am sure it will be a loss for the event, but not as much as the one that comes from the lack of a public dialogue about the government's actions and activities tracking internet traffic.
Saying that Defcon fosters an open community where there are no sides is a little misleading. The government has it's own reasons for showing up and they are not all related to sharing ideas, learning and having a good time. It's just the other people who really lack an agenda.
I know people who are not going to Blackhat because the NSA is giving the keynote. What kind of strange alternate future is it we live in where this even happens?
>> "we feel strongly that DEF CON has always presented a neutral ground that encouraged open communication among the community,"
Whoever thinks the feds will at any time play fair is a fool. Those who actively violate the rights of the people should not be welcome anywhere.
They didn't "exclude" the Feds. They simply warned them that given the current atmosphere, it might not be wise for them to attend.
There's a pretty damned big difference.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if these two were contractors for the fed.
They can get bent if this is their attitude toward willful violation of my civil rights. I'm not interested in the opinions of people who lend ANY support to the ingrates who knowingly and willfully violate our rights for a day job.
I read this story on a site yesturday, it wasn't that they weren't allowed to, they were Asked not attend this year which they still could, due to the whole NSA spying issue that came up recently.
If these researchers want to take the wrong side in this fight, let them.
Why does everything always have to be a "them against us" when it comes to these types of debates. I am in no way affiliated to any government organization, and I definitely do not like government intrusion in my private life. However, government security is as much in my interest as in theirs. Afterall, if they do legally obtain some of my private information for whatever reason, I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
Or perhaps it will take an asteroid hurdling towards Earth for you to side with "the feds" and work together on a solution?
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
It's time the entire populace stand up and tell the federal government to go fuck itself.
Polls show that most people think Snowden was a criminal, and that the NSA is keeping us safe. Excluding and isolating your opponents is often a good strategy when you are winning. But privacy advocates are not winning. They are losing. In this battle for hearts and minds, engagement may be a better strategy.
If these researchers want to take the wrong side in this fight, let them.
They are not taking a side. They are disagreeing on means, not ends.
Because the first step in solving any dilemma is to grab the nearest sharp knife and cut off our noses despite our faces.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Hahahahahahahahaha. You must be checking those government polls...
I honestly think there's a significant aspect to the move to "ban" Feds that people are overlooking: safety and liability. DEFCON gets a bit rowdy at the best of time, in the current climate re: PRISM, Snowden, etc. I seriously think the move will save a few bloody noses, possibly broken bones, and likely lawsuits and criminal charges stemming from the same. The conference also shields itself from the associated liability. A lot of people, especially in the hacker/DEFCON community, are *seriously* pissed at the US gov't right now, and that's gonna cause a lot more friction than normal.
GStreamer - The only way to stream!
Wouldn't it be difficult to even have a nose to cut off, if you didn't have a face?
Or perhaps it will take an asteroid hurdling towards Earth for you to side with "the feds" and work together on a solution?
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability. This is one of those hard facts that doesn't just go away. It takes a long time and a lot of effort to restore broken trust, especially when it has been repeatedly broken with little or no consequence to the perpetrators.
Right now our government doesn't seem interested in regaining the trust and confidence of the citizens. They'd rather watch every move and outright spy on the people, becoming more and more intrusive, in order to justify this paranoia of theirs that more of their misdeeds might become known. It never seems to occur to them to look in the mirror if they want to find the source of the problem. They don't seem to think that maybe, just maybe, actual respect for the lives, privacy, and freedom of the citizens they're supposed to be serving is a better solution.
If some doomsday asteroid were coming our way, these people would likely retreat to some kind of well-stocked underground "continuity of government" bunker than lift a finger to help us.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
It's not a 12 y/o Chinese hacker that most US citizens need to fear. It is the unrestrained overreaching of the US government as they push aside our privacy, our rights, our Constitution and our history.
Polls show that most people think Snowden was a criminal, and that the NSA is keeping us safe.
It's all too easy to manipulate polling results. There are plenty of subtle ways of doing it. I would rather think something like that is going on and apply all the usual "qui bono?" scrutiny to who conducted the polls and who paid for it and what the methodology was. I would rather think that because if so many Americans really are that naive, then the nation is forfeit and it's only a matter of time before it becomes a totalitarian state of some kind.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
The reason its us against them is because they have repeatedly broken the law, in spirit if not in fact, by their current activities. The only possible reason for them to be doing so is to gather more and more power to those who enable them. The purpose of such power is always to control, to enforce their will upon those who would otherwise prefer to live a life of freedom instead of a life of enslavement.
Those concepts aside, it becomes more of an us against them atmosphere when hackers, people who skirt legalities to do what they do in a lot of circumstances, are in the same room with law enforcement who are known to be gathering information on ALL communications in the US. Keep in mind that those communications may be discussing illegal activities whose purpose is to research weaknesses in security methods. While this could technically be illegal their purpose is to educate and repair problems - and the unfortunate wording and enforcement of the law makes their activities illegal. So bearing all of that in mind, the NSA walks into the room and starts getting names of people in attendance, then goes back and digs into PRISM and finds what those people are doing. And then, ultimately, either uses it for their own agenda or passes the information on to someone who will.
is that really in the best interest of anyone who wants to retain not only their freedom but their civil liberties?
It just occurred to me, one of the researchers pulling out was slated to give a presentation on how to hack sharepoint.
While it would be an enormous loss for the community not to have the opportunity to learn more about the specific ways this guy attacks M$'s premium CMS ... ... how much effort would it really take for a bunch of Defcon attendees to put together a session with equally useful information about hacking sharepoint to replace it?
While registering to the conference, have attendees fill in a form with the two questions "Are you a government employee, and if so in what quality" and "Are you a journalist, and if so, in what newspaper(s) do you publish?" The people that you want to attend will be happy to have a name tag saying "Government employee, University of so and so". The people who feel the need to hide their affiliation are probably the ones you want to be escorted by security.
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability.
So, hackers? ...
Perhaps the organizer wish to avoid apolitical and protest maelstrom that could appear? Preferring to keep the conference at least somewhat apolitical?
Hahahahahahahahaha. You must be checking those government polls...
If the polls are wrong, where's the outrage? Most of the taxpaying, voting citizens in my little slice of the world agree with those polls. They've never heard of /. and would think Reddit is the same thing as 4chan, except they've never heard of them, either. The cold, hard truth is the vast, silent majority of Americans are apathetic about personal privacy.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
Afterall, if they do legally obtain some of my private information for whatever reason, I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
I'd trust a random 12 year-old Chinese hacker before I'd trust an organization that's currently torturing and keeping people locked up illegally.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
These are probably the same researchers that have been crying "no security is better than a false sense of security" for years now in a devious (and successful) attempt to keep our communications channels completely unencrypted, by default. Lucky OTR (Off the Record) didnt to listen to such mal-aligned researcher advice so now we have a widely deployed chat encryption method...
Polls show that most people think Snowden was a criminal
No they don't, they show that a majority of the people who have an opinion now think that what he did was wrong (earlier, the majority supported him). However, almost 30% of respondents had no opinion. Apathy is killing this country, no one gives a shit about their rights until they experience a very direct and negative impact on themselves personally. Even if people think the government is spying on them, almost a third don't give a shit until they have to deal with actual consequences.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
So can a divorce.
Life is not for the lazy.
Earning my trust is pretty easy.
1. Don't lie
2. Don't cheat
3. Don't steal
Depending on how you view the way our taxes are spent, the feds are getting somewhere between 0/3 and 1/3 of that formula correct.
The cold, hard truth is the vast, silent majority of Americans are apathetic about personal privacy.
Actually, the cold hard truth is that the vast majority of Americans are idiots, and you are included.
I didn't say they were right, or that I agreed with them in the slightest. Just that they don't care.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
So can solitude.
But I like roads, bridges, and military protection.
Kid-proof tablet..
don't care?
The vast majority of Americans likely don't understand what legal repurcussions and violations are being propagated against them in the name of 'fighting terrorism' and 'security'.
The truly sad part is they end up supporting it out of social pressure, lest they be thought of by their peers as I patriotic. It's a self-fulfilling cycle of idiocy.
It is amusing that they think that Feds will not attend because they are "not allowed". It is foolish to be divisive in this way. The "Feds" likely make a useful contribution to the conference.
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability.
That also explains why I don't trust much coming out of the "hacker" community, either. :)
See what happens when you make sweeping generalizations about a community based on the wrongdoings of some members of that community?
I didn't say they were right, or that I agreed with them in the slightest. Just that they don't care.
But they DO care.
And claiming otherwise is either the action of a fool or a stooge. ...
Maybe you are being paid to make the erroneous claims you have made
Yeah, you got me. I've been a paid government shill here on /. for more well over a decade. I don't know why I even bother replying to ACs.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
We do not want to make this a "political" move, and we do not make this decision based on their motivations. The issue we are struggling with, and the basis of our decision, is that we feel strongly that DEF CON has always presented a neutral ground that encouraged open communication among the community, despite the industry background and diversity of motives to attend. We believe the exclusion of the "feds" this year does the exact opposite at a critical time.
James and I do not feel that this should be about anti/pro government, but rather a continuation of openness that this event has always encouraged. We both have much respect for DEF CON and the entire organization and security community.
The specific inclusion of the federal government was never the intent of DefCon. The intent was to provide a neutral ground for people working in the security industry or on the fringes of the industry to be able to come together and discuss ideas, problems, and solutions. The Feds began coming, not to participate in the DefCon community but hoping to catch hackers or to recruit them. Obviously there may be some federal employees who attend for the same reasons we do, but DefCon prizes anonymity and those who would legitimately be attending obviously could not and would not be excluded.
For your team to purposely pull your talk from DefCon because they have asked that the feds not attend this year is absolutely silly. If your purpose is openness and community, it seems rather fishy that the organizers simply asking that the 'Feds' don't attend (i.e. the guys trying to track hackers) would incite you to pull your talk. I think it is completely disingenuous to say that this is not a political move because the community will still be there - you just aren't targeting the community anymore with your talks and your target audience may not be present...at least that's the way you make it seem.
don't care?
The vast majority of Americans likely don't understand what legal repurcussions and violations are being propagated against them in the name of 'fighting terrorism' and 'security'.
The truly sad part is they end up supporting it out of social pressure, lest they be thought of by their peers as I patriotic. It's a self-fulfilling cycle of idiocy.
Completely agree with this, except I don't think there's a lot of social pressure. I think they are mostly just happy not to think about it too much. It's terrifying to think how little a splash something like Watergate would have today.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
This is how you find out who's snitching to the feds.
I can well understand why anyone in the non-corporate, civilian security community would have absolutely lost any shred of trust they had in the feds.
Those guys in DEFCON know who Aaron Schwartz is. They probably know people like Edward Snowden. They know that the federal government could bring their whole world crashing down in a heartbeat, without anything like constitutional rights.
I bet there are some feds who are sad about missing the parties, and about missing all the intel. But seriously, if any of them were decent people, they'd be blowing whistles, too.
Anybody who's working for the federal government in cybersecurity needs to make a decision about their future. Are they OK with being part of a police state? I know jobs are scarce, but if the day ever comes where push comes to shove, understanding of why they chose to continue to be part of this American StaziTM is going to be even more scarce.
You are welcome on my lawn.
And yet last year everyone who attended DEF CON already knew the NSA was spying, they just didn't have any proof of it. There were ok with having feds last year though. So the only thing that really changed is that this spying is now front page news.
For the NSA, there is no "Anonymous Coward"...
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
If these researchers want to take the wrong side in this fight, let them.
Why does everything always have to be a "them against us" when it comes to these types of debates. I am in no way affiliated to any government organization, and I definitely do not like government intrusion in my private life. However, government security is as much in my interest as in theirs. Afterall, if they do legally obtain some of my private information for whatever reason, I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
Your logic, if we can call it that, escapes me. There's no reason that the government AND some twelve year-old Chinese hacker can't BOTH have copies of your information. Anyway, where'd you get the notion that your information was obtained legally?
Perhaps it's legal by the distorted forms of of reasoning the Feds use to justify their acts, but not by the common sense ways most people would understand the laws.
It's just 2 people from the same company who decided they didn't like DEF CON's stance this year and wrote a blog post saying they wouldn't attend. This means nothing. If me and a buddy decide we don't like Coke anymore that doesn't warrant a headline saying "People now giving up on Coke in response to [whatever]".
The way that I read Jeff's comment was not so much as a ban of the Feds but he seemed to be politically cautioning the attendance of Feds on potential hostilities from attendees who aren't particularly thrilled with the recent disclosures. We can all argue the maturity level of the conference but in the immortal words of Friedrich Nietzsche: "Madness is rare in individuals, but in groups, parties, nations and ages, it is the rule" Surely there would be severe consequences on both sides were there to be pranks or aggressions on Feds in attendance. Of my many years of attendance, I have never considered Defcon to be a completely open environment free from danger, but rather a Hackers Mos Eisley where you can interact with all walks of life, but that you had better be aware of those who do not like you.
The people making up DEF CON hijacked the term "hacker" for their security-related work. Give it back to the people who actually deserve it: smart, clever engineering types.
Yes there is. They call them "Analysts".
the NSA walks into the room and starts getting names of people in attendance, then goes back and digs into PRISM and finds what those people are doing. And then, ultimately, either uses it for their own agenda or passes the information on to someone who will. is that really in the best interest of anyone who wants to retain not only their freedom but their civil liberties?
It's certainly not in the NSA's interest. The hackers they catch this way would not be the best and the brightest. It would also tip off the best and brightest that the NSA is doing something underhanded like this. That would cause them to strengthen their defenses and anonymity.
It's like misusing antibiotics; if you don't get all of them, the remaining ones will only become stronger.
"Once we've identified and embraced our sickness, we'll have strength...and that's when we get dangerous." - John Waters
They don't seem to think that maybe, just maybe, actual respect for the lives, privacy, and freedom of the citizens they're supposed to be serving is a better solution.
Perhaps you define better different than they do? IE: Unchecked Power and Unlimited Funds. Tell me citizen, what powers may you grant us, that we may not take our selves? What benefit can you give us, that turning knowledge into stock can not?
The cold, hard truth is the vast, silent majority of Americans are apathetic about personal privacy.
From what I can tell (discussing this issue with my non-technically-minded family members), they're not apathetic, they're cynical. The best response was from my mom -- "if they know everything about everybody, why can't they stop these damn telemarketers from calling me?"
"Once we've identified and embraced our sickness, we'll have strength...and that's when we get dangerous." - John Waters
I'd trust a random 12 year-old Chinese hacker before I'd trust an organization that's currently torturing and keeping people locked up illegally.
This is what's known as a false dichotomy. We at your local Federal Government will be here for you to trust mere moments after you have trusted the Cheenager.
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability. This is one of those hard facts that doesn't just go away. It takes a long time and a lot of effort to restore broken trust, especially when it has been repeatedly broken with little or no consequence to the perpetrators.
So the thing to do is to boot all gov't employees? I think there is a fallacy here, that 100% of feds are working on surveillance technology. NSA implemented SELinux - what if those types of security researchers want to go? Just screw 'em?
I claim the first "Spot the fed" siting. i.e. Kevin Johnson
Enjoy your security contracts. Your grandchildren will thank you for the police state you helped create.
We don't want people like yourself at this convention anyways. DEF CON has always been Anti-Fed one way or another. That you fail to realize that is your own short-sightedness.
Now pardon me while I nail your blog with my new 97% accurate OCR-based captcha breaker, since you've still failed to stop it two years in a row.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
We ALL knew they were spying. What has changed is that they are no longer even bothering to hide it.
Good-bye
There was proof even before. About the only thing that was revealed by Snowden was the exact names of the companies that were helping the NSA (and a few more similar details).
I don't know why suddenly it's become such a big issue when it wasn't before. Maybe everyone was distracted by gay marriage or abortion or banks or spying on the press or something. The number of scandals going on is rather ridiculous.
I'd still rather have it be a big issue than not.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Replace roads, bridges, and military protection with chains, whips, and ball gags. I suppose it all depends on who is using what against whom. Do the people control the government, or does the government control the people?
That's because of two, connected things. The first is that most privacy advocates sound and act like raving paranoid nutjobs (and for the most part they are). The second is that this has lead them to scream "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" so many times that nobody listens to them anymore.
The there is a third thing, one the nutjobs don't grasp and don't seem to even realize the existence of: most people don't care. Nor have have the nutjobs been able to frame a cogent, coherent case for people to care.
Perhaps you have not spent much time at these gatherings, but the amount of crossover between the them and the bone breakers is rather limited. It is more likely that additional mean spirited T-shirts will be created AND displayed.
But they DO care.
No, the majority doesn't care. Even those that think Snowden was a hero, aren't doing anything about it. Is a single politician going to lose an election over this issue? I don't think so. This is a dead issue. It has been pushed off the front pages by Kim Kardashian's new baby. It's a girl!!!
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability.
That also explains why I don't trust much coming out of the "hacker" community, either. :)
See what happens when you make sweeping generalizations about a community based on the wrongdoings of some members of that community?
If you thought your one-liner taught me a valuable life lesson, your smug expectations deserve to be disappointed. What you think you're point out is trivial, obvious, and only a moment's thought reveals why it's wrong.
Characterizing a government is not a "sweeping generalization" like, say, characterizing a race or ethnic group. A government includes those at the top who make the important decisions and those who have chosen to carry out those decisions. This is not a "community", it's a voluntary organization. No one is making any of them behave the way they do. "Just following orders" didn't work at Nuremberg and it doesn't work here, either.
What you seldom or never see is "the wrongdoings of some members" being investigated and prosecuted by the other members. What you often see is that life suddenly gets very difficult and unpleasant for whistleblowers. People choose to work in these positions and to carry out these activities because they believe in and support them.
I'm sorry but portraying corrupt officials and the silent consent of their lackeys, massive unconstitutional abuses such as the NSA spying, and a long list of other scandals that usually result in a resignation at the very worst, as "mean ol Causality picking on poor helpless extremely powerful people" is so goddamned naive.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
There was proof even before. About the only thing that was revealed by Snowden was the exact names of the companies that were helping the NSA (and a few more similar details). I don't know why suddenly it's become such a big issue when it wasn't before. Maybe everyone was distracted by gay marriage or abortion or banks or spying on the press or something. The number of scandals going on is rather ridiculous. I'd still rather have it be a big issue than not.
It's a big issue now because mainstream, average people either didn't know about it, or were in denial about it and preferred to ignore those who tried to bring this to their attention. Or they branded them with labels like "tin-foil hatter" or "conspiracy nut" and the like. It's the standard procedure for how small-minded people treat those who have clearer vision than themselves (they can't just disagree, or be skeptical, they have to denigrate).
Now they can't do that anymore so it's finally getting the attention it deserves.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability. This is one of those hard facts that doesn't just go away. It takes a long time and a lot of effort to restore broken trust, especially when it has been repeatedly broken with little or no consequence to the perpetrators.
So the thing to do is to boot all gov't employees? I think there is a fallacy here, that 100% of feds are working on surveillance technology. NSA implemented SELinux - what if those types of security researchers want to go? Just screw 'em?
I'm curious how you read what I wrote and think that is what I am suggesting. I double-checked and I just can't find anyplace where I said we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.
...) and return to having most governance come from the states.
The problem, as I identified it, is that this government does not seem interested in re-establishing mutual trust between itself and the citizenry. If it were interested in that, it could start by increasing transparency and accountability. If it *really* wanted to do that, it could reduce its own size and power (yeah I know, keep dreaming
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
almost a third don't give a shit until they have to deal with actual consequences
That's because they don't appreciate just how predictable and inevitable those consequences really are.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
There was proof even before.
What proof?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
As of this writing, this comment was moderated 'insightful'...
I know we aren't supposed to comment on moderation but Parent is pure flamebait. The whole concept is a trolling concept...'blame government' is half a point and one way to start a never-ending argument.
I HATE these never ending arguments about straw man aspects or red herrings...I downmod these type of comments when I have mod points and I encourage others to do the same. I know we're supposed to focus on promoting good comments but having this kind of flame at the top of the comments really kills the discussion.
Slashdot needs the casual reader/commenter and they get turned off by seeing this same stuff over and over...
Thank you Dave Raggett
Here's one example. There was a leaker in 2005, too, who was also charged with espionage. Remember Thomas Drake?.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Anyone consider DEFCON just might not want the hassle of an official government presence b/c of the trouble it might stir up with attendees???
Jeez, if any of you dorks ever threw a party, you'd know the big variable is who will show up and what they will do.
Having an **official** presence from these gov't IT types would definitely tax security...just look at the comments on this thread. If I was organizing this, I definitely consider the same, given that it's a...you know...'hacker' convention and all.
It's like making sure two people who just broke up don't both show up to your party...avoids commotion...
The NSA and the like **will still be there** of course! Just not in an 'official' capacity.
If I was a gov't IT guy I'd be going just for the fun of it on my own time.
Thank you Dave Raggett
Now they can't do that anymore so it's finally getting the attention it deserves.
I don't think that's it, because the evidence was extremely clear before. Maybe people believed Obama wouldn't do the evil things Bush did? It seems like the 2009 inauguration was about the time people stopped mentioning it. Maybe now, after Snowden, it's impossible to believe that Obama ever intended to do anything about it?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
this government does not seem interested in re-establishing mutual trust between itself and the citizenry.
they know they are unbeatable (powerful) and so, they are filled with hubris.
why SHOULD they give in? those that have that kind of power never willingly give it up.
plus, they have spent years conditioning the everyday joe sixpack that this is all for THEIR safety and benefit. and you know, roughly half the country believes that bullshit, hook line and sinker.
we don't have an educated country, generally. and so, we get abused.
then again, I don't see any other country truly being a bastion of freedom and individual rights. some talk a good game, but behind the scenes, they're 'enjoying' the same power that the US gov is.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
this is starting to tread onto the batshit insane territory now! seriously? make your own roads? make your own bridges using "basic geometry and a few wood/metal shop classes"? and lets not even get started about the military protection that you think only consists of guns and "a few home-rigged explosives"?
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
military protection.
yeah, we are always being attacked by actual armies by other countries ON OUR OWN LAND.
yup, happens so much, we need to keep arming our military more and more.
"I feel so safe"
(barf!)
but hey, those who have military and defense related jobs are surely enjoying this and the last decade. the rest of us have to deal with poor roads, rotting infrastructure, lack of money for proper education and the general enrichment of society via improvements we 'cannot afford' due to military spending.
but sure, at least we have the illusion of being 'safer'. I guess there's that....
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD and the ones like it
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
they never hid the programs, many various media outlets besides the right, left and mainstream media had been reporting on it for years before that idiot Snowden came out about it, there was a link from slashdot on HOPE 9 Keynote that showed an former government agent William.Binney showing how the system works.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xs8zd7_william-binney-hope-9-keynote-part1_tech#.Ud-YFqyfjeg
well they're obviously feds or fed financed, so they're pulling out - or were there just in hopes to get fed financed.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
... Wow. I never actually thought about that song's lyrics before. Now I feel like an idiot. If it wasn't actually written about a whistleblower, it may as well have been. That's a very good description of how working a government job, and deciding you don't like what your employer is doing, goes down (for people who take a less extreme approach than Snowden or Manning).
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
I work together with the feds all the time. I pay taxes, I follow the law, I obey legitimate instructions by officials, police officers and the military. It takes massive hardship for me, or other individuals, not to work 'with' the state. The question is what does it take to make the state work with me, and frankly I doubt an asteroid would do it!
(Score: 5, Insightful)
Thou art naive, my brother. The government relies on secrecy (among other things) for its security. God has given every individual the inalienable right to privacy (personal secrecy) for his/her personal security. By divulging thy private information to strangers, thou art laying thyself bare to attack and abuse. Knowlegde is power. Power corrupts. The more knowledge governments have of their citizens, the more power they have over them. The more power they have over them, the more likely they are to abuse their citizens. Governments are instituted by God to ensure law and order, but when governments dare to take away the individual's God-given rights (like privacy), they themselves become criminal. When individuals give up their God-given rights in exchange for protection by men, they forfeit God's own protection of them. In fact, they become God's enemy.
Why do you apologists always so desperately want the US to be compared to the greatest shits on the planet?
But if you insist: When compared to the reign of Idi Amin, Pol Pot or Hitler, the US government isn't the worst offender.
Happy now?
I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
It's not a 12 y/o Chinese hacker that most US citizens need to fear. It is the unrestrained overreaching of the US government as they push aside our privacy, our rights, our Constitution and our history.
Seriously? And who do you think that 12-year-old Chinese hacker works for (oh yes I said work)? What? You think hacking in China is a hobby? Grow up.
Profiling? Let's just spy on Arabs and Asian? It's works for the police doesn't it? Blacks and Hispanics are the criminals, so concentrating on them is how America should reduce crime right? You see, the assumption is that there is some flag or indicator that allows organizations like the police or the NSA to identify potential criminals before they become a threat. News flash...there isn't. At least not often enough to save people from an individual intent on causing massive harm. All I have seen is outrage about the NSA practices, but what I haven't seen, even in the most offhanded opinion, is an option for how to be just as effective without the perceived violation of personal privacy.
It's true, not all hackers aren't exactly angels and are only looking out for their own self interest.
"But I like Roads"
So build your own. It's not that hard. Even my crippled ass can lay some concrete and asphalt.
"bridges"
Well, guess what? If you passed basic geometry and maybe took a little wood/metal shop class, building one shouldn't be an issue at all. But you like solitude so why would you build one, since that just invites people?
'Military Protection'
Son, if you don't have your own arsenal and at least a few home-rigged explosives, you're not worth your user name or worth being called American.
LOL I'm sure everyone has a background of an engineering degree. You are truely a troll.
I see, so you don't believe in the National Transportation and Safety Board...them are the guys that keep airline, train, bus, and auto companies from cutting corners to keep your ass safe. Now, about the Social Security Administration, let's get rid of them because Grandma can come and live with you, right? You have no need for safe workplace, there goes OSHA. And your air and water have no business being clean, let's get rid of the EPA. The list is very long....
Your problem is that you have no sense of perspective.
I don't see how violating the constitution is in any way necessary for the administration of OSHA, SSA, NTSB, EPA, or any legitimate function of government.
Here's one example. There was a leaker in 2005, too, who was also charged with espionage. Remember Thomas Drake?.
I certainly don't, and I had been paying attention back then. In 8 years we probably won't remember Snowden's name either. The US populace is even less well informed (or willfully ignorant), so you can bet that around 2020 there will be another leaker telling us shocking things about how the NSA has a running log of everybody's Google Glass feed.
You can build things without degrees. I'm pretty sure that the Greeks who built the 2800+ year old caravan bridge didn't have engineering degrees, and that has survived continuous use from the time of Homer to commuter buses.
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
Are the speeches from the keynote speakers broadcast by any chance?
So now we know who is kissing the Fed's ass.
How many Ancient Greek bridges did not survive?
DefCon has merely advised the Feds that it is probably not the best time for them to attend, and that they would prefer that they not be in attendance due to the likelihood of malicious attacks upon any suspected Feds. Not that they may not attend, but at least then DefCon has made it quite clear that they are perfectly aware of the risks and don't want to see it get ugly.
DefCon is being prudent, not exclusionary. They know there will be Feds, and they know that now that DefCon has covered their arses by identifying a likely hazard and giving a fair notification to those who ignore their warnings. It's like a parking lot that reminds you not to leave valuables in your car. People do it anyway, but it's hard at that point to blame the parking lot.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Classic dismissal. "Oh, polls can be manipulated" but zero effort is made to show or prove any of this. A proper poll includes the question text so one can do this analysis. Thing is, if you had done this, you would see the OP was wrong.
Q-Poll: "Do you regard Edward Snowden -- the national security consultant who released information to the media about the phone scanning program -- as more of a traitor, or more of a whistle-blower?" 34% say traitor, 55% say whistleblower, 11% unsure (6/28-7/8)
ABC Poll: "The NSA surveillance program was classified as secret, and was made public by a former government contractor named Edward Snowden. Do you support or oppose Snowden being charged with a crime for disclosing the NSA surveillance program?" 43% support, 48% oppose, 9% unsure (6/12-6/16)
pollingreport.com
"Trust no one." --Fox Mulder. Humans sin so you can't trust them 100%. :(
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
You did a beautiful job of paraphrasing, reminded me so much of the original: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
I've never seen one that didn't.
Why do you apologists always so desperately want the US to be compared to the greatest shits on the planet?
But if you insist: When compared to the reign of Idi Amin, Pol Pot or Hitler, the US government isn't the worst offender.
Happy now?
To be fair, the USA is only 240-something years old, so buck up, we can yet be #1, we just have to believe in ourselves and various bogeymen.
More Twoson than Cupertino
What about the following hypothetical chat in the white house:
POTUS: We gotta sort this out, this dragnet thing is unacceptable. ...
NSAOfficial: Of course, Mr President, I completely agree. On a completely unrelated note, would you care to take a look at this, rather thick, folder - obviously we would have to declassify it should we find a viable way to proceed with this route. Our analysts have market the sections you might find most interesting with post it notes.
POTUS:
Those seem to be allegations of targeted surveillance without a warrant. Blanket surveillance is in a whole different league IMO. Not the same thing at all. Blanket surveillance crosses the line from routine unwarranted privacy invasions and fishing expeditions by individual LEOs and 1984.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Spontaneous building collapses were a serious problem prior to the development of classical mechanics. In ancient literature, it's how Job's children die, and Simonides of Ceos discovers the method of loci after miraculously escaping a collapsing banquet hall.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." - Bob Dylan
OK. So let's just dismember the standing army, and see if anything happens.
I'm game for the experiment.
Are you?
Kid-proof tablet..
The allegations now are of targeted surveillance. The NSA claims to only look at records if they fulfill the conditions.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Red herring. You don't need a government "with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability" in order to have roads, bridges, and military protection. Switzerland for example seems to do just fine with their government; you never hear about Orwellian surveillance programs from the Swiss government, and they have very nice roads and bridges there. There's dozens of other countries that do just fine with their governments too, such as Norway.
Does anyone actually believe them though? That's the problem with lying. It tends to make people trust you less. The NSA has about as much credibility as the TSA. Professional liars.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
It's probably mostly true. My problem isn't that they are doing horrible things (the TSA on the other hand is, I hate getting groped); I think they are probably mostly just doing their jobs, trying to catch terrorists. It's not like the NSA hates America or wants to return us to the "good old days of monarchy" or something.
But even if that's true, and they haven't hurt anybody, and are totally benign, eventually this program WILL be abused, and they will cause real damage. So let's get rid of the program altogether before that happens.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Because people like simple solutions to complex problems, which they can then pretend that they've dealt with.
Do you want Kool-Aid with that?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
I was just now going to post (first time I've read \. in several days), but scanned first to see if anyone had caught it. You're right, of course, on both accounts: he is the current DIRNSA, and the preceding posters are...well...I guess a nice word is ignorant.