Their owners and editors then had their briefing, and suddenly actions that were pro-american whistleblowing were anti-american spying.
So yes, he didn't change, but the media's portrayal of him did, and that's what's important.
Many people that did and would have continued supporting him as a whistleblower changed their minds once the leaks shifted from alleged violations of the rights of Americans to revealing American intelligence operations overseas. Not hard to figure out.
Sorry you love the Federal Government so much, but Snowden is a patriot standing up for the ideals on which the USA was founded. Deal with it.
Snowden is a patriot standing for the ideals on which the USA was founded in much the same way as another American patriot and hero of the early part of the Revolutionary War did. That hero was General Arnold.
Maybe you should have kept looking. I found coverage from news services that many news outlets would rely upon, major and minor newspapers, broadcast networks, industry publications. Just a sample, there is a lot more.
Claiming that the US media isn't covering this story is BULL. It is being covered by the mainstream press, and often from more than one angle. It is no surprise that the Guardian is going to have the biggest drum on this - Snowden gave the stolen documents to one of the Guardian's journalists to write the stories. Frankly I think if you only go to the Guardian you will have almost the opposite problem - you won't necessarily get the other side of the discussion. Of course you may not be interested in that.
...that I have to wonder who is guiding them. How would Snowden know exactly how to publish this data to maximum effect? He's a sysadmin, not a PR expert. This seems more like one of the successful KGB misinformation campaigns of the 1970s and 1980s.
Some grocery chains are currently featuring what for most Americans would be exotic fruits, such as dragon fruit, Buddha's Hand, horned melons, rambutan, and others. A number of things you could do with those. If you eat them, make sure it's the right part.;)
Why would they try to stop terrorists? The sooner there is another successful attack the sooner their budget gets doubled.
Your thinking is too limited. It's obvious that they enjoy being the subject of Congressional probes about their failures, with the added chance that the boss could be fired like just happened to two Marine generals fired for negligence in Afghanistan. Since half of NSA is reported to be military, there might even be a court martial or dozens.
And if it turned out that the attack they didn't stop was one involving Black Plague that ended up killing tens of thousands of Americans, just think of the pride they would feel. "I didn't stop that!"
Of course you have to understand that not everyone lives in a morally inverse universe, so their thinking may not be understandable by everyone.
... they're subject to a very stern reprimand (on the merits on not getting caught), and for the most egregious offenders, the possibility of paid vacation and/or reassignment.
From what I seem to recall reading, many of them were fired.
We also know that the analysts are nearly totally unsupervised. How many do you think were not caught? 100? 1000? It's certainly a lot more than have been caught.
Do we know that? I don't think that we do. It also isn't clear that your speculation is well founded.
The unknown part is what dark matter is made of. We know it's there, we just don't know what it is.
I think it would be more correct to state that we can see the measured effect, but if it is matter or something else causing it is still uncertain. (That something else being a modified theory of gravity, or something else, for example.)
...that maybe they're not seeing it because it's just not there?
Just a suggestion.
Although dark matter is a leading explanation for the universe we see, there are others. Modified theories of gravity are a contender. One of them that I find interesting is MoND and its TeVeS offshoot. There aren't a lot of people working on it, so when a perceived roadblock appears it sometimes takes time to work around it.
This is a violation of Google's Terms of Service. I hope Google cuts off all access from.gov and.mil domains.
Is that really true? If this really occurred as suggested, and a cable was tapped to copy message traffic, they wouldn't be making use of Google search servers as a service so it isn't clear that it would be a violations of the TOS. It would be pretty much equivalent to copying.mp3 files, something that most people here claim isn't a crime.
Since you're throwing out pie in the sky ideas, what do you think would happen if Google cut off all access from.gov and.mil domains? Would the government just lump it? Would it file a lawsuit? Civil rights investigation? Antitrust investigation? Nationalize Google? Stop all their traffic at US borders on national security grounds? Lots of possibilities depending on what factors you want to include in the analysis. Keep in mind that some of the driving factors in this are likely to be related to the armed conflicts in which the US is currently engaged along side its allies.
IBM beat back an antitrust investigation by the US government, but it took decades IIRC and was a major distraction for the company.
Meanwhile the NSA agents are using their dragnet of all of the worlds communications to do what? Loveint, the NSA agents are using their wiretaps to spy on their loved ones, neighbors, crushes, and anyone they want.
About 1 person per year has been caught doing that if you read the reports. I'm not going to mark that down as a major threat.
Slashdotters seem pretty appalled at these revelations, but when will the general public reach the point of disgust? In theory the people of the USA still have the power to change these behaviors through the ballot box. The news just goes on and on. but the outrage seems slow to reach the surface.
There is a process for changing things in a democracy*, and that normally doesn't involve mobs with torches and pitchforks when it comes to important national policy questions, even if you call people "sheep".** People are writing their legislators. Congress is gathering facts, including reviewing its reports and holding the hearings occurring at present, as noted here. It is up the Congress, President, and Courts to work through the issues as they occur. There are disputes about the facts of what has been done, the legality of it, what the country needs from its intelligence agencies, and about how to proceed. That will eventually get worked out.
It is entirely possible that little if anything will change for many reasons. Many people have mistaken views about what the law and precedent is on this, both Constitutional and statutory. As a result there are people that are upset due to their mistaken ideas about the legality of various aspects of what has been going on. It isn't likely that Congress will accommodate all of the mistaken ideas about what is and isn't legal when they act. They will rely on what the lawyers and court cases tell them. There are clearly cases in which the documents from Snowden have been misinterpreted as to what they represented. That results in people being upset due to their mistaken belief about what has been going on. Although various activists advocate a range of reactions, from stopping all foreign intelligence to limiting specific methods or targets of intelligence, most of the American people still support intelligence operations focused on terrorists and enemies of the US and its allies. Also keep in mind that what has been under discussion over the last several months is only a small part of what NSA does. There may be some new restrictions on the intelligence agencies. It is unlikely that all of the activists and cranks will be satisfied, so the complaints are likely to marginally decrease, but are unlikely to disappear.
* Democratic Republic - spare me further comments. ** Generally not a strong indicator that you have real insight into the process.
So you're making France and North Korea out to be equivalents in your faulty example of moral equivalence? Nice. Nice. You have a rare gift for insights like that.
The Soviet Union had a long history of aggression. I don't even have to look anywhere to come up with at least a short list of countries, many of which it either annexed directly, or stole territory from: Poland, Finland, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Afghanistan. There are other cases of Soviet aggression to be sure. That list you have is also faulty in a number of respects, not the least of which is that there was no democracy in Iran when the US and UK assisted the restoration of the Shaw to the throne of Iran in a counter-coup.
The death of Mao brought China to a major fork in the road. It look a couple of years before their new direction became clear.
Getting out of poverty and become rich is inviting all over the world. Especially in countries like China, which “has been poor for too long,” to use the words of the country’s legendary leader Deng Xiaoping.
“To get rich is glorious” he declared in 1978 — injecting a dose of capitalism into the country’s communist system, unleashing the ingenuity and creativity of the Chinese people. -- Two Ways To Become Rich In China
Slashdot Mirror
Their owners and editors then had their briefing, and suddenly actions that were pro-american whistleblowing were anti-american spying.
So yes, he didn't change, but the media's portrayal of him did, and that's what's important.
Many people that did and would have continued supporting him as a whistleblower changed their minds once the leaks shifted from alleged violations of the rights of Americans to revealing American intelligence operations overseas. Not hard to figure out.
Looks like the time to buy is coming up before they're gone.
Not the first time that a better technology has been driven from the market.
... he'll be supporting one of non-government internet portals ...
Odd that the Russian government took a pass on hiring such talent. On the other hand, the Russians aren't stupid.
Much more likely it is an NSA/GCHQ malware USB stick given they have been caught red handed spying at the G20
Why? Do you think there is a rule that only one country is allowed to spy per meeting? That would be news.
Sorry you love the Federal Government so much, but Snowden is a patriot standing up for the ideals on which the USA was founded. Deal with it.
Snowden is a patriot standing for the ideals on which the USA was founded in much the same way as another American patriot and hero of the early part of the Revolutionary War did. That hero was General Arnold.
Maybe you should have kept looking. I found coverage from news services that many news outlets would rely upon, major and minor newspapers, broadcast networks, industry publications. Just a sample, there is a lot more.
Anti-NSA rally attracts thousands to march in Washington
Hundreds march at anti-NSA rally in D.C.
Protesters march in Washington against NSA spying
Anti-NSA rally targets Washington
Claiming that the US media isn't covering this story is BULL. It is being covered by the mainstream press, and often from more than one angle. It is no surprise that the Guardian is going to have the biggest drum on this - Snowden gave the stolen documents to one of the Guardian's journalists to write the stories. Frankly I think if you only go to the Guardian you will have almost the opposite problem - you won't necessarily get the other side of the discussion. Of course you may not be interested in that.
...that I have to wonder who is guiding them. How would Snowden know exactly how to publish this data to maximum effect? He's a sysadmin, not a PR expert. This seems more like one of the successful KGB misinformation campaigns of the 1970s and 1980s.
That inference has been made.
It's Now Clear That Russian Intelligence Speaks For Edward Snowden
Defector Describes Russia’s Handling of NSA Leaker Snowden
The Russians were involved with him long before it was acknowledged in Moscow.
Report: Snowden stayed at Russian consulate while in Hong Kong
Definitive? Not quite. Suspicious? Very.
I this this qualifies: Soviets Sponsor Spread of AIDS Disinformation
Fog: Either dry ice in water, or a fog machine.
Maybe a Plasma ball
Various chains have some potentially amusing decorations.
Some grocery chains are currently featuring what for most Americans would be exotic fruits, such as dragon fruit, Buddha's Hand, horned melons, rambutan, and others. A number of things you could do with those. If you eat them, make sure it's the right part. ;)
Maybe some Halloween Sound Effects
Remote controls - always handy.
Perhaps some party lights.
Remote speakers.
Have fun.
It greatly simplifies things to look and see who Congress says the President can take military action against. That is pretty clear.
Authorization for Use of Military Force
Terrorists?
Why would they try to stop terrorists? The sooner there is another successful attack the sooner their budget gets doubled.
Your thinking is too limited. It's obvious that they enjoy being the subject of Congressional probes about their failures, with the added chance that the boss could be fired like just happened to two Marine generals fired for negligence in Afghanistan. Since half of NSA is reported to be military, there might even be a court martial or dozens.
And if it turned out that the attack they didn't stop was one involving Black Plague that ended up killing tens of thousands of Americans, just think of the pride they would feel. "I didn't stop that!"
Of course you have to understand that not everyone lives in a morally inverse universe, so their thinking may not be understandable by everyone.
I though it was the moon that was all dark.
... they're subject to a very stern reprimand (on the merits on not getting caught), and for the most egregious offenders, the possibility of paid vacation and/or reassignment.
From what I seem to recall reading, many of them were fired.
We also know that the analysts are nearly totally unsupervised. How many do you think were not caught? 100? 1000? It's certainly a lot more than have been caught.
Do we know that? I don't think that we do. It also isn't clear that your speculation is well founded.
The unknown part is what dark matter is made of. We know it's there, we just don't know what it is.
I think it would be more correct to state that we can see the measured effect, but if it is matter or something else causing it is still uncertain. (That something else being a modified theory of gravity, or something else, for example.)
Nothing is "secure" any more. "Secure" is now a one word oxymoron.
When it comes to computers, when wasn't it?
...that maybe they're not seeing it because it's just not there?
Just a suggestion.
Although dark matter is a leading explanation for the universe we see, there are others. Modified theories of gravity are a contender. One of them that I find interesting is MoND and its TeVeS offshoot. There aren't a lot of people working on it, so when a perceived roadblock appears it sometimes takes time to work around it.
Tensor-vector-scalar-modified gravity: from small scale to cosmology
This is a violation of Google's Terms of Service. I hope Google cuts off all access from .gov and .mil domains.
Is that really true? If this really occurred as suggested, and a cable was tapped to copy message traffic, they wouldn't be making use of Google search servers as a service so it isn't clear that it would be a violations of the TOS. It would be pretty much equivalent to copying .mp3 files, something that most people here claim isn't a crime.
Since you're throwing out pie in the sky ideas, what do you think would happen if Google cut off all access from .gov and .mil domains? Would the government just lump it? Would it file a lawsuit? Civil rights investigation? Antitrust investigation? Nationalize Google? Stop all their traffic at US borders on national security grounds? Lots of possibilities depending on what factors you want to include in the analysis. Keep in mind that some of the driving factors in this are likely to be related to the armed conflicts in which the US is currently engaged along side its allies.
IBM beat back an antitrust investigation by the US government, but it took decades IIRC and was a major distraction for the company.
Meanwhile the NSA agents are using their dragnet of all of the worlds communications to do what? Loveint, the NSA agents are using their wiretaps to spy on their loved ones, neighbors, crushes, and anyone they want.
About 1 person per year has been caught doing that if you read the reports. I'm not going to mark that down as a major threat.
Slashdotters seem pretty appalled at these revelations, but when will the general public reach the point of disgust? In theory the people of the USA still have the power to change these behaviors through the ballot box. The news just goes on and on. but the outrage seems slow to reach the surface.
There is a process for changing things in a democracy*, and that normally doesn't involve mobs with torches and pitchforks when it comes to important national policy questions, even if you call people "sheep".** People are writing their legislators. Congress is gathering facts, including reviewing its reports and holding the hearings occurring at present, as noted here. It is up the Congress, President, and Courts to work through the issues as they occur. There are disputes about the facts of what has been done, the legality of it, what the country needs from its intelligence agencies, and about how to proceed. That will eventually get worked out.
It is entirely possible that little if anything will change for many reasons. Many people have mistaken views about what the law and precedent is on this, both Constitutional and statutory. As a result there are people that are upset due to their mistaken ideas about the legality of various aspects of what has been going on. It isn't likely that Congress will accommodate all of the mistaken ideas about what is and isn't legal when they act. They will rely on what the lawyers and court cases tell them. There are clearly cases in which the documents from Snowden have been misinterpreted as to what they represented. That results in people being upset due to their mistaken belief about what has been going on. Although various activists advocate a range of reactions, from stopping all foreign intelligence to limiting specific methods or targets of intelligence, most of the American people still support intelligence operations focused on terrorists and enemies of the US and its allies. Also keep in mind that what has been under discussion over the last several months is only a small part of what NSA does. There may be some new restrictions on the intelligence agencies. It is unlikely that all of the activists and cranks will be satisfied, so the complaints are likely to marginally decrease, but are unlikely to disappear.
* Democratic Republic - spare me further comments.
** Generally not a strong indicator that you have real insight into the process.
No surprise. It is consistent with the President's previously expressed views.
Coal-state lawmakers seek to block EPA power plant rules
Ah, might you be a so called "Sovereign Citizen"? That probably won't end well.
So you're making France and North Korea out to be equivalents in your faulty example of moral equivalence? Nice. Nice. You have a rare gift for insights like that.
The Soviet Union had a long history of aggression. I don't even have to look anywhere to come up with at least a short list of countries, many of which it either annexed directly, or stole territory from: Poland, Finland, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Afghanistan. There are other cases of Soviet aggression to be sure. That list you have is also faulty in a number of respects, not the least of which is that there was no democracy in Iran when the US and UK assisted the restoration of the Shaw to the throne of Iran in a counter-coup.
Great post.
The death of Mao brought China to a major fork in the road. It look a couple of years before their new direction became clear.
Getting out of poverty and become rich is inviting all over the world. Especially in countries like China, which “has been poor for too long,” to use the words of the country’s legendary leader Deng Xiaoping.
“To get rich is glorious” he declared in 1978 — injecting a dose of capitalism into the country’s communist system, unleashing the ingenuity and creativity of the Chinese people. -- Two Ways To Become Rich In China