Slashdot Mirror
Snowden Demystified: Can the Government See My Junk?
An anonymous reader writes Comedian and journalist John Oliver set out to understand US Government surveillance in advance of the June 2015 expiration of section 215 of the Patriot Act. What resulted was a humorous but exceptionally journalistic interview of Edward Snowden which distilled the issues down in a (NSFW) way everyone can understand. Regardless of whether you view Snowden as a despicable traitor or an honorable whistleblower, it's worth a watch.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Uh...I just got out of some very cold water, but normally, it would be HUGE, I swear.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Regardless of whether you view Snowden as a despicable traitor or an honorable whistleblower, it's worth a watch.
I didn't think so.
Oliver criticized Snowden for his complex descriptions of complex issues, and asserted that it's Snowden's job to make the facts easily digestible and relatable for the general public. It's not. In the first place, it's the media's job to do that. That is their raison d'etre. In the second place, distilling issues down to "dick pics" is part of the problem with the modern media. Why fuel that race to the bottom? Idiocracy was supposed to be satire, not prophecy.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
The uploader has not made this video available in your country. :( :(
It was very interesting to see that people indeed where worried if the gov could see their junk.
I think this is because people have no idea what 'security' or 'privacy' actually is or do not understand the implications.
If you tell people "we know who you called" people will think "I have nothing to hide". Once you say "We saw your dick" then suddenly it becomes real and understandable.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I like John Oliver, but his attempts at humor early in the interview just came off as awkward at best. However, he did finally hit his stride when he started in with his survey results, which showed Americans have no clue and even less concern with educating themselves on todays issues much less wanting to do anything about it. Hopefully Snowden got the message -- that coming here to "Face Trial" as he has supposedly been mulling over would not serve any sort of public debate or discourse that could create change, but only be ratings fodder for Fox and CNN. Because yes -- American's don't care, Americans don't want to know, Americans just want to be given shiny things.
The TSA sure can. They get to feel it up as well.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Speaking on behalf of the NSA, no, we cannot as youve asked, "see" your "junk." We have collected so much vast knowledge of your human anatomy from the comfort of our underground high security facilities that it would be difficult to explain to the lay-citizen how we experience their reproductive organs. In our patented high security JunkChamber the bits and pieces as you call them of nearly every human being who has ever entered or lived in the united states for more than 70 years is experienced at our leisure. Junk from the mid 19th century as well as african american junk which was at the time deemed 3/5ths junk, is painstakingly simulated and recreated in our private parts simulator.
now you may be asking, "what does this do? how does this keep me safe?" but let me assure you the details of which are so complex your poor mind would hardly have the fortitude to endure even a cursory explanation. Whats important is that you remember thanks to this compendium of human evolutionary anatomy (in 3d and projected oftentimes 6 stories tall) has kept us safe from terrorism for eons. Now return to the television, for the idols of america will begin soon and you'll not want to miss the opportunity to tweet and text your friends and ours about the events as they unfold, and the products you aspire to consume.
Good people go to bed earlier.
No, actually, it has not. The omni-present surveillance itself, though uncomfortable, is neither a required nor sufficient condition for "Police State" term to apply.
As long as the NSA only records (or even forwards to police but only to prosecute actual crimes), it is not a representative of "police state".
(Also note too, that, according to Snowden, for NSA to record your conversation, it has to cross the national border.)
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I think John Oliver did an excellent job of educating Snowden on how to speak. I think it's something that many people her on slashdot struggle with. Put it in layman's terms. As John Oliver pointed out to Snowden... most people don't get what you are saying. All the geeks do... and are rightfully freaked-out/outraged by it ...but most regular people don't. But mention how the current programs captures all your 'dick pics'... and people start to get it. Hopefully this will help him in the future with how he communicates this with the American public ...and hopefully enough of the American public will be freaked out about it and push for roll-back/limits on these things.
Actually Oliver was doing something very valuable with his interruptions. Forcing Snowden to refrain from technobabble that the general public would not get. Forcing Snowden to be more effective at his self appointed task, to put in the extra effort necessary to phrase things so the general public could understand.
Sometimes simplification is helpful, sometimes it is not. Technobabble can give the illusion of importance. For example is you say the NSA is collecting telephone metadata that sound ominous. If you simplify it and say the NSA is having AT&T share the info on your phone bill, date, number called, duration ... then people would understand and probably not rate the collection of much importance.
My usual response to anyone of the "I have nothing to hide" mindset: Do you close the bathroom door when you go to the toilet? I'm betting the answer is "Yes." Why? Modesty? Propriety? Custom? Doesn't matter. The question is: Does it mean you have something to hide? Not something evil or wrong, just private? So maybe it's OK to have things to hide . . . or at least not flaunt in public.
Now, Do you also close the bathroom door when you are home by yourself, and know for certain that nobody is there to see? Again, I'll bet the answer is "Yes". Why? WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO HIDE? Oh, right, you have nothing to hide, so why are you hiding? The guilty hide when none pursueth! How easy it is to infer guilt!
You think he'd have a soapbox in prison? I rather think not. He'd be in solitary and that would be that.
Nice hair splitting.
We'll keep that in your permanent record.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
You think if he came back home he'd get a soapbox? He'd get a show trial with the spin machine in the media cranked up to 11.
The only question is whether they'd break him like they did Manning (Edward becomes Edwina), lock him away for life, or find an excuse to execute him under the Espionage Act.
Uh, yeah. You know what the difference would have been if Snowden hadn't "chickened out" and fled the country? You wouldn't have ever heard of him and his obituary would say he "died suddenly" like all the other suicide victims that needed to be removed because they are a threat to national security.
In my opinion, the last 10min of the presentation, using the analogy of taking pictures of your junk, and which systems would capture, store, and track it, were excellent.
Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
There is no "Patriot Act". It's called the USA PATRIOT Act and it must be remembered for what it is because what it stands for and what it spells out demonstrates the absolute inanity of the document and the (lack of) discussion when it was voted on.
USA PATRIOT stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.
It was proposed on October 23, 2001, passed by the House on October 24, passed by the Senate on October 25, and signed into law by President Bush on October 26. The Act amended 11 previously passed acts, 108 US Codes, and created 9 new US Codes. The bill itself was 342 pages long and it was passed in 3 days.
I don't think we have since learned our lesson, but at least there will be a historical record of our errors and how quickly we can be bullied into a political frenzy.
These 15 minute "in depth" pieces are amazing AND effective.
But an actual interview with Snowden was amazing.
And oliver covered every angle from what I could see. He brought some reality to Snowden. And He brought some reality to us.
His humor is the sugar that makes the medicine go down.
I'm still pissed off about police officers confiscating people's houses and cars and using the money to buy margherita machines.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
A fair trial is what he asked for since the beginning. But under current U.S law, almost all evidence would be hidden under the claim of "national security" - essentially a secret trial, apart from knowing that it took place. That is, if it was even a trial as opposed to a "tribunal" as happened to Manning - no discovery of evidence, no jury, no impartial judge, just a panel of officers, all hidden from view.
The government wouldn't even have to charge him with anything related to the issues involved. Chances are he hasn't filed a U.S income tax return as required by all U.S citizens, even outside the country. For that matter, an obscure and rarely enforced law requires government papers to emigrate legally. He could be charged with any number of laws which don't allow any "public interest" defence to bring up the issues he wants to raise.
As opposed to Manning, who got thrown straight in jail and never got to make serious public statements?
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
As the NSA regularly "tipps off" the DEA and the FBI (with their agents then lying under oath in court about it), you argument is deeply flawed.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
One thing that wasn't clear. ES said that if my gmail account was moved overseas on an international server, then the NSA could have a copy of my account even if there were no international sources/targets. Is that true or false?
Also, that look on Oliver's face when Snowden told him 'you're already on the list' as an associate was priceless.
"Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
hi. im Troy McClure. you might remember me from such shows as the simpsons. also Death.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Sorry, but having Big Brother observe each and every one of us through the telescreen is absolutely Police State. Being put on "a list" is unquestionably a threat, even if nobody is at liberty to say just what being on that list does. (It does do something, right? I mean, you're not just supporting Big Government spending your tax dollars to make lists and throw them away and then making more lists, right?)
You'd be OK with the government having "a list" of every gun owner in the country, right? Because at this point, I'm pretty sure the NSA has one. Those forms that sellers mail in on toilet paper go somewhere.
Oh, he doesn't?
-- https://www.schneier.com/blog/... (emphasis added)
Oh dear, it looks like you might be right. XKeyscore wasn't from the UK, it's run right here in the good ol' US of A. Against fellow Americans, "without distinction".
Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence, especially when the government has demonstrated the ability to destroy evidence and immediately kill any court proceeding for "national security". Al Haramain's lawyer had their warrantless wiretap transcript mailed to him, the government destroyed that evidence and killed their lawsuit repeatedly due to "lack" of evidence.
What would such an allegation look like? How would we tell it apart from the waves of everyone else getting released for false convictions, because they've only been in prison since the NSA started spying on everyone instead of being imprisoned for 30 years?
Maybe it'd look like the IRS denying your nonprofit status application? I wonder if we'll ever find those emails...
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
What if I think he's a despicable traitor who just happened--in the course of his treasonous endeavors--to shed light on the NSA's probably extralegal practices.
But which practices didn't *really* surprise anyone.