Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Senate Passes Bill Renewing NSA's Internet Surveillance Program (reuters.com)

Posted by msmash on from the here-we-go dept.

From a report: The U.S. Senate on Thursday passed a bill to renew the National Security Agency's warrantless internet surveillance program for six years and with minimal changes, overcoming objections from civil liberties advocates that it did too little to safeguard the privacy of Americans. From a report on CNET: The programs, known as Prism and Upstream, allow the NSA to collect online communications of foreigners outside the US. Prism collects these communications from internet services, and Upstream taps into the internet's infrastructure to capture information in transit. Some communications from Americans and others in the US are collected in the process. The vote Thursday renews the programs for six years. The House approved a bill renewing the programs last week. Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden first revealed the programs by leaking information about them to journalists in 2013. After the news coverage, the administration of President Barack Obama declassified much information about the programs.

8 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. Democracy theater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is there anybody left at this point who actually believes that the US intelligence apparatus is governed by laws? They made it quite clear over the past couple decades that they can construct a legal fiction as needed to do whatever the fuck they want. Anything done in Congress is only a show for the public.

    The only recourse for "little people" is encryption, cryptocurrency, or anything else that has a chance of minimizing state power.

    1. Re:Democracy theater by ScienceofSpock · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with this is that it renews a bill that legalizes many of those previously illegal gathering methods, and since this was done under the guise of "national security", those methods are not transparent. If they're not transparent, we have no recourse but to accept the government's word that they are necessary and work.

      I mean, more people were killed by toddlers in the US in 2015 than by terrorists, yet there are no new laws coming out to "protect" Americans from toddlers. But god damn, we need to snoop all your shit because "Oh no! teh terrorists!"

      I know people here have seen this enough, but it still rings true in my opinion: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Ben Franklin

  2. NOW the buck stops with the president... by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now you all can say the buck stops with the president.... I'm guessing he's going to sign it so get ready to blast away....

    All you who voted democratic though, remember that many in your party voted for this in the Senate... You might want to hold your Senator responsible if yours voted for this...In fact, PLEASE do that... ;)

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:NOW the buck stops with the president... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You still think you have two distinct parties in the US?

      Cute.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:NOW the buck stops with the president... by youngone · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You still think you have two distinct parties in the US?

      What I wonder about is why Americans think having two parties is normal and not to be questioned.

      The UK currently has 6 parties in it's parliament, and the tiny little country I live in, of only 4 million people, currently has 5 parties represented.
      Until recently we had as many as 8 parties but apparently the US, a country of 320,000,000 agree with each other to the extent that they only need two parties.
      Of course no-one does propaganda quite like the US.

  3. Re:Show up to your primaries by PoopJuggler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would say that if you really want things to change, rid yourself of the belief that 3rd parties have "zero chance of winning". Vote for the best candidate, regardless of party affiliation. If you keep voting along R/D party lines, you're just part of the problem because neither of those parties is really interested in making the country better.

  4. Giving reason to Encrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And then they wonder why the rest of us want to encrypt our comunications.. Idiots.

  5. Re:Show up to your primaries by hierofalcon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Register in the major party that is most likely to win the majority of the races in your state. Vote for the best candidate in that party. Then in the general election - vote for whoever you feel is best.

    This does two things. First, it means that the primary ballot will not be as likely to be overwhelmingly for one candidate because many are voting in the major party. Second, once you have done the best you can to try to get the majority party to pick a candidate you can live with via the primary, voting your conscience in the general will make you feel better. It probably won't matter for most offices anyway, but that's life. There are usually not enough candidates competing for election in a third-party to make the primary matter.

    There are some states where the outcome is close enough that this isn't safe, but most states are pretty solidly red or blue. In these cases, there is nothing wrong with voting with the major party in the primary and then for the best candidate that survives in the general.

    What really needs to change is the first past the post. Have the primary election countrywide on the same day - just like the general election. That, by itself, would do more to make sure that the best of the lot cleared the primary and not just the candidate with the most money of their own or their friends. It would also help to eliminate the influence of a few states that get to vote earlier than others.