Not gonna happen. There is too much investment on both sides. And if it cleans up the misdeeds of both side's spooks-- so much the better.
Does the dark side of intelligence need a spanking? Oh.Yeah. Will this do it? No.
This was the Chinese press calling for the action, not the government. Our press did the same stupid thing regarding Huawei. Did it have an effect? Not really.
It already is happening. Do you think the boycotts will stop here? The US will retaliate and then China will retaliate.
Why shouldn't a nation be able to take steps to maintain its own sovereignty? I'm not a fan of Chinese human rights violations, but they have an interest, no, a responsibility to secure their borders from US aggression. Including espionage.
They can, the problem is it brews an even more paranoid environment which means more prism like spying operations will be built. The more nations distrust each other the more they spy on each other. The cold war is an example of this kind of distrust.
The level of distrust China now has may lead China to crack down domestically and build more effective domestic spying capabilities.
And this will initiate a trade war. Now China will suspect every US IT product of having a backdoor. Even if this has always been true, it's now proven true by Snowden and the consequences to the economy will be negative. It means more protectionist policies are coming as distrust slows global trade.
Every country should boost its defences if another country is snooping around anonymously in its businesses!!! No country has the right to do that! Thank Edward Snowden indeed!
That is the cause of the cold war. I guess we are going to go back to that again because governments never trust other governments and never have.
Are we at war with China? Are we even in a cold war with China?
China and the US are friends but also at war in other areas depending on the area. In the technology space the US and China are at war. It's a cyber war between hackers at this point and Edward Snowden has made it harder for US hackers which gives the advantage to Chinese hackers. This impacts the global economy and the US economy.
If you're being sarcastic, you're deluded. China improving it's defenses, even against the US is not your loss, and the US successfully spying on the Chinese is not necessarily to your benefit. It's only a problem for you if it becomes one-sided, which will take a lot more than Snowden's actions. Meanwhile, Snowden has brought to light the US government shitting on it's own constitution.
If that is a sincere thanks to Snowden, I agree.
Of course I'm being sarcastic. I don't support losing American jobs to China and I don't support boosting China at the expense of America. Let me guess, you're a foreigner? If you were an American you would understand why this is bad.
Only problem with your statement is that so far the start of every full blown war has helped the US economy. I'm not talking about peacekeeping or drawn out police actions...I mean war. WWI, WWII, Cold War. All boosted the US economy to some degree.
One of the main reasons is that these companies decide to bring jobs back to the US. Not sure if this will happen in this age of a global market. But the tension between US and China has been growing for a very long time.
The cold war and WW2 is why we have prism in the first place. Nothing good resulted from the red scare, the cold war, etc. It did not help our economy either, look at the fact that the US is not backed by gold, look at the fact that the US buying power in a family has decreased. We have to work more to get less than our parents did and our parents had to work more than theirs. So at this point, no it does not increase your salary or your buying power to have war unless you work for the war machine of China or the US.
There is a war. Huaewei is dragged through the mud by witless/gutless/dimwits in the US Congress. Turnabout is fair play.
The silly thing is, that all of the cell phones across the planets are like little location devices, revealing your location, your contacts, your texts, and your conversations.
Cisco is on the slide anyway, and this won't really have a dramatic effect on the US economy. The problem, you see, is that the warriors aren't making enough money right now, and with moderate Middle East peace, there's no good money to be made from that.
Trade war? Insignificant. Sorry. Just not gonna happen.
If the boycott of Cisco takes place then a trade war has begun. Cisco is one of the most important tech companies in the USA. What if they boycott Apple, Microsoft, and several others? I expect there will be a trade war as well as a cold war among hackers.
Don't you understand what just happened? We are now entering a trade war which could spiral into another cold war.
This is not going to be good for us citizens who will lose our jobs. It will not be good for the US economy, and Chinese spies will continue hacking into US corporations. You want to be ruled by China then that is fine but let's not pretend like it will be good news to most people in America.
How telling others (specially, US citizens) that they are being spied put your own people in danger? Who is behaving wrong there? Or spying all the world is a god given priviledge? Is not that they won't abuse that privilege,
I don't want anybody hurt, but give government free card to do anything and they will be the terrorists. If you think that that terror campaign only goes to a few countries, think again, they want to go against hackers too (so better you don't live in the same area that someone downloading an mp3). And if that don't worry you because you, after all, live in US, you probably will be next.
This is about awareness, the rest of the world so they can protect themselves, and you, that should be the one that can do anything about it. But you can keep giving them free pass, in the end, if/when something happens to you or to someone you cares about in the hand of that government you are defending, you will know that was your fault.
He's way of getting awareness is now starting to cause damage. I understand he wants to shut the program down but he's going about it the wrong way. Also it might not be an option to shut it down anyway.
So I agree with you if it's about abuse we have to prevent that but I don't see how him fleeing to Cuba or threatening to release damaging files will prevent abuse. Has the NSA stopped spying on us? No.
Always. The US government has been at war non stop since WW2.
It's SOP in the US for prosecutors to go after any charge they can even remotely pin on. Many people are calling Snowden a traitor. If they managed to catch him I think there's a good chance they would seek to charge him with Treason.
He's not going to be charged with Treason. He's not the first guy to release classified documents. He'll get life in supermax prison though.
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
So traitors can be executed and that means the stakes here really are life or death.
That hasn't happened in a long long time. It's highly speculative to think it would happen to him.
Why is the US such an enthusiastic torturer and why is the US such an enemy of human rights? Why is speaking out against a corrupt government a capital offense? Freedom of speech is an illusion. When it really matters speech will get you the electric chair.
Most of the world considers the US a thug and a villian and seeking to execute someone for speaking out against government abuse of power is proof that they are right. Only a certain kind of American would want to see this guy fry or hang. The rest of the world is cheering for him as are all Americans who believe in freedom and human rights.
All governments act the same way and treat civilians as less than human during war. Also when did the US say he seeks to execute him? Why does it have to be extreme?
I don't want to see Snowden hang but I don't want to see him hanging out in Cuba either. Whatever he knows has to be kept safe and that is a lot more difficult in Cuba unless the CIA is there to protect him from Castro.
AFAIK Snowden has not actually entered Russia. He lacks a visa or even a valid passport. He remains in transit until his next flight out.
The Russians are no longer our enemies. Are you as afraid of the UK gaining classified information about us and if not why not?
Governments are way too obsessed with secrecy and the vast majority of it is unnecessary and unjustified. Yes, there is the occassional bit of weapons research that we may want to keep close to our chests, but most other secrets are not of much value and are merely embarrassing. If you don't want to look like an asshole it might be better not to act like one in the first place instead of relying on secrecy laws to protect you from the consequences of your moronic actions. Neither Russia nor China are our enemies. Perhaps it's about time we started treating them the way we would like to be treated ourselves. Reading their mail does not make us more secure. It just makes us look like jerks when we inevitably get caught with our hands in the cookie jar.
Why does Russia support Assad while the US gives weapons to the rebels?
Just because you're tired of it doesn't mean it isn't true. There is a line.
I have my own priorities, so I can that, at least for me, it isn't true.
Freedom is more important than security for me too, but if I can have freedom and security that is better. Why should I be forced to choose death as an outcome if it wouldn't even guarantee freedom for humanity?
It's one thing if we are talking about an action by Snowden which freed humanity from war and governments but we both know that wont be the result of his leak. His leak will result in crackdowns, increased surveillance. Just looking at the stuff said by some people on this site I wouldn't be surprised if many of them aren't flagged and put under surveillance.
That said I want free speech and I say what I think regardless, but I just don't see how these leaks will solve anything. I think it's naive to think leaking can fix government, but I do agree with that leaking can bring attention to abuses by authority on citizens. Snowden's leak did not reveal any abuses though.
The problem is with any leak that is made usually a bunch of lives would have to be sacrificed in order to make that move. My stance is that it's not worth it to sacrifice those lives because it's not protecting lives. Meaning it does not make sense to sacrifice the lives of 1000 service men and women when it's not saving 100,000 civilians. It's also not realistic to because chances are if you're an American you know more service men and women than you know civilians overseas being caught up in drone strikes.
So the real choice you get is to sacrifice the lives of your friends, family and limited amount of people who you know in your life, or sacrifice the lives of people you don't know. But in any conflict people are going to die and you only really get to choose which people and perhaps do your best to limit the use of certain weapons on all sides. The NSA/CIA/US has some truly cruel weapons which should not be used, and so do China and Russia. It's in all of our interest as civilians to restrict our governments use of those weapons, and this is why we need law and order combined with oversight and accountability.
Right now the NSA has Prism which is like a weapon because it can be used to destroy anyone's life. For that reason it is something which must be strictly regulated. For that reason for me it's important that the technology not get spread around the world by Snowden or anyone else. If it's bad enough that the NSA has it why would we want China and Russia to have it or even know details about it? Also where are the leaks of Russia's surveillance state? There are no leaks coming out of Russia being sent to Wikileaks.
The point here is many people deem it that because the US is the biggest bully on the block that it has to be taken down, the problem is if you take the US down then all global stability goes to shit. The US has nuclear weapons and technology even worse than nukes. If the US is taken down then if that stuff leaks the human race is doomed. The NSA does protect those facilities and technologies and in my opinion it's better that stuff does not leak ever, because if we keep promoting this pro-leaker culture eventually WMDs will leak.
I would happily see all governments fall, and all presidents, prime ministers, kings and queens dead, hung by the guts of the priesthood (however they might call themselves, imans, rabbis and gurus included). The war will not be civil, but will be a vast uprising of the masses against the oppressors. Capitalists shall be drawn and quartered in an orgy of revenge that shall make the French and Russian Revolutions look like picnics.
It won't be pretty. And I certainly don't desire it. But I can't see a good way out of it, other than the fanciful. Perhaps the powerful might be convinced to give up their wealth and powerful, and sit with the rest of us and eat common food. I doubt it.
You talk as if some governments are better than others, or even that some are good. I see the reality, that they are all bad. Saddam Hussein was an awful man, no doubt. But the "liberation" of Iraq did not lead to fewer deaths or a more free country.
it's better for all humanity to know how we are spied upon. And if I could, I would release all government secrets at once (and fuck the soldiers and special ops and spies, who all knew what they were getting into signing up to fight for their country). And if I couldn't, but if I could instead just release the secrets of one government, I would do that.
I go further than Thoreau, who suggested that the government that governs least governs best. I say that no government governs well at all, and all should be abolished.
No I talk as if some people are better than others. That is because to me it's subjective. There are people I happen to like who happen to be in the USA or US allied nations. To hurt national security for the US would put their lives at risk and I don't support that.
I agree that governments are too authoritarian, but I disagree with the tactic of leaking as a solution. Leaking creates arms races as governments discover what other governments have been working on in Top Secret. Leaking also makes each government a bit more paranoid which usually means they spy on us even harder because they are worried about the next Bradley fucking Manning or Edward Snowden. If anything the leaks could be used to justify an increase in the spy budget of the NSA. People will say if we just looked at Snowden a bit more carefully and vetted him a bit more thoroughly that maybe this couldn't have happened.
The truth is no amount of vetting would have changed this and the problem isn't that the NSA spies, but whether or not the mechanisms they are using is causing abuse. I think spying on peoples Internet habits over years is ripe for abuse so there has to be a lot more oversight of these sorts of programs but I also believe if the NSA isn't doing it foreign intelligence will so I don't believe attacking the NSA program is how you change things, you change things by getting laws passed to restrict, regulate, and provide accountability for all who abuse their power.
I know, your job is improve the reputation of the NSA and alikes, even with this kind of spills. But what you don't know can hurt you, or the ones you care about, and that they have in a silver platter anything that can be used against you (even by misinterpretation) don't improve your chances. Speaking of misuses, how will affect you personally what russia or cuba or whatever enemy in your mind nation do with this information? And how is that compared with that NSA/CIA/(dis)intelligence agencies can do to you with what they are gathering? And what about the average citizen of US, or the world? Focus in the biggest foe.
This isn't about a reputation, it's about people staying alive.
I don't think everything the NSA does is bad. I think it needs more oversight and I think there may be abuses but I don't think we should completely sacrifice all national security like you do. Don't you have friends and family in the USA? What about in the military? Do you want to hurt the NSA so bad that you don't care about the security of thousands or perhaps millions of people?
There is a difference between not liking a program or policy of the US government or NSA and completely hating the organization and country.
First, do you realize that Snowden left US because he felt that would never receive fair trial.
He chose to go to Hong Kong which is in China. That is no accident. Yes there is fear of US allies extraditing him but why did he choose Hong Kong and then Russia? He had other options but chose these countries which would cause the greatest amount of political fallout possible. It's not the Cold War anymore but China? Russia? Cuba?!
After the decision he made to reveal unjust practices to public he had no other choice than to leave.
If he had been convinced that he would have fair trial there would have been no reason to escape. He did not leave because it was fun or because he wanted to hand over secret information to foreign countries, but because it was necessary for his own safety after going public what is done by NSA/CIA.
The difference between you and me is that I question his motives. I don't pretend to know what he was thinking or know why he made his decisions. But if you want to know my position on what I think he was thinking and doing, I believe he was acting based on his moral compass and his conscience. I think the problem he had was a lack of information, and this led to him making terrible decisions. The thing about the government is information is so ridiculously compartmentalized that he might have known everything there is to know about Prism and certain programs being a Sys Admin or whatever he was but then because he couldn't see from another angle he might not have known enough to have made a better decision. Also I really do believe abuses are going on and he probably did stumble upon some legit abuses of the information being collected, or blackmail, such as the story he tells about how the CIA got some guy drunk, These things really do happen so it's perfectly understandable that he could have had a guilty conscience but I also don't think he fully thought through his actions and acted impulsively in a way which is self defeating.
He did achieve something and that is bringing attention to the potential for abuse by the NSA and I give him credit for bringing attention to a legit problem with lack of oversight. That part of his leak is the part most people pass over but he said an analyst could basically look into anyones online activity for any reason. As far as I know he made it out like there is no oversight. What is to stop the NSA from abusing the information after collecting it? So don't get the impression that I like Prism, it definitely needs more oversight. The (NSA doesn't spy on Americans) was also proven not to be true.
I don't believe he carries any secret documents with him, that would be really naive. He probably has his material, if he still has more, uploaded somewhere multiple encrypted copies online somewhere and where he can get them when needed.
There is no way he can get them without Russia getting them when he's physically in Russia. So whatever method he uses to access them can and will be intercepted.
The documents might be literally right under the noses of NSA and CIA but appear so innocent that nobody without knowing it would be able to pick up those files.
He may be skilled but he's still in Russia. The NSA and CIA isn't in control of him anymore. He cannot access anything without it being intercepted by Russian intelligence because he;s in their country. The same goes for China or anywhere else he is. He wont be able to access a damn thing because he wont have any privacy to access anything without sharing it with them.
For sure Snowden will and have been interviewed already by the intelligence agencies agents at least few times, offered cooperation and he will also spied by many as they want to know where he has his stuff etc. He will not for sure reveal his all cards as that is his life insurance least so long that trust leve
Don't look at the top of the iceberg. He wasn't so special in his organization, and his organization wasn't so special neither. That he knew/had access means that a lot of people had (and keep having) the same access. Before worrying about what he did, think what the others could be doing right now.
Those others aren't in Russian custody right now. Also it's not my job to worry about what every contractor is doing. Snowden is the one who went on the media and put himself in the public consciousness.
If its not illegal, then the laws are rigged. Im ok that a country that elected their government (US don't qualify on that, but less suppose) could suffer whatever abuse against their rights their government does. But what about the people from rest of the world? The communication don't even need to pass thru US to get intercepted.
The biggest damage is not against people. Is against internet, if you don't trust it or the government behind it, it will damage its adoption, or create not so open alternatives.
Governments are at war and people suffer. The G8 leak was for politics and not to help people. The US does need to fix a lot of it's laws and so do many other nations, but I don't want terrorists corrupting the process and preventing the people who love their countries from fixing the problems. Meaning you can be against illegal spying but also against terrorism and the balance for that position is you have to find a way to keep people physically safe while not infringing on their liberties.
The problem with certain kinds of leaks is that they put peoples lives in danger. To me that is a line which shouldn't be crossed. Snowden made that claim in his interview that he understands that but is saying it from China and also saying how Hong Kong has a free Internet (which might be true but no more free than the US) then goes on to say what he could have done but didn't do, how he has every identity and all sorts of knowledge of all sorts of operations, but even if he does not have those documents on him (we really don't know), the fact that he could remember some stuff could cause problems too.
So the question is how do you protect civil liberties and the Internet without putting innocent peoples lives at risk to do it? Every leak has to be judged on it's own merit, they aren't all equal. In his leak there was no detail about NSA abuses but it may have leaked something which was breaking the law and in that case it should be addressed. At the same time the G8 leak was not breaking the law and he leaked it anyway for unknown reasons.
He did show that the NSA lies to the American people about not spying on Americans and that the NSA may have broken the law. He also revealed sources and methods about how the US spies on the G8 which didn't help anything.
But you don't know that you'd do in such an extraordinary situation.
But I know what I wouldn't do.
Whatever floats your boat.
What? I don't really care what he has. I'm tired of this "Revealing our wrongdoings could endanger lives!" nonsense. It's well worth it to me since freedom is more important than security.
Just because you're tired of it doesn't mean it isn't true. There is a line.
It may have been legal in the USA for the NSA to spy on others. But it may not be legal in other countries. Moreover, talking about benefits, it benefits all of humanity to know more details of how governments spy on us and each other.
Fuck you.
There is more to it than that. People will die if certain operations are compromised. So it's not as simple as saying you want people around the world to know what every government is doing. It would be nice in some utopia but all these governments are at war and people are dying in these conflicts. When it's a state of war then secrecy is part of the element of surprise and it's considered a necessary tactic, just like camouflage. Troop locations and mission objectives must be kept secret or they could be captured and killed.
Is it okay if millions of people get killed in civil wars in exchange for releasing all government secrets? And if you do support releasing all government secrets then you have to release them all at once so that no other government can capitalize on it.
All these governments assist each other and share secrets to spy on us more efficiently. But at the same time if the secrets are leaked then innocent people like us are always the ones to lose their lives over it. If operations going on in Iraq were leaked while Saddam was still alive then Saddam would have cracked down, tortured and killed them. The same would happen under any similar regime. So how can we liberate people if we have people who snitch or to put it in order words, reveal the plan and mission to the opposition forces?
The people you're liberating get to die when leaks take place. If you're a soldier, now the enemy knows where your troops are and can launch their terrorist attacks. If you're a civilian fighting a civil war, now they know how to fight you because details were leaked about what you plan to do. Governments use civilians to fight their civil wars and supply weapons and technology to both sides. Prism is an example of a technology developed by the NSA to prevent civil war on US soil, it is designed to suppress revolution, not merely to stop terrorism.
Every country wants to have the same ability to prevent civil war and suppress revolution. Cuba would love to know how Prism works so they can use it to crush whatever resistance they have which communicates on the Internet. So basically it would make it harder for civilians in Cuba who don't agree with their government. That is the reason why sources and methods should not be revealed.
In the G8 leak it was revealed that the NSA tapped Internet cafes. That is a specific source and method which can now be duplicated anywhere in the world by any regime. So now instead of just the NSA monitoring Internet cafes now we have to expect every nation in the world to do that now because it's a proven effective method. So how will Internet activists in some other country like Iran for instance deal with their country monitoring their Internet cafes? What about if it's Israel? China?
That is why sources and methods should not be leaked. The other reason is that anyone who worked for the cafe at that time now has to look over their shoulder for life just like how Snowden has to do because foreign intelligence might be looking to speak with them.
otoh, if an entity that keeps claiming to have the high moral ground was caught being VERY naughty and you 'tell on them', is that, in itself, wrong?
quite a lot of us believe that there should be limits as to what our spying agencies can do. many of us believe the US has crossed a line and needs to be reeled back in.
if someone had committed murder and you knew about it, would you just sit on that info?
how is this any different? he saw crimes committed and told about it. I think he's a hero!
But that is not all he could end up doing. If the story ended there then you could debate with me whether or not he is a hero. The story did not end there. He still has information either in his brain or on him which could help the Russians, Cubans and whomever else. He did release a leak about the G8 which in no way was directed at civilians and so why did it get released at all? On top of that it wasn't even illegal what the NSA did in that instance so it should never have been leaked.
To me that shows he's not doing this to benefit the people of the world but he's trying to protect himself at this point from going to jail and will do anything in his power to avoid that. He will leak anything to avoid going to a US prison, but the problem is he's in Russia now and they can tell him anything they have to in order to secure his cooperation. At this point I don't think he even knows right from wrong, he's in a position to be completely brainwashed by Russian agents.
At this point Snowden is a victim of governments, but he's not a hero. He isn't a hero because I don't believe his actions will result in anything which benefits Internet activists, free speech, democracy. If he ends up in Cuba do you really think his knowledge if they get it will be used to promote Democracy?
It's also possible that I love my country (not necessarily the policies but the people).
When I speak about the danger Snowden is in and the risk he puts to national security I'm not talking about the leak about the NSA illegally spying on Americans. Most of us knew about that already. I'm talking about whatever else he may know which wasn't leaked to the media and anything else he might have.
Why do I think he's going to tell the Russians how to redesign their networks? Because I don't think the Russians are going to give him an option not to. They'll social engineer it out of him, they'll use psychology and whatever interrogation techniques that it takes to get the information.
So Snowden in his fear of going to a US prison, now may be in a position where he can be interrogated without any human rights and if he refuses to help them he'll be threatened to be sent to the US to go to prison or perhaps with worse depending on how much leverage they gain over him over time. He's basically part of Russia.
Nonsense. Going to prison for reporting that the government is flagrantly violating the rights of its citizens under its own law is pointless, particularly when the process involved would likely be outside the public eye. The whole point Snowden's information release was to bring information to the public eye was to expose the corruption going on in secret.
If going to prison can save thousands of lives and many different global intelligence operations then its better to go to jail. Why should activists in Iran get killed because you're too coward to go to prison? If you're brave enough to be blowing the whistle you should be brave enough to go to prison too. We don't know what documents Snowden has on him, but if he has as much as he claims he has then he has enough information to cost people their lives.
Only a fool would recognize that corruption going on in secret behind the guise of "national security" and then just hand himself over to the government to do as they please with him in secret.
The difference between Snowden's situation and, say, Martin Luther King, is that Dr. King could enjoy the protections afforded in a public, on-the-record environment in his legal proceedings. Snowden, on the other hand, would basically disappear with no public record.
Only a fool? Or someone who loves their country, who actually loves their family and friends in the USA. It's okay to hate specific policies or even hate the NSA but when you leak some things it affects not just the corrupt part of America but every part. What he released to the media in my opinion doesn't surprise America all that much. The only really bad leak he made in my opinion is the G8 leak which did not expose anything illegal but which was leaked merely to hurt US operations by revealing sources and methods.
The point is even if you don't like the NSA spying on Americans and believe that is illegal (and it might be illegal), that has nothing to do with leaking details of a G8 spying operation which clearly was legal. That spying was directed at government officials and no one who supports Snowden can explain why he leaked that other than to hurt US national security.
If he could leak that, it means he might be able to take it to the next level. In my opinion he was attempting to use greymail, to send a message to the US government that if they come after him he will leak everything he knows. It probably does not help that the US did decide to go after him but by law the US has no choice but to go after him. That set everything in motion because now he's got documents and knowledge in his brain to share and as far as we know he's in Moscow.
What could he be doing in Moscow? He wont be able to keep any secrets from the Russians so the longer he's in Moscow the more likely it is that he's told them everything he knows.
Slashdot Mirror
Not gonna happen. There is too much investment on both sides. And if it cleans up the misdeeds of both side's spooks-- so much the better.
Does the dark side of intelligence need a spanking? Oh.Yeah. Will this do it? No.
This was the Chinese press calling for the action, not the government. Our press did the same stupid thing regarding Huawei. Did it have an effect? Not really.
It already is happening. Do you think the boycotts will stop here? The US will retaliate and then China will retaliate.
Why shouldn't a nation be able to take steps to maintain its own sovereignty? I'm not a fan of Chinese human rights violations, but they have an interest, no, a responsibility to secure their borders from US aggression. Including espionage.
They can, the problem is it brews an even more paranoid environment which means more prism like spying operations will be built. The more nations distrust each other the more they spy on each other. The cold war is an example of this kind of distrust.
The level of distrust China now has may lead China to crack down domestically and build more effective domestic spying capabilities.
And this will initiate a trade war. Now China will suspect every US IT product of having a backdoor. Even if this has always been true, it's now proven true by Snowden and the consequences to the economy will be negative. It means more protectionist policies are coming as distrust slows global trade.
Every country should boost its defences if another country is snooping around anonymously in its businesses!!! No country has the right to do that! Thank Edward Snowden indeed!
That is the cause of the cold war. I guess we are going to go back to that again because governments never trust other governments and never have.
Are we at war with China?
Are we even in a cold war with China?
China and the US are friends but also at war in other areas depending on the area. In the technology space the US and China are at war. It's a cyber war between hackers at this point and Edward Snowden has made it harder for US hackers which gives the advantage to Chinese hackers. This impacts the global economy and the US economy.
If you're being sarcastic, you're deluded. China improving it's defenses, even against the US is not your loss, and the US successfully spying on the Chinese is not necessarily to your benefit. It's only a problem for you if it becomes one-sided, which will take a lot more than Snowden's actions. Meanwhile, Snowden has brought to light the US government shitting on it's own constitution.
If that is a sincere thanks to Snowden, I agree.
Of course I'm being sarcastic. I don't support losing American jobs to China and I don't support boosting China at the expense of America. Let me guess, you're a foreigner? If you were an American you would understand why this is bad.
Only problem with your statement is that so far the start of every full blown war has helped the US economy. I'm not talking about peacekeeping or drawn out police actions...I mean war. WWI, WWII, Cold War. All boosted the US economy to some degree.
One of the main reasons is that these companies decide to bring jobs back to the US. Not sure if this will happen in this age of a global market. But the tension between US and China has been growing for a very long time.
The cold war and WW2 is why we have prism in the first place. Nothing good resulted from the red scare, the cold war, etc. It did not help our economy either, look at the fact that the US is not backed by gold, look at the fact that the US buying power in a family has decreased. We have to work more to get less than our parents did and our parents had to work more than theirs. So at this point, no it does not increase your salary or your buying power to have war unless you work for the war machine of China or the US.
There is a war. Huaewei is dragged through the mud by witless/gutless/dimwits in the US Congress. Turnabout is fair play.
The silly thing is, that all of the cell phones across the planets are like little location devices, revealing your location, your contacts, your texts, and your conversations.
Cisco is on the slide anyway, and this won't really have a dramatic effect on the US economy. The problem, you see, is that the warriors aren't making enough money right now, and with moderate Middle East peace, there's no good money to be made from that.
Trade war? Insignificant. Sorry. Just not gonna happen.
If the boycott of Cisco takes place then a trade war has begun. Cisco is one of the most important tech companies in the USA. What if they boycott Apple, Microsoft, and several others? I expect there will be a trade war as well as a cold war among hackers.
Don't you understand what just happened? We are now entering a trade war which could spiral into another cold war.
This is not going to be good for us citizens who will lose our jobs. It will not be good for the US economy, and Chinese spies will continue hacking into US corporations. You want to be ruled by China then that is fine but let's not pretend like it will be good news to most people in America.
He has certainly helped China to boost it's defenses.
How telling others (specially, US citizens) that they are being spied put your own people in danger? Who is behaving wrong there? Or spying all the world is a god given priviledge? Is not that they won't abuse that privilege,
I don't want anybody hurt, but give government free card to do anything and they will be the terrorists. If you think that that terror campaign only goes to a few countries, think again, they want to go against hackers too (so better you don't live in the same area that someone downloading an mp3). And if that don't worry you because you, after all, live in US, you probably will be next.
This is about awareness, the rest of the world so they can protect themselves, and you, that should be the one that can do anything about it. But you can keep giving them free pass, in the end, if/when something happens to you or to someone you cares about in the hand of that government you are defending, you will know that was your fault.
He's way of getting awareness is now starting to cause damage. I understand he wants to shut the program down but he's going about it the wrong way. Also it might not be an option to shut it down anyway.
So I agree with you if it's about abuse we have to prevent that but I don't see how him fleeing to Cuba or threatening to release damaging files will prevent abuse. Has the NSA stopped spying on us? No.
Are we at war?
Always. The US government has been at war non stop since WW2.
It's SOP in the US for prosecutors to go after any charge they can even remotely pin on. Many people are calling Snowden a traitor. If they managed to catch him I think there's a good chance they would seek to charge him with Treason.
He's not going to be charged with Treason. He's not the first guy to release classified documents. He'll get life in supermax prison though.
18 USC section 2381:
So traitors can be executed and that means the stakes here really are life or death.
That hasn't happened in a long long time. It's highly speculative to think it would happen to him.
Why is the US such an enthusiastic torturer and why is the US such an enemy of human rights? Why is speaking out against a corrupt government a capital offense? Freedom of speech is an illusion. When it really matters speech will get you the electric chair.
Most of the world considers the US a thug and a villian and seeking to execute someone for speaking out against government abuse of power is proof that they are right. Only a certain kind of American would want to see this guy fry or hang. The rest of the world is cheering for him as are all Americans who believe in freedom and human rights.
All governments act the same way and treat civilians as less than human during war.
Also when did the US say he seeks to execute him? Why does it have to be extreme?
I don't want to see Snowden hang but I don't want to see him hanging out in Cuba either. Whatever he knows has to be kept safe and that is a lot more difficult in Cuba unless the CIA is there to protect him from Castro.
AFAIK Snowden has not actually entered Russia. He lacks a visa or even a valid passport. He remains in transit until his next flight out.
The Russians are no longer our enemies. Are you as afraid of the UK gaining classified information about us and if not why not?
Governments are way too obsessed with secrecy and the vast majority of it is unnecessary and unjustified. Yes, there is the occassional bit of weapons research that we may want to keep close to our chests, but most other secrets are not of much value and are merely embarrassing. If you don't want to look like an asshole it might be better not to act like one in the first place instead of relying on secrecy laws to protect you from the consequences of your moronic actions. Neither Russia nor China are our enemies. Perhaps it's about time we started treating them the way we would like to be treated ourselves. Reading their mail does not make us more secure. It just makes us look like jerks when we inevitably get caught with our hands in the cookie jar.
Why does Russia support Assad while the US gives weapons to the rebels?
Just because you're tired of it doesn't mean it isn't true. There is a line.
I have my own priorities, so I can that, at least for me, it isn't true.
Freedom is more important than security for me too, but if I can have freedom and security that is better. Why should I be forced to choose death as an outcome if it wouldn't even guarantee freedom for humanity?
It's one thing if we are talking about an action by Snowden which freed humanity from war and governments but we both know that wont be the result of his leak. His leak will result in crackdowns, increased surveillance. Just looking at the stuff said by some people on this site I wouldn't be surprised if many of them aren't flagged and put under surveillance.
That said I want free speech and I say what I think regardless, but I just don't see how these leaks will solve anything. I think it's naive to think leaking can fix government, but I do agree with that leaking can bring attention to abuses by authority on citizens. Snowden's leak did not reveal any abuses though.
The problem is with any leak that is made usually a bunch of lives would have to be sacrificed in order to make that move. My stance is that it's not worth it to sacrifice those lives because it's not protecting lives. Meaning it does not make sense to sacrifice the lives of 1000 service men and women when it's not saving 100,000 civilians. It's also not realistic to because chances are if you're an American you know more service men and women than you know civilians overseas being caught up in drone strikes.
So the real choice you get is to sacrifice the lives of your friends, family and limited amount of people who you know in your life, or sacrifice the lives of people you don't know. But in any conflict people are going to die and you only really get to choose which people and perhaps do your best to limit the use of certain weapons on all sides. The NSA/CIA/US has some truly cruel weapons which should not be used, and so do China and Russia. It's in all of our interest as civilians to restrict our governments use of those weapons, and this is why we need law and order combined with oversight and accountability.
Right now the NSA has Prism which is like a weapon because it can be used to destroy anyone's life. For that reason it is something which must be strictly regulated. For that reason for me it's important that the technology not get spread around the world by Snowden or anyone else. If it's bad enough that the NSA has it why would we want China and Russia to have it or even know details about it? Also where are the leaks of Russia's surveillance state? There are no leaks coming out of Russia being sent to Wikileaks.
The point here is many people deem it that because the US is the biggest bully on the block that it has to be taken down, the problem is if you take the US down then all global stability goes to shit. The US has nuclear weapons and technology even worse than nukes. If the US is taken down then if that stuff leaks the human race is doomed. The NSA does protect those facilities and technologies and in my opinion it's better that stuff does not leak ever, because if we keep promoting this pro-leaker culture eventually WMDs will leak.
I would happily see all governments fall, and all presidents, prime ministers, kings and queens dead, hung by the guts of the priesthood (however they might call themselves, imans, rabbis and gurus included). The war will not be civil, but will be a vast uprising of the masses against the oppressors. Capitalists shall be drawn and quartered in an orgy of revenge that shall make the French and Russian Revolutions look like picnics.
It won't be pretty. And I certainly don't desire it. But I can't see a good way out of it, other than the fanciful. Perhaps the powerful might be convinced to give up their wealth and powerful, and sit with the rest of us and eat common food. I doubt it.
You talk as if some governments are better than others, or even that some are good. I see the reality, that they are all bad. Saddam Hussein was an awful man, no doubt. But the "liberation" of Iraq did not lead to fewer deaths or a more free country.
it's better for all humanity to know how we are spied upon. And if I could, I would release all government secrets at once (and fuck the soldiers and special ops and spies, who all knew what they were getting into signing up to fight for their country). And if I couldn't, but if I could instead just release the secrets of one government, I would do that.
I go further than Thoreau, who suggested that the government that governs least governs best. I say that no government governs well at all, and all should be abolished.
No I talk as if some people are better than others. That is because to me it's subjective. There are people I happen to like who happen to be in the USA or US allied nations. To hurt national security for the US would put their lives at risk and I don't support that.
I agree that governments are too authoritarian, but I disagree with the tactic of leaking as a solution. Leaking creates arms races as governments discover what other governments have been working on in Top Secret. Leaking also makes each government a bit more paranoid which usually means they spy on us even harder because they are worried about the next Bradley fucking Manning or Edward Snowden. If anything the leaks could be used to justify an increase in the spy budget of the NSA. People will say if we just looked at Snowden a bit more carefully and vetted him a bit more thoroughly that maybe this couldn't have happened.
The truth is no amount of vetting would have changed this and the problem isn't that the NSA spies, but whether or not the mechanisms they are using is causing abuse. I think spying on peoples Internet habits over years is ripe for abuse so there has to be a lot more oversight of these sorts of programs but I also believe if the NSA isn't doing it foreign intelligence will so I don't believe attacking the NSA program is how you change things, you change things by getting laws passed to restrict, regulate, and provide accountability for all who abuse their power.
I know, your job is improve the reputation of the NSA and alikes, even with this kind of spills. But what you don't know can hurt you, or the ones you care about, and that they have in a silver platter anything that can be used against you (even by misinterpretation) don't improve your chances. Speaking of misuses, how will affect you personally what russia or cuba or whatever enemy in your mind nation do with this information? And how is that compared with that NSA/CIA/(dis)intelligence agencies can do to you with what they are gathering? And what about the average citizen of US, or the world? Focus in the biggest foe.
This isn't about a reputation, it's about people staying alive.
I don't think everything the NSA does is bad. I think it needs more oversight and I think there may be abuses but I don't think we should completely sacrifice all national security like you do. Don't you have friends and family in the USA? What about in the military? Do you want to hurt the NSA so bad that you don't care about the security of thousands or perhaps millions of people?
There is a difference between not liking a program or policy of the US government or NSA and completely hating the organization and country.
Grow up big man. You sound such a cry baby.
First, do you realize that Snowden left US because he felt that would never receive fair trial.
He chose to go to Hong Kong which is in China. That is no accident. Yes there is fear of US allies extraditing him but why did he choose Hong Kong and then Russia? He had other options but chose these countries which would cause the greatest amount of political fallout possible. It's not the Cold War anymore but China? Russia? Cuba?!
After the decision he made to reveal unjust practices to public he had no other choice than to leave.
If he had been convinced that he would have fair trial there would have been no reason to escape. He did not leave because it was fun or because he wanted to hand over secret information to foreign countries, but because it was necessary for his own safety after going public what is done by NSA/CIA.
The difference between you and me is that I question his motives. I don't pretend to know what he was thinking or know why he made his decisions. But if you want to know my position on what I think he was thinking and doing, I believe he was acting based on his moral compass and his conscience. I think the problem he had was a lack of information, and this led to him making terrible decisions. The thing about the government is information is so ridiculously compartmentalized that he might have known everything there is to know about Prism and certain programs being a Sys Admin or whatever he was but then because he couldn't see from another angle he might not have known enough to have made a better decision. Also I really do believe abuses are going on and he probably did stumble upon some legit abuses of the information being collected, or blackmail, such as the story he tells about how the CIA got some guy drunk, These things really do happen so it's perfectly understandable that he could have had a guilty conscience but I also don't think he fully thought through his actions and acted impulsively in a way which is self defeating.
He did achieve something and that is bringing attention to the potential for abuse by the NSA and I give him credit for bringing attention to a legit problem with lack of oversight. That part of his leak is the part most people pass over but he said an analyst could basically look into anyones online activity for any reason. As far as I know he made it out like there is no oversight. What is to stop the NSA from abusing the information after collecting it? So don't get the impression that I like Prism, it definitely needs more oversight. The (NSA doesn't spy on Americans) was also proven not to be true.
I don't believe he carries any secret documents with him, that would be really naive. He probably has his material, if he still has more, uploaded somewhere multiple encrypted copies online somewhere and where he can get them when needed.
There is no way he can get them without Russia getting them when he's physically in Russia. So whatever method he uses to access them can and will be intercepted.
The documents might be literally right under the noses of NSA and CIA but appear so innocent that nobody without knowing it would be able to pick up those files.
He may be skilled but he's still in Russia. The NSA and CIA isn't in control of him anymore. He cannot access anything without it being intercepted by Russian intelligence because he;s in their country. The same goes for China or anywhere else he is. He wont be able to access a damn thing because he wont have any privacy to access anything without sharing it with them.
For sure Snowden will and have been interviewed already by the intelligence agencies agents at least few times, offered cooperation and he will also spied by many as they want to know where he has his stuff etc. He will not for sure reveal his all cards as that is his life insurance least so long that trust leve
Don't look at the top of the iceberg. He wasn't so special in his organization, and his organization wasn't so special neither. That he knew/had access means that a lot of people had (and keep having) the same access. Before worrying about what he did, think what the others could be doing right now.
Those others aren't in Russian custody right now. Also it's not my job to worry about what every contractor is doing. Snowden is the one who went on the media and put himself in the public consciousness.
If its not illegal, then the laws are rigged. Im ok that a country that elected their government (US don't qualify on that, but less suppose) could suffer whatever abuse against their rights their government does. But what about the people from rest of the world? The communication don't even need to pass thru US to get intercepted.
The biggest damage is not against people. Is against internet, if you don't trust it or the government behind it, it will damage its adoption, or create not so open alternatives.
Governments are at war and people suffer. The G8 leak was for politics and not to help people. The US does need to fix a lot of it's laws and so do many other nations, but I don't want terrorists corrupting the process and preventing the people who love their countries from fixing the problems. Meaning you can be against illegal spying but also against terrorism and the balance for that position is you have to find a way to keep people physically safe while not infringing on their liberties.
The problem with certain kinds of leaks is that they put peoples lives in danger. To me that is a line which shouldn't be crossed. Snowden made that claim in his interview that he understands that but is saying it from China and also saying how Hong Kong has a free Internet (which might be true but no more free than the US) then goes on to say what he could have done but didn't do, how he has every identity and all sorts of knowledge of all sorts of operations, but even if he does not have those documents on him (we really don't know), the fact that he could remember some stuff could cause problems too.
So the question is how do you protect civil liberties and the Internet without putting innocent peoples lives at risk to do it? Every leak has to be judged on it's own merit, they aren't all equal. In his leak there was no detail about NSA abuses but it may have leaked something which was breaking the law and in that case it should be addressed. At the same time the G8 leak was not breaking the law and he leaked it anyway for unknown reasons.
He did show that the NSA lies to the American people about not spying on Americans and that the NSA may have broken the law. He also revealed sources and methods about how the US spies on the G8 which didn't help anything.
But you don't know that you'd do in such an extraordinary situation.
But I know what I wouldn't do.
Whatever floats your boat.
What? I don't really care what he has. I'm tired of this "Revealing our wrongdoings could endanger lives!" nonsense. It's well worth it to me since freedom is more important than security.
Just because you're tired of it doesn't mean it isn't true. There is a line.
It may have been legal in the USA for the NSA to spy on others. But it may not be legal in other countries. Moreover, talking about benefits, it benefits all of humanity to know more details of how governments spy on us and each other.
Fuck you.
There is more to it than that. People will die if certain operations are compromised. So it's not as simple as saying you want people around the world to know what every government is doing. It would be nice in some utopia but all these governments are at war and people are dying in these conflicts. When it's a state of war then secrecy is part of the element of surprise and it's considered a necessary tactic, just like camouflage. Troop locations and mission objectives must be kept secret or they could be captured and killed.
Is it okay if millions of people get killed in civil wars in exchange for releasing all government secrets? And if you do support releasing all government secrets then you have to release them all at once so that no other government can capitalize on it.
All these governments assist each other and share secrets to spy on us more efficiently. But at the same time if the secrets are leaked then innocent people like us are always the ones to lose their lives over it. If operations going on in Iraq were leaked while Saddam was still alive then Saddam would have cracked down, tortured and killed them. The same would happen under any similar regime. So how can we liberate people if we have people who snitch or to put it in order words, reveal the plan and mission to the opposition forces?
The people you're liberating get to die when leaks take place. If you're a soldier, now the enemy knows where your troops are and can launch their terrorist attacks. If you're a civilian fighting a civil war, now they know how to fight you because details were leaked about what you plan to do. Governments use civilians to fight their civil wars and supply weapons and technology to both sides. Prism is an example of a technology developed by the NSA to prevent civil war on US soil, it is designed to suppress revolution, not merely to stop terrorism.
Every country wants to have the same ability to prevent civil war and suppress revolution. Cuba would love to know how Prism works so they can use it to crush whatever resistance they have which communicates on the Internet. So basically it would make it harder for civilians in Cuba who don't agree with their government. That is the reason why sources and methods should not be revealed.
In the G8 leak it was revealed that the NSA tapped Internet cafes. That is a specific source and method which can now be duplicated anywhere in the world by any regime. So now instead of just the NSA monitoring Internet cafes now we have to expect every nation in the world to do that now because it's a proven effective method. So how will Internet activists in some other country like Iran for instance deal with their country monitoring their Internet cafes? What about if it's Israel? China?
That is why sources and methods should not be leaked. The other reason is that anyone who worked for the cafe at that time now has to look over their shoulder for life just like how Snowden has to do because foreign intelligence might be looking to speak with them.
on one hand, 'snitches get stiches'.
otoh, if an entity that keeps claiming to have the high moral ground was caught being VERY naughty and you 'tell on them', is that, in itself, wrong?
quite a lot of us believe that there should be limits as to what our spying agencies can do. many of us believe the US has crossed a line and needs to be reeled back in.
if someone had committed murder and you knew about it, would you just sit on that info?
how is this any different? he saw crimes committed and told about it. I think he's a hero!
But that is not all he could end up doing. If the story ended there then you could debate with me whether or not he is a hero. The story did not end there. He still has information either in his brain or on him which could help the Russians, Cubans and whomever else. He did release a leak about the G8 which in no way was directed at civilians and so why did it get released at all? On top of that it wasn't even illegal what the NSA did in that instance so it should never have been leaked.
To me that shows he's not doing this to benefit the people of the world but he's trying to protect himself at this point from going to jail and will do anything in his power to avoid that. He will leak anything to avoid going to a US prison, but the problem is he's in Russia now and they can tell him anything they have to in order to secure his cooperation. At this point I don't think he even knows right from wrong, he's in a position to be completely brainwashed by Russian agents.
At this point Snowden is a victim of governments, but he's not a hero. He isn't a hero because I don't believe his actions will result in anything which benefits Internet activists, free speech, democracy. If he ends up in Cuba do you really think his knowledge if they get it will be used to promote Democracy?
It's also possible that I love my country (not necessarily the policies but the people).
When I speak about the danger Snowden is in and the risk he puts to national security I'm not talking about the leak about the NSA illegally spying on Americans. Most of us knew about that already. I'm talking about whatever else he may know which wasn't leaked to the media and anything else he might have.
Why do I think he's going to tell the Russians how to redesign their networks? Because I don't think the Russians are going to give him an option not to. They'll social engineer it out of him, they'll use psychology and whatever interrogation techniques that it takes to get the information.
So Snowden in his fear of going to a US prison, now may be in a position where he can be interrogated without any human rights and if he refuses to help them he'll be threatened to be sent to the US to go to prison or perhaps with worse depending on how much leverage they gain over him over time. He's basically part of Russia.
Nonsense. Going to prison for reporting that the government is flagrantly violating the rights of its citizens under its own law is pointless, particularly when the process involved would likely be outside the public eye. The whole point Snowden's information release was to bring information to the public eye was to expose the corruption going on in secret.
If going to prison can save thousands of lives and many different global intelligence operations then its better to go to jail. Why should activists in Iran get killed because you're too coward to go to prison? If you're brave enough to be blowing the whistle you should be brave enough to go to prison too. We don't know what documents Snowden has on him, but if he has as much as he claims he has then he has enough information to cost people their lives.
Only a fool would recognize that corruption going on in secret behind the guise of "national security" and then just hand himself over to the government to do as they please with him in secret.
The difference between Snowden's situation and, say, Martin Luther King, is that Dr. King could enjoy the protections afforded in a public, on-the-record environment in his legal proceedings. Snowden, on the other hand, would basically disappear with no public record.
Only a fool? Or someone who loves their country, who actually loves their family and friends in the USA. It's okay to hate specific policies or even hate the NSA but when you leak some things it affects not just the corrupt part of America but every part. What he released to the media in my opinion doesn't surprise America all that much. The only really bad leak he made in my opinion is the G8 leak which did not expose anything illegal but which was leaked merely to hurt US operations by revealing sources and methods.
The point is even if you don't like the NSA spying on Americans and believe that is illegal (and it might be illegal), that has nothing to do with leaking details of a G8 spying operation which clearly was legal. That spying was directed at government officials and no one who supports Snowden can explain why he leaked that other than to hurt US national security.
If he could leak that, it means he might be able to take it to the next level. In my opinion he was attempting to use greymail, to send a message to the US government that if they come after him he will leak everything he knows. It probably does not help that the US did decide to go after him but by law the US has no choice but to go after him. That set everything in motion because now he's got documents and knowledge in his brain to share and as far as we know he's in Moscow.
What could he be doing in Moscow? He wont be able to keep any secrets from the Russians so the longer he's in Moscow the more likely it is that he's told them everything he knows.