Original URL: Computerworld has an article on the final extension to the NSA's bulk collecting phone records.
The U.S. National Security Agency's controversial program for the bulk collection of domestic phone call records has been granted extension for the last time, according to documents released.
Under an order by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the NSA is now allowed to continue collecting the data for a three-month period until Nov. 28. The permission had previously been extended in June to Aug. 28.
The collection of phone records metadata, which did not include collection of information on the content of conversations, is one of many large-scale surveillance schemes of the NSA that were disclosed by former agency contractor Edward Snowden. The disclosures led to demands for the reform of government surveillance to protect people's privacy.
U.S. President Barack Obama approved as law in June the USA Freedom Act, legislation that reins in the program by leaving the phone records database in the hands of the telecommunications operators, while allowing only a targeted search of the data by the NSA for investigations.
While some provisions of the Act took effect immediately upon enactment, the ban on bulk collection of call records allowed for a 180-day transition of the program.
(Score: 2) by Snow on Wednesday September 02 2015, @06:53PM
Domestic phone record metadata are probably the least interesting that the NSA collects.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @07:35PM
Meta-data is who you are, where you are, who you are talking to and how long...at any given point in time.
I'd be interested in using that data if I wanted to track you movements and communications....even if all I could do was point a stingray in your general direction. I could then still get your call info if I really wanted...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by K_benzoate on Wednesday September 02 2015, @07:57PM
That's the point. It's the least useful thing they can give up, but it sounds important to normies. It's a basic negotiating tactic; give up something you don't actually mind losing in order to appear willing to compromise. It protects the really important things you want to keep.
Climate change is real and primarily caused by human activity.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by davester666 on Thursday September 03 2015, @03:19AM
They aren't even really giving it up, but instead just REQUIRING the phone companies to keep all this data for them to troll through later.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Thursday September 03 2015, @09:38AM
Exactly. People need to stop repeating the myth that this specific type of mass surveillance is ending.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Kromagv0 on Thursday September 03 2015, @12:36PM
One thing I keep telling people about this is that since the data is now held by a 3rd party the NSA, FBI, etc now don't need a warrant to get at the data all they have to do is ask and at worst send a somewhat polite letter requesting the data.
Also for those who think this is a partisan issue of the entire Minnesota Congressional delegation except Representative Keith Ellison (D) and Representative Tom Emmer (R) voted for it. The rest of them including Senators Franken and Klobuchar all voted for it. My former nuclear football carrying Representative John Kline voted for it and was one of the sponsors in the House of Representatives. To add insult to injury Representative Kline did respond to my letter but it was one about how this would protect our privacy and that the NSA needed time to properly shut down the program even though it was already shut down and at the time had been ruled unconstitutional.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday September 02 2015, @06:57PM
Old news. Subject covered back in June.
These automated Knackerbracket submissions are becoming annoying.
Story automatically generated by StoryBot Version 0.0.1f (Development).
Note: This is the complete story and will need further editing. It may also be covered
by Copyright and thus should be acknowledged and quoted rather than printed in its entirety.
I have a hunch they impose a rather large risk of a plagiarism charge being leveled by original publishers
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by martyb on Thursday September 03 2015, @11:19AM
(tl;dr: The bulk data collection deadline was extended, so this is news. Automated submissions are generated only when the submission queue is running on empty. Editors are cautioned the submission is the entire story and need to edit accordingly. The posted story contained less than 40% of the original submission.)
Yes, it is indeed true that several stories about the subject of NSA bulk data collection have been posted here. I believe the reason for THIS story being posted is this passage:
So, the news is: an additional three whole months of NSA bulk data collection was authorized.
We would prefer to not use the bot that generates these submissions.
Previously, when insufficient stories were in the submission queue, an editor would go searching for a suitable story and submit it from scratch. What "Arthur T. Knackerbracket" provides is an automated scanning of feeds, a heuristic selection of possibly suitable stories, and an automated submission of those. "Arthur" is only launched when the queue is extremely low and we are desperate for stories for the site. When the submission queue is in good shape, we don't even run "Arthur."
I do note that you have submitted well over 120 stories to the site and I personally thank you for your efforts! If even a tenth of our community submitted a tenth as much, we would be overwhelmed with submission to choose from!
The quoted test above is the cautionary text which is included in every automated submission. Looking at the entire submission and comparing that against the story that was ultimately posted to the site, one can see that only five of the submission's ten paragraphs were used. On the basis of number of words used, that is approximately 40% of the original submission made it into the final story. Separately, full attribution was given to the source. In addition, a <blockquote> was used to clearly demark that it is quoted from the original source.
The above-quoted warning served its purpose. It called out that the submission contained the entire story and cautioned the editor to not use the entirety of the story in the submission lest one run into possible claims of plagiarism.
Disclaimer: Although I am an editor on this site, the views expressed above are mine alone and do not necessarily represent those of other editors or of the site as a whole.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @12:05AM
What happens after that, probably anything and everything.
(Score: 1) by DutchUncle on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:41PM
It will be dragged out on one excuse or another, until finally they just explicitly ignore the rules.