SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Two articles have been received regarding the NSA and its activities:
NSA chief knew of Snowden file destruction by Guardian in UK
Surprising absolutely no one, the Guardian reports that Keith Alexander was fully briefed and supportive of the GCHQ's plan to destroy Snowden-related computers at the Guardian's offices in London.
The revelation that Alexander and Obama's director of national intelligence, James Clapper, were advised on the Guardian's destruction of several hard disks and laptops contrasts markedly with public White House statements that distanced the US from the decision.
White House and NSA emails obtained by Associated Press under freedom of information legislation demonstrate how pleased Alexander and his colleagues were with the developments. At times the correspondence takes a celebratory tone, with one official describing the anticipated destruction as "good news".
A Compromise with the NSA
"The NSA wants to know everything we do? Fine, but only if We the People see everything the NSA does. The real problem with the current mass surveillance is asymmetry."
Now we all know that the NSA is not going to open its doors and reveal its secrets - that would be foolhardy in the extreme and seriously endanger the US and its citizens. And despite the sincerely-held views of many of our members and others elsewhere, from the outside there doesn't appear to be anything like a groundswell of dissent in the US regarding Snowden's revelations about the NSA's activities.
However, perhaps by being a little more open it might begin to win back the trust of those who currently doubt that the NSA is working in their interests. What would it take for you to be convinced that the NSA was under control and acting in the best interests of every US citizen, and not just the interests of a small number who appear to use it to cling to power? What amount of spying on allies and partners would be acceptable while remembering that each time such activity is discovered it weakens the trust of the ally and can have serious repercussions for US business? Would clearly stating which terrorist plots had been thwarted by intelligence gathered, in part at least, by the NSA be enough? Or have we already passed the point of no return?
(Score: 5, Informative) by wonkey_monkey on Saturday July 12 2014, @04:40PM
Knowing whether or not the NSA is listening in to your calls is not going to make everything "symmetrical."
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by buswolley on Saturday July 12 2014, @05:53PM
I think that rectifying asymmetry involves the American people being able to listen to the NSA's phone calls.
subicular junctures
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 12 2014, @07:31PM
> I think that rectifying asymmetry involves the American people being able to listen to the NSA's phone calls.
That is insufficient because the public has much, much more to lose.
The knowledge that everything you do and say is stashed somewhere to be called up as soon as you become a person of interest or even just adjacent to a person of interest is inherently oppressive. Just because you can look up the same thing on the people with the power doesn't stop you from self-censoring your actions.
"If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged."
-- Cardinal Richelieu
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 12 2014, @07:44PM
Currently its "adjacent to a person who's adjacent to a person of interest." If you're on the same FedEx delivery route as a person of interest, or shop at the same grocery store, or use the same cell carrier, you're within 3 hops and subject to scrutiny. Basically the stash they have on anyone can be called up at any time.
(Score: 1) by Frost on Saturday July 12 2014, @08:20PM
So it's OK for them to spy on me if I can spy on them? Fuck that. Y'all spy on each other to your hearts' content, but please leave me out of it.