Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday January 16 2017, @01:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the now-they're-all-watching-you dept.

If you thought government surveillance was bad already, it just got worse. A lot worse.

[T]he Obama administration on Thursday announced new rules that will let the NSA share vast amounts of private data gathered without warrant, court orders or congressional authorization with 16 other agencies, including the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and the Department of Homeland Security.

The new rules allow employees doing intelligence work for those agencies to sift through raw data collected under a broad, Reagan-era executive order that gives the NSA virtually unlimited authority to intercept communications abroad. Previously, NSA analysts would filter out information they deemed irrelevant and mask the names of innocent Americans before passing it along.

[...] Executive Order 12333, often referred to as "twelve triple-three," has attracted less debate than congressional wiretapping laws, but serves as authorization for the NSA's most massive surveillance programs — far more than the NSA's other programs combined. Under 12333, the NSA taps phone and internet backbones throughout the world, records the phone calls of entire countries, vacuums up traffic from Google and Yahoo's data centers overseas, and more.

In 2014, The Intercept revealed that the NSA uses 12333 as a legal basis for an internal NSA search engine that spans more than 850 billion phone and internet records and contains the unfiltered private information of millions of Americans.

[...] But this massive database inevitably includes vast amount of American's communications — swept up when they speak to people abroad, when they go abroad themselves, or even if their domestic communications are simply routed abroad. That's why access was previously limited to data that had already been screened to remove unrelated information and information identifying U.S. persons. The new rules still ostensibly limit access to authorized foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes — not ordinary law enforcement purposes — and require screening before they are more widely shared. But privacy activists are skeptical.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 16 2017, @01:54PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 16 2017, @01:54PM (#454369) Journal

    Exactly. Now, until Sanders and Trump, which recent candidate was NOT a neocon? McCain, Clinton, and the magic underwear guy were all neocons. So, we had to choose the lesser evil among neocons for the last few years.

    While every one is beating down Trump, I'll remind them that Trump isn't a neocon. He at least has some potential. He has already demonstrated that he is not a lapdog to the intelligence services.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Monday January 16 2017, @02:05PM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Monday January 16 2017, @02:05PM (#454371) Journal

    I sure didn't expect Brennan to get slapped with a figurative glob of shit on his way out.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 16 2017, @02:07PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 16 2017, @02:07PM (#454372)

    Oh, how very true. Instead, he's going for far more hardcore extremists along the neocon spectrum to be in his cabinet. Because he hasn't got clue fucking one about who to appoint other than in the style of, "Pikachu, I choose you!" Get ready for a full-conservative enema, America!

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Arik on Monday January 16 2017, @02:18PM

      by Arik (4543) on Monday January 16 2017, @02:18PM (#454375) Journal
      That seems a fair criticism so far and I agree this process should be watched carefully.

      Ultimately he seems like the kind of guy that will appoint someone he disagrees with but respects, but still expect that guy to defer to him the ultimate decisions and back them the same.

      Some of the people he's appointing seem very unlikely to behave that way, but we still don't know if they will bend to his will, bend him to theirs, or simply wind up resigning when the incompatibilities come to the fore.

      At this point, only time will tell.
      --
      If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 16 2017, @02:55PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 16 2017, @02:55PM (#454382)

        As you say, "time will tell", so I haven't been following his appointments much yet but I know of one possible counterpoint so far: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

        Trump wants Kennedy to "lead a new government commission on vaccine safety and scientific integrity". Kennedy has no educational background in immunology, microbiology, biology, medicine, or science (BA in American History and Literature and a JD). Kennedy believes that vaccines cause autism and that there is a government conspiracy to cover it up.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy_Jr.#Views_on_autism_and_vaccines [wikipedia.org]
        https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/us/politics/anti-vaccine-activist-trump-immunizations.html?_r=0 [nytimes.com]

        • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday January 16 2017, @03:14PM

          by Immerman (3985) on Monday January 16 2017, @03:14PM (#454384)

          Well, *if* there are any issues of safety or scientific integrity, such a person might be just what you need to uncover it.

          Of course, they're also just the sort of person you'd want to launch a witch hunt that will end with the restoration of such poor endangered species as whooping cough and cholera.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 16 2017, @03:48PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 16 2017, @03:48PM (#454393)

            Well, *if* there are any issues of safety or scientific integrity, such a person might be just what you need to uncover it.

            I would actually argue it to be the other way around - if you were trying to cover-up a conspiracy of tax fraud, then someone with no training in any mathematical field would be less likely to find discrepancies. Should Kennedy perform a code-audit looking for foreign-spy-agency backdoors in government used software (maybe Trump should appoint Clinton for this)?

            Lacking any understanding of science or medicine, does not automatically qualify someone as an objective observer. Choosing someone who has no qualifications and has publicly declared their biased view does not encourage the idea of an objective observer.

            • (Score: 2) by arslan on Monday January 16 2017, @11:28PM

              by arslan (3462) on Monday January 16 2017, @11:28PM (#454599)

              Ummm... you just made a non-point:

              Lacking any understanding of science or medicine, does not automatically qualify someone as an objective observer.

              True, so is the flip side, i.e. having the understanding does automatically qualify someone to be an objective observer either. Having the means doesn't dismiss a person's prejudices nor their incompetence.

              Choosing someone who has no qualifications and has publicly declared their biased view does not encourage the idea of an objective observer.

              Only the second part is true. Again whether someone has qualifications or not has no bearing on their objectivity. Their biases on the other hand do.

              However I believe the parent's point was, if a person is biased but not a blind zealot, it may actually be a good thing. They'll start from the position of looking for dirt based on their biases, but if they eventually find nothing and is man enough to say "Well shits and sizzles, I've been barking up the wrong tree", then it is actually a productive thing. I suppose, the question is whether Trump is a good judge of character.

              We know for sure he isn't an idiot. No idiot can get this far on pure luck...

              • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 17 2017, @01:43AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 17 2017, @01:43AM (#454663)

                you just made a non-point

                I was arguing against the point that Kennedy is "just what you need" to uncover safety issues with vaccines. I mentioned that he is not knowledgeable in relevant fields and that he is already biased in favor of a particular conclusion. I further mentioned that his lack of qualifications is not some sort of advantage (being an outsider is sometimes equated with being objective).

                qualifications or not has no bearing on their objectivity

                Correct, but knowledge does have bearing on their ability to observe. It also has bearing on their ability to judge the quality of arguments and data. This has clearly left Kennedy susceptible to believing a conspiracy theory started by a man who was paid to find a conclusion, failed to disclose conflicts of interest, and fabricated data to further his own self interests.

                looking for dirt based on their biases

                This can lead to finding things that aren't really there and ignoring things that don't fit their bias (e.g. other non-autism related issues).

                the question is whether Trump is a good judge of character [...] isn't an idiot

                No, it isn't.
                Just as you rightly argued (not that I intended to claim) that knowledge doesn't necessarily imply competence or objectivity, being smart or a good judge of character does not imply that someone is immune to bias, will have a perfect record in judgement, or will even intend to choose the best person.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 16 2017, @02:18PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 16 2017, @02:18PM (#454376) Journal

      Sometimes, I really wonder who has a grip on the term "neocon" and who doesn't. A person can be very far right, and not be a neocon. I wish that I had saved the front page from 'The New American Century' when I found it all those years ago. The front page, and all the rest of the site. Trump doesn't qualify as a neocon, and his picks are pretty random, in that respect. Some of them are neocon, others are not. If you judge their neocon status based on how far right they are, you're doing it all wrong. Two basic tenets of the New American Century must be present, before you can even consider them as neocons. 1 - the oil must flow and 2 - we will go to war if anyone threatens the flow of oil. Moving beyond that, is an adherence to the idea that every man, woman, and child on the planet must serve Wall Street, in some capacity. If Wall Street cannot exploit your ass, then you have no right to live.

      Now, go back and take a look at Trump's picks. They are not all neocons.

      Remember that I have characterized Trump as the court fool. I'm not certain that Trump even recognizes a neocon when he sees one. It's not part of his world. Trump isn't a politician, after all.

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Monday January 16 2017, @05:16PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday January 16 2017, @05:16PM (#454416) Journal

        1 - the oil must flow and 2 - we will go to war if anyone threatens the flow of oil.
        Moving beyond that, is an adherence to the idea that every man, woman, and child on the planet must serve Wall Street, in some capacity.

        1: Trump picks ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state [washingtonpost.com]
         
        2: Trump announces 5th high-profile hire from Goldman Sachs [msnbc.com]
         

        • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday January 16 2017, @06:52PM

          by LoRdTAW (3755) on Monday January 16 2017, @06:52PM (#454458) Journal

          The Trump voters all get fooled big time and cant come to grips with getting fucked up the ass so hard. At this point they're plugging their ears shouting "I cant hear you LA LA LA LA..." They cant admit failure or accept humility.

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday January 16 2017, @06:51PM

        by Thexalon (636) on Monday January 16 2017, @06:51PM (#454457)

        The report I think you're looking for: Project for a New American Century: Rebuilding America's Defenses [informationclearinghouse.info]

        Among other things, that paper demonstrates conclusively that the Bush administration's decision to attack Iraq occurred long before Sept 11, 2001, and had absolutely nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 16 2017, @07:40PM

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 16 2017, @07:40PM (#454481) Journal

          That document was partly incorporated into the website. I found the site in the months before 9/11/01, and I visited it often in the months after 9/11/01. I watched the site "evolve" over that time. It never occurred to me to archive it - I really wish I had. I have found a link to an archive of the site, dated in 2013, but it doesn't want to load for me . . .

          https://web.archive.org/web/20130609154959/http://www.newamericancentury.org/ [archive.org]

          There we go, it loaded in Firefox, but the scripts won't run in Chromium.

          What I meant to make clear in my previous post, is that the site was changed drastically over the years. What you see if you click on that 2013 version is quite tame, in comparison to 2001 through 2006 or so. It's been "sanitized", so to speak. Sanitized, until the site was finally abandoned, and taken down.

        • (Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Monday January 16 2017, @10:08PM

          by curunir_wolf (4772) on Monday January 16 2017, @10:08PM (#454555)

          Don't forget about The Plan [youtube.com]. Developed during the Bush administration, and picked up by the Obama administration and Clinton's State Department. Will Trump abandon the plan? One can only hope...

          --
          I am a crackpot
    • (Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 16 2017, @05:17PM

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday January 16 2017, @05:17PM (#454417) Journal

      This is the opposite of an enema. We're going to be stuffed to the gills with shit.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...