Slashdot Mirror


Snowden A Hero? Gates Says No, Woz Says Yes

hcs_$reboot writes "In a lengthy interview from Rolling Stone, Bill Gates, was asked: 'Do you consider [Snowden] a hero or a traitor?' The Microsoft founder responded, 'I certainly wouldn't characterize him as a hero. ... You won't find much admiration from me'. What about government surveillance? 'The government has such ability to do these things. ... But the specific techniques they use become unavailable if they're discussed in detail. Rolling Stone retorts that privacy can be an issue: 'We want safety, but we also want privacy,' says the journalist. Bill Gates tells his main priority focuses on stopping the bad guys: 'Let's say you knew nothing was going on. How would you feel? I mean, seriously. I would be very worried. Technology arms the bad guys with orders of magnitude more [power]. Not just bad guys. Crazy guys.' Meanwhile, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak expressed the opposite opinion about Snowden at a tech conference in Germany. 'He is a hero to me, but he may be a traitor to other people and I understand the reasons for them to think that way. I believe that Snowden believed, like I do, that the U.S. has a right to freedom. '"

335 comments

  1. said the bad guy by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Funny

    yes, technology has certainly armed you, Bill Gates, you twisted evil fuck

    1. Re:said the bad guy by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "yes, technology has certainly armed you, Bill Gates, you twisted evil fuck"

      Well, this certainly does illustrate how much Bill Gates is actually a closet Statist. But those who have followed what the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation do already knew that. At first I was happy to see Gates spending much of his fortune on "charity"... until I learned what they were actually doing with the money.

      Like supporting "Common Core" education... which is worse than you probably think. Contrary to what supporters say, while it may not technically be a "government" program, the government had a heavy hand in its formation. And there is a lot more to the whole story.

      You can bet that if the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is behind it, it has a Statist purpose.

    2. Re:said the bad guy by s.petry · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Gates foundation is just the last piece of exploitation for him. It really should take minutes to gather enough data to show that Bill Gates should not be used as a morality touch stone. He started by stealing a professors work, caused immense harm to the computer era, and does not mind harming people to get ahead. He is a liar, a cheat, a thief, and is working to undermine society pretty much every where he goes including his home (yes, Common Core is that bad).

      Asking Bill Gates if someone is a hero is akin to asking Bill Clinton about monogamy.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    3. Re:said the bad guy by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates is hardly unique in this regard. Many young techies with a leftist bent aspire to "change the world" through various disruptions to and meddling in the lives of others. The difference between them and Bill is merely one of scope and budget. I find it amusing how these people curse the Koch brothers and others who use these methods to stand in the way of "progress" while at the same time cheering those, like Bill Gates, who use the same or similar methods to achieve more ideologically aligned goals.

    4. Re:said the bad guy by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      We could be little be gentler. Just perhaps, just maybe, his money might well and truly exceed his ability and whilst trying to do good, surrounded by yes men hungering after that money, he ends up doing evil. Of course continued failure to recognise errors, publicly apologise and allow others to fix them, does reflect ego supplanting recognition of what is actually going on, typically again as a result of being surrounding by flunkies desperate for a piece of the cash pile, creating that bubble delusion.

      The only thing common core should be is, a complete set of educational material freely available, including texts, software programs, videos and lesson plans. This to reduce the costs of education programs for schools and students. The range of common core free educational materials should be quite broad to allow choice et al. The government should fund the production of those materials and release them into a creative commons framework where all educated persons can contribute and the materials are freely available for use in educational environments but should be paid for in commercial environments. So schools can either pay or get free common core stuff. Better to work at shaping properly than just trying to block it.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:said the bad guy by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1
      Bill Gates has said himself that these days he devotes most of his time to their Foundation and its efforts.

      "The only thing common core should be is, a complete set of educational material freely available, including texts, software programs, videos and lesson plans. "

      I agree. That is what a "common core" should be. But that isn't what it IS.

    6. Re:said the bad guy by s.petry · · Score: 0

      Be gentle on a liar, thief, and cheat? Nope, sorry I'm not going to be gentler. I'm not gentle on other liars in public places either, because we should never be "gentle" when people cause harm to society and lie about both the motive and means. I'm just as brash with Obama, Reagan, Bush, Turner, Murdoch, Rockefeller, etc.. and all of society should be. Society as a whole probably would be, but people are kept ignorant about a great many things.

      As Jane Q said already, common core is not what it's summarized sales pitch is. If you believe the false summary without reading the whole program shame on you! Stop looking at the surface that people tell you and look underneath.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  2. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Travis+Mansbridge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good thing they executed Einstein... oh wait...

  3. Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nobody. Absolutely NOBODY.

    1. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there are those who admire his ability to use the "invisible hand" to make himself so big.

    2. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few years ago a local Seattle TV station voted him an "Unsung Hero." Maybe that's where it comes from.

    3. Re: Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      The bizarre irony is that most would characterize B. Gates as an over sung antihero.

      Fortunately, Melinda is there to spend the stolen/cheated money on good causes, so maybe karma will one day even out.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    4. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      Nobody. Absolutely NOBODY.

      The large number of persons who also idolized Steve Jobs, I suspect.

    5. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anybody in Africa who's received a polio vaccine from Gates' foundation would. I'm sure they'd be much more likely to call Gates a hero than Snowden, too.

      It's all perspective.

    6. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by QilessQi · · Score: 1

      I'll just leave this here:

      http://www.businessinsider.com...

      I certainly see the similarities in their business ethics...

    7. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Burz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe he thinks MS joining NSA PRISM was a heroic act.

    8. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "The large number of persons who also idolized Steve Jobs, I suspect."

      Wow. I have very strong doubts about that. Two very different people, those two.

      But regardless: while I have a lot of respect for both of them for some of the things they did, their politics aren't among those things.

    9. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would more than "talk a lot but did actually zero technical" (& used Wozniak for that latter part) Jobs.

    10. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you talk without knowing, have you ever even been to africa?

    11. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by mysidia · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Anybody in Africa who's received a polio vaccine from Gates' foundation would. I'm sure they'd be much more likely to call Gates a hero than Snowden, too.

      I don't know.... if Windows, SQL Server, and Microsoft Office weren't so darned expensive, or they went away, so we could be using Open source software instead, there might be 1000x the funds being donated for Polio vaccines in Africa.

      Gates is labelled a hero..... but maybe he's the villain depriving large numbers of people of the chance to be heros :)

    12. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Reeses · · Score: 1

      Nobody. Absolutely NOBODY.

      Anyone whose career depended on CP/M or any of the what we now consider non-standard hardware.

      --
      Reeses
    13. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      He should pay people to go around smashing windows so that glaziers will call him a hero too.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    14. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, i'm sure Bill fancies himself a hero.

    15. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by cavebison · · Score: 1

      It's all perspective.

      True, but the fact is there is more than one type of "hero". It doesn't have a simplistic definition.

      Snoden is a hero, in one definition, because anyone who risks their personal wellbeing to help others is a hero.

      Gates is a hero also, as his efforts have saved lives; albeit via money, without personal risk.

      Of course, one can be a hero for a period of time, then go and do something stupid and not be a hero anymore. It's just a word, not a permanent tattoo on one's forehead.

    16. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by drolli · · Score: 1

      He is not my hero, but:

      Bill gates did a number of decisions against the mindset of the time, and made computing available to the masses. While other companies required you be in some kind of exclusive club to interoperate, MS allowed to run basic on pretty much everything, even low priced systems (C64), and do everything with it and never demanded that anybody writing programs for their OSes paid them a fee or asked them for permission. The path to put computing to the masses (and go outside the idea of exclusive deals) was probably seen risky, and could have gone wrong.

      And while i personaaly mounr over the suffering of OS/2 from a technical viewpoint, i am not sure that staying together in bed with IBM would have done the world much good (although i am sure the short-term revenue could have been higher for MS).

    17. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Are you a hero if you steal from the poor and give to the poorer?

    18. Re:Who would characterize Gates as a hero? by Kirth · · Score: 1

      But nobody who needed to pay the pharma companies for said polio vaccine, because the Foundation was lobbying for more patent protection at the same time.

      --
      "The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
  4. Re:Snowden = Traitor by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    oh, are we at war with Russia?

    last I checked we were sticking our noses into Crimea situation (majority of populace ethnic Russian) but do tell what constitutes "enemies"

  5. not a hero, not a villain by globaljustin · · Score: 0

    Gates is an evil sociopath.

    Snowden was a dupe. He was blackmailed...and manipulated/handled by journalist Glenn Greenwald (who was **supposed** to protect his source, even from himself if necessary). As for now we can only guess at his original motivations, but I tend to think he had a sort of condescending desire to show people "how they are sheeple"...so theoretically we could round up to "whistleblower"....**maybe**

    Right now, Snowden is essentially in prison in Russia.

    Behave accordingly.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:not a hero, not a villain by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gates is an evil sociopath.

      If 'evil sociopaths' have the eradication of malaria, the delivery of clean drinking water and readily available birth control to all as objectives, I say bring 'em on.

      Certainly a bigger impact than all these so-called "Christians" blathering away on TV while doing nothing to follow Jesus's preachings.

    2. Re:not a hero, not a villain by fredprado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry, but for every good deed he accomplished he did at least two dirty deals and bribed a couple of politicians to get richer..

    3. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Narcocide · · Score: 5, Funny

      Even evil sociopaths have to answer to their wives.

    4. Re: not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do YOU follow Jesus' teachings, oh perfect one? Jackass.

    5. Re:not a hero, not a villain by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I think that most successful corporate heads these days could be called sociopaths

      Gates-wise, certainly evil in the eyes of microsoft's competitors for the better part of three decades, but he has really put forward a Carnegie-esque effort to 'do good' with his accrued wealth

      Snowden-wise I think that you are pretty much spot on with the whole manipulation by greenwald angle. Maybe even the idea that Snowden has a latent superiority complex that greenwald fed into and used to manipulate him,

      Where does Snowden's redemption lie? Can he attempt to buy his reputation like Gates or Carnegie? Are public events like SXSW that currency that he will spend on it? If that is it, then I am not buying it. It is one thing to buy into the idea that Gates bringing clean water to Africa is a good thing, it is quite another thing to label Snowden's one-sided fear mongering as 'good'

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    6. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      All of your above statements are inaccurate, misleadingly potrayed, or require citation. Malaria is a third world problem that does not actually "require" a drug to eradicate. But Gates and his Pig Pharma buddies would certainly like to make billions from the attempt. Thrid World problem, does not require "EyePee" to solve. None of his damn business. Gates is a robber baron plain and simple. His company stands right up there with Standard Oil. A putrid waste that has cost the world untold billions.

    7. Re: not a hero, not a villain by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      Do YOU follow Jesus' teachings, oh perfect one? Jackass.

      Where I can, yeah. But I'm not perfect.

      ...but I also don't go on TV claiming to be a 'christian,' then cut food stamps for poor kids and cheer executions.

    8. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Shaman · · Score: 1

      Exactly this.

      --
      ...Steve
    9. Re:not a hero, not a villain by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If 'evil sociopaths' have the eradication of malaria, the delivery of clean drinking water and readily available birth control to all as objectives, I say bring 'em on.

      Those things are only being delivered as a means of exerting control over those countries for the next eternity. They're the foot in the door for Big Pharma, in which both the foundation and Gates are heavily invested.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Snowden intended to reveal his identity, and he initiated contact with Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras. He also outed his own location. Or do you suggest Greenwald pushed him to out himself? As for his motivations, he hardly came off as condescending. He was polite, reasonable, and he didn't just dump the documents on the "sheeple" (which is an actual point of contention, though John Young (Cryptome) is extremist). He delivered the goods, and even Obama has been forced to agree that "it's good we're having a debate".

      On his stay in Russia... Putin hardly wants Snowden around. They don't share the same values, and the "fuck the U.S." novelty will wear off eventually. And since he's been communicating regularly with the outside world, someone would notice if he was muzzled.

    11. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As someone who has had malaria, I disagree.

    12. Re:not a hero, not a villain by gIobaljustin · · Score: 2

      "Bill Gates tells his main priority focuses on stopping the bad guys"

      And yet he lives in a country that's supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave. You're not free if you give away your freedoms for security, and you're not brave, either. Amazing how people think the government is composed of perfect angels, even though minimal knowledge of government abuses throughout history will tell you that governments ('even' the US government) cannot be trusted with such powers.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    13. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody is going to claim Gates was a saint as a business man. He was notoriously ruthless. But I think you need to remember, the bad isn't undone by the good, nor is the good undone by the bad. If he did bribe politicians to get richer, remember that he's also dedicated his entire wealth to helping the poor. And doing it a hell of a lot more efficiently than any government has done so far.

      I'm not going to stand up for him, but I'm also certainly not going damn him either. I'll damn portions of him, and I'll stand up for portions on him, but I won't represent his entire being as one small portion of his behavior.

    14. Re:not a hero, not a villain by ISoldat53 · · Score: 1

      Nobody likes a poor thief.

    15. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So let me get this right. In your mind, you shouldn't try to help people with disease or getting them clean water because that helps big pharma?

      Riiiiiiight

      You are aware that even if that is the case, for it to be profitable in any way, shape or form, you first need to turn 3rd world countries into countries which can afford any of that stuff, which probably means greatly improving living and economic conditions. This is bad how?

    16. Re:not a hero, not a villain by RazorSharp · · Score: 2

      He's no more altruistic than the big pharmaceutical companies. It's not really altruism when you stand to make a large profit. Gates just figured out that the charity business can be an extremely successful one -- it gives one the ability to strong-arm entire nations all while immune to criticism under the protection of "philanthropy." The Gates Foundation, like similar foundations, exists so those of his lineage will all be filthy rich no matter what and no individual will be able to screw it all up for the rest of the family. It's like a trust fund designed to last centuries rather than decades.

      Your attack on televangelists is irrelevant. They're much more an analog to Gates than a dichotomy.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    17. Re:not a hero, not a villain by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      So let me get this right. In your mind, you shouldn't try to help people with disease or getting them clean water because that helps big pharma?

      So let me get this right. You're an idiot, or an asshole. All I'm saying is that Bill Gates is still a shitheel.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're either trying to whitewash away the last two decades, or you're too young to remember how Gates was in his 30s and 40s. He was WAY worse than Steve Jobs.

    19. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who knows the difference between "treat" and "eradicate", I think you should sit back down.

    20. Re:not a hero, not a villain by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Much like many men in his position, charity is just a public relations whitewash. This is expecially obvious when all of this occurs in their "retirement". Of course Gates didn't invent this idea, he swiped it from someone else.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    21. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are aware that even if that is the case, for it to be profitable in any way, shape or form...

      Perhaps you should look up the definition of "charity". Hint: If it's for-profit, then it sure as shit ain't a charity.

      The "bad" is when they're selling a product to relieve the problems of poor countries. What they *should* be doing is developing solutions which those poor countries can implement and be in charge of themselves, without having to indefinitely buy goods or services from a small number of foreign suppliers.

      Give a man a fish, and he becomes reliant on your supply of fish.
      Teach a man to fish, and you've lost a valuable market for fish exports.

    22. Re:not a hero, not a villain by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Gates is a sociopath in the same way lex luthor is a sociopath, he is someone who does do many good things but is still evil.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    23. Re:not a hero, not a villain by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      Please see Slashdot comment #45746307 (Attached to: Bill Gates Plays Secret Santa To Reddit User). It pretty much explains Gates. Spoiler: He's better than you!

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    24. Re:not a hero, not a villain by anagama · · Score: 1

      I'm not calling Gates a Hitler, this isn't really a godwin thing. But Hitler was a vegetarian and perhaps even an antivivisectionist (early form of animal rights). This illustrates that you can find good in even the most heinous people.

      That Gates is using his arguably ill-gotten gains for good purposes, doesn't make him a hero. It makes him a creep who has a little good in him (although philanthropy like his is usually more about a different kind of personal aggrandizement). Secondly, think how chilling his whole law-and-order-protect-the-government stance is coming from Gates (essentially Microsoft) -- just one more bit of evidence we live in a proto-fascist America.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    25. Re:not a hero, not a villain by blackbeak · · Score: 1
      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    26. Re:not a hero, not a villain by sharknado · · Score: 2

      They're the foot in the door for Big Pharma, in which both the foundation and Gates are heavily invested.

      Actually, he sold his big pharma investments in 2009: http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

      Maybe you should try reading the ingredients on the Kool-Aid before you drink it. >.>

    27. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Livius · · Score: 1

      Of course Gates didn't invent this idea, he swiped it from someone else.

      ...like so much else he is incorrectly credited with.

    28. Re:not a hero, not a villain by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

      Gates' hedge funds are owned through his foundation, it's all bullcrap!

    29. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill Gates is one of the greatest men alive today. "Great men are almost always bad men." Lord Acton.

    30. Re:not a hero, not a villain by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Those things are only being delivered as a means of exerting control over those countries for the next eternity.

      Gates is nearing 60, he isn't going to be exerting control over anything for much longer.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    31. Re:not a hero, not a villain by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      Gates is a sociopath in the same way lex luthor is a sociopath, he is someone who does do many good things but is still evil.

      I'd say in the same way that oligarchs generally are; the result of all his philanthropy will not change the way society is ruled by sociopathic oligarchs and their ilk, rather it will be more firmly established, and the common folk less upwardly mobile than ever. For the most part, our rulers believe they are entitled to the bulk of the world's good things because they are a better race of human. A modest and decent person will never come to possess $76 billion.

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    32. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " remember that he's also dedicated his entire wealth to helping the poor" BZZZZZTTTTT requires citation and proof

    33. Re:not a hero, not a villain by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      ...This illustrates that you can find good in even the most heinous people.

      Say what you want about Hitler, he sure was good at making collectibles!

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    34. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In the case of Malaria, treatment is essential to eradication. You quite simply can't eliminate it without treating those who have it, because the host makes a new generation of the pathogen every year or two. To fight malaria you need to (1) treat victims as soon as possible to avoid the disease spreading, and (2) control mosquito population and take measures to prevent mosquito bites - the vector by which it spreads from person to person - in order to reduce the number of victims who need treatment. (1) is the crux of eliminating the disease, (2) is something necessary to make (1) feasible.

      Malaria infects all sorts of vertebrate animals, but is rather dependant on humans and cattle to maintain high levels of infection. If you can magically prevent all mosquito bites from spreading the disease for a few years but the victims remain infected, the disease bounces back to where it was quickly after the magic spell ends. But if you are somehow able to treat all those humans (and treat or cull the cattle - the latter isn't generally considered an option for humans) who keep the disease alive then you will have a comparatively easy time dealing with the new cases that emerge from time to time (from birds and other wildlife, to cattle, to humans, via mosquitos)

      Don't be so quick to insult someone who makes an argument just because you don't see why it's a good argument. It ends up making you look like the fool.

    35. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those things are only being delivered as a means of exerting control over those countries for the next eternity.

      Gates is nearing 60, he isn't going to be exerting control over anything for much longer.

      You mean like his bladder? He's still going to swing his monetary dick around while he lives, like a trophy wife. And that only makes sense when swinging it around company that is going to applaud, and that's the grab-all-you-can crowd he is chummy with. Never mind that he is not actually going to spend dozens of billions himself while he lives, he'll still play to impress the make-even-more crowd. His charities are just like other people's golf handicap.

    36. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of which does not at all adress my original point. Also, your point #1 above is also completely false as Malaria is not contagius.

    37. Re:not a hero, not a villain by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should try reading the ingredients on the Kool-Aid before you drink it. >.>

      If you're so big on reading before replying, perhaps you should consider addressing the issue of Gates' personal investments. As well, The foundation is still invested in biotech, which is tied to big pharma. And they have expanded their investments in energy companies, which kill people.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    38. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who questions this unprovable, likely bogus claim, stfu.

    39. Re:not a hero, not a villain by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Gates is nearing 60, he isn't going to be exerting control over anything for much longer.

      I've read your comments, you cannot possibly be this stupid. You have to be aware that corporations outlive people. So, why did you leave this comment? The deal Gates was obviously offered when the USDoJ had him over a barrel clearly does not benefit the rest of us in the long run. If the heavily moneyed interests would just butt out of a lot of these countries, and let them make their own deals with whoever they like, these nations could lift themselves out of their own problems. Take the foot off of their head and they can save themselves from drowning. But a lot of people have been hoodwinked into thinking that Gates is a good guy, when history proves that he has a small, dark heart.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    40. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much like many men in his position, charity is just a public relations whitewash. This is expecially obvious when all of this occurs in their "retirement". Of course Gates didn't invent this idea, he swiped it from someone else.

      Gary Kindall invents the cp/m.

      IBM mistakenly think it's Gates, who (to his credit) redirects them to Kindall. Kindall rejects IBM's offer. IBM returns to Gates to inquire about legitimate alternatives to Kindall's product. Gates has an idea and hires Patterson to make an alternative. Patterson makes the qDos which Gates has Allen buy from Patterson for 50 Grand. IBM finds the licensing agreement created by Gates for the renamed DOS acceptable.

      52 year old Kindall dies from a head injury in a biker bar. Although the actual cause is unknown, a drunken fall or an assault due to biker colors is the usual explanation.

    41. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's stupid and you know fucking nothing about epidemiology.

    42. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gary Kindall invents the cp/m.

      Actually it was Gary Kildall. He felt it was an obvious knock off of the CP/M and was going to sue but reconsidered since the qDOS wasn't an exact copy.

    43. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      erm, no, not even close, Jobs was to Gates like Stalin was to Roosevelt

    44. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut the fuck up, Bill.

    45. Re:not a hero, not a villain by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      This. Lol BG a redditor Hivemind FTW!

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
  6. Re:Snowden = Traitor by rubycodez · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I seem to recall Russia calling our Homeland protectors and warning us about a particular guy. they didn't have to bother to do that, and it's an extraordinary thing that they did. Our Protectors of Der Fatherland ignored the warning. being busy courting punks and filling their heads with violent thoughts and then fake weapons so they could make headlines. And so the Boston Marathon bombings happened. So, who is the enemy of We the People?

  7. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One could think that an operating system maker would appreciate more the privacy of the customers' data going through the pipes.

  8. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    in this case the enemy is our government. Are you taking refuge with them ?

  9. Obvious response from Gates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill Gates is a scumbag who lets NSA have a backdoor in Windows.

    He's also very keen on Malthusian population reduction... sending tainted vaccines to cull the undesirables in third world countries is his (and Melinda's) idea of 'charity'.

    1. Re:Obvious response from Gates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a fan of the NSA part, but anything that reduces the worldwide birth rate is good in my opinion.

    2. Re:Obvious response from Gates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a fan of the NSA part, but anything that reduces the worldwide birth rate is good in my opinion.

      The earth is capable of sustaining everyone one of us.
      The problem are not the resources, the problem is the inequal distribution of those resources to the world population.
      Of course fucktards like Gates and company would like us belive that overpopulation is the problem. It is not.
      A system where one person is allowed to have a personal wealth that is worth more than the GDP of certain states is a fucked up system for everyone except those at the very top. And Gates is at the very top. Just like Harry Lime looking down at all those ants from the height of the Vienna ferris wheel.

    3. Re:Obvious response from Gates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is people living in unsustainable areas. You shouldn't need food trucked in from 1000mi away to live. Less people=more for everyone.

    4. Re:Obvious response from Gates by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Not a fan of the NSA part, but anything that reduces the worldwide birth rate is good in my opinion.

      So you are in favour of a global thermonuclear war? Because that certainly would reduce the birth rate worldwide.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    5. Re:Obvious response from Gates by blackiner · · Score: 1

      The earth is capable of sustaining everyone one of us.

      This is not really true, though. Sure the land can grow enough food to support quite a bit more population, but the energy needed to harvest and distribute it? And how do we know it won't eventually turn into desert as we push it more and more? But by far the most important factor is that society itself cannot support more population, we already vastly out populate meaningful social roles. See: http://www.cabinetmagazine.org...

      So what exactly happened in Universe 25? Past day 315, population growth slowed. More than six hundred mice now lived in Universe 25, constantly rubbing shoulders on their way up and down the stairwells to eat, drink, and sleep. Mice found themselves born into a world that was more crowded every day, and there were far more mice than meaningful social roles. With more and more peers to defend against, males found it difficult and stressful to defend their territory, so they abandoned the activity. Normal social discourse within the mouse community broke down, and with it the ability of mice to form social bonds. The failures and dropouts congregated in large groups in the middle of the enclosure, their listless withdrawal occasionally interrupted by spasms and waves of pointless violence. The victims of these random attacks became attackers. Left on their own in nests subject to invasion, nursing females attacked their own young. Procreation slumped, infant abandonment and mortality soared. Lone females retreated to isolated nesting boxes on penthouse levels. Other males, a group Calhoun termed “the beautiful ones,” never sought sex and never fought—they just ate, slept, and groomed, wrapped in narcissistic introspection. Elsewhere, cannibalism, pansexualism, and violence became endemic. Mouse society had collapsed.

  10. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Man that is most certainly part of the NSA dragnet says Snowden isn't a hero. Mean while other slowly becoming irrlevant has been tech leader/media whore that hasn't been part of an OS development team in nearly 30 years says YAY FOR SNOWDEN.

  11. wat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about government surveillance? 'The government has such ability to do these things. ... But the specific techniques they use become unavailable if they're discussed in detail.

    That's kind of the fucking point. The government is doing some really bad shit and we want them to stop. Or are you under the impression that repressing peoples' freedoms is a good thing, especially in a country that is supposed to pride itself in being free?

    1. Re:wat by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      He seems to be of the opinion that security is more important than freedom, even though he's living in a country that is called "the land of the free." The whole notion of it being better for numerous guilty people to get away than for one innocent person to be wrongly convicted is probably equally as disgusting to him.

      Not everyone likes freedom, especially those who haven't had to live without it, or those without principles.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    2. Re:wat by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      The government is doing some really bad shit and we want them to stop.

      You think you want them too. You like waking up ? The stuff the government is doing behind your back is helping your ability to continue to do that.

      Sometimes you have to do questionable things to combat the bad guy. They dont play by 'the rules'.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    3. Re:wat by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      The stuff the government is doing behind your back is helping your ability to continue to do that.

      Unsubstantiated claim, but also an irrelevant one. Even if true, fundamental freedoms, privacy, and the US constitution are simply more important than safety.

      Sometimes you have to do questionable things to combat the bad guy.

      If the "question things" involve violating the constitution or people's liberties, then the government *becomes* the bad guy.

      They dont play by 'the rules'.

      But governments are damn well supposed to. They're supposed to be better than the 'bad guys.' That's why we have constitutions, checks and balances, and rules to begin with.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  12. Gates is a 1%er He wants us oppressed. by Hey_Jude_Jesus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The wealthy want to keep people under the control of the government, so they can increase their wealth and power over us.

    1. Re:Gates is a 1%er He wants us oppressed. by smg5266 · · Score: 1

      No he's a 1.4285714e-10 percenter

    2. Re:Gates is a 1%er He wants us oppressed. by sgt_doom · · Score: 2

      Thank you, Micro$oft donates to American Friends of Bilderberg, Inc., according to their tax returns (and this has been online for a number of years now, so don't any of the usual douchetard trolls request the link, you know how to use Google, morons), with the directors being David Rockefeller, international war criminal, Henry Kissinger and Richard Perle.

  13. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Good thing they executed Einstein... oh wait...

    Completely irrelevant analogy. He was visiting the US when Hitler came to power and decided not to go back due to the anti-semitism. It's not like he gave away secret documents from the German High Command. Analogies need to be relevant to work.

  14. And Jobs says, "I believe I'm the real hero" by slagell · · Score: 1

    And where's my limelight?!?

  15. Gates has changed... by bigbbri · · Score: 1

    Yes, you would think an OS owner would champion privacy but he is not an OS owner any longer. Gates has learned the complexity of wealth and power and an alliance with his government to protect his interests is what he now champions. Anyone that lives in the US and isn't concerned about what the NSA has done is ignorant or helping them make in roads into our privacy. Snowden has done the right thing and I am grateful for his sacrifice!
    I want safety but this is power hungry people with not enough safeguards to protect us from them. I don't want the technology removed, I want it governed by our people!
       

    1. Re:Gates has changed... by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      ... Anyone that lives in the US and isn't concerned about what the NSA has done is ignorant or helping them make in roads into our privacy...

       

      Well, I think that anybody who was shocked and surprised by the revelations is pretty much ignorant.

      The NSA has gone from a never-mentioned no-such-agency to a recognized public entity in the past 40 years.
      The use of meta data has been the subject of court cases going back to the 70's with a SCOTUS ruling in the '80s that pretty much ruled the data as the property of the phone companies and that their customers had no expectation of privacy
      The heads of TLA's have appeared at security conferences and stated that nobody should underestimate their capabilities
      Then there was the wholesale shock that they did not identify and stop the 911 attacks, followed by the wholesale funding of data collection, analysis and sharing between agencies

      oh wow, Snowden 'discovered' the Patriot Act... and fyi, it is governed by the people, and the US hasn't fallen into a fascist death-camp filled, modernized killing fields of constant disappearances and suppression oh WOW!

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    2. Re:Gates has changed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I think that anybody who was shocked and surprised by the revelations is pretty much ignorant.

      I was neither shocked nor surprised, and yes, I would have to say that anyone who was was ignorant. However, everyone should be opposed to this disgusting abuse of power, and now is a perfect time to be discussing it.

      oh wow, Snowden 'discovered' the Patriot Act... and fyi, it is governed by the people, and the US hasn't fallen into a fascist death-camp filled, modernized killing fields of constant disappearances and suppression oh WOW!

      What are you even talking about? If you're suggesting that this power won't be abused, then I encourage you to read up on some history, and I feel that I should remind you that the US is supposed to be "the land of the free and the home of the brave." Hundreds of millions were abused and/or murdered by governments (including the US government, if you consider women, blacks, the Japanese, the Indians, and other individuals who crossed its path) throughout history. Free and/or brave people would not sacrifice freedom for security, as that would mean they're not free.

      To trust the government with this power is the same as making the ridiculous claim that the government is made up of perfect angels who would never make a mistake or abuse their power, and that that will always be true. In other words, you would have to have an unwavering and unwarranted degree of trust in this government and all future governments, which would make you a god damn idiot.

    3. Re:Gates has changed... by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      living in black and white world there?

      no government is run by people, if we look at the history over the past decades that the NSA has been around... the US does not seem to have fallen into the dystopia that you have drawn up

      sure be vigilant, sure be aware of your environment, but what you are doing is just fear inducing screeching that does nothing to help people

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    4. Re:Gates has changed... by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      living in black and white world there?

      Nope. Just reality.

      the US does not seem to have fallen into the dystopia that you have drawn up

      But many other countries all throughout history did. It's likely not a matter of "if" it's going to happen, but "when." The road to real tyranny is long.

      However, even if that *weren't* the case, violating people's freedom and privacy and the US constitution is wrong all by itself, and it needs to stop.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    5. Re:Gates has changed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're just another fucking idiot. thanks for letting the rest of us know.

    6. Re:Gates has changed... by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      AC talking smack... wowers

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    7. Re:Gates has changed... by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 1

      seeing as you are the 'fake' globaljustin I'll just take you as a troll

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
    8. Re:Gates has changed... by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      Unable to answer my actual points?

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  16. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ha, the russian haven't been an enemy of the US for a long time, Was their another safe place for him to go? The US would have indefinitely detained snowden or executed him after a great show trial.

    Snowden is a hero, he had the conviction to stand up and say no to an organisation that would take his life for simply telling the truth.

  17. Woz vs Gates by gmpassos · · Score: 0

    Apple I, alone, in a garage? Well, Woz is a Hero. Gates was only about money, Woz was about changing the world, like Snowden.

    1. Re:Woz vs Gates by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Gates has eradicated many vile diseases like Malaria, River Blindness, OS-X and Linux.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:Woz vs Gates by gmpassos · · Score: 0
      Nothing changed more the society than personal computers.

      By the way, the internet only exists because the personal computer revolution happened before the connectivity revolution. Without the personal computer, internet will be only an academic thing.

      Woz did that as a "kid" in a garage, not as the most rich man in the world. Bill Gates is a very intelligent, brilliant business man and important figure, but I'm talking about what a "kid" did, someone with only his mind and no money. Also against the industry of the time, where computers were very, very expensive things, and used by a terminal in a mainframe. The world was a much more difficult place to do this changes, to have access to knowledge and resources than today. People don't realise how difficult was to do that in the 70s. Today any kid can have a computer, can access any book, any information. In the 70s, no one had a computer! No one had easy access to all the information needed to build a personal computer, and he did this almost alone.

      Even the IBM personal computer was inspired by Woz, once Apple I showed the existence of a huge market for personal computers. Before that IBM and computers were a mainframe thing, only for companies and business men. Without the IBM PC Microsoft won't be what is today! Even MS history depends of Apple I creation.

      Woz did the Apple I almost alone and in his head! From the hardware to the software! Even to write the first code to run in this computer was a hard task, since he needed to build this by hand, in paper! An IDE, or a high level programing language, was just something not possible to use!

      In other words, now, you and me, have in our hands much more power, information and resources to build an Apple I than anyone in the 70s! A single person did that in the 70s, powered only by his dreams. This changed everything, created a new industry, made internet a viable thing, changing our society, making information something much more accessible.

      Just imagine how much wealth, innovation, and research the personal computer made viable!

      NOTE: The classical view of a Hero, is about the power that a single person have. Someone that can do something amazing by himself. Not because is easy, not because he has the power, but because is the right thing to do.

  18. Neutrality by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gates isn't exactly neutral on this matter. Companies as big as Microsoft don't happen without close friendships with the government, and those relationships get even closer when the company is let off easy in an anti-trust case. Even if he did support Snowden, he wouldn't be able to publicly state that.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Neutrality by Atmchicago · · Score: 1

      Point taken. However, if he was less self-centered and money-grubbing then yes he could. Bill Gates just took a big hit to his reputation (in my book), and if it weren't for his support of anti-malarial and other research he wouldn't have much to show for.

      --

      You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.

    2. Re:Neutrality by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA, he's a true believer who supports big government, high taxes, and mass surveillance

    3. Re:Neutrality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think microsoft cares about anything in the world other than microsoft? The gates foundation and all of that malaria stuff is fine PR. But that's all it is: PR. They're trying to buy themselves a good reputation.

      I, for one, will never forget how gates and his lot got to the position they're in in the first place. A pox on them and everything they built.

    4. Re:Neutrality by Burz · · Score: 2

      He supports high taxes for other people, not for freemarket heroes like himself. Just look at Microsoft's tax history in Washington and Nevada (they use loopholes to dodge taxes). And Gates railed against government interference when the court was considering breaking up/penalizing Microsoft for monopoly abuses.

    5. Re:Neutrality by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Show me one wealthy person who has argued for higher taxes and then hasn't turned around and found ways to not pay them. Hollywood does this all the time and so does Silicon Valley, but they get passes because they tend to support Democrats and tax hypocrisy is accepted among wealthy Democrats. It's classic limousine liberalism: do as I say and not as I do.

    6. Re:Neutrality by Schmorgluck · · Score: 1

      Warren Buffet.

      --
      There's nothing like $HOME
    7. Re:Neutrality by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Companies as big as Micro$ are the inevitable result of positive feedback in economies. The people at Harvard illustrated in Scientific American with the Beta v. VHS. both were at marginal acceptance in the market for 3 years...and then came the JVC deal with Paramount, creating monopoly distribution on VHS format. Bang! Instant takeover of the market by the technologically inferior product. This kind of 'natural monopoly' is the inevitable byproduct of self-interest by all market players. Eventually you get monopolies and inferior products locked into the market place. So it was with Micro$ v. Apple v. Unix. Some call it Kackistocracy, rule by the worst.

    8. Re:Neutrality by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      You are actually suggesting the dominance of the cheapest in the market. I won't disagree with that, but what I'm saying is that when you get as large as Microsoft, you tend to make good friends with a lot of people in the government or you don't stay as large as Microsoft.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    9. Re:Neutrality by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Really? Like when Clinton tried for 5 years to prosecute under antitrust law, only for the case to be dropped when Bush (who got 1.5 million directly from Gates and servants) took office?
      no, getting huge is a result of the monopoly practice of business and does not need government.
      Indeed, it can only happen when Government has been corrupted by Business.

    10. Re:Neutrality by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1
      One, Microsoft's monopoly is very much tied to copyright and patents, which very much do need government. Two, you seem to not be understanding that 'a lot of good friends' doesn't equate with complete control of the government, it means that they can nudge things in their behavior from time to time, which they clearly can, and the anti-trust trial is a pretty good example of that.

      no, getting huge is a result of the monopoly practice of business and does not need government.

      It usually does. Government contracts bring in a lot of money, and end up causing everyone working with anyone working with the government to be compatible with you. That's pretty much the only thing keeping fax machines alive today.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    11. Re:Neutrality by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Copyright and patent are issued by Government, true. That, however, has nothing to do with Capitalist Corruption. Absent government enforcement, NO ONE would be in the software business so the contribution to monopoly is ultimately neutral. So much for that argument.
      Anti-trust was government DOING ITS JOB, serving the public good over the private evil. It was CORRUPT government (republican in this case, though there are plenty of examples of Democrats doing likewise) and all you can argue there is that Capitalism CORRUPTS and absolute Captialism Corrupts Absolutely.

      Government contracts are issued BASED ON WHAT BUSINESS OFFERS, not the other way around.
      I give you the Osprey as an example.

    12. Re:Neutrality by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Absent government enforcement, NO ONE would be in the software business so the contribution to monopoly is ultimately neutral. So much for that argument.

      Not true at all. The business would be very differently structured, but it would still exist, and would likely be much more productive.

      Anti-trust was government DOING ITS JOB, serving the public good over the private evil. It was CORRUPT government (republican in this case, though there are plenty of examples of Democrats doing likewise) and all you can argue there is that Capitalism CORRUPTS and absolute Captialism Corrupts Absolutely.

      The Anti-trust trial was a legitimate action of the government, it failed in that regard due to corruption, but political corrupttion has nothing to do with absolute capitalism. It's cronyism that is the problem, and copyright and patent based businesses are very much antithetical to capitalism. Free markets are free as in freedom, after all.

      Government contracts are issued BASED ON WHAT BUSINESS OFFERS, not the other way around. I give you the Osprey as an example.

      I was saying that parties with closer ties tend to get a lot more government contracts regardless of the actual quality and features of their products and services.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    13. Re:Neutrality by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Explain how business "would be very differently structured" without Adam Smith's "Strong arm of Justice" to keep the rich wealthy. Go ahead, I defy you.
      Capitalism IS cronyism, or did you miss Adam Smith and even Fredrich Hyeck? Hmm?
      Capitalism can ONLY exist with the hand of Government. Imagine private property enforcement, AKA, The Wild West.
      Actually, it is the government contracts which get the closer ties. As always among Randians, you confuse cause and effect except when reality can be mis-cited to support your nonsense.

      The reality of Atlas Shrugged is that FAILURE to have government guarantees of profit led to the 'revolt', not success of those government guarantees.
      Read your own handbook and quit rattling off Glenn Beck b.s..

  19. money is your hero then by globaljustin · · Score: 1, Insightful

    eradication of malaria, the delivery of clean drinking water and readily available birth control to all as objectives

    Sociopaths can donate money to charity when it helps their tax burden.

    Bill Gates didn't himself do any work except public appearances...he's a **Billionaire** you don't get points for making charities to solve well-known problems that also promote your company's products

    Gates **should** give his money to charity...the fact that he does **the bare minimum** to charties that spread his products to new markets...and gets a **tax write off** doesn't make him not a sociopath

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:money is your hero then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but this stupidity in this if effing insane! I'm glad you hate Gates, I really am. But you just said, and I wish I was making this up, people shouldn't make charities in areas where they have expertise.

      He isn't involved directly for very good reasons. Next time there's a massive disaster, go over there, find the red cross, and say you're ready to start helping out. You know what they'll say? It'll be something along the lines of "we appreciate what you're trying to do, but giving us money would be more helpful". Why? Because you're an inexperienced fool, and you don't know what you're doing. You'll get in the way and cause more harm than good. Donate money, so they can hire people who are actually skilled at that sort of thing.

      And as for tax write off? WTF are you talking about?!?! He's promised his ENTIRE fortune to charity. If he gets a tax write off, so be it! More money goes to charity. And then beyond that, there's a charity I support that gives ceramic water filters to Africa. Should I stop supporting that because the company that makes them is making money off it? If that's you're honest opinion, I'm sorry, but I'm going to say it. You're a fucking idiot, a fool, and a moron. The people supplying goods for the betterment of anything still need to eat.

    2. Re:money is your hero then by RazorSharp · · Score: 1

      It's not just a tax write off. By keeping his money in the foundation and the investments of the foundation, its a tax shelter.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    3. Re:money is your hero then by cavreader · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates became a billionaire because he recognized early on the potential personal computers would have on the IT industry. No matter your opinion of the man he was there at the beginning of the personal computer era and as a result became obscenely wealthy without relying on marketing and advertising revenue that companies such as Google or Facebook depend on for their success. He leveraged a sketchy OS at a time when standards, both hardware and software, were virtually non-existent. Standards and IT industry related anti-trust law evolved primarily to battle Microsoft's market dominance by those who missed the boat when it came to the future of personal computers. He never claimed to be running a non-profit organization. Why do you think anyone who is successful in life is a sociopath who is required to give their money away to others for whatever reason?

    4. Re:money is your hero then by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Gates **should** give his money to charity...the fact that he does **the bare minimum** to charties

      He's pledged far more actually.

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  20. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OK, then, how about Fermi? Emigrated in 1938 to escape fascism and helped the U.S. (the "enemy") develop the atomic bomb.

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  21. Snowden is a Whistleblower by fermion · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Whistleblowers are not heroes or villains, They are meddlesome do gooders who are willing to destroy society and the status quo just to make a name for themselves. Sometimes, as with Snowden, they reveal practices that many would consider at least unethical and force change. They are seldom thanked for their contribution. What is always the case is that the people who have to change because of the revelations are annoyed. Changing means they lose money, power, or both.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:Snowden is a Whistleblower by Luthair · · Score: 2

      I'd say he's sacrificed more than most whistleblowers as he no longer has the opportunity to live a normal life.

    2. Re:Snowden is a Whistleblower by gIobaljustin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They are meddlesome do gooders who are willing to destroy society and the status quo just to make a name for themselves.

      Don't decide what other people's intentions are for them.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    3. Re:Snowden is a Whistleblower by Luthair · · Score: 1

      Meant to say... this is why the hero moniker isn't completely out of place.

  22. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What about someone fleeing from China to the US to whistleblow on genocide within the country? Would you think someone not a hero for going somewhere his story would be heard and that he wouldn't be in mortal danger?

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  23. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cheesybagel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    History is written by the victors and all that.

  24. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As far as I can tell, we don't want anything to do with the Crimea situation, but unfortunately the Ukraine signed an agreement that they would disarm their nuclear stockpile with the agreement that the west would protect their borders. And as such, we are now forced to intervene if we want to push forward any other nuclear disarmament agreements and not risking making other such agreements null and void.

    Like it or not, the world is usually more complex than just giving one group of people what they want.

  25. Re:Hang sNOwden by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

    "He puts an entire nation in jeopardy."

    Actually, he put an entire nation on the alert to very real abuses by our government.

    I've heard the NSA complain that a journalist is not qualified to determine what is and what is not too sensitive for publication. However, I would like to submit that the NSA and like institutions are not qualified to determine what is in the best interests of a democracy.

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  26. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by QuasiSteve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He's stuck in Russia, away from friends and family, probably not exactly having the best time of his life.

    Sure, it's probably a cakewalk compared to what the intelligence community would put him through and where he would end up once they're 'done' - but I think he's feeling quite a few consequences of his actions and revelations, and I tend to think those consequences are plenty unjust as they are.

    By your statement regarding facing consequences, I would think that you believe there should be no such thing as witness protection programs.

    Though I think the basic issue with the premise of the question is that it's a false dichotomy. I don't think Snowden is a hero. I also don't think he's a traitor. At least not wholly on either. Getting people to label him as one or the other is populist journalism. Of course, this is Rolling Stone.. while held in higher regard than the usual tabloids, it is what it is.

  27. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He is owning up to the consequences of his actions. His action was to leave the country, and thus he has accepted the consequence of not being tortured, dragged through a kangaroo court, and eventually killed one way or the other. If an intelligent person with some political foresight cannot be a hero to you by definition, then you might want to rethink how you define that term.

  28. Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Snowden exposed the USA for the hell hole of a dictatorship that it really is.

  29. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's so weird that he chose not to get thrown into a padded jail cell forever! Everyone knows that's the true sign of a hero anyway. /s

  30. The more time passes by mx_mx_mx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The more I admire Steve Wozniak. He is a true hero.

    --
    Linux forever
  31. Re:Snowden = Traitor by kthreadd · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm missing the point, but I still can't see how Mr. Einstein was supposedly working for the nazis with their atomic bomb, copied all their documents and gave them to the U.S. Especially since this should have happened as early as in 1933, the year Einstein moved to there.

  32. Snowden only revealed abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    To my knowledge, Snowden did not reveal how the NSA lawfully conducts its business within the mandates of the law. What Showden revealed were only the abusive and illegal activities that the NSA engages in. I'll go along with the notion that sometimes the government breaks the law for the greater good, but... spying on lawyers representing a foreign government in a legal case over shrimp imports? Spying on US-to-US emails if the routes inadvertently go overseas? Collaborating with intelligence agencies in the UK and Australia so they can spy on US domestic activities and the US spies on the UK/Australia domestic activities, then they all share everything?

    What Snowden did was show that the NSA is running amok. The agency is out of control, and that is the reason why Snowden did what he did. Not for money, not for fun, but out of a sense of patriotism and duty to his country.

    1. Re:Snowden only revealed abuse by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      I'll go along with the notion that sometimes the government breaks the law for the greater good

      Why? The government, of all things, must follow the law (which obviously includes the constitution). I don't want a government that feels it can break the law and infringe upon people's individual liberties "for the greater good."

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    2. Re:Snowden only revealed abuse by fnj · · Score: 2

      I was going to make a reply along those lines; that such are the attitudes that enable tyrannies, but on reflection I reconsidered. It is my belief that AC was driving in a different direction. I believe AC was indicating that governments sometimes have a case to make that one of their prime directives (defense of the nation) may lead them on occasion to skirt legalities. Please note, I am not saying the defense justifies the action in any particular case. I am saying what I believe AC was driving at: the NSA, and the present tyranny, has gone way beyond the point where they can even make that defense with a straight face.

      Just to clarify, the constitution is not something to be honored only when convenient. The constitution, underlaid as it is by human rights, does not say whatever the NSA or congress or the president decides it says. It does not even say what the supreme court decides it says. It says what it says. I really mean that. The supreme court is an instrumentality of the constitution, not the reverse. When the supreme court says "the constitution really means X when it says Y", or "it really means Z but it just forgot to say Z", it has gone rogue - the former, since the latter by definition cannot go rogue.

      The founders never intended that the integrity of the constitution rely on the supreme court, nor does the constitution say that it does. The only ones who can fix the tyranny uncovered by Snowden and others are the people. The people are the ones who have to fix a presidential institution and congressional institution and judicial institution gone rogue. The constitution is the people's champion and guide, but the supreme court is not a police force they can call up to fix things. Only by asserting their rights and voting with their rights uppermost in their mind can they fix things.

    3. Re:Snowden only revealed abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When it comes to national security, there are many grey areas.

      Whenever somebody says, "do you want the President to have the power to interrogate somebody who can help disarm a nuclear weapon in a major US city" my reply is always the same. "Of course, I do, but having the power to do something is different from it being legal."

      Do not conflate POWER with LEGALITY. The President absolutely has the power to use the military in contravention of American and International law. This arguably happens all of the time. But that doesn't make it legal.

      If the President does something illegal, the Congress can punish him. But most times it won't, because it's not illegal _enough_. But if society makes legal something that was once illegal, not only can Congress not punish the President, but he'll be emboldened to push the envelope further and more often.

      The fact is, the NSA can continue doing whatever they want without a warrant, and if they do it right there is little that the courts can do, and in many cases little Congress can do (beyond budgeting). And maybe they'll catch a terrorist some day. But if you make what they're doing _legal_, then they can start going after regular criminals, pursue politically motivated investigations, etc. And innocent Americans will get caught up in the net and there'll be no recourse whatsoever.

      So, yes, I want to keep some grey areas where the government can do what it deems necessary, under exigent circumstances. But if you try to devise some convoluted theory which brings those situations under the umbrella black & white law, I think you're going to end up losing far more freedoms then you bargained for, because then you'll have to compromise with idiots who have fantastical and unrealistic ideas about what threats are out there.

    4. Re:Snowden only revealed abuse by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      But if you try to devise some convoluted theory

      My theory isn't so convoluted; the government should follow the constitution and the law. The end.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  33. Why only Gates and Wozniak? by FunkyLich · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can see the different viewpoints of those who say Snowden is a hero, and the others who say he is a villain. It is also a good thing to know that either group does agree that whatever the act of Snowden is labeled, it is a flagrant violation of the Constitution. This is still without getting out of the US worldview of things. If we suddenly 'retreat' a bit more to get into this 'field of view' not only the US, but the World as an entity, the US worldview should learn how to queue.

    But my main curiosity is this: We have two computer technology worldwide-known persons, who have expressed different opinions about the Snowden Saga. I wonder, why stop at them alone and not ask any further, how would other world-wide known computer technology persons see this matter? We could ask Larry Wall, Brian Kernighan, Bjarne Stroustrup, Larry Ellison... the more the better.

    THEN, we could mine this data set and maybe we could even find that there is some mysterious connection between beeing a famous computer guy AND success of wealth AND which of these have thick trade-pipes with governmental contracts which in turn loopback towards their welth.

    This way we would have way more accurate conclusions and much more credible ones. And with a much lower margin of error as the sampling set would be richer, supposing that the sampling set would not be cherry-picked.

    1. Re:Why only Gates and Wozniak? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "flagrant violation of the Constitution" Really? That is what Snowden exposed. But let's not be too US centric so toss in flagrant violations of the Geneva convention, war crimes, crimes against humanity, torture, etc. etc. etc.

  34. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by gIobaljustin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sure, it's probably a cakewalk compared to what the intelligence community would put him through and where he would end up once they're 'done' - but I think he's feeling quite a few consequences of his actions and revelations, and I tend to think those consequences are plenty unjust as they are.

    I think people are wrong in saying that you have to be suicidal, a martyr, or masochistic to be a hero.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  35. The full sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The summary didn't include the full sentence by Gates. Just for completeness, he said: "I think he broke the law, so I certainly wouldn't characterize him as a hero."

    1. Re:The full sentence by LVSlushdat · · Score: 2

      Yes, Snowden broke the "law", a "law" that ANYone with half a brain could see violated the Constitution, DESPITE what the paid-off Congress and Judiciary say.. He stood up for the Constitution, and is a hero in my book, like many of the heroes from the first American Revolution.. I say "first revolution" because I'm damn sure we're well into the 2nd Revolution... I fear this one is gonna be MUCH bloodier than the first...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    2. Re:The full sentence by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The summary didn't include the full sentence by Gates. Just for completeness, he said: "I think he broke the law, so I certainly wouldn't characterize him as a hero."

      I wonder if he applies that line of thinking to other heroes.

      Rosa Parks - broke the law
      Mahatma Gandi - broke the law
      Martin Luther King - broke the law
      Paul Revere ...
      John Hancock ...
      Oscar Schindler ...

      Underground Railroad...
      French Resistance...

    3. Re:The full sentence by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      The people hiding Jews in Nazi Germany also broke the law. I guess that would also exclude them from being heroes in Bill Gates' opinion?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:The full sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What second revolution? For the most part, the people are just bending over, cheeks spread, allowing whoever to do whatever they like to them.

    5. Re:The full sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Martin Luther (the original)
      Coppernicus
      Arius

    6. Re:The full sentence by kaoshin · · Score: 1
    7. Re:The full sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and software pirates.

    8. Re:The full sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of these people you mentioned defected to Russia. Snowden did.

    9. Re:The full sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he fled to Russia. There's a crucial difference. Not that you give a shit about that, shill.

    10. Re:The full sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention Alan Turing.

  36. Difference between rights and priveliges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time to get rid of this idea of rights .Everybody expects their rights but forgets to take responsibility.You have privileges and sometimes you have to pay for these privileges as soldiers fought in the first and second world wars and died for the idea of democracy which we have pissed away in all civilized countries.Letting political correctness take it's place,letting religion make demands without holding it to it's responsibility of religious tolerance and the most important responsibility to your freedom is standing up for your freedom when you see your country pissing on your privileges ,not rights,even if it makes you unpopular

  37. Re:Snowden = Traitor by RazorSharp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but unfortunately the Ukraine signed an agreement that they would disarm their nuclear stockpile with the agreement that the west would protect their borders.

    Treaties like that caused WWI.

    --
    "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
  38. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Heroes do not run and take refuge with our enemies. Snowden is a traitor and should be executed.

    The Founding Fathers were all traitors/terrorists to their motherland.
    No one gave himself up to the Crown just to express their dissent about how the colonies were being governed.

  39. Gates is a traitor to the Constitution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    His philanthropy had me thinking for a while that maybe he was okay.

    Now? Now I'm sure he's a scuzbucket.

  40. The opinion of a convicted monopolist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... matters?

  41. Re:Snowden = Traitor by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Informative

    > last I checked we were sticking our noses into Crimea situation

    You mean the situation where we are a party to a treaty that says that Ukraine keeps it's borders intact in return for NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT?

    You mean THAT situation?

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  42. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    History is written by the victors and all that.

    doesn't the same apply to Snowden? History/victors; media/government.

    If you're going to start saying "yea, but that might be a lie," then it get a whole lot harder to say anything about anything. Including Snowden.

  43. Trolling Sockpuppetry 100% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  44. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

    Good thing they executed Einstein... oh wait...

    The Germans would have if they could have. Maybe you've heard about their plan to exterminate the Jews? I would think that genocide trumps loyalty to a state.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  45. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I seem to recall Russia calling our Homeland protectors and warning us about a particular guy. they didn't have to bother to do that, and it's an extraordinary thing that they did. Our Protectors of Der Fatherland ignored the warning. being busy courting punks and filling their heads with violent thoughts and then fake weapons so they could make headlines. And so the Boston Marathon bombings happened. So, who is the enemy of We the People?

    Answer: The Government.

  46. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Russia failing to honor its part of the treaty may cause WW III.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  47. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by RazorSharp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sticking around hasn't helped Manning any.

    I think you're looking at "consequences" as a very black and white thing. Snowden is facing the consequences for his actions -- he's exiled from his country and may never be able to return. He's already sacrificed so much to do the right thing. Sticking around to be persecuted wouldn't help out any. He took the risk of being tortured, imprisoned, and even executed. Isn't that enough? That's the most we ask of our soldiers and then we declare them heroes -- we ask that they risk their lives. We ask that they risk sacrifice, not that they do sacrifice. Kamikaze pilots and suicide bombers have no place in the defense of our country. Why should the whistleblower be so self-sacrificial? Why is he not a hero for risking his life when that's the standard of valor we place upon ourselves?

    --
    "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
  48. Woz is absolutely right... by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

    Always knew there was something about the Woz I really admired...

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  49. Or he's both by J'raxis · · Score: 0

    "Traitor" is a legal term. "Hero" is a value judgment. Snowden is probably both. The government he turned against, having long turned against their own people, deserved it.

    1. Re:Or he's both by vux984 · · Score: 1

      "Traitor" is both a legal term AND a value judgement.

      The people calling Snowden "traitor" are not simply saying so in a 'technical legal sense', they wish to invoke the emotional sense and lead us to imagine him as someone who has betrayed us.

  50. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    OK, then, how about Fermi? Emigrated in 1938 to escape fascism and helped the U.S. (the "enemy") develop the atomic bomb.

    Italy made itself his enemy with its racial laws, so his family left to become citizens in another country, the US.

    Italy was the enemy, fascism was the enemy.

    Are you suggesting that Snowden changed his loyalty to Russia? That would fit.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  51. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    History is written by the victors and all that.

    Yes, I guess it would be going too far to condemn Italian and German fascism as an enemy of mankind.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  52. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    A hero, in my view, isn't somebody who runs away from a fight they don't think they can win.... if it was important enough to start, then it's important enough to finish. Like I said above... it's probably not a popular sentiment.

    Torturing Snowden or otherwise subjecting him to unjustified treatment in the USA wouldn't change anything that's already happened, and because particularly controversial treatment, such as violating any of his constitutional or inalienable rights, would not dare ever become public knowledge (the public outcry would be enormous if it were, and probably reach all the way to the whitehouse), it wouldn't practically serve to deter other people from doing the same thing in the future. In fact, regardless of what happened, it might even do exactly the opposite.

  53. not prison by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    Where does Snowden's redemption lie?

    hmm idk busygary...I've thought about this & i hope he's in a position where he can exchange information for some kind of reduction of charges to misdemeanors here in the USA...does the federal government even have misdemeanors? like some kind of "misuse of government property" and get a suspended sentence & the crime is gone in 5 years kind of thing. That's what I'd hope could happen.

    Can he attempt to buy his reputation like Gates or Carnegie?

    b/c of how I view this, he's really fighting for his personal freedom right now

    Are public events like SXSW that currency that he will spend on it?

    i think this was a PR/propaganda tactic (a new, evil but not illegal combination of the two: PRpoganda)...basically whoever is manipulating him scheduled the SXSW thing b/c they thought it would help somenow...idk...anything to get him free & not in prison

    I really don't want him in prison *unless he's done stuff we dont know* of course...too many potentially good people in prison

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  54. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

    Geez.. I wish I hadn't already posted.. I'd mod you UP UP UP.. I STRONGLY agree with your eloquent statement on "consequences"... Snowden has sacrificed his normal life, where he will likely be permanently exiled to whatEVER country feels the cojones to stand up to what has become the American war-machine... hint: VERY few countries have these cojones... Russia being one of the very few.. If he'd stayed in the US, he'd more than likely be dead now... As much as I love America, having served in the Army in the 70s, I'm terrified of its government, which has become totally evil in the last 20 years or so..

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  55. not cool by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    look, #3526197...this is #574257)...i know that users like yourself are part of being on the internet...i don't like that you copied my user profile stuff & I wish you'd close it down...but i mean...this is the internet...

    what i think crosses the line is when you **reply to the person you're imitating**

    let's not shit where we eat, ok?

    and really...could you just change up your sig at least? why would you want to appear to be me anyways???

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:not cool by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      wow, I didn't even realize folks do this... for what purpose?

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    2. Re:not cool by globaIjustin. · · Score: 1

      please ignore the troll pretending to be me

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    3. Re:not cool by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      It's a strange thing, he did the same thing to me, presumably others as well. Not sure what attaches him to us in particular other than the fact that our names have two lowercase L's in them, which is what he takes advantage of to create his spoofed profiles.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  56. Apple by tom229 · · Score: 1

    Given this statement, it must just kill Woz to see what's happened to Apple.

    --
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  57. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by fnj · · Score: 1, Insightful

    An interesting intellectual point. I take it you think "owning up" to asserting your rights and turning yourself in to a tyrant's forces is more somehow more heroic than doing your level best to expose and undermine the tyrant. That may be true by the definition of "hero", but I believe value to good is more important than pointless self sacrifice.

    I would categorically disagree in the strongest possible terms - i.e., vehemently - with your premise that "if one isn't prepared to face whatever the consequences are for the choices that they make, then they probably shouldn't be doing that in the first place". Yes, there is a need for heroes, but asserting one's rights - the rights of the people - should not require every individual to be a hero.

    Actually Snowden took a big risk on behalf of championing the rights of the people: the risk that he would be persecuted by a tyranny for the actions he took. Can you say the same? I am not willing to make the claim on my own behalf, so I have a damn high threshold for calling those who stick their necks out for me and my brothers "unheroic".

  58. Hero -or- Not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HERO: Blew the wistle on the biggest mass constitutional rights violation in history!
    NOT A HERO: Gave our enemies, ya know, the British, Germany the American people, a hint at the capabilities of our spy agency, so not a hero, wait what?

  59. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    If he'd stayed in the US, he'd more than likely be dead now

    Like killing him would somehow undo what he had done? If they didn't make it public, his death wouldn't deter anyone from doing something similar, and if they *DID*, the martyr effect would probably do the exact opposite.

  60. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    I would categorically disagree in the strongest possible terms - i.e., vehemently - with your premise that "if one isn't prepared to face whatever the consequences are for the choices that they make, then they probably shouldn't be doing that in the first place". Yes, there is a need for heroes, but asserting one's rights - the rights of the people - should not require every individual to be a hero.

    You are absolutely right about this.... it does not require that every individual be a hero. And in my view, Snowden is not one. What he did was good, yes...Important, even. But heroic? Sure, he still had to make a sacrifice, but the concept of living to fight another day by however wisely choosing to run away doesn't fit that word, in my book.

  61. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right. So Margarat Sanger, to pick one example of many, isn't a hero because she fled the country to avoid legal ramifications so that she would continue to be in a position in which she was able to make a positive change in the world. She came back and faced them when she thought things had changed enough that that would make a strong statement.

    Being heroic isn't about some bullshit archaic views regarding what's "brave" and what's not, it's about being willing to stand up to make change. I'm not arguing whether or not Snowden is a hero because I don't know enough about what happened, but fleeing definitely doesn't exclude him from being a hero. It's not as if he hasn't made a sacrifice in all of this.

  62. Re:Snowden = Traitor by SpankiMonki · · Score: 2

    You mean the situation where we are a party to a treaty that says that Ukraine keeps it's borders intact in return for NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT?

    You mean THAT situation?

    First, the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances isn't a treaty under US law. Second, the BMSA doesn't require the US to do anything other than "seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine" if Ukraine is the "victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used."

    As the US is currently consulting with the UN and other nations on possible responses to the Russian actions in Crimea, the US has more than met it's obligations to Ukraine in THIS situation.

  63. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 0, Troll

    Because "fleeing" is not heroic, no matter how practical or prudent the choice may be.

    He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day may be true, but it's not how heroes are made.

    Snowden doesn't have to be a hero to make what he did important.

    But heroes don't run.

  64. Gates is a moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Gates thinks that Snowden is anything but a hero, then he's fucking dumber than Steve Jobs was (and that's saying something).
    Jobs was nothing but a thief from beginning to end, stealing kid's kidney so they could buy some piece of shit iDumb product. Gates stole everything that made up his company as well. They both got rich of the blood, sweat and lives of those that actually created / developed things of value, only to see them stolen by these geek-thieves that we've idolized and iconified in our twisted society.

  65. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Artifakt · · Score: 2

    I suspect one of the points you are missing is that Germany certainly did call Einstein a traitor, and certainly had laid the groundwork for executing him specifically for treason and not just as part of the final solution if they had captured him after a successful conclusion to their war.. Another one is that the United States has a very limited definition of treason, which is actually spelled out in the constitution.

    Article 3 - The Judicial Branch
    Section 3 - Treason

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

    The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

                By that definition, neither Einstein nor Snowden would even possibly count as a traitor. The arguement you're making comes off as everyone should use some other definition of traitor that is broader than in the US Constitution, but somehow doesn't allow the sort of abuses a nation such as Nazi Germany would commit with such a legal basis, so that Snowden might count while Einstein, Fermi, et. al. couldn't possibly. .Unless you care to formally offer such a definition, and see what happens when a few hundered Slashdotters try to pick it apart and you find it isn't anything like any of either the precise LEGAL, the proper ETHICAL or the GENERALLY ACCEPTED definitions of treason, the side you're supporting boils down to saying "I know it when I see it, and everybody else needs to just shut up and let me decide". You can guess how well that will be received playing to this crowd.
              The point is, we have two entities who appear to fall in the same domain (non-treasonous things). Someone created an analogy that correctly asserts these two entities do in fact belong in the same domain. Then someone else declared, by apparent fiat, that the analogy was irrelevant. Not flawed, not violating some principle of logic, but simply irrelevant. Every analogy is imperfect. All are flawed to some extent, and matter only because they can still be useful to get to a correct conclusion despite the flaws. This analogy may have more flaws than a great many, (In fact, I think analogies of this sort seldom lead to the correct conclusion, and generally shed more heat than light on their subjects) but still, in this case, it has somehow led to the correct conclusion, therefore it simply cannot be irrelevant. Declaring it irrelevant is thus not a counterargument, but an attempt to suppress speech. You probably don't want to endorse the AC doing that, instead of rationally addressing the flaws specifially and not just dismissing the whole.
             

    --
    Who is John Cabal?
  66. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    First of all, you don't have to be a hero to do something extremely important or valuable, or even worthy of being admired by others.

    But no matter how prudent or practical running away might be, it isn't heroic.

  67. Re:Snowden = Traitor by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    They (indirectly) executed Alan Turing, though.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  68. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1

    Or von Braun. SS officer, stole a bunch of his own files and then told the allies where they were.

  69. Let's cut the crap already by sgt_doom · · Score: 0

    Billy Gates is descended from horse-rustling shysters --- name me one member of his family who has ever served in the US military?

    You can't!

    He's still doing horse-rustling but on a different order, and Gates is the most anti-american swine possible, offshoring as many jobs as possible, while avoiding taxes.

    1. Re:Let's cut the crap already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You spend too much of your life devoted to hating a person. Step the hell back for a minute and look at yourself.

    2. Re:Let's cut the crap already by graphius · · Score: 1

      What does serving in the US military have to do with anything?

  70. Great comment by sgt_doom · · Score: 2

    I keep forgetting the proper term is "evil twisted fund" --- thanx

  71. How many Gates ancestors. . . . by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    . . .have run away from their obligation to serve in the US military --- a whole effing boatload, so shut your yap, moron!

  72. Who cares? by matthewv789 · · Score: 0

    Why does anyone think the opinion of a tasteless money-grubbing opportunist matters on this topic?

  73. Gates and Woz are bad privacy references by alispguru · · Score: 2

    Both of them can choose exactly how much privacy they want, because they're both rich. Gates is maybe three orders of magnitude richer than Woz, but both of them are at least three orders of magnitude away from the American median income ($45K or so).

    Also, neither of them can just go out in public in the US without being recognized.

    That's the problem with the privacy "discussions" in the US - most of the people who can actually change things are members of a minority who gave up big swaths of their privacy, voluntarily, as an entrance requirement for their profession. They can say "privacy is an illusion - get over it" with a straight face, because they haven't had any themselves for decades.

    They may be over it, but I'm not, and it pisses me off that they get to choose my privacy level.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
    1. Re:Gates and Woz are bad privacy references by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Both of them can choose exactly how much privacy they want, because they're both rich.

      I'm not sure what you mean here......you don't think Gates would be happier if people weren't flying helicopters by to see what his house looks like?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  74. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    History is written by the victors and all that.

    Yes, I guess it would be going too far to condemn Italian and German fascism as an enemy of mankind.

    What about American fascism? Or is only "an enemy of mankind" when *they* do it? Or are you indirectly agreeing with the GP, that the victors' fascisms are whitewashed by their history books.

    Oh, and, yea, when I say fascism I mean fascism. You know, the process by which government effectively is one with corporations. It happens in the US, UK, France, etc. But at least in France everyone gets healthcare.

  75. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look up what Hitler said about Einstein's "Jewish science."

  76. Bill Gates = PURE EVIL. You need more proof? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) the 'inBloom' database- named for how Victorian paedophiles referred to their child victims ("in bloom and ripe for the picking"). Bill "MSNBC" Gates partnered with Rupert "Fox News" Murdoch to create the most disturbing FULL SURVEILLANCE in US History. This database gathers every possible piece of information (including intimate medical details of sexual development) about every single child in the USA. Gates personally pays individual States to fight court battles against parents - so, for instance, in the State of New York, the highest court has ruled that it is ILLEGAL for any parent of that State to attempt to keep their children off the 'inBloom' database. Gates also offers bounties to individual teachers who are willing to use information overheard in the classroom and in parent meetings to 'enhance' the records on individual pupils.

    2) Common Core. This project exploits state-of-the-art psychological research into the effectiveness of various teaching methods to MANDATE methods known to collapse scores and confidence in a given subject by the majority of a group that falls in the middle of the ability range. The two 'tail' groups (best and least able) see their scores almost unchanged, allowing Gates' propagandists to claim any failure by pupils in the majority 'middle' cannot be the fault of the Common Core teaching methods. The need to 'dumb down' the vast majority of the population is a constant theme in the eugenic philosophies of the organisations Gates funds and promotes. You don't "need" an educated population when "slave" States like China do all the heavy lifting, is the "message".

    3) The NSA spy platform- Microsoft's Xbox One. Bill Gates personally had Microsoft spend billions of dollars developing the military grade 'time-of-flight' sensor in the Kinect 2 sensor block provided with every console. A side-effect of this is that the Xbox One, while vastly less powerful than the competing PS4 (as a gaming box), is significantly more expensive. Anyway, the sensor actually measures the speed of light at each pixel, in an attempt to be a world class depth camera. Depth information is used for things like identifying sexual activity, and locating the head for perfect facial photographs.

    The Kinect 2 (which shares NOTHING with the stone-age technology if the original Kinect) is a literal NSA wet-dream. Every Orwellian blue-sky fantasy of the most depraved NSA agent is brought to life by Bill Gates. HD cameras that see in the dark. Microphone arrays that can usually hear conversations in adjoining rooms. Movement pattern recognition for triggered video recording of sex. All instantly controllable from remote NSA servers with ZERO possibility of user detection (the console is constantly uploading encrypted data, justified by MS as 'quality control', to create plausible deniability).

    .

  77. Other TLA agencies by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

    Gates seems to be forgetting that other Three Letter Acronym agencies were already standing in line to access the "metadata" and some were already actively using it, with the caution that the source could never be disclosed. And once the TLAs had their fill, the FLAs are next (Four Letter... as in MPAA or RIAA).

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
  78. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 0

    Actually, his running to China and Russia is not an issue. We have provided safe haven for others from other nations without them telling us all their secrets.
    The problem is that Snowden is a hero by speaking about the spying on Americans, but then he is a traitor for speaking of what we LEGITIMATELY do with spying on other nations.
    Now, he has destroyed a lot of our capabilities to know what terrrorists, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc are doing. In fact, I would not be the least bit surprised if all of this outing of our capabilities is what is leading to Putin to go after Ukraine ( that and the fact that there is enough oil to provide Ukraine and the rest of Europe independence from Russia).

    At this time if were to come back to the west, I say pin a medal on his chest and then allow 20 ppl to shoot him in the head.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  79. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    While it is irrelevant, Germany did want to.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  80. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All soldiers that survive eventually walk away from war. Do you propose that veterans cannot be heroic?

  81. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russia failing to honor its part of the treaty may cause WW III.

    Failure to have an NSA may cause us to lose WW III.

  82. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    Hmmm.
    Einstein was doing nothing with Germany's military projects before he came to the US, nor did he seek to steal any state secrets to bring here. Yes, Einstein was declared a traitor by Germany, but only later on, and not for spying and stealing.

    Snowden has openly stated to others that he stole these documents. He has said exactly how he did it. And multiple other witnesses who were part of this are backing up his story ("I gave my credentials to snowden", etc).

    Sorry, but in any nation in the world, Snowden would be a traitor, while Einstein would only be a traitor by those that say that all ex-pats with value are traitors (like china still does, and USSR used to do).

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  83. Well. Gates is a dick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing further need be said.

  84. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 0

    First, Femi was part of the fascist party. He left Italy to escape the anti-jew laws that was used against his assistants, and was looking at his wife and kids.
    Secondly, everything that he had done up to that time, had been in the open. Germany had not even started work on nukes until late in 39, and they used Femi's work just as much as the American's did.

    There is ZERO similarities here. After all, did America pass laws that prosecuted either Snowden or his family? Nope.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  85. Obligatory Franklin quote by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 2

    "Rolling Stone retorts that privacy can be an issue: 'We want safety, but we also want privacy,' says the journalist. Bill Gates tells his main priority focuses on stopping the bad guys: 'Let's say you knew nothing was going on. How would you feel? I mean, seriously. I would be very worried. Technology arms the bad guys with orders of magnitude more [power]. Not just bad guys. Crazy guys."

    “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
    -Benjamin Franklin

    I wish I could just beat that into the head of the majority of people. We as a people should be firmly on the side of privacy over safety, it should not even be a question. Many do not see the big picture, but rather focused on a phantom enemy and see Snowden as betraying us against that enemy. Snowden is a true patriot, and indeed a hero, simply in the sense that he EXPOSED OUR PRIVACY BEING USURPED BY OUR OWN GOV'T. I'm pretty young (30 this year) but I'd imagine there was a time when the end of the last sentence would've incensed the MAJORITY of Americans, not just the one's paying attention. We must not sacrifice our freedom (in the form of privacy in this case) for safety. We cannot. And that is more important than some false sense of them doing this for our own good to "catch the bad guys". Secret courts, indefinite detention, etc. should NOT be happening in the land of the free. People wake the fuck up. /rant

    As for Gates, obviously he would not be a fan of Snowden...it's people like him who pull the strings of our gov't anyways. I wish I could say I was surprised.

  86. No Surprises by StormReaver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It doesn't surprise me that Bill Gates would identify with the megomaniacal dictatorship mentality that permeates our Federal Government. He was the megomanical dictator of a multinational corporation for so many years, that he can't understand an organization working in any other manner.

  87. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    LOL; Right now, Large businesses and foreign gov. are buying America's gov. That is true. BUT, TRUE fascism is where the gov. controls businesses. By far, the best example of that is NOT the west, but China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and somewhat socialist nations in Europe.

    BUT, America got businesses to go along with this by offering up contracts (Verizon, ATT and Qwest very much got contracts for allowing a lot more ).

    But declaring America as a whole to be fascists is a joke. I will say that the republican party fits the very definition, but they do not control everything.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  88. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    True, but apparently, we have not honored our part either. We told Gorby that we would NOT be going after old warsaw pact nations, but we have.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  89. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    There's a pretty big difference between walking away from a fight that is already done and over with, and running away from a fight you can't or you do not think you can ever win. Snowden did the latter... and however wise that choice might have been (I don't fault him for it for a second), it definitely was not cut from the same cloth as what I would call a hero.

  90. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by dwillden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No he would not likely be dead by now. Had he stayed here, he would have been prosecuted for the original revelations, claimed and won whistle-blower status and been acquitted or pardoned. And that would have been the end of it. When he made his original revelations of the surveillance program he was a hero. That needed to be revealed, and his choosing to flee to another country to make the revelation is semi-understandable though less than the honorable act of standing by your actions when you reveal government wrong doing.

    But!

    Because he fled the country, and has to keep his value to his current hosts in order to retain his guest status, he's kept revealing stuff that has gone far beyond whistle-blower status. We the people did need to know that our government was collecting our data, and most likely in violation of the Constitution (gotta leave the final decision to the courts but I think it was illegal). But we did not have any need to know about our collection efforts directed at foreign leaders, even if they are allies. It's the Intelligence game, everybody collects on everybody, allies and enemies both. A political and Military Ally is still an economic competitor, and politically we don't agree on everything so even in that realm is there cause for intelligence collection. Neither did we need any knowledge of the UK surveillance program nor the Aussie program. Nor anything else he's released. And it was all those revelations that pushed him from Hero Whistle-blower to Traitor.

    Had he stayed and faced the music he likely would have been acquitted by now as a Whistle-blower. We would still have had the national discussion about the surveillance program and even were he to be convicted he would be considered a Hero for protecting the Constitution. And had he stayed he likely would not have had the opportunity to dip into treason by revealing the stuff that did not concern us as constitutional violations.

    We do owe him a debt of gratitude, but he ruined that by revealing classified information that did not concern violations of our constitutional rights and damaged our valid intelligence collection efforts. He has tarnished his Hero status and now stands as a traitor.

    --
    I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
  91. Please don't feed the trolls. by mmell · · Score: 1

    They become dependent upon feedings and lose their ability to survive in the wild. Ultimately, they become violent when not fed the attention the poor widdle things crave.

    1. Re:Please don't feed the trolls. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      BACK ON TOPIC?

      Bill Gates is a traitor to Humanity.

      Woz is a flawed HERO of Humanity.

      You doubt the humanity angle? Which of the two would you choose to be marooned with, on a small island for 20 years - hoping to cooperate and survive?

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
  92. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    I will say that the republican party fits the very definition ...

    Not really, no.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  93. Nope. by mmell · · Score: 1
    Either Melinda thinks Bill's hot, or Melinda thinks Bill's money is hot. If it's the former, okay.

    I suspect it's the latter, and I note that Melinda isn't giving so much away that her lifestyle is being impacted.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of philanthropy - but giving away something you don't even have a use for is different from sacrificing to help others.

  94. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

    That's an extremely narrow perspective on heroism, and it would likely exclude the winners of many prestigious military medals. Your definition of hero would exclude even Robin Hood, practically an archetypal hero. You are basically speaking of a strict militaristic honor code, which is not something the general public applies to heroes.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  95. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's just "Ukraine", not "The Ukraine".

  96. Rolling Stones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happened to the article Michael Hastings was writing before his death? Rolling Stones was going to publish it, but never did.

  97. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Megol · · Score: 1
    The idea that Fascism is government control of business can only come from a total disregard of reality. Simply stated Fascism claim that the state is the _one_ community and that actions within the state (including businesses) should only benefit that community as directed by the leader. That didn't mean that the state had total control.

    The word you should be using is totalitarian regime - this is the name of the idea that the state is directed towards one goal. This isn't something unique with Fascism rather the reverse - in some form this have been promoted by most ideologies including neo-Libertarians (not that they admit it but...).

    Also the idea that a government would have to direct businesses and other aspects of the life within a state to it to be totalitarian is wrong - the ideal is of course that the people themselves strives towards the goals of the state and the government only stepping in when people goes against those goals. A variant of the night watchman idea.

    And lastly I note that the Fascistic states that have existed didn't in practice have more control of their businesses than most other state systems in a similar situation. But Totalitarian states have and do exist separated from the political ideologies.

  98. What a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Newsflash: unabashed fascist and pro-government hack thinks Snowden is a traitor.

  99. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Megol · · Score: 2
    The word you should use is not hero - martyr fits your idea better.

    He did sacrifice a lot to release this information. That he choose not to ritually sacrifice himself to satisfy your blood lust doesn't change that fact.

  100. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Informative

    OPERATION PAPERCLIP

    "To circumvent President Truman's anti-Nazi order and the Allied Potsdam and Yalta agreements, the JIOA worked independently to create false employment and political biographies for the scientists. The JIOA also expunged from the public record the scientists' Nazi Party memberships and régime affiliations. Once "bleached" of their Nazism, the scientists were granted security clearances by the U.S. government to work in the United States. Paperclip, the project's operational name, derived from the paperclips used to attach the scientists' new political personae to their "US Government Scientist" JIOA personnel files."

    * Otto Ambros was a Third Reich chemist who served as director of the German corporation that produced the gas used in the death camps. He was tried at Nuremberg, found guilty of mass murder, and sentenced to eight years. While he was serving time in prison, Operation Paperclip officials arranged for his sentence to be commuted. In 1951, Ambros was hired to work at a clandestine facility north of Frankfurt called Camp King. His work, sanctioned by the Defense Department, ultimately involved the testing of sarin toxins on American soldiers without their knowledge.

    * Arthur Rudolph was a Nazi rocket scientist who played a key role in the V-2 rocket program. One of Operation Paperclip's earliest hires, Rudolph, in the U.S., worked his way up through the ranks of NASA to become project director of the Saturn V rocket program. Ultimately, Rudolph was led to confess to war crimes, but his work is all over the U.S. aeronautics technology.

    * Kurt Blome, a virologist, pioneered Hitler's secret germ warfare program. Specializing in plague research, Blome conducted human tests on concentration camp prisoners and was a defendant at the Nuremberg Doctors' Trial. Acquitted, Blome was instrumental in the U.S. germ warfare program.

    * Kurt Debus was a V-weapons engineer who oversaw mobile rocket launches at Peenemunde. An ardent Nazi, he wore the SS uniform to work and after Paperclip, became the first director of NASA's JFK Space Center in Florida.

    * Hubertus Strughold was in charge of the aviation research in the Reich Ministry and despite his war crimes was hired by the Americans to eventually become America's father of Space Medicine.

    The notorious CIA interrogation techniques and other mind-control programs and projects had their beginnings in a camp near Franfurt called Camp King. It was there where Operation Bluebird experiments involving LSD and other drugs started with Paperclip personnel and research.

    The US Army's herbicidal warfare program during the Vietnam War, in which 11.4 million gallons of Agent Orange were sprayed over more than 24 percent of South Vietnam was the brainchild of Fritz Hoffmann, another Nazi war criminal.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  101. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Russia has a SOF agreement with Ukraine as a part of the Sevastapol lease agreement - good well past a 2017 renewal. It allows for 35,000 Russian Troops in Crimea. The Russians are legally in Crimea under the same kind of frameworks that legally allow US troops in Bhagram, Afghanistan.

    The Crimean referendum is being conducted under the precedent most recently, of Kosovo and South Sudan.

    Good for the goose? Good for the gander.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  102. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are no terrorists. They are as fictional - in EVERY sense, as the "terrorists" in the movie "Brazil".

    But?

    Edward Snowden is definitely a "Harry Tuttle".

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  103. Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gates' ideals are about being successful grabbing all you can (which does not mean that you cannot choose to pass stuff on to charities, but even then you game charities involving computers etc by getting people hooked on your own stuff). Snowden did not profit by his actions.

    If Gates could respect that, he would not be where he is today. A person whom Gates cannot respect he cannot in good conscience call a hero.

    Woz has shown other priorities in his life. That does not mean that he's averse to success, but it's more a reward than a goal in itself for him. So he's open to more personal metrics than Gates.

    Personally, I don't envy Gates. Ok, I don't envy Woz either, but at least I don't think "what a poor guy".

  104. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Megol · · Score: 1

    Geez.. I wish I hadn't already posted.. I'd mod you UP UP UP.. I STRONGLY agree with your eloquent statement on "consequences"... Snowden has sacrificed his normal life, where he will likely be permanently exiled to whatEVER country feels the cojones to stand up to what has become the American war-machine... hint: VERY few countries have these cojones... Russia being one of the very few.. If he'd stayed in the US, he'd more than likely be dead now... As much as I love America, having served in the Army in the 70s, I'm terrified of its government, which has become totally evil in the last 20 years or so..

    Dead? Not unless it was done in secret.

    What he probably could have looked forward towards was sitting in a federal super max cell locked in for life, 23 hours per day with no communication allowed.

    I'd think* anyone not an introvert loon would prefer death before that. Not an option though.

    (* but given what people can tolerate while keeping their will to live this may be very wrong)

  105. Re:Snowden = Traitor by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

    snowden took a huge risk and endured a massive disruption to his personal life in order to show the NSA/surveillance state for what it is. he did this explicitly to help the people of the US -- those are the actions of a hero. He did the exact polar god damn opposite of committing treason against the US.

  106. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [...] the United States has a very limited definition of treason, which is actually spelled out in the constitution.

    Article 3 - The Judicial Branch
    Section 3 - Treason

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

                By that definition, neither Einstein nor Snowden would even possibly count as a traitor.

    Huh? There are more than two witnesses to Snowden having passed on internal files and he would likely confess to it as well. The whole intelligence community is singing the "aiding the enemy" song. It's a lot of bullshit and hogwash in my opinion but that does not preclude some U.S. judge swallowing it.

    It was good enough for the prosecution to throw at Manning, and Manning was way less specific in her actions and statements. Snowden is very specifically the enemy of what the intelligence apparatus has come to be, and the U.S. government very much aligns itself with it. So a treason charge is not outside of sanity enough to be sure that it won't stick here, either.

  107. What's wrong Bill, NSA money drying up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Still looking out for MicroSofts best interest at the detriment of everybody.

  108. Re:Snowden = Traitor by S.O.B. · · Score: 1

    I think Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc. already knew or suspected the capabilities that Snowden has exposed. In fact, I'm sure they also have or are working on those very same capabilities. The only difference is that the public (i.e. the ones being tracked) now know as well.

    And exposing those capabilities is not why Putin is going into Crimea. Putin is going in to Crimea to prevent what he sees as a shift in the Ukraine away from Russia and towards Europe putting Russia at a perceived disadvantage politically, militarily and more imporatntly economically. Well, that and he's batsh*t crazy.

    --
    Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
  109. Heh... by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

    Microsoft... Just like the NSA has management issues...

  110. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL; Right now, Large businesses and foreign gov. are buying America's gov. That is true. BUT, TRUE fascism is where the gov. controls businesses. By far, the best example of that is NOT the west, but China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and somewhat socialist nations in Europe.

    Uh, no. Not only do you fall afoul of "no true scotsman", but that's Socialism not Fascism. The US is in a power struggle between Socialism and Fascism but generally Fascism wins out. Overall, Fascism is "evil" because Socialism at worst subjugates the people of a nation (one government in one nation has one nation of interest) but Fascism at worst subjugates the people of other nations (multi-national conglomerates hosted in one nation offer "sweet" jobs for one nation while resource raping as many other nations as they can). Hence the point of why Fascism is "an enemy of mankind" and Socialism is "an enemy of a nation".

    BUT, America got businesses to go along with this by offering up contracts (Verizon, ATT and Qwest very much got contracts for allowing a lot more ).

    Exactly. Businesses want to be paid to comply with government regulations. And government regulations are happy to pay businesses to comply with whatever rules without regard for the Constitution under some guise that paying for a service somehow makes it legal. In the end, it's all directed to better control the people on both ends, either by force of law and enforcement or by power in money. Lobbying, btw, is the process of causing government to offer contracts to "go along with" the regulation of the day. It's called rent-seeking.

    But declaring America as a whole to be fascists is a joke. I will say that the republican party fits the very definition, but they do not control everything.

    Beyond the point that I never stated "as a whole", your logic precludes there being German fascism because there existed a German resistance. Or that most German citizens may have made token gestures to fit the Nazi Party (just like there's Republican/Democrat Party support), but most simultaneously didn't particularly intentionally participate in the fascism. Yet the whole point is that fascism is rarely entirely subsuming nor is there any intention that any but a "ruling elite" be part of that fascism anyways. To that end, the main difference between Fascism, Socialism, and Communism is the organizational structure of government and business, how it reacts to the populace at large, and what the byline is for its actions.

    PS - Most nations in Europe aren't Socialist in the sense that China or Russia are Socialist. That has less to do with the organizational structure per se but in how that power is used. That is, China censors their news but France does not. It's not that France isn't per se in control of the newspapers but that in reality they don't actually control the newspapers. Ie, there's a clear intent in France that people can speak their mind, have freedom, etc on an individual level and government interaction on people and business should be to serve that end, even if does effective control various business dealings--aka regulation. Yet China, Russia, etc clearly focus more on social order vested in their government and are willing to go to greater lengths to control business and the people. The kicker, of course, is merely that the latter allows more readily for explicit corruption and tyrannical action; it's the inherent property of the mindset. And it's precisely the reason why American fascism, though things like the pervasive NSA spying, are so bad; they open up the same method to governmental abuse by a select few without any real visibility or recourse.

  111. Re:Snowden = Traitor by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Einstein didn't steal state secrets and give them to the enemy either.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  112. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    No.... someone who sticks it out and wins a fight can be a hero too... martyrdom is not remotely necessary.

    But running away is not heroic.

    Is what Snowden did a good thing? Yes... that doesn't make him a hero, however.

  113. Re:Snowden = Traitor by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    Is this from personal introspection, A/C?

  114. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Heroes don't run away from fights that they might find themselves in, simply because they know that they cannot win. That's what makes them heroes, and what really distinguishes them from everyone else.

    Is it a narrow view of heroism? Perhaps... but I don't think that everybody is cut out to actually *be* a hero. In fact, most aren't.

    That doesn't mean that every single person is not capable of doing tremendous good, or making a positive difference in the world around them, however.

    But running away is just not something I can associate with heroism.

  115. Semi-illiterate by pigsycyberbully · · Score: 2

    It is written like a semi-illiterate or the person copied and pasted it in the wrong order. either that or they are secretly drugging and polluting the brains of people in the U.S. turning them into semi-illiterates. U.S. people relying on Windows products and its voice recognition and other Gadgets and programs just a function in life tut tut tut. Have a burger watch a commercial and go back to sleep you obese fat bastards.

  116. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

    Let us not forget that the Soviets had their Germans scientists as well. And the Soviets didn't give them a choice, they arrested and moved thousands of them long after the war.

    The Rest of the Rocket Scientists - Some went west. This is the story of the ones who went east.

    More

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  117. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by tragedy · · Score: 1

    A hero, in my view, isn't somebody who runs away from a fight they don't think they can win....

    Sure. Also, true heros don't wear protective gear. All those "heroic" firemen who have run into burning buildings? Did they run in naked without respirators? Well, obviously not heroes then. In fact, if they didn't go in and stand in the fire heroically until the fire burned out, then they're obviously not heroes.

  118. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Feeling nostalgic, are you, treasonous traitor?

  119. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They sound like your kind of guys, treasonous traitor.

  120. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, but Alan Turing wasn't considered a traitor at any point* so I'm not sure how what happened to him is relevant.

    *Although after the war the British intelligence services didn't consider him to be able to be trusted with classified work because he was homosexual, because apparently homosexuals are more likely to caught in a "honey trap".

  121. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Sique · · Score: 1

    For me, the NSA is the enemy. People who constantly spy on me are the enemy. It's that simple.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  122. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Sique · · Score: 1

    Failure at the NSA may cause you to lose WW III. Currently, the successes of the NSA are basicly pissing everyone off, weakening anything that could help protect information and not producing anything worthwile. The only result ever the NSA produced in the War on Terror so far seems to be detecting one wire transfer to Somalia.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  123. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

    Winners of prestigious military medals stand in the face of danger. It's why they earned their medals. Snowden faces no danger whatsoever because he ran away. Putin loves this guy and he'll live a long life there. The problem with what the general public calls a hero these days is that the definition has become so broad as to become nearly meaningless. If you're not putting yourself into a position of substantial danger, you're not a hero...period.

    --
    Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
  124. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In fact, most "heroes" we see in the movies run away and survive. I agree. You don't need to die in order to be a "hero," and the wind doesn't respect a fool.

  125. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A hero, in my view, isn't somebody who runs away from a fight they don't think they can win.... if it was important enough to start, then it's important enough to finish. Like I said above... it's probably not a popular sentiment.

    It was important enouigh to start, but the whole point is that this fight is not for him to finish. This fight is not about what happens to Snowden. It is about what happens to the U.S. Snowden's job was telling the American public that their rights have been violated. He cannot restore the people's rights. Only the people themselves have this power.

    The real cowards are those who don't take up their fight, stating "before Snowden comes back and gets thrown into jail, I don't see that my freedom is worth a dime to me". It won't be afterwards, either. You are a coward and an underling, considering yourself brave because somebody who went out on a line for you has not yet surrendered to your self-chosen jailers.

    What a pitiful spectacle. Worse than Stockholm syndrome.

  126. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You illustrate nicely why I tend to dislike your country so much.

    The US is behaving like shit towards its "friends", and though its part of the game, there are things that go too far. Somehow it is OK to ignore *any* laws when it concerns people from outside of your country.

    Apart from being foolish (you really seem to believe he would stand a chance in his own country; I do not. I am sure he himself also doubts this, so far, you are in the minority here...), you are also blind. Snowden has shown us a lot about the exchange of info between spy-programs. You can freely spy on not-americans, and the Brits can freely spy on Americans, so you needed to know the whole thing. I cannot understand how the foreign part is not relevant to the discussion, you are deluding yourself. Your info will simply be collected by a foreign entity, and than given to the NSA. Poof...there go your rights and constitution, without doing anything illegal! How nice!

    Snowden did not release anything (apart from things he said in interviews). The call what to release and when to release it was made by journalists. So he did not go from hero to traitor, he did everything at the same time. Oh, and I actually see nothing tarnishing about being a traitor to the dark side.

  127. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is such a glass-is-so-full-it's-causing-problems-with-laws-of-physics hindsight view of what happened. More likely he would have ended up an Aaron Schwartz, only he would never have seen the sunlight again after they got a hold of him. There is nothing worse you can do to people who love power than shame them, and that's what he did.

  128. Arsehole thinks hero isn't a hero by UpnAtom · · Score: 1
  129. A a naive moral relativist by coolmanxx · · Score: 0

    Or someone on the Kremlin payroll. Which are you?

    --
    ~~~ There is no Wikileaks.
    1. Re:A a naive moral relativist by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      A free thinker. Which means I will perform thought experiments, with assumed values that are contrary to my observation or bias, and see where that leads. Often an otherwise undiscovered insight or new set of observable conditions can arise - to be confirmed with primary documentary sources.

      One thing I can assure you - the USA is no inherently or morally "better" than Russia. Their murdered millions were mostly within the borders of their assumed territory. US's are continual, in secondary economic fiefdoms.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
  130. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by fnj · · Score: 1

    Let's get one thing straight. I am giving the detractors a pass on the term "hero", but that doesn't mean Snowden is not an admirable and highly effective actor in the current play of tyranny against human rights, and there are sure damn few of those.

    I am already kind of regretting paying too much attention to what Wikipedia calls "the will for self sacrifice" as a determinant for who deserves the term "hero". The Greek root for hero means "protector" or "defender".

    The best example I can think of for true misuse of "hero" is the pilot of a jetliner whose skill saves the occupants of a jetliner in a ditching or crash landing. That pilot is saving HIMSELF as well as everybody else on the plane. The lives of those other occupants have absolutely zero bearing on what he must do.

  131. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol

  132. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by gIobaljustin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And that would have been the end of it.

    Or maybe he'd be absolutely miserable, like how other whistleblowers ended up.

    We do owe him a debt of gratitude, but he ruined that by revealing classified information that did not concern violations of our constitutional rights and damaged our valid intelligence collection efforts.

    I for one am thankful that he gave us a more in depth view of what our government is doing. Just because some of the activities he revealed aren't related to our constitutional rights doesn't mean that the activities are moral, or that we shouldn't know they're happening.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  133. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Paradigma11 · · Score: 1

    Russia has a SOF agreement with Ukraine as a part of the Sevastapol lease agreement - good well past a 2017 renewal. It allows for 35,000 Russian Troops in Crimea. The Russians are legally in Crimea under the same kind of frameworks that legally allow US troops in Bhagram, Afghanistan.

    The Crimean referendum is being conducted under the precedent most recently, of Kosovo and South Sudan.

    Good for the goose? Good for the gander.

    But Putin already told us that those 20.000 troops with russian military hardware that man road blocks and besiege ucrainian barracks are in fact not russian soldiers. Also are you certain that those recreational activities are covered in the lease agreement?

  134. Re:Snowden = Traitor by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    "Providing aid and comfort to enemies" can be interpreted pretty damned broadly.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  135. What Gates does in his free times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what Bill Gates does with all his money in his free time
    http://cheezburger.com/4328197376

  136. Lies lies lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, there is so much wrong in this post I don't even know where to begin.

    Let's start with the "claimed and won whistle-blower status". That is completely false. First off, the whistleblower laws only apply to government employees. As a contractor, they did not protect him at all. Second, he is charged under the Espionage Act, which does not have any whistleblower or "public good" exception. People prosecuted under this law are forbidden from telling a jury that they were acting for the greater good, the only thing that the jury is allowed to hear is that the law was broken.

    http://www.politifact.com/pund...

    Second, as for "the worst thing that could happen to him", consider the prior example of Thomas Drake, who was a whistleblower years before Snowden, followed the letter of the law precisely, and as a result had his house raided by armed FBI agents. They also raided the houses of three other people who knew Drake, the FBI holding the families of these associates at gunpoint. The prosecution of Drake was in fact persecution, as Richard D. Bennett of the Federal District Court said explicitly when he called it "unconscionable".

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

    He has not "kept revealing stuff" in order to "keep his value". He gave his documents to a few trusted reporters before he fled, and since he left he has not released a single thing. The continuing revelations are from his original release to the reporters, he is not providing anything new at all. He says he has none of the documents anymore, and the NSA and CIA and FBI have not shown any evidence that he does have them. The intelligence agencies have instead used weasel-words to insinuate that he does without literally accusing him of it.

    The collection efforts directed at our allies need to be revealed, because they are part of a larger pattern of flagrant disrespect and veiled acts of war the intelligence agencies are perpetuating universally across the globe. Do you even realize we are talking about universal surveillance of every man, woman, and child on Earth? The reality is far worse than any dystopian science fiction you can find. The NSA is worse than the Stasi, as said by a former Stasi official.

    https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

    As for our political and military allies also being economic competitors, how the hell do you justify spending more on our intelligence budget than the rest of the First World nations combined? In what possible way is that an economic advantage?

    The worst part of all this is that I cannot ever know for sure if you are simply grossly misinformed, or you are a government shill paid to deliberately post false information in an organized propaganda attempt.

    https://firstlook.org/theinter...

    You, sir, terrify me almost as much as the totalitarian government intelligence agencies.

  137. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if it's really important enough to do, then it's important enough to own up to and take full responsibility for.... whatever the consequences, even if those consequences may be unjust.

    You mean just like those who perpetrated the acts?

    ...wait...

  138. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but the concept of living to fight another day by however wisely choosing to run away doesn't fit that word, in my book.

    That's because you are a fucking idiot.

  139. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In this case, history was written by those who benefited from it.

    By definition, they were traitors. It's almost like people on here have no idea what perspective means...

  140. Authoritarians by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Authoritarians are not simplistic 1 dimensional or binary extremes. Given how important the Anarchy to Authoritarian scale are to human existence you would think we would study and educate people on this aspect of life/politics/economics etc.

    Gates is an Authoritarian, he is not a dictator but he is not in the middle either. It is understandable that Gates would take authoritarian positions given his bias; he can identify with and agree with similar reasoning to his own in other areas.

  141. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And people like you enable them by not recognizing that BOTH parties fit that definition.

  142. perhaps just political? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Something else to consider here: Gates runs an organization that requires him to have good relations with many heads of state. Perhaps he requires more caution than Woz to continue to do the good he does. Who knows what he really thinks.

  143. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    I don't know if I'd agree that a person who is trying to save himself can't be a hero.... I would actually place the criteria for hero as being someone who actually personally faces some level of danger, and whether or not they personally overcome it, somehow manages to help one or more other people get past a threat that they are facing. A hostage victim who manages to foil the plans of the people who have taken them and others hostage certainly has a personal vested interest in trying to get out of the situation, but I wouldn't hesitate to call such a person a hero when his or her actions have saved the lives of others. I find myself ambivalent on your example of a pilot being a hero, however. I think I'd really be willing to use the word to describe a pilot only in circumstances where the pilot had shown personal creativity and resourcefulness in overcoming the situation that went far beyond what he or she was actually trained to do in such circumstances, and by all rights and reason they should not have survived at all.

    To that end, ordinary people may become heroes, but heroes are anything but ordinary.

    And Snowden didn't face any real danger by doing what he did. In the end, he still ran away.

    That doesn't make what he did meaningless, it just means he's not cut from the same cloth as what I'd call a hero.

  144. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty sure the closest precedent here is the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, where a spontaneous people's revolution overthrew a communist government controlled by Moscow. Subsequently the Soviet Union invaded to restore its puppet government.

    In both Kosovo and Sudan part of the context was ethnic genocide, with tens of thousands of people already slaughtered, and the prospect of peace nowhere in sight. Nothing of the sort has been happening in the Ukraine.

  145. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So same as the US then, or didnt you realise there was more than 1 party to that agreement?

  146. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very well stated.

  147. Gates has not changed... by RR · · Score: 1

    If you go back all the way to the beginning of Gates's career, then it should be obvious that he is no friend to freedom, and he never has been.

    In the beginning, there was no open source movement, because all software was open source. Computers were so difficult and non-standard, that software was one-off for each machine, and everybody shared everything just to get the darn things to work. Gates was born into the economic elite (his father was a lawyer and his mother was a rich civic busybody), and he brought elite paternalism into computing. The software we run is only by his permission, and we should all pay him for the privilege of improving and distributing it.

    Wozniak came from a different mindset. His father was an engineer, and he learned the morality of engineers. He wrote the first BASIC for Apple, but licensed Microsoft's BASIC for later models. When somebody at Apple wrote MacBasic, Bill Gates had the gall to cancel it and not release a decent Basic for the Mac. So, Wozniak experienced Gates's ruthlessness, but he's too nice to say anything about it.

    --
    Have a nice time.
  148. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US isn't the one invading Ukraine.

  149. Gates Is Living Walking Shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gates gave the least indefensible answer given the $$$$ that M$ has squandered from the U.S.A. Federal Government including the DoD.

    Foe sure I want to out live Gates !

    And, that given, I want to piss on his grave !

    The "little Hell Raiser From Seattle" can no longer "Raise Hell !" and not even in the 'Rolling Stone' !

    I look forward to the hour that a Russian T-60 Tank grinds little billie gates body into the fud of the mud of Crimea.

    And I look forward to seeing the headless bodies of his Mommy and Daddy. Sniff Sniff Whimper Whimper.

    Ha ha.

    Suckers.

       

  150. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're an idiot, COINTEL, or both.

    Snowden hasn't revealed anything. All the disclosures have come from media outlets. Snowden claims to no longer be in possession of intelligence materials. And whether you believe him or not, the slow leaks that have been coming out are clearly from Greenwald and the Washington Post. Both Greenwald and the Washington Post are in possession of those materials.

    Snowden planned the slow leaks from the day one. Everything he's done since handing over the material to the media has been to stay out of jail, pure and simple. There is no quid-pro-quo happening, as far as we can know. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

    And there are no whitleblower protections for Snowden. For one thing, he was a gov't contractor, which nixes even the most theoretical possible defense. For another, similar whistleblowers--actual government employees--have already been convicted.

  151. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was the one breaking the treaties that led to the invasion though...

  152. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Shaiken · · Score: 1

    "The Russians did it too." is not an excuse. Not that I'd expect any better from an NSA shill of course.

  153. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    No excuse is needed for that. You should be thankful since it helped keep the free world free, not that you probably care.

    What a pity, you precious snowflake, you encountered an opinion you disagree with. Did it scar you for life?

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  154. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No he would not likely be dead by now. Had he stayed here, he would have been prosecuted for the original revelations, claimed and won whistle-blower status and been acquitted or pardoned. And that would have been the end of it. When he made his original revelations of the surveillance program he was a hero.

    Oh wow. You seem like a reasonable person who has been told something that made a whole lot of sense! The problem is assuming you aren't trolling propaganda, your entire premise is based on the fact that he would have sought and won whistleblower status. I don't blame you, Obama and some other government officials said about the same thing, so why woudn't you repeat it?

    There are two huge issues with this:

    1. As a contractor he was not elible for any whistleblower protections. This is 100% fact. There is just no way around it, the whistleblower protections that were written into law have no bearing on him.

    2. Look at what happened to several people who tried to come forward who would very much have been elible for whistleblower status. Their names are escaping me, but one of them went to Russia to help present Snowden with an award.

    So, since we're being reasonable, and it's known that a large chuck of your current reasoning is built on a broken foundation, would you be willing to reconsider?

  155. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He was still under investigation by Hoover's FBI as a suspected communist.

  156. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop him, no. But it sure might convince somebody else to not go public the next time.

  157. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Shaiken · · Score: 1

    I'd be a lot more threatened by your opinions if they'd ever shown a sign of involving any actual thought. As it is, they just seem to repeat whatever the intelligence state decided to try to throw out today.

  158. Re:Snowden = Traitor by mysidia · · Score: 1

    It was enough for Einstein to just "have helped the US" to be deemed a traitor. He didn't have to copy or steal anything, since the US was deemed an enemy.

  159. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dwilden (521345), what you've just posted... is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this website is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul...

  160. can you ask him? by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    wow, I didn't even realize folks do this... for what purpose?

    idk he replied below maybe if you ask him he'll give a different answer that is more revealing

    i think it's someone I pissed off who is mad that I got upmodded when their response didnt or something on a long-dead thread...this isn't likely though, as they post quite a bit

    that or they just picked to Karma Whore me b/c of random reasons

    i honestly can't tell you...it's weird b/c I do have 'excellent' karma but i'm not really a 'slashdot fixutre' or anything just a random guy who hates M$, false dichotomies, republicans, and artificial scarcity....i post mostly in the space, programming, 'social media' and free speech areas

    i seriously have **no idea** why anyone would want the world to think they are me!!!!

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:can you ask him? by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      And by the way I'm libertarian, so I don't think he targeted either of us due to a particular political view.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
  161. hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't Gates break the law, you know by bundling internet explorer with windows? I mean, I know legally speaking it was Microsoft Corp. that did that, but I just don't see how Gates can utter that sentence with a straight face.

  162. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2

    Snowden would be a traitor in any *autocratic* nation in the world. By definition you cannot be a traitor if your "betrayal" was in keeping with your oath of citizenship and protecting the nation and people from illegal acts.

    Or to put it another way: It's not stealing to take a purse back from a purse thief and give it back to its owner.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  163. Not again by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    Bill, we've been over this before. Snowden tried the legal channels, informing his superiors 10x, and got nowhere. If you bothered to closely follow the story, you'd see your suggestions were tried and failed.

    Armchair critics are stupid. "Why couldn't Rosa Parks just ask the bus driver for permission, did she really need to get arrested?"

  164. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would think that genocide trumps loyalty to a state.

    So you do think Snowden is a hero. Or is genocide the only crime that can trump loyalty to the sate?

  165. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Einstein told the US about Germany's work and progress on the atomic bomb. I am pretty sure that was state secret under whatever German appellation that was use at the time. In the same way, Snowden told us about the secret NSA F.A.C.E.B.O.O.K. program. And the US are now just as piss off as Germany was back then.

    All this debate about Snowden been a traitor/hero only prove us how easy a population can fall into supporting fascism.

  166. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean Buttle?

  167. The man is clearly a hero by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    He didn't do it for fame. he didn't do it for power. He didn't do it for money.

    He did it for us.

    The NSA was lying to the American people and to congress. And snowden blew the whistle on that for us all.

    And this is so far what he gets as thanks.

    Can't wait for the current group of crooks to get sunsetted out of office so the next batch can save face by granting the guy amnesty.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  168. Anthony David by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree with Bill Gates' views on privacy, we should have cameras everywhere and the recordings should be posted on-line for everyone to see in real-time, and archived for eternity.

  169. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is that any country Snowden likely would feel any allegiance to would also bend over for the US and give him up.

    Fermi probably had nothing against the people of his former country, but against that government. Same as Snowden.

  170. Who to listen to? by IndieVoter · · Score: 1

    Gates is doing things to fix the world. Woz hasn't done much since designing the Apple II disk controller. Who to listen to?

  171. he just writes checks by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    people shouldn't make charities in areas where they have expertise.

    i didn't say that

    i said ***all he does is write checks***

    that's very VERY different from what you, trollingly, claimed I said

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  172. Rotted grey matter by messymerry · · Score: 1

    Bill Gates brain is poisoned by his billions of filty lucre. Plus he's a shill for the State. Who gives a flying fuck what he says. Transparency like a gun causes people to be polite. Snowden is a gorram hero! Happy Sunday,,,

    --
    Dear Microlimp: I give you 2 valid product keys for win7 and you reject both of them. Piss off you wankers!!!
  173. What to do by brunnegd · · Score: 1

    Snowden should have his genitals cut off and stuffed down his throat

  174. Re: A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    haha nice billy Madison reference.

    maybe he's spent his entire life running from a penguin.

  175. I don't know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I agree that Snowden opened our eyes to what the NSA was doing, I don't agree with how he went about it.
    I think he could have done things differently.

  176. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by dwillden · · Score: 1

    Wrong, those programs are classified for a reason. The country that has no secret will not stand. So many on /. think we have some right to know everything our government does, but no such right or need exists. You have no need or right to know about those programs. They do not encroach on constitutional rights therefore they are entirely legal, and are thus moral. Well as moral as anything in the international espionage game is. Just because you want to know does not mean you need or have any need or right to know. And his publication of those programs put them at risk and damaged our collection efforts, which in turn damages our ability to negotiate effectively for treaties. And in turn damages our freedoms. Because if our government cannot negotiate with the best hand, it hurts our interests, and our economy.

    Everybody spies on everybody, the Germans certainly didn't stop their efforts to collect on us just because we were forced to halt a very effective program on our part.

    Oh and get your own ID, stop trying to live off the reputation of the real globaljustin.

    --
    I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
  177. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

    Wrong, those programs are classified for a reason.

    It's nice that you have so much faith in governments thugs, even though the hundreds of millions of people abused and/or murdered throughout history by various governments (including the US government) give you no reason to do so. Oh, wait, it's not nice.

    Go back to lickin' those boots.

    and are thus moral.

    Legal != moral. Illegal != immoral. You're an idiot.

    Just because you want to know does not mean you need or have any need or right to know.

    I don't "need" freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, or various other rights. The fact that you do not "need" something means nothing. As for a "right," well, the government says many things that I think should be rights are not rights. I do not care what the government says; they infringe upon our rights all the time.

    And in turn damages our freedoms.

    You're really, really trying hard to make this seem like a bad thing, aren't you?

    Posts like yours contribute to the mentality that we're the only important ones in the world, which in turn leads to heavy-handed foreign policies that damages our worldwide reputation. That, in turn, damages our freedoms, because it further provokes certain people to attack us, and then governments use that as an excuse to violate our freedoms in the name of safety.

    Damn, that was easy. I could do this about anything, even copyright infringement (pretty much already been done, in a way).

    Frankly, even if what you said *were* true, knowing this does not damage my freedoms. The only ones effectively capable of that are government thugs; they're who I truly fear. And for what it's worth, I believe innocent people in other countries also deserve privacy.

    Everybody spies on everybody

    "Everybody's doing it!" is not an excuse.

    a very effective program

    Unsubstantiated and irrelevant claim. Irrelevant because freedom and privacy are more important than security to begin with.

    Fuck off, you insolent bootlicker.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  178. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Let me ask you a silly question:
    If somebody stops a theft, but then shoots his way out murdering 100 ppl which were not connected to the theft, is he a hero in your POV?

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  179. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by metaforest · · Score: 1

    This!

    Heros don't pick fights they cannot possibly win. They jump in having a good notion of the risks they face. They PREPARE for those risks. Fire fighters, EMTs and many beat cops are heros because they use(d) their training and equipment to help people, and protect property.

    full disclosure: I am a trained & experienced FFT2 with high-angle rescue and white-water rescue training.

  180. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

    I'm glad you call that a silly question because that's exactly what it is. You may as well ask me if two plus two equals an apple for all that question is related to the situation at hand.

    You can try as hard as you want to shill for the traitors who've decided to burn the constitution for profit, exposing their treason is by definition not a crime.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  181. MSDOS MAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why Bill Gates?

    The journalist was unfortunate, should have chosen other personalities to answer this question, suggestions?

    The great chiefs of the UN, they should publicly rebuke and apply various sanctions against "uncle sam", as they like to do with other countries.

    His statements do not become a better patriot than the person Snowden.

    When it was discovered that the information was a business, the truth is no longer important.

  182. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fine, you don't want to use the word hero? That's fine. Be as pedantic as you want. The simple fact of the matter is that he has done a great service for hundreds of millions of people, whether they know it or not. Quibble about virtues all you want, you can't deny that if he hadn't exposed these massive breeches of trust, they'd probably still be going at it without a care in the world.

  183. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by Sciath · · Score: 1

    I find that assertion very difficult to sustain when there are major political leaders (like Senator McCain, Feinstein, et Al) calling Snowden a "traitor". When you have so many wealthy and powerful individuals labeling Snowden as a traitor it is superbly implausible that Snowden would garner whistleblower status under our judicial system. Once the elites have scapegoated someone, the expectation of just treatment is ludicrous.

    --
    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
  184. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Heroes *face* adversity... They do not run away from challenges simply because they may not overcome them. In this case snowmen didn't personally face anything... He basically fought by "remote control" and ran away when he was going to be caught. However good what he dd was, it's still not heroic.

  185. . Bill Gates tells his main priority focuses on st by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Bill, what about when the government becomes the bad guys? I won't quote Ben Franklin for the zillionth time because everyone quotes him, but had Nazi Germany had access to the kind of information that the governments that once fought against it now claim they need to 'protect' their citizens, how many more people would have died in concentration camps?

  186. Re:Snowden = Traitor by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I figured that you would not use any logic or thought behind this. That is why I considered it a silly question. Just as silly as talking to a wall.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  187. Hero and Traitor by Freeman-Jo · · Score: 1

    Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? I don't see why does it have to be that way. While not saying what my opinion is, as I don't see how that's matter whether what he is to me. What matter is what he did? I think it's kinda pointless what to label him. In fact, even if he is being labeled both, as I see that they can be mutually inclusive, we wouldn't have been all pissed off at the NSA if not for what he did. Yes, even people who call him traitor can still pissed at NSA, and they all wouldn't say so if not for what Snowden leaked. While many want to argue that what NSA did was with in the power granted by Patriot Act. But as I recalled, there were many who weren't happy when we first heard of the Patriot Act either. Regardless of what it was, the leak is definitely in a good timing. As many now know that there need to be a change and in favor for the change toward more privacy and the time for the Patriot Act to be review is soon. It could be worse if the leak were to come out much later, say after Patriot Act get a permanant stamp.

    --
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- If picture worth a thousand words, how many megapixels is it? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  188. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Being heroic is not the same thing as being intelligent or wise... It might very well be smart or prudent to run away from a foe that can harm you... but that's still not heroic.

  189. Re:A hero isn't someone who runs away by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Risk isn't what makes somebody a hero... Neither is sacrifice. The latter makes one a martyr, and the former makes one a gambler. Heroism is defined by actually facing whatever it is that is being overcome. Whether the battle was ever realy his to finish or not, running away isn't facing anything.

    That doesn't make what he did something not good or worth to be respected, but it does mean he's not a hero.

  190. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    I guess I'll take that as a compliment since you acknowledge my comments have something to do with intelligence. I regret that I can't return the favor.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  191. Re:Snowden = Traitor by Shaiken · · Score: 1

    Oh yes, in exactly the same way that an ice cube has something to do with heat.

  192. Re:Snowden = Traitor by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    Water freezes at 273K. That is pretty warm.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  193. Re:Snowden = Traitor by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    Crimea was autonomous region; also, our Constitution says Senate ratifies treaties. guess what?

  194. Re:Snowden = Traitor by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    No, bullshit. wrong. read the memorandom (not a treaty), there are no assurances of any military protection from the USA

  195. Re:Snowden = Traitor by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    not a treaty, no such military protection was offered or promised

    Crimea was an autonomous region, they autonomously decided to rejoin Russia.

    not our problem