Slashdot Mirror
Judge Tosses Wikimedia's Anti-NSA Lawsuit Because Wikipedia Isn't Big Enough (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader writes: A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Wikimedia Foundation, Amnesty International, and others against the NSA and other U.S. intelligence agencies for their surveillance of internet communications. The judge used some odd reasoning in his ruling to absolve the NSA of any constitutional violations. He said that since the plaintiffs couldn't prove that all upstream internet communications were monitored, they didn't have standing to challenge whatever communications were monitored. This is curious, given that tech companies are known to be under gag orders preventing them from discussing certain types of government data collection. The judge also made a strange argument about Wikipedia's size: "For one thing, plaintiffs insist that Wikipedia's over one trillion annual Internet communications is significant in volume. But plaintiffs provide no context for assessing the significance of this figure. One trillion is plainly a large number, but size is always relative. For example, one trillion dollars are of enormous value, whereas one trillion grains of sand are but a small patch of beach."
Seriously, forget the courts. They're completely in the pockets of the politicians and Big Money. Lois Lerner just got off Scot free, and I'm willing to bet money that Clinton will as well. If you want justice in this day and age and you aren't a 1%'er, you'd better dish it out yourself or organize with others, because that's the only way it's going to happen.
In the meantime, encrypt everything you possibly can. Destroy any data you no longer need. Don't keep logs on anything any longer than YOU need to. Make everything as difficult as possible for the establishment.
My guess is for whatever reason, the judge did not want to rule against the NSA. So just used whatever barely coherent reason seemed remotely plausible.
As a federal judge, you're not going to ever get in trouble for protecting the NSA regardless of the gaping holes in your ruling.
"one trillion grains of sand are but a small patch of beach."
The largest dump truck in the world would have to carry more than nine full loads to move a trillion grains of sand. A regular dump truck will have to make 150 trips. (first hit on Google "how much is one trillion grains of sand."
In money terms it's about $9 million, that's what NJ spent to replace the sand along one stretch of beach. 150 dump truck loads is a lot.
Now 1 trillion angels, that's really really tiny.....
How many internet communications are there in total? Without that the number one trillion is meaningless, and this must be what the judge meant.
Especially fun is that you usually don't get to disagree with the judges findings.
That is he can make a claim - and as long as it is arguably reasonably supported by the facts, and not so unreasonable that 'no reasonable person' would make the same decision (very, very far from 'was the decision reasonable), you can't challenge that at any appelate level.
...whereas the amount it takes to buy a judge is much smaller.
Really? Sounds like this judge had his/her verdict in mind before anyone stepped into the courtroom.
Nah, his verdict was probably given to him by the NSA shortly after realizing exactly how much internet monitoring they do.
In money terms it's about $9 million, that's what NJ spent to replace the sand along one stretch of beach. 150 dump truck loads is a lot.
If each grain of sand is 1 mm^3, then a trillion grains is 1000 m^3. So NJ paid $9000 per cubic meter. When I built my son's sandbox, I paid $50 for a cubic yard (slightly less than a cubic meter). Somewhere in NJ, there is a very rich dump truck driver. Probably Chris Christie's brother-in-law.
... is only rivaled by the sophisticated thinking that goes on in the 114th United States Congress.
Lets see your argument .. look, a wookie! You failed to make your case. Next!
Really? Sounds like this judge had his/her verdict in mind before anyone stepped into the courtroom.
. . . so the judge gets delivered a National Security Letter. The first thing, that is very clearly stated in the letter, is that he is not allowed to talk about the National Security Letter. Then the letter instructs him how to rule on the case.
All, legal, no problem . . .
. . . or . . . ?
What if you received a National Security Letter instructing you to kill somebody . . . what would you do . . . ?
Does the US government issue issue letters like this? Who knows? There is no oversight from anyone on what these letters require you to do. Maybe Snowden knows . . .
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Wikipedia didn't meet the notability requirements.
Dereliction of duty.
HIs job is to enforce the constitution, not to invent asinine excuses for letting the government violate our rights.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
only in a corrupt shit-country like the United States could something like this be argued. What kind of stupid rationalization on Wikipedia supposed insignificance is that? This coward has been bought, wipped and tamed long ago.
They made a point. It's a valid one. Wikipedia is global and this response represents a large amount of people. Respond appropriately.
Cybie! aka Ralph Bonnell
What do you mean? The FBI and DHS should have copies of most of them. And Congress is ever so diligent in making sure they are following the law, because it's their job and they take it very seriously.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
One trillion connections per year is roughly the size of the traffic the Wikipedia gets. Wikipedia is one of the top ten sites on the internet.
Next up: Judge Bennet tosses out a case because plaintif neglected to provide context for the sky being blue or water being wet. I don't know what bugs me more, this obvious attempt to subvert justice or the lame-ass excuse used for doing so. It is insulting. It's like the judge is telling us the fix is so far in that he doesn't even have to bother to appear to make sense.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- forever.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
The judge must be extending the familiar legal concept of the fact that since there are 330,000,000 people in the United States, the rights of any one single individual does not matter.
Future Shock is coming true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Judge fails at understanding technology, rather.
And this won't change any time soon, at least until we get judges that actually have a faint idea of what this "inter...thing" is. And given that those geezers tend to cling to their seats until they fall off them rotting, I guess I won't live to see that happening.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I'd publish the letter. Duh.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Quite the opposite. The rights of EVERY SINGLE ONE of those 330 millions matter.
Rights either matter universally and for everyone or they're not rights but privileges, to be taken away at the whim of whoever is in power at any moment without notice. They are rights exactly because this cannot happen. If it can, don't bother talking about having a right anymore because you don't.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
A NSL is a type of subpoena, a request for basic account info and activity logs. A NSL can't ask you to provide the content of someone's data, kill someone, or smear Crisco all over your body and dance around praising Lord Xenu. (Though if it did, you'd probably be grateful for the non-disclosure clause.)
reference
example
The original purpose of non-disclosure was to avoid tipping off suspects that their communications could be monitored, but now that the proverbial cat is out of the bag and any target who worries about NSLs has surely switched to more secure communications, the secrecy around NSLs does a lot more harm than good. Of course, any change to or publicity about NSLs would rekindle debate on the legality of the program (or lack thereof), and they wouldn't want that to happen... Thankfully, people like Nicholas Merrill are forcing the issue, and hopefully there will be change...eventually.
Hint: hyperbole doesn't help, it just distracts people from the real issue. NSLs are bad because they force people to reveal personal information without due process of law. That is all.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
You really have no choice but to publish it. If you really do believe in and support freedom of democracy, then that demand that onus is placed upon you to expose that letter. That letter demands you carry out the active actions of that demand else face punishment ie an order from a master to a slave and as such as a citizen of a supposedly (apparently) free and democratic country, you are required under all the principle of freedom and democracy to publicly challenge it, you are not a slave, your fellow citizens are not slaves and it is your duty to uphold that law, slavery is illegal in free and democratic countries. Buckle to orders issued from master to slave and you sell out all of us. A warning to them when they attempt to issue that letter is likely a safer bet, before reading because of course it defeats the point of them attempting to delivery the master to slave order in secrecy ie give it to me and I will publish it, thus defeating the point of giving it to me, so you might as well keep it (you must emphatically refuse to accept that letter under their conditions ie refuse to accept their contract).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
If I were a judge with a gun to my head like that I'd issue a batshit-crazy ruling, like talking about the mystery of numbers and grains of sand on a beach, to at least signal something is very wrong.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
So this is what passes for the third box in defense of liberty these days?
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
I would tell everyone. Because any order from any government that forces me to a) cover up something illegal b) aid them with something illegal or c) do something illegal is null and void. Nations do not have the authority to grant themselves power to ignore or break laws, nor can they make secret laws giving themselves power. Not if they also claim to be lawful nations.
Of course they could throw me in jail or worse. It's up to each and every one of us to resist tyranny. When we don't then tyranny is what we get.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
No need for a letter. Just a quiet word in his ear that he can forget about ever being appointed to an Appeals court if he rules against the government.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
What if you received a National Security Letter instructing you to kill somebody . . . what would you do . . . ?
It'd be fake because they wouldn't put something like that in writing.
Not even the point. But getting an order to KILL SOMEONE, while not being in any shape or condition, not having any training or other qualification to execute such an order, can only mean one of two things: Either I am supposed to get killed in the process or they need a patsy.
My chances for survival are actually higher when I publish the letter.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Nah, his verdict was probably given to him by the NSA shortly after realizing exactly how much internet monitoring they do.
This, or perhaps the judge in question was just too much of a coward to rule against a government organization that could destroy his entire life.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
What if you received a National Security Letter instructing you to kill somebody . . . what would you do . . . ?
Frankly? I'd take the shortest possible route to the closest foreign embassy of either Russia, or China, or some other large country that is not an ally of the United States, and present them with it, because at that moment in time it would become obvious that even the illusion of the U.S. Constitution meaning a goddamned thing would be gone, so there would be no reason to defend it anymore.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
...before making analogies. A trillion grains of sand is about 150 regular dump trucks' worth.
You obviously don't read many legal rulings if you think this is outside the norm.
I don't think the NSA can just hand a judge a NSL. I suspect they went with the monkey wrench approach or the black mail approach.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
What you did there, I see it.
And I am greatly amused. You have shares in an aluminum mine, perhaps?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
You say that, but would you really? I mean, I say I'd take a bullet for a nun but I've yet to face that so I can only hope I'd not chicken out and piss myself if it happens. In fact, I was in a single firefight while enlisted and I was scared shitless (suppressive fire only). I was all gung-ho about it before hand. When the situation happened, I'd have run the fuck away had it not been for the fact that the job needed doing and my brethren's lives were at stake. (If you think the enlisted fight for you, you are mistaken. But, I digress.)
So, would you? I know you think you would. I know you can claim you would. I know I say the same. But, would I? I'd like to think I would. Hell, I've got a few bucks - I can fight the case. But, would I? I dunno, really. I'd like to think so, but maybe not. I've also got a lot to lose and, to be honest, I don't really like you that much. (Not you personally, but you get the idea.)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Beach sand isn't play sand. Play sand is from a river, and is collected as a byproduct of the more valuable gravel and rock. That is why it is cheap. If they were going out and collecting just straight play sand out of a river valley, above the amount already available, it would be much, much more expensive.
Beach sand has to be dredged off the ocean floor. And collected carefully, after environmental impact and other site analysis is done by professionals. And often the equipment isn't sitting around on standby for that sort of project, so you'll either be paying really high equipment rental on everything, or buying much of the heavy equipment before the project, and selling it afterwards. Not only to collect it, hold it for draining so it can be moved by truck, move by truck, and dump it, but delivery probably can't be done just by telling the trucks where to dump. The trucks are likely to sink into the beach if you try to drive right up and dump it in the surf. You're going to need a bunch of light tractors or some similar thing.
1000 m^3 is too much for a small project, and not enough for a large project. If they wanted to save money, they could purchase more, and have the rest delivered in the future; but governments are run in debt, with no cash reserves at all, and so the financing would eat the savings.
...
You know, I do like you - I even think you're right with the hosts file use (you should compile a version for Linux, it needn't be GPLed or anything and you can keep the source - just release binaries). But, you know...
I really don't want you editing Wikipedia if your edits are anything like your Slashdot posts and your style confrontational. I'd smack your hand and tell you 'no' too. Bad APK - stay away from Wikipedia! Not yours!
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
One has to wonder how many delicious details can be said about the ego of said soul. Knowing that the Justice likely has a soft spot for fraud could be reason to see him falling to a so called "Act of God".
Likely wouldn't be surprised if somehow Anonymous decided to call themselves in play and release the judge's personal details.
That's why they never write such letters duh. It would be like incriminating themselves. Everything is done verbally and sometimes the person who receives the message doesn't even know the identity of the person who delivers it.
Now, try to prove you received the message; "Some guy told me that...". Worse case, when you know the identity of the person, it is his words against yours, there again, not much chances.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
A market-based "solution" to health care has been a GOP idea since Republicans first proposed it in '92, as an alternative to the Clinton plan. This results in awkward questions for partisan tribalists on both sides of the aisle:
Yes, yes I do. Did you think it was a BFD when Karl Rove was also hiding communications behind private email servers, when it was "their guys" in office?
They didn't, you brain dead partisan tribalist, you. Both liberal and conservative groups were scrutinized by the IRS, and the only one to actually be denied tax-exempt status was a liberal one.
Why don't you move out to a deserted island, along with the Obamabots and Hillbots, and fight out your double-standards and hypocrisy to leave the rest of us alone, eh?
> "A NSL can't ask you to provide the content of someone's data"
That's false, they've done two expansive things:
In some cases. they've asked for a box on the network. In essence they've replaced "give us transactional records" for "trust us to only look at what we're legally allowed to look at for the subject we're legally allowed to search". I recall these boxes were run by the NSA who was keeping all the data, filtering it for the FBI, then handing the legal bit back to the FBI.
And with Lavabit they demanded the crypto keys which would have also permitted content analysis on a "trust us" basis:
http://www.wired.com/2013/10/lavabit_unsealed?ref=cm
The law sets limits, and they conspire to hide the data collecting mechanism in the NSA (out of reach of the courts due to national security), while keeping the legally limited portion within the FBI.
Proving standing when one is subject to a secret procedure is akin to proving one's innocence: it may be impossible unless the guilty party steps forward and admits guilt. What the judges SHOULD do is modify the rules on determining standing, so that if it regards a secret procedure, the judge does his own discovery, and examines the classified information on his own, in order to determine if the plaintiff has standing. Judges already privately examine classified information in other contexts, so it shouldn't be unreasonable. Maybe get FISC involved if necessary.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
A grain of sand might be 1 mm^3, so 10^12 is 1000 m^3, or maybe 3 x 10^6 kg or 3000 tons worth. I would like to see that idiot judge move that amount, say from one end of his courtroom to another. Ideally, he would do that every working day for the rest of his time on the bench; that might teach him the value of a trillion grains of sand.
Incidentally, 10^12 grains of sand would cover a 10 m x 1 km beach 10 cm deep - sounds like a pretty nice beach to me,
First, a NSL can't demand that. Secondly, it couldn't demand it of a judge.
NSL's are basically for demanding evidence in your possession, or you could have provide access to, and not disclosing it. They aren't just a blank letter they can write anything they want in it.
But that is sort of the point. The prosecution failed to provide enough evidence of their case before the judge. That's their job, and they didn't provide enough facts for him to make a (correct) ruling. Not the judge's fault that they failed to provide a reference of how much their traffic is.
I defend the U.S. Constitution every single time I exercise my right to vote in this country, sign petitions to right wrongs or effect change, join in a peaceful public protest, write or call a member of congress to voice my opinions or concerns, or for that matter call or write POTUS directly -- all of which I have, at one point or another, actually done. For that matter I'm defending the U.S. Constitution right here and now, by exercising my First Amendment Right to freedom of speech. What have you done, other than shoot your mouth off as an anonymous coward on a gods-be-damned Internet discussion forum? Rhetorical question, I'm pretty sure you've done Jack and Shit, in that order. You do not impress me one bit.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
The gatekeepers never let any good people into power.
it's that way on purpose.
. . . so the judge gets delivered a National Security Letter. The first thing, that is very clearly stated in the letter, is that he is not allowed to talk about the National Security Letter.
The first rule of National Security Letter club is...
Really? Sounds like this judge had his/her verdict in mind before anyone stepped into the courtroom.
TO have the verdict in mind , that moron judge has to have a brain in his head. .. patch of beach sand !!
One trillion dollars
_______________________________
Resistance is futile
And Congress is ever so diligent in making sure they are following the law, because it's their job and they take it very seriously.
60 killed in embassies under Bush, not a single investigation. 4 dead under Obama's administration, and one of the longest and most expensive investigations in Congressional history. They are too busy crucifying Clinton (either one will do) to do anything useful. And yes, I know you were being iconic/sarcastic.
Learn to love Alaska
I'm sure there are a LOT of chess players around the world, so winning a chess championship isn't notable?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
But it is the judge's fault. He should know the value, and if not, one of his many unpaid interns would look it up for him. It's not like it's a secret. The judge knows the "value" of a trillion dollars, and a trillion grains of sand, so he should teach himself the value of the subject he's ruling on. That's the judge's failing, though it would have helped if the lawyer had given some manner of comparison, though he, like us, may have assumed the judge has heard of one of the top 10 sites on the planet. Because talking to a judge like he's an idiot usually does more to harm your case than help it.
Learn to love Alaska
No, it's abject stupidity on the part of the judge. Judges are supposed to be smart.
How many requests: 1e12
How many humans in the world: 1e10
That's an average of 100 per person. We can fuzz the figures by a few orders of magnitude by making assumptions about what proportion of people visit wikipedia.
The "grains of sand" argument only makes sense if there are even vaguely the same order of magnitude of humans as grains of sand. The judge was therefore being intentionally obtuse which is not the role of judges or is in fact very dim which is really not a good thing.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Seems a bit of a contradiction to call someone a coward for not wanting their life ruined.
Don't kill them. National Security Letter? What National Security Letter?
""Some guy told me that...". Worse case, when you know the identity of the person, it is his words against yours, there again, not much chances."
Not 'some guy'! You have to say: Some bearded guy in the sky...
This sounds like an application of a de minimis principal -- arguing that the scale of Wikimedia's traffic isn't large enough to give it standing.
I seem to remember learning this phrase in college in a political science class about some guy who sued the government to get some kind of information on defense appropriations, but was rejected because his individual contribution was so small that it essentially didn't matter.
No, we should just have a trillion grains delivered to his house.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
There is only one way to find out, isn't there?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Well if it's done verbally how can THEY prove they did it and enforce it against you then?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Someone should ask the judge if he'd be happy to have a trillion grains of sand dropped on him.
Assuming spherical sand grains 1mm across with a density of 2,2g/cm^2, I make that over 1,100 tonnes of sand.
That wasn't even the reason why it was thrown out. Even if it was, the very nature of the subject means that the prosecution cannot present the evidence. That's the point of the whole lawsuit, that the secrecy around that shit. If that had been the reason you can as well toss the justice system as a defense against unlawful government snooping because the whole point is that they do it in secrecy without any warrant or oversight.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If you file a legal brief that says "this number is really, really big and significant, trust us!" -- expect the court to laugh. Foreign lawyers accustomed to an inquisitorial system, perhaps? If so, better to do some homework next time.
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
Not a single person in this thread knows what he's talking about. Welcome to the new Slashdot, gents... you'll fit right in.
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
. . . so the judge gets delivered a National Security Letter. The first thing, that is very clearly stated in the letter, is that he is not allowed to talk about the National Security Letter. Then the letter instructs him how to rule on the case.
Any judge with half a brain would recuse themselves from the case.
Really? Sounds like this judge had his/her verdict in mind before anyone stepped into the courtroom.
Another notch in the anti-democracy belt.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
I think the government should be guilty until proven innocent.
Yes, yes I did ask for it. ;-)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Which one of us is going to dress up in a suit, fake a letter, and deliver it to the other one while pretending to be the NSA?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Hey - look: I can put you away (& I like you too) easily with 100's of upmods of my posts that say otherwise vs. purely arbitrary bullshit, EASILY - want proof of them? Just ask - THAT is EXACTLY how I put away fools giving me guff, with concrete, undeniable & verifiable fact - every time... apk
There's an example of what I mean. I'd call that confrontational. You can call it what you want. It won't fly on Wikipedia, they'll get grouchy. Also, Wikipedia doesn't do "PS" and the likes. However, I'm pretty sure you know that was mild banter for humor sake. As for moderation? I don't even use my mod points. Who am I to judge?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Some of us are human enough to be willing to protect those who are unable to protect themselves. Some of us accept that we're a part of society and didn't make it on our own. Some of us are willing to accept risks on behalf of those who can not or will not. It's called, "doing the ethical thing." You may have fewer ethics and, well, that's okay. Someday, when you're in the ditch and I offer you a hand up - maybe you'll understand the idea.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
And you forget just how vile neo-Nazi vitriol can become.. and then ..
Seriously your speech patterns indicate severe mental illness. You are subject to severe delusions it just happens that in this case that they centre on the 'Jewish conspiracy' fallacy.. The first stage to getting help is accepting that everything you said was rubbish. And remember in the heart of madness your instincts almost always betray you - every time, that feeling of absolute certainty is the greatest lie of all and you are telling it to yourself... Get help.
Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. -- Upton Sinclair
Not a single person in this thread knows what he's talking about. Welcome to the new Slashdot, gents... you'll fit right in.
No one has written enough yet for us to discern. Only basic reactions are posted.
The one post we can state was written by someone insufficiently informed is yours.
I would post "Racist much?", but that doesn't really capture your stupidity. I presume that's why you post as AC as well.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Strangely he doesn't appear to know the value of a trillion grains of sand. Really, go dump 11000 (metric) tonnes of sand on miami beach and see if no one notices the change.
,
It's really weird, the US court system. You can be hit for 1000s of instances of copyright violation for a single bit torrent file but trillions of individual transactions don't count as "large"
They don't enforce it directly. They will get you for something else or frame you for something else or use connections to ruin your career.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Sadly your probably right... Sigh..
Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
Humans aren't likely making the most requests, but the prosecutors should have made an attempt to show the magnitude.
If your goal is to get people to think the same way as you, you should try to be coherent at a bare minimum. You've fucking failed miserably at that. I suspect the reason for this is that you're fucked in the head.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Are we both talking about the series of comments I directly replied to? If so, L2R.
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
It's amazing what lengths some people would go to just to get some toilet cleaner...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I suspect this judge's search history might be judged by some as suspect (if it were ever to be released)
Sounds more as if this is yet another judge who is clueless and still passes a verdict. OK, might be that the lawyers didn't educate the judge sufficiently.
By my calculations about 10 million kilograms. Hardly a small patch of beach.