Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/24/2013 06:16 PM: http://thebulletin.org/not-all-secrets-are-alike Great article! Thanks. It reminds me of this: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-path-of-honesty In particular, this case: 'Harris: Let’s again invoke a deathbed scene, where the dying person asks, “Did you ever cheat on me in our marriage?” Let’s say it’s a wife asking her husband. The truthful answer is that he did cheat on her. However, the truth of their relationship—now—is that this is completely irrelevant. And yet it is also true that he took great pains to conceal this betrayal from her at one point, and he has kept quiet about it ever since. What good could come from telling the truth in that situation?' -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Who keeps alive the concept of mom FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/25/13 10:49 AM, glen wrote: In particular, this case: 'Harris: Let’s again invoke a deathbed scene, where the dying person asks, “Did you ever cheat on me in our marriage?” Let’s say it’s a wife asking her husband. The truthful answer is that he did cheat on her. However, the truth of their relationship—now—is that this is completely irrelevant. And yet it is also true that he took great pains to conceal this betrayal from her at one point, and he has kept quiet about it ever since. What good could come from telling the truth in that situation?' I would say that legislation can be robust to crime or lapses in individual ethics. Legislation is a qualitatively different thing from ethical decisions that govern individual behavior. The lie above as described is compartmentalized and does not impact anyone else. And revealing the cheating is a catharsis that the husband does not deserve and should not seek. The public secret (the thing people know but put out of their minds) is not at all compartmentalized. It's secret legislation that contradicts the public law. Among the bad things about it is how arrogant it is: The idea that the chain of command can be used to keep illegal things secret even across tens of thousands of employees and contractors. Even the military only requires that soldiers follow legal orders. The proof of the pudding is in the eating: If the NSA *could* keep massive surveillance a secret (e.g. not conspire with other government agencies), then they'd probably keep the ability to study the minds of dangerous people. But they failed to, because they failed to persuade at least one person the mission was a good one. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/25/2013 11:24 AM: The public secret (the thing people know but put out of their minds) is not at all compartmentalized. Oh, but it _is_ compartmentalized. Even in the case where everything, all aspects of every piece of legislation, is public, the composite law that results is too complicated for any one lawyer, judge, court, or agency to understand completely. That means that compartmentalization is a natural (perhaps unintended) consequence of complexity. To see this, try asking a 60 year old real estate lawyer about the Samsung/Apple law suits ... or your divorce lawyer about the tax consequences of an S-corp vs. an LLC. ;-) Or look at the variations between 9th circuit rulings and the rest of the federal courts. Compartmentalization is the rule, not the exception. It's secret legislation that contradicts the public law. Again, that's not as relevant as it might seem because lots of laws contradict other laws, secret or not. Among the bad things about it is how arrogant it is: The idea that the chain of command can be used to keep illegal things secret even across tens of thousands of employees and contractors. I agree completely, here. But I don't agree because of the secrecy so much as because of the byzantine nature of our constitutional republic and the (somewhat dysfunctional) method for constructing and curating legislation. It's arrogant all the way around, from the guy arrested for carrying too much marijuana in a state where the law enforcement has simply decided not to enforce some laws to the absurdity of punishing Snowden for disclosing something we technically aware people already knew. Even the military only requires that soldiers follow legal orders. In letter, but not spirit. If the chain of command decides to blame you for something (like humiliating prisoners of war or taking pictures with dead bodies), then they will. If you try to disobey the extant modus operandi of whatever clique you're assigned to, you will suffer for it. And that's all over and above the fact that most service members, like most people, aren't lawyers and don't understand the law, even the relatively simpler military law. By the time any question is settled by a court, the accused's life is already severely damaged or re-aligned. (witness poor little innocent Zimmerman who was merely trolling the neighborhood looking for vandals to shoot) The proof of the pudding is in the eating: If the NSA *could* keep massive surveillance a secret (e.g. not conspire with other government agencies), then they'd probably keep the ability to study the minds of dangerous people. But they failed to, because they failed to persuade at least one person the mission was a good one. I think their mistake lay in the _choice_ of secrets, not in an inherent inability to keep huge projects secret. In this, I agree with Aftergood that we've resigned ourselves to these blanket, broad stroked classifying everything that moves methods. Perhaps what we've lost is the strategic and tactical rationale for what to make secret and what to make public. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Say today's for you and I FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/25/13 12:51 PM, glen wrote: I think their mistake lay in the _choice_ of secrets, not in an inherent inability to keep huge projects secret. Yes. My only disagreement is that I meant compartmentalized as a situation in which there is only one point of vulnerability, one relevant person. I didn't mean generally operating autonomously, I meant bullet proof and air tight. Whether or not there are contradictions in various areas of law matters to the extent people care, and there is someone willing and able to do something about it... Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Now I'm just making up stuff in order to keep arguing. 8^) Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/25/2013 12:04 PM: My only disagreement is that I meant compartmentalized as a situation in which there is only one point of vulnerability, one relevant person. I didn't mean generally operating autonomously, I meant bullet proof and air tight. OK. But before you said: Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/25/2013 11:24 AM: On 7/25/13 10:49 AM, glen wrote: I would say that legislation can be robust to crime or lapses in individual ethics. Legislation is a qualitatively different thing from ethical decisions that govern individual behavior. The lie above [infidel husband at wife's deathbed] as described is compartmentalized and does not impact anyone else. And: The public secret (the thing people know but put out of their minds) is not at all compartmentalized. Legislation and individual ethics do compare nicely because _some_ people know the public secret while others do not, in the same way that the infidel husband's secretary might know of his infidelity (as well as the person with whom he had the affair), even though his wife does not know. The point being that both cases, the public secret and the infidel husband, are compartmentalized in the same way. The one's who notice the _potential_ are in on the public secret, whereas the oblivious ones are not. I can't tell you how many California and Oregon hicks thought I was one of them when they learned that I suspected the government was attempting to build a database for tracking every phone call, text messages, and e-mail. I can count 5 such hicks right off the bat (though I don't know the names of 2 of them that I met at dive bars). But putting paranoia aside, the self-described nerds who know lots of flat technology would write off my suspicions until/unless I (and they) took the time to dig in a little deeper. Those people, the non-paranoid middle tier civilian, were not in on this particular public secret any more than the guys who played golf with the infidel husband might not have been in on the secret of his infidelity, whereas his secretary might have been. Such an ethical case should _not_ scale like this, but it does. It would not scale, if we spent more time curating our classified materials and/or more time curating our legislation. Agencies like the NSA SHOULD have the most sophisticated classification methods on the planet. But they don't, probably because there's too little budget for understanding how to classify and too much budget for ... oh, I don't know, building data centers in Utah. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella I heard you think I miss it, you'd bet I'd kiss it FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/25/13 2:24 PM, glen wrote: Legislation and individual ethics do compare nicely because _some_ people know the public secret while others do not, in the same way that the infidel husband's secretary might know of his infidelity (as well as the person with whom he had the affair), even though his wife does not know. The point being that both cases, the public secret and the infidel husband, are compartmentalized in the same way. The one's who notice the _potential_ are in on the public secret, whereas the oblivious ones are not. While the wife is on her deathbed, it seems unlikely to me that a secretary, buddy, or mistress barges in to report the affair. That could have happened, but it was described as not occurring because that was the thought experiment. It was really up to the husband to confess or not. My point is not about the structural similarity of information leaks in various realms (yes I see your point), it's about their relative consequences. Exposing problems with organizations is more important that exposing problems with individuals, simply because of the number of people it impacts. If the Catholic church tolerates sexual abuse of children, or a DA tolerates homicides based on racial profiling, or a government takes actions that promotes violent blowback from other organizations, these are qualitatively different than instances of crime by individuals. Unfortunately, what often happens is that organizations are good at what I'd describe as internally negotiating the truth amongst themselves, such that a critic can't pin down any one fault. But, Zimmerman and Martin, that's easy to form an opinion about. But putting paranoia aside, the self-described nerds who know lots of flat technology would write off my suspicions until/unless I (and they) took the time to dig in a little deeper. Those people, the non-paranoid middle tier civilian, were not in on this particular public secret any more than the guys who played golf with the infidel husband might not have been in on the secret of his infidelity, whereas his secretary might have been. A basic sketch of a suspicion may have diffused around, at least notionally, to paranoid and cynical technology types. The scale of the metadata effort was obvious to me back as far as 2003 or so, and the intent was absolutely clear with the Patriot act right after 9/11. Of course it takes government quite a long time to convert intent in to anything. I would guess the NSA had production tools by 2008 or so. More alarming to me is the collusion between corporations and between governmental organizations. Not merely cleverly intrusive (I can respect the technical capability), but heavy-handed too. Normal people that put most importance on getting along with their neighbors and peers and the powers that be will tend to be dismissive until it absolutely smacks them in the face and there are enough middle tier civilians to form a new consensus. Without that critical mass, change won't occur. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/25/2013 02:15 PM: My point is not about the structural similarity of information leaks in various realms (yes I see your point), it's about their relative consequences. Aha! I didn't snap to that. It's an important difference. Exposing problems with organizations is more important that exposing problems with individuals, simply because of the number of people it impacts. If the Catholic church tolerates sexual abuse of children, or a DA tolerates homicides based on racial profiling, or a government takes actions that promotes violent blowback from other organizations, these are qualitatively different than instances of crime by individuals. Unfortunately, what often happens is that organizations are good at what I'd describe as internally negotiating the truth amongst themselves, such that a critic can't pin down any one fault. But, Zimmerman and Martin, that's easy to form an opinion about. I agree in principle with your main point, here. But in practice, I end up disagreeing. The problem lies with the illusion of a crisp distinction between an organization and an individual. The counter claim is: Problems in organizations ultimately reduce to problems with individuals. This is why I think Zimmerman/Martin opinions are not so easy to form. (OK, I'm baiting... they're easy to form _prematurely_ without thought... but if you put a little thought into it, then it's not so easy.) Nothing Zimmerman did was or should be illegal. Yet, nothing Martin did was or should be illegal, either. Likewise, lots of completely legal things can get you killed. And there are completely legal ways to kill people. Given this, why all the hoopla? The reason for the hoopla is because the _organization(s)_ gave birth to Martin and the organization(s) gave birth to Zimmerman. Yet the organization was not on trial. The individuals were on trial. The legal system doesn't _die_ when it makes a wrong turn. And the legal system doesn't go to jail when it does something stupid. It seems quite clear that, in practice, our legal system is reductionist, organizational corruption reduces to individual corruption. The same can be said of Snowden and Manning ... individual scapegoats for organizational problems. So, while I agree with you in principle, how do we _force_ a reorganization in the face of organizational problems? More alarming to me is the collusion between corporations and between governmental organizations. I agree, especially large multi-national corporations, which are in direct conflict with self-government. Normal people that put most importance on getting along with their neighbors and peers and the powers that be will tend to be dismissive until it absolutely smacks them in the face and there are enough middle tier civilians to form a new consensus. Without that critical mass, change won't occur. The question is how to [re]generate that critical mass. For a very short time, I thought the simultaneity of the Tea Party and 99% might get us over a threshold. But my experience with individuals from both groups was that they were as unwilling to think and act critically, skeptically, argumentatively, as everyone else. It seems we're doomed to building an unthinking mass to move in one direction, then having to forcibly dissolve that one and reconstitute another in order to change direction again later. We've hit some sort of efficacy ceiling with our 2, 4, and 6 year bloodless revolutions here in the US. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Better come to the throne today FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
The problem lies with the illusion of a crisp distinction between an organization and an individual. The counter claim is: Problems in organizations ultimately reduce to problems with individuals. At every step of the way, and often in iterated private bilateral discussions, any potentially accountable individual in a large organization is tolerating (and thus creating) vast inefficiency to to reduce their liability. That's not their only goal, of course, they also are looking up. The buck passing is just a way to stay safe until they are selected for advancement. What they actually want to accomplish when they get their doesn't matter, they just want to get there! By the time an objection can be raised, they've found a way to have everyone say the sky is not blue because the paper trail leads to that. To say otherwise would be against regulation, policy, good faith, civility, etc. So I agree, in practice, to stop this sort of random growth of nonsense, it is necessary to have a strong argument against a policy from the perspective of the health of the organization (no agendas or idealistic motives allowed!) as well a specific and relevant set of targets for blame, and to pursue it all at once. Or find something else to do. Meh. Marcus mail2web.com - Microsoft® Exchange solutions from a leading provider - http://link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 3:03 PM, glen wrote: I have this opinion because I already knew the government was (or intended to) spy(ing) on my every behavior prior to Snowden's actions. http://thebulletin.org/not-all-secrets-are-alike FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
I'm guessing you're talking about Knife Party? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_Party Google seemed to understand what you were on about :). Never heard of them before, myself. Cheers On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 01:23:39PM -0700, glen wrote: Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/17/2013 11:42 AM: On 7/17/13 12:19 PM, Gary Schiltz wrote: Agreed, but we could form an alliance with them on issues on which we agree. This goes back to the comment someone (Steve, I think) made about whether or not you really want your social network to include some of the people it actually includes. ;-) One of the reasons I stopped (blanketly) calling myself a libertarian was because of all the ... hm, what can I call them ... non-libertarians calling themselves libertarians. I don't want to be associated with them, much less allied. A certain Australian electro house band would be a catchy name amongst the Tea Party folks (or the Domestic Terrorist Party depending on your politics) as well as the club-going young people. I don't dare spell it out for sake of the humor-impaired that might be reading! Hint: Julius Caesar. Allright. It's killing me. You have to provide another hint. Or rot13() it. That way anyone who might be offended will have time to cool off. [grin] -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella We like to keep it on the D.L. because our clientele prefers it that way FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
That's fantastic! It not only helps maintain (at least the illusion of) an extant separation between govt and corporations, but a balance of power between those 2 branches of govt. Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: This could be interesting: Secret court sides with Yahoo, orders U.S. to declassify Prism surveillance ruling http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/16/usa-prism-yahoo-court-idUSL1N0FM20220130716 -- == glen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Sweet! We've always said right/left differences meet at libertarianism. I think we should all join the Tea Party. -- Owen On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Marcus G. Daniels mar...@snoutfarm.comwrote: On 7/17/13 9:31 AM, glen wrote: That's fantastic! It not only helps maintain (at least the illusion of) an extant separation between govt and corporations, but a balance of power between those 2 branches of govt. Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote: This could be interesting: Secret court sides with Yahoo, orders U.S. to declassify Prism surveillance ruling http://www.reuters.com/**article/2013/07/16/usa-prism-**yahoo-court-** idUSL1N0FM20220130716http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/16/usa-prism-yahoo-court-idUSL1N0FM20220130716 And for other types of organizations too.. https://www.eff.org/press/**releases/unitarian-church-gun-** groups-join-eff-sue-nsa-over-**illegal-surveillancehttps://www.eff.org/press/releases/unitarian-church-gun-groups-join-eff-sue-nsa-over-illegal-surveillance ==**== FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/**listinfo/friam_redfish.comhttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/17/13 12:19 PM, Gary Schiltz wrote: Agreed, but we could form an alliance with them on issues on which we agree. Some suggested names: Herbal Tea Party (we could also push for legalization of marijuana); Chai Party somehow seems more southwestern, though I'm not sure why; Coffee Party may already be taken; Irish Whiskey Party - now we're talking :-) A certain Australian electro house band would be a catchy name amongst the Tea Party folks (or the Domestic Terrorist Party depending on your politics) as well as the club-going young people. I don't dare spell it out for sake of the humor-impaired that might be reading! Hint: Julius Caesar. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/17/2013 11:42 AM: On 7/17/13 12:19 PM, Gary Schiltz wrote: Agreed, but we could form an alliance with them on issues on which we agree. This goes back to the comment someone (Steve, I think) made about whether or not you really want your social network to include some of the people it actually includes. ;-) One of the reasons I stopped (blanketly) calling myself a libertarian was because of all the ... hm, what can I call them ... non-libertarians calling themselves libertarians. I don't want to be associated with them, much less allied. A certain Australian electro house band would be a catchy name amongst the Tea Party folks (or the Domestic Terrorist Party depending on your politics) as well as the club-going young people. I don't dare spell it out for sake of the humor-impaired that might be reading! Hint: Julius Caesar. Allright. It's killing me. You have to provide another hint. Or rot13() it. That way anyone who might be offended will have time to cool off. [grin] -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella We like to keep it on the D.L. because our clientele prefers it that way FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
You have to provide another hint. I would but You blocked me on Facebook! :-) Marcus mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/17/2013 01:57 PM: You have to provide another hint. I would but You blocked me on Facebook! :-) LoL! Lrnu, V oybpxrq rirelobql ba Snprobbx. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Every day I wake up to a bowl of clover honey and let the locusts fly in FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Glen writes: Lrnu, V oybpxrq rirelobql ba Snprobbx. Here's some elisp code to keep them busy: (defun annoy-nsa () (interactive) (let ((start (point))) (spook) (rot13-region start (point myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft® Windows® and Linux web and application hosting - http://link.myhosting.com/myhosting FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 11:32 PM, Steve Smith wrote: My only excuses (to my conscience) for NOT speaking up might be: [..] This fact, while technically dead-nuts wrong, is not really that important (everybody suspects and are not railing against it already?) The paradox: A conscience is a security risk. It's absence is a security risk. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
My only excuses (to my conscience) for NOT speaking up might be: [..] This fact, while technically dead-nuts wrong, is not really that important (everybody suspects and are not railing against it already?) The paradox: A conscience is a security risk. It's absence is a security risk. Well said... I wish I'd understood that before I accepted the responsibility... I'm glad I had an intuitive understanding of it enough to avoid wedging myself ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 07/15/2013 10:32 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Can honor ever trump oath? I think your question is unanswerable, not because of lack of context, but because both honor and oaths are ideals, not real things. And the answers to questions about ideals are always just as idealistic as the questions ... which means they're ultimately meaningless. What matters more, I think are the expected outcomes of potential actions. In the Snowden example, what outcomes are possible then probable if you leak? What outcomes are possible then probable if you don't leak. Once you've got a decent handle on that tree, then you can prioritize those outcomes. The highest priority, most probable outcome is the one you should work toward. And if that means you leak, then you leak. One thing I think is missing from the Snowden case that might have been present in other cases is that our military industrial complex has plenty of _experts_ in such what if methods. And that's part of why I classify Snowden with O'Keefe. I see no evidence Snowden engaged in any significant effort to explore the outcomes tree. If I saw that evidence, I would likely change my mind about him. But, as it stands, I see an agenda-driven child who lies to get a position, then almost _immediately_ grabs the documents and runs. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella But my fuse gets shorter every day FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
If I saw that evidence, I would likely change my mind about him. But, as it stands, I see an agenda-driven child who lies to get a position, then almost _immediately_ grabs the documents and runs. What does agenda-driven add to your point? It seems to me if you substitute purposeless it would be more damning. Marcus mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/16/2013 08:30 AM: What does agenda-driven add to your point? It seems to me if you substitute purposeless it would be more damning. It's an indicator that I think he purposefully sought the BAH job just so that he could gain access to evidence of PRISM, and just so that he could then quit the job and leak the evidence. I use the term merely for emphasis, to make an assertion that he intended to find and leak this data all along. I assert he never had any intention of fulfilling any duty to BAH or its contractors. I couldn't use purposeless. Nobody I've ever known is ever purposeless. But most people are driven by a dynamic complex of competing agendas, including the kinds of conflict Steve asks about in his honor/oath question. Snowden, like O'Keefe, _seems_ to me to be absent any interesting complex of agendas. I will be happy if/when I learn of his other agendas. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella They teach us how to wiggle FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
But most people are driven by a dynamic complex of competing agendas, including the kinds of conflict Steve asks about in his honor/oath question. Snowden, like O'Keefe, _seems_ to me to be absent any interesting complex of agendas. A contrary view is that only young people have a clear enough view of things to act this way. Old timers like me rationalize their fears, inhibitions, constraints, and coping strategies as a proxy for wisdom. Worse, we may point to the collective wisdom as better than an informed individual's analysis. Same thing as authoritarianism. Marcus mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus - But most people are driven by a dynamic complex of competing agendas, including the kinds of conflict Steve asks about in his honor/oath question. Snowden, like O'Keefe, _seems_ to me to be absent any interesting complex of agendas. A contrary view is that only young people have a clear enough view of things to act this way. Old timers like me rationalize their fears, inhibitions, constraints, and coping strategies as a proxy for wisdom. Worse, we may point to the collective wisdom as better than an informed individual's analysis. Same thing as authoritarianism. Marcus Yer pretty smart for such a young feller! No, seriously, this back and forth between you and Glen is very illuminating from my perspective. It is probably precisely what drove some folks from the list, but it warms my dark old soul to hear this kind of relative perspective being bandied about so deftly. - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/16/2013 08:30 AM: What does agenda-driven add to your point? It seems to me if you substitute purposeless it would be more damning. It's an indicator that I think he purposefully sought the BAH job just so that he could gain access to evidence of PRISM, and just so that he could then quit the job and leak the evidence. I use the term merely for emphasis, to make an assertion that he intended to find and leak this data all along. I assert he never had any intention of fulfilling any duty to BAH or its contractors. I couldn't use purposeless. Nobody I've ever known is ever purposeless. But most people are driven by a dynamic complex of competing agendas, including the kinds of conflict Steve asks about in his honor/oath question. Snowden, like O'Keefe, _seems_ to me to be absent any interesting complex of agendas. I will be happy if/when I learn of his other agendas. I still don't have the context you two seem to have on this... I just didn't follow the myriad announcements and interviews as they rolled out and going through them after the fact has some specific charms (according to Clemens who professed to read the newspaper two weeks late) but I haven't gotten down to it yet. Disclaimer aside, I still don't hear Snowden as being *that* pre-meditated. He *may* in his self-aggrandizement suggest he was, but I'm hearing something else... I hear your (Glen's) behaviourist bent (especially when confronted with my idealist one), and defer to it partway. I think Ideals (honor, oath) are very *real* if only in the minds of those who idealize them. Those two things mean something very specific and strong to me and they are where the buck stops for me in some situations. While I may be very pragmatic about the fine grain organization of my priorities, I am not particularly pragmatic at all when it comes to the large grain stuff, and I would submit to you as Exhibit A, One Glen Ropella who can't (by his own declaration) seem to get through Social Ettiquete 101 in the OldSkool of hard knocking around. What is that about? It is certainly not (or not obvious to me) about careful evaluation of consequence trees... It looks a lot like the adherence to an ideal (and/or aspect of self-image?). My rear-view mirror is littered with the wreckage of where my Ideals (which you contend don't exist?) defined my actions, running over pragmatism (another ideal?) over and over. You could say that I never broke my oath (except in that one unfortunate faux pas in the hot tub) because I knew the (external) consequences and chose to avoid them by avoiding taking that fork in the path. I grant you that I did evaluate the (internal) consequences. Who would I be, if I broke this oath? was at least as important as what would they do to me if I broke this oath? of course I didn't want to be charged with felony treason nor did I want to see the global balance of superpower get tweaked off it's precessing axes, nor see some upstart (think Kim Jong) get any tiny advantage. But first and foremost, I didn't want to step off the side of that slippery slope of thinking that I could say one thing and do another on a whim. Perhaps I project too much, but I have a hard time NOT imagining Snowden thinking the same thing who would I be if I did not take this one trivial almost non-fact from below the table and put it above the table? From what little I know about it all, I suspect *I* would NOT have spoken up, the truth he exposed feels a bit too trivial to be worth the consequences (external and internal) but he and I are clearly very different people. Do you deny that people (egos) operate strongly on maintaining the integrity of their feedback loop of their self-image? Some people do this by soliciting reinforcing feedback from others. Some do it by talking out loud to themselves a lot (like I do here, pretending I'm talking to the rest of you). And some do it by picking an idealized spot (or set of spots) on the idealism horizon and keeping their compass trained on them as they navigate the heavy weather of modern life. Or all three? I don't mean this as argumentative as much as provocative... I find your (Glen) view of human nature very interesting and it often helps to fill out some of the holes in my own, and sometimes even shifts my own a little. And I'm finding Marcus' counterpoint equally useful here. - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
What I don't understand is why Snowden went public using his real identity. Why not just be the Deep Throat of the intelligence community? Surely he could have divulged just enough to whet the appetite of the some select journalists without being the only one to have access to the information, thus giving himself deniability. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/16/13 11:18 AM, Gary Schiltz wrote: What I don't understand is why Snowden went public using his real identity. Why not just be the Deep Throat of the intelligence community? Surely he could have divulged just enough to whet the appetite of the some select journalists without being the only one to have access to the information, thus giving himself deniability. Gary - I too have contemplated this. My answer is complicated: 1. We can't know 2. He *wanted* the noteriety (Glen's perspective?) 3. His honor required he not maintain deniability (My perspective?) 4. Other stuff - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
4. Other stuff The giant dragnet that would be underway for months at the NSA, torturing everyone he worked with. Marcus mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On the other hand, if what they say about his life is true, he shows a remarkable _inability_ to complete anything he starts. He seems to be a serial quitter, to me. If that were just a flake, he wouldn't have had a 6 figure salary with the NSA. He raised the black flag early in his life. With all the blood on his hands, 50 more years of that might have seemed like a lot. Dunno. Marcus mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Regarding the how it is done aspect: Wired has an article last year that the NSA started reverse-engineering the database that is used at Google. Apparently the software is named Accumulo Achttp://accumulo.apache.org/ http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/07/nsa-accumulo-google-bigtable/ Todd Hoff had an article at HighScalability recently that explains how easy it is to build PRISM if you have the right data http://highscalability.com/blog/2013/7/1/prism-the-amazingly-low-cost-of-using-bigdata-to-know-more-a.html -J. On 07/15/2013 05:47 PM, Owen Densmore wrote: I've started following the Snowden/PRISM thing a bit more, and came across this via twitter: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/15/crux-nsa-collect-it-all Regardless of opinions on the ethics/legal side, the collect it all approach seems just impossible for me to grok. Lets suppose you *did* have all the data generated on the internet every day for the last 20 years. What could you do with it? I presume they are using specialized hardware, possibly openCL sort of processing via GPU farms. Fine. How would you turn this into a usable tool? Color me naive, but isn't this a self generated DOS on themselves? -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
I've started following the Snowden/PRISM thing a bit more, and came across this via twitter: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/15/crux-nsa-collect-it-all Regardless of opinions on the ethics/legal side, the collect it all approach seems just impossible for me to grok. Lets suppose you *did* have all the data generated on the internet every day for the last 20 years. What could you do with it? I presume they are using specialized hardware, possibly openCL sort of processing via GPU farms. Fine. How would you turn this into a usable tool? Color me naive, but isn't this a self generated DOS on themselves? -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
``Regardless of opinions on the ethics/legal side, the collect it all approach seems just impossible for me to grok.'' Sounds like the UK is more aggressive in this regard: `full take' for 3 days. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-whistleblower-edwar d-snowden-on-global-spying-a-910006.html Marcus mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
How would you turn this into a usable tool? If one knew all communication events between all possible hosts over time, then that organization could identify the likely relevant endpoint security to attack (e.g. using a library of purchased zero-day exploits) on, say, the likely paths of Tor connection. If they could compromise all of those hosts, they could get behind the encryption when the next conversation occurred. Marcus mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 08:47 AM: Regardless of opinions on the ethics/legal side, the collect it all approach seems just impossible for me to grok. Lets suppose you *did* have all the data generated on the internet every day for the last 20 years. What could you do with it? I think they're taking the usual approach to large data sets, save it all (or as much as you can) just in case you find an anomaly you want to study. The point of having the raw data available is to allow you to engage in hindsight. What interests me most is not what they _intend_ to do with it, but what they end up doing with it. For example, I used to keep every single e-mail I ever received. I started doing that way before I learned about Eddington typewriters. On several occasions, I've had reason to go back and mine that data for various things, including building various bots that could spit out text similar to various people and spam sources. An interesting tangent is that encryption was a significant irritant ... even where e-mails were encrypted with my public key. ;-) The more important question, I think, is how these agencies are organizing the long-term storage. What schema are they using? How is it indexed? What storage media do they use? These are the questions that make me want to apply for a job with the NSA. (BTW, I _did_ apply for a job there as I was finishing college. I didn't pursue it because I had a good offer from somewhere else. ... Plus, one of my roommates landed a job there. And he was so perky, sunny, and patriotic, he creeped me out. He asked why I liked the work of H.R. Giger, claiming it was too dark and depressing. He actually asked me to take down my prints ... which I did. [sigh]) -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal. -- F.A. Hayek FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Very useful, thanks! So the current approach is a blend of full-take for 3+ days, with much larger time for meta-data. Targeted people are basically pwned, with full-take for as long as they'd like, default for ever. Unlikely the full-take is useful for analysis without auxiliary field input to narrow searches. Airline examples were interesting. I'm now officially freaked. And I really do believe there are serious legal/constitutional issues here. NSA and the gvt itself no longer represent and protect us, the citizens of the USA. We're trapped by international intrigue and interests that simply do not matter to us as a country, a citizenry. Indeed, they harm us. All our wars from Korea to the present have been insane hubris and the begin of the fall of our Empire. And the sum is that the distrust for us is placing us at unparalleled risk. Voting hasn't worked and the real issues are not discussed and debated. Damn. -- Owen On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:04 AM, mar...@snoutfarm.com mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote: ``Regardless of opinions on the ethics/legal side, the collect it all approach seems just impossible for me to grok.'' Sounds like the UK is more aggressive in this regard: `full take' for 3 days. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-whistleblower-edwar d-snowden-on-global-spying-a-910006.html Marcus mail2web.com – What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
``I think they're taking the usual approach to large data sets, save it all (or as much as you can) just in case you find an anomaly you want to study.'' A short term sample of all traffic could be used analogously to a UAV video recording. Take any suspect or event and look for any and all signals leading to them backward in time. Declare the source of those signals suspects find the correlated physical sites compromise them. Recurse. Marcus mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
A good point make in the article was that keeping the metadata allows you to retrieve full-take data if at a later time you need deleted buffered data. So full-take also has a full-retake aspect. -- Owen On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM, mar...@snoutfarm.com mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote: ``I think they're taking the usual approach to large data sets, save it all (or as much as you can) just in case you find an anomaly you want to study.'' A short term sample of all traffic could be used analogously to a UAV video recording. Take any suspect or event and look for any and all signals leading to them backward in time. Declare the source of those signals suspects find the correlated physical sites compromise them. Recurse. Marcus mail2web.com – What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/15/2013 10:08 AM: A short term sample of all traffic could be used analogously to a UAV video recording. Take any suspect or event and look for any and all signals leading to them backward in time. Declare the source of those signals suspects find the correlated physical sites compromise them. Recurse. Yeah, that does imply a good index ... a kind of inverted light cone. I can imagine an explosion in the number of compromised sites, though. You'd need some way of rolling out ancillary sites, perhaps based on the number of associated indices. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. - Frank Herbert Dune FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
glen e. p. ropella wrote at 07/15/2013 10:21 AM: Yeah, that does imply a good index ... a kind of inverted light cone. I can imagine an explosion in the number of compromised sites, though. You'd need some way of rolling out ancillary sites, perhaps based on the number of associated indices. You'd also need upgrade survivable root kits and dynammic dns updates. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone. -- H. L. Mencken FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
This mode of use is powerful (TiVO for intell) but at least it limits (in principle) use to an actual incident, something determined (legally?) to be actionable. I have worked on projects which DID NOT presume ubiquitous data like this but which would become unnaturally powerful if the data coverage was near complete, even meta-data. I'm surprised when people believe that the time-registered network topology of all human (or just US Citizens, or just those who have communicated with a non-US Citizen, and those who have communicated with those... you get the picture). Correlation does not imply Causation... except in nearly every human intuition on the planet. Think of every person you have known (of) who was implicated in a crime (or terrorist attack)... do you want to be implicated by association? OK, maybe you feel that any investigation into your behaviour because a fellow FRIAM member got implicated (doing X, Y, or Z) will be exonerated when it is looked into further. One of the worries I have from the tools I have helped build and have seen along the way is that at some point, all evidence becomes circumstantial and as the *probability* goes up that you are guilty and exceeds some threshold, it is too easy for many to conflate that with whether you did it or not, or more to the point, people become willing to take the chance we are wrong, when the stakes go up. Around 9/11, and around horrific murders, serial cases, etc. People often speak as if the risk of a few false positives is acceptable. It *MAY BE* but I claim that a statistical (especially network-oriented) approach to analysis is extra risky for many reasons. One is that I don't believe we (SFI included) has a sophisticated enough science behind networks to honestly analyze and judge. The last suite of projects I worked on in this domain (Multi Investment Decision Support Tool, Pre-Incident-Indicator-Analysis, and Faceted Ontologies) were very specifically interested in what could be *inferred* across a time-iterated series of events on a complex network. Among other things, we found that we needed to include Uncertainty Measures (how many tools or methodologies do you know that actually incorporate uncertainty measures and do it well?) In answer to Owen's question what can they do with it?, the answer is *plenty*. A corollary question is what can they do with it which is well understood and honest? is a more questionable question. My experience is that there is a LOT we can do with it that is *intuitively* compelling but very little which we have formal proofs that transform what would normally be considered circumstantial to proof. In the meantime, gung ho law enforcement (and the general public) will continue to charge forward, cheering abuses of power without realizing that is what they are doing. - Steve ``I think they're taking the usual approach to large data sets, save it all (or as much as you can) just in case you find an anomaly you want to study.'' A short term sample of all traffic could be used analogously to a UAV video recording. Take any suspect or event and look for any and all signals leading to them backward in time. Declare the source of those signals suspects find the correlated physical sites compromise them. Recurse. Marcus mail2web.com – What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: snip Glen might have watched a *different* interview with Snowden than the one I watched http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/nsa-whistleblower-edward-snowden-why. I have my own bs detectors and a natural suspicion of those who might tell stories where they are the natural victim/hero. In this case, he seemed not only articulate and insightful but relatively straightforward about what/why was up in this case. Totally agree. Snowden is honest. Its interesting to see his insight that the public should decide along with Lessig's notion of Win back the Republic. Neither are rabidly anti-American nor extreme right or left. They present a common sense plea to return to simple, basic american values, one of which is to let the people decide issues in open discussion and debate. Lessig has the Tea Party discussing policies with Environmentalists, and it seems to all work, sorta a TED for Public Discussion. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 11:28 AM, Steve Smith wrote: This mode of use is powerful (TiVO for intell) but at least it limits (in principle) use to an actual incident, something determined (legally?) to be actionable. The secret guidance from the attorney general was that the NSA director has the latitude to pass on intel from `incidental' collection to the FBI if there is evidence of a crime being committed. So even if the FBI doesn't have legally usable intel after given the NSA digest they obviously can invent some pretty easily by watching the right people at the right time (duh!). Even more curious is that it is not the NSA hardware, it's FBI hardware, oh, except when it is the vendors'. The NSA is looking for international bad actors with FBI hardware, except when it is handy to make an illegal arrest on a U.S. citizen. We now return you to your regularly scheduled Zimmerman idiocy. Where's Doug when you need him.. :-) Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:02 AM: Totally agree. Snowden is honest. Well, depending on how you define honest. E.g. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-booz-allen-hamilton_n_3491203.html He is analogous to a mole or a spy. He's honest in the same way that James O'Keefe is honest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella But never seen around FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
I mean that I believe what he says. -- Owen On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:21 PM, glen g...@ropella.name wrote: Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:02 AM: Totally agree. Snowden is honest. Well, depending on how you define honest. E.g. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-booz-allen-hamilton_n_3491203.html He is analogous to a mole or a spy. He's honest in the same way that James O'Keefe is honest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe -- == glen e. p. ropella But never seen around FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 12:21 PM, glen wrote: He's honest in the same way that James O'Keefe is honest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe The more important question, I think, is how these agencies are organizing the long-term storage. What schema are they using? How is it indexed? What storage media do they use? These are the questions that make me want to apply for a job with the NSA. I read his remarks consistent with your remarks immediately above. I think they were taking him out of context to make a headline. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:27 AM: I mean that I believe what he says. Yeah, but so did the hiring managers at Booz-Allen and whoever accepted his signature on the NDA when he signed onto the NSA contract. The trouble with people like Snowden (as opposed to an honest whistle blower) is that he intentionally lied at the outset. That means that he is capable of intentionally lying again whenever he deems it will serve his agenda. In the same way that you can't trust a defector not to defect again, you can't trust Snowden to tell the truth for any altruistic purposes. He's gaming us just like the NSA is gaming us. I believe some of what Snowden says. I also believe some of what the Clapper says ... and some of what Obama says. Etc. And it has _nothing_ to do with that slimy feeling I get when I listen to them talk. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Pushin up and pushin down against the sky FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
This article points out some of the real fun: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/us/double-secret-surveillance.html So several months ago the DOJ got a suit by the usual anti-surveillance do-gooders dismissed in the SCOTUS by arguing that the do-gooders had no standing to sue, only someone who's actually being tried by the USGOVT based on or derived from surveillance evidence had the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the surveillance. The majority opinion parrotted the DOJ's argument. Now, the DOJ is arguing in court cases that those being tried by the USGOVT have no right to challenge the constitutionality of the surveillance, either. -- rec -- On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:38 PM, glen g...@ropella.name wrote: Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:27 AM: I mean that I believe what he says. Yeah, but so did the hiring managers at Booz-Allen and whoever accepted his signature on the NDA when he signed onto the NSA contract. The trouble with people like Snowden (as opposed to an honest whistle blower) is that he intentionally lied at the outset. That means that he is capable of intentionally lying again whenever he deems it will serve his agenda. In the same way that you can't trust a defector not to defect again, you can't trust Snowden to tell the truth for any altruistic purposes. He's gaming us just like the NSA is gaming us. I believe some of what Snowden says. I also believe some of what the Clapper says ... and some of what Obama says. Etc. And it has _nothing_ to do with that slimy feeling I get when I listen to them talk. -- == glen e. p. ropella Pushin up and pushin down against the sky FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/15/2013 11:36 AM: The more important question, I think, is how these agencies are organizing the long-term storage. What schema are they using? How is it indexed? What storage media do they use? These are the questions that make me want to apply for a job with the NSA. I read his remarks consistent with your remarks immediately above. I think they were taking him out of context to make a headline. I doubt his motives would be consistent with mine. I do admit that I may not know C++ as well as one might infer from my resume'. 8^) But I would _never_ (have never) claim(ed) to have attended a university that I didn't actually attend. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Float away from those horizons FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 12:38 PM, glen wrote: Yeah, but so did the hiring managers at Booz-Allen and whoever accepted his signature on the NDA when he signed onto the NSA contract. The trouble with people like Snowden (as opposed to an honest whistle blower) is that he intentionally lied at the outset. He signed an NDA and in all likeliness become a corpse, a fugitive or a prisoner for the rest of his life because he broke that deal. His 2nd interview with the Guardian make it clear that he knew he'd go down for this. There's no selfish upside I can see. A few weeks of grandiosity? You'd think that if the Clapper, the AG, etc. really had one bit of evidence he was a spy they'd have it all over the news and use it to full propaganda effect. It's possible he could be pressured in to that (say by the Russians), but where's the evidence? If the U.S. govt. is afraid of the latter, they should be making him feel like he'll get reasonable consideration as a whistle blower, or at least lie plausibly to that effect. If for some reason Snowden had specific prescience into the NSA's capabilities and prior to signing the NDA (someone leaked to him?) those beliefs could have been falsified after he was in. That means that he is capable of intentionally lying again whenever he deems it will serve his agenda. It's intelligence arena; it's all about deception and manipulation. Children need not apply. It's fine if you think deception and manipulation cannot serve the greater good of the democracy and promoting individual freedom. But by that standard every competent employee in the intelligence community would be guilty of having that character flaw/feature. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/15/2013 12:09 PM: He signed an NDA and in all likeliness become a corpse, a fugitive or a prisoner for the rest of his life because he broke that deal. His 2nd interview with the Guardian make it clear that he knew he'd go down for this. There's no selfish upside I can see. There need be no selfish upside. His lies could easily be seen as motivated by a delusional disorder. He may feel like a martyr. He may feel his chances of surviving are greater than they actually are. ... Whatever. The point is that he saw lying to and about perfectly innocent people as his means to an end. Take my point as a comment on our byzantine rule of law, where laws must be broken in order for justice to be done, or take it as naive rhetoric for two wrongs don't make a right. It doesn't change the fact that Snowden is a weasel. Now, I happen to be OK with weasels when their actions make our lives, our democracy better. I don't expect people to have infinite foresight or even to be ideologically stable. People make mistakes and, whenever possible, systemic causes should be sought before assigning blame to a pure, single cause. Persoally, I think Snowden should be welcomed back to the US as a hero, at least to some demographic, perhaps in the same way Ollie North is treated these days. But you can safely bet that I won't be telling any of my secrets to Snowden. 8^) He'll have to steal them (which is not hard, given my lax security). It's intelligence arena; it's all about deception and manipulation. Children need not apply. It's fine if you think deception and manipulation cannot serve the greater good of the democracy and promoting individual freedom. But by that standard every competent employee in the intelligence community would be guilty of having that character flaw/feature. No, I don't think so. I actually think the balance between empathy for those you've infiltrated and your original mission is a _difficult_ balance. To paint the whole community of spies and undercover cops as having this particular character flaw/feature is too broad. It does a disservice to those who think long and hard ... and get professional training regarding ... what it means to go undercover. O'Keefe and Snowden seem particularly cavalier to me. They seem very agenda-driven and don't have much respect for the humanity of their targets. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella There's a light that used to shine FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
The point is that he saw lying to and about perfectly innocent people as his means to an end. Ironic that some of the people that are especially mad at him are in Congress! Marcus mail2web LIVE Free email based on Microsoft® Exchange technology - http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/15/2013 01:01 PM: The point is that he saw lying to and about perfectly innocent people as his means to an end. Ironic that some of the people that are especially mad at him are in Congress! I agree completely, there. But Shakespeare taught us that the _loudest_ condemners of weasels are other weasels. I even think Wyden (D-OR) is being a bit overly dramatic about all this. I'd be much more interested in hearing what Snowden's co-workers and bosses think. It's too bad he wasn't there long enough to develop any real relationships with them before he flew off to Hong Kong to break his oath. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella I'm gonna bleed on this town until its red FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
I'd be much more interested in hearing what Snowden's co-workers and bosses think. It's too bad he wasn't there long enough to develop any real relationships with them before he flew off to Hong Kong to break his oath. I recall there was an interview late-June with one of his colleagues that expressed roughly I understand but wish he hadn't done it alone. Sorry I can't find the reference at the moment. In any case, the media fixation on this guy's judgement, training, loyalty or whatever is moot at this point. He's a person, so he's flawed. This all may have just been a royal screw-up on his part. So what? The issue should be what was disclosed (even if misguided or accidental) and how it relates to the constitution of the United States. It's fine to dismiss him as weasel or a mole -- provided collective attention is given to these questionable moves at the highest levels of our government. I'll be disappointed if the conclusion is just fascism: Do absolutely anything to protect U.S. economic interests from harm. Marcus mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/15/2013 01:34 PM: In any case, the media fixation on this guy's judgement, training, loyalty or whatever is moot at this point. He's a person, so he's flawed. This all may have just been a royal screw-up on his part. So what? The issue should be what was disclosed (even if misguided or accidental) and how it relates to the constitution of the United States. It's fine to dismiss him as weasel or a mole -- provided collective attention is given to these questionable moves at the highest levels of our government. I disagree. I think the circumstances surrounding his judgement, training, loyalty, etc. is _primary_ at this point. I have this opinion because I already knew the government was (or intended to) spy(ing) on my every behavior prior to Snowden's actions. And, frankly, I don't much care. When my government decides to put me in prison or kill me, it will find a way to do it. Such is life. What I do care about, however, is whether or not our government is of/by/for the people or not. The fact that we need people like Snowden (and Manning and Swartz) is an indicator that it's not. And the fact that we label all these guys as traitors, terrorists, or criminals for doing the work of the fourth estate is what's wrong. Snowden was encouraged to do what he did, in the way he did it, by our system of laws and the way we enforce them. The same can be said of lots of do-gooder law breakers (e.g. filming animal abuse at industrial farms, medical marijuana growers, etc.). These people feel like they _cannot_ achieve anything from within the system. They feel like they must break the law in the service of some higher justice. That's the problem. What Snowden revealed is trivial. The fact that he had to sacrifice his life to reveal it is non-trivial. I'll be disappointed if the conclusion is just fascism: Do absolutely anything to protect U.S. economic interests from harm. Me too. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Well they look so pencil thin FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus, agreed. Though I'm at the annual AI meeting and think this kind of surveillance may be the new normal. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 15, 2013, at 1:34 PM, mar...@snoutfarm.com mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote: I'd be much more interested in hearing what Snowden's co-workers and bosses think. It's too bad he wasn't there long enough to develop any real relationships with them before he flew off to Hong Kong to break his oath. I recall there was an interview late-June with one of his colleagues that expressed roughly I understand but wish he hadn't done it alone. Sorry I can't find the reference at the moment. In any case, the media fixation on this guy's judgement, training, loyalty or whatever is moot at this point. He's a person, so he's flawed. This all may have just been a royal screw-up on his part. So what? The issue should be what was disclosed (even if misguided or accidental) and how it relates to the constitution of the United States. It's fine to dismiss him as weasel or a mole -- provided collective attention is given to these questionable moves at the highest levels of our government. I'll be disappointed if the conclusion is just fascism: Do absolutely anything to protect U.S. economic interests from harm. Marcus mail2web.com – Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
They feel like they must break the law in the service of some higher justice. That's the problem. Is it that he believed he had to break the law (e.g. was mentally ill) or that he had to break the law (because the government went off the reservation). Both and neither? ;-) Marcus mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/15/2013 02:13 PM: Is it that he believed he had to break the law (e.g. was mentally ill) or that he had to break the law (because the government went off the reservation). Both and neither? ;-) Both, of course. A) It's a flaw in our ... what? ... in our educational system? ... our child rearing system? ... that we leave people like Snowden behind. I can say the same thing about several of the youth I've met over the years ... very bright but with dullards for teachers and role models. Ideally, Snowden is capable enough to put his efforts into within-the-system reform. If only such paths were more canalized, more obvious, more clear as he made his various decisions through his life. But B) it doesn't matter how bright you are, or how genuine you are, or how capable you are... in the system we have, one wrong move and you're tin-foil hat insane or a criminal. If/when the law gets you in their sights, it comes crashing down on you. And if you weren't a criminal when it started, you will be one soon, as you learn to navigate our industrial prison system. And even if you navigate your way to a prestigious and relatively powerful position (e.g. Obama or Wyden), you'll steadily accrue various restraints, be they golden handcuffs or gray area oaths. The various constituents of our justice system are too tightly coupled. There's not enough play or wiggle room for the average Joe to be part of the process. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella The economic factors are no longer relevant FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
It's a flaw in our ... what? ... in our educational system? ... our child rearing system? ... that we leave people like Snowden behind. And let loonies like Dick Cheney become vice president. As Doug would say, we get what we deserve. Marcus mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/15/2013 02:57 PM: It's a flaw in our ... what? ... in our educational system? ... our child rearing system? ... that we leave people like Snowden behind. And let loonies like Dick Cheney become vice president. N. Labeling Cheney that way is precisely the same thing as labeling Snowden a traitor. Cheney was _trained_ ... programmed, by his service with Nixon, Ford, at Haliburton, etc. He's no more loony than Snowden. We groomed him to become what he was. It's useless to label him or place blame on him. It would be more useful to examine the system in which such a gamer would thrive. Again, I say this regardless of the slimy feeling I get when I think about Cheney. ;-) -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Somehow must reflect the truth we feel FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
``Labeling Cheney that way is precisely the same thing as labeling Snowden a traitor. Cheney was _trained_ ... programmed, by his service with Nixon, Ford, at Haliburton, etc. He's no more loony than Snowden. We groomed him to become what he was. It's useless to label him or place blame on him.'' True. Marcus mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
I doubt his motives would be consistent with mine. I do admit that I may not know C++ as well as one might infer from my resume'. 8^) But I would _never_ (have never) claim(ed) to have attended a university that I didn't actually attend. I don't know, I think I saw School of Hard Knocks listed and I can attest I've been in that one for over 40 years and never saw you in class once... are you trying to say that there are multiple campuses? grin FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
I'm a particularly slow learner. So you're probably in the more advanced classes. I still haven't passed Social Etiquette 101. Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: I don't know, I think I saw School of Hard Knocks listed and I can attest I've been in that one for over 40 years and never saw you in class once... are you trying to say that there are multiple campuses? grin -- == glen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Glen - There need be no selfish upside. His lies could easily be seen as motivated by a delusional disorder. He may feel like a martyr. He may feel his chances of surviving are greater than they actually are. ... Whatever. The point is that he saw lying to and about perfectly innocent people as his means to an end. Take my point as a comment on our byzantine rule of law, where laws must be broken in order for justice to be done, or take it as naive rhetoric for two wrongs don't make a right. It doesn't change the fact that Snowden is a weasel. I don't have enough data to validate or refute this last statement, but the first interviews actually struck me that he was NOT such a creature. I expected him to be, but he did not present that way (though perhaps that changed in later interviews/statements?). Now, I happen to be OK with weasels when their actions make our lives, our democracy better. I don't expect people to have infinite foresight or even to be ideologically stable. People make mistakes and, whenever possible, systemic causes should be sought before assigning blame to a pure, single cause. Persoally, I think Snowden should be welcomed back to the US as a hero, at least to some demographic, perhaps in the same way Ollie North is treated these days. But you can safely bet that I won't be telling any of my secrets to Snowden. 8^) He'll have to steal them (which is not hard, given my lax security). More to the point, he may already have them, as collected by the NSA. It's intelligence arena; it's all about deception and manipulation. Children need not apply. It's fine if you think deception and manipulation cannot serve the greater good of the democracy and promoting individual freedom. But by that standard every competent employee in the intelligence community would be guilty of having that character flaw/feature. No, I don't think so. I actually think the balance between empathy for those you've infiltrated and your original mission is a _difficult_ balance. To paint the whole community of spies and undercover cops as having this particular character flaw/feature is too broad. It does a disservice to those who think long and hard ... and get professional training regarding ... what it means to go undercover. I met up with a friend from high school about 10 years ago... she had gone into police science and joined up with a local law-enforcement crowd after graduation, but eventually distinguished herself as a forensic specialist and took a job with the Navy (wink wink) DC but her job was to debrief returning Company men (and women) while wired up to her machines. She spoke in all the veiled, thinly-mis-directed terms I'd already come to understand about (the tip of the iceberg of) the Intelligence world so that she wouldn't have to kill me and then off herself with her cyanide tooth for having divulged state secrets to me. She told me stories that would raise the hairs on your whole body, especially the short ones where the electrodes go when they are torturing, not merely interrogating. Whe was completely repulsed by the guys (and maybe a few gals, mostly guys) who came back from mission... and could only barely acknowledge that they were *selected for* their strong wills and nearly (or even fully?) sociopathic natures... and that *of course* they tried to lie to her about things they might have seen or done that was maybe not their employer's business. It isn't hard to imagine that some of these characters live a pretty depraved life while wielding the power vested in them by their role (and their sociopathic natures?). I've also worked with more than a few of these folks after they have retired from active field duty and most of them showed a pretty sketchy idea of honor and integrity (tended to be biased toward arrogant militaristic nationalism, and self-serving xenophobia). Of course, that sample was biased by self-selection (who would work with the likes of me and mine). That is not to say that *none* of the field agents in our intelligence (especially overseas) are highly competent boyscout/choirboys... I'm sure we have a few who were born with red/white/blue birthmarks, diapered in the flag, lost their virginity to the statue of liberty, etc... O'Keefe and Snowden seem particularly cavalier to me. They seem very agenda-driven and don't have much respect for the humanity of their targets. I'm not seeing that, but I generally respect your opinion enough to look a little harder... I admit to a bias of believing (not without some evidence of my own) that the US government (and especially the Intell world) is pretty cavalier about lots of things, and when someone stands up in the middle of the street and blows a shrill whistle and points at them, I tend to assume that at least *some* of what they are whistling shrilly at is real and if they are standing in front of a bus as they do it (Bradley Manning?) at the time, I
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Glen/Marcus mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote at 07/15/2013 01:34 PM: In any case, the media fixation on this guy's judgement, training, loyalty or whatever is moot at this point. He's a person, so he's flawed. This all may have just been a royal screw-up on his part. So what? The issue should be what was disclosed (even if misguided or accidental) and how it relates to the constitution of the United States. It's fine to dismiss him as weasel or a mole -- provided collective attention is given to these questionable moves at the highest levels of our government. I disagree. I think the circumstances surrounding his judgement, training, loyalty, etc. is _primary_ at this point. I have this opinion because I already knew the government was (or intended to) spy(ing) on my every behavior prior to Snowden's actions. And, frankly, I don't much care. When my government decides to put me in prison or kill me, it will find a way to do it. Such is life. I happen to have a hugely split personality, one of which completely embraces this position. I find it of high survival for (or reduced threat to) my ego(2) to think this way. The other personality is completely offended by this idea. Yes, I knew the US Gov't was up to these tricks and I didn't like it *before* Snowden released what he did, and I have no more reason to like it now. To whatever extent I believe that the US Gov't is of/by/for me and the rest of we the people, this offends the crap out of me. What I do care about, however, is whether or not our government is of/by/for the people or not. The fact that we need people like Snowden (and Manning and Swartz) is an indicator that it's not. And the fact that we label all these guys as traitors, terrorists, or criminals for doing the work of the fourth estate is what's wrong. Snowden was encouraged to do what he did, in the way he did it, by our system of laws and the way we enforce them. The same can be said of lots of do-gooder law breakers (e.g. filming animal abuse at industrial farms, medical marijuana growers, etc.). These people feel like they _cannot_ achieve anything from within the system. They feel like they must break the law in the service of some higher justice. That's the problem. That is the problem, but in your own words, such is life... I think maybe there simply cannot be a government (collection of rules and interpretations and policies for enforcing said rules) that fits the criteria you imply. But both Ego(1) and Ego(2) tend to agree with the sentiment of what you are saying here. What Snowden revealed is trivial. The fact that he had to sacrifice his life to reveal it is non-trivial. Emind me which side of the argument you are on? Wait, as usual, you have reframed the arguement so that you can not have to be on both sides at the same time... I think this might be more healthy than my own Ego(n) response. I'll be disappointed if the conclusion is just fascism: Do absolutely anything to protect U.S. economic interests from harm. Me too. I'll be smug. But also disappointed. - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 9:12 PM, glen wrote: I'm a particularly slow learner. So you're probably in the more advanced classes. I still haven't passed Social Etiquette 101. At least once a year I take the remedial courses titled: Always Lead With your Chin Telegraph Your Moves to your Opponent. Maybe you were home schooled or did those by correspondence? Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: I don't know, I think I saw School of Hard Knocks listed and I can attest I've been in that one for over 40 years and never saw you in class once... are you trying to say that there are multiple campuses? grin -- == glen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Kerfluffling the kerfluffle: I have tried to ask this in meat-space of numerous people who seem to *need* to condemn Snowden out of hand, generally for not upholding his oath, and usually painting him with the grandstanding or martyr brush: How can you promise to keep a secret absolutely until you have heard it? Once you have promised to keep a secret with best intentions, honor, integrity, what kind of discovery would make you dishonor that promise? Even if he is grandstanding or martyring, was he exposing secrets that needed/deserved exposing? Would we all be better off if the (trivial and generally assumed) secret was still held secret? As I've said before here, this is not academic for me. I have given oaths of this type and I have been exposed to secrets, some of which offended me more than mildly. I chose not to let that offense overrule my promise but can easily imagine an escalation to the point where I would rather risk torture and death than keep the secret. The same honor that allowed me to make the promise seriously and to keep it even when it was uncomfortable would compel me to break it. Does this make any sense to anyone but me? Or is this just another example of me having signed up for the School of Hard Knocks? Nobody I ever worked with who had various high clearances seemed to be able to acknowledge that their honor might *require* them to break their oath? Is it that hard of a concept or did they not understand the nature of honor in the first place? - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 9:59 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Nobody I ever worked with who had various high clearances seemed to be able to acknowledge that their honor might *require* them to break their oath? Is it that hard of a concept or did they not understand the nature of honor in the first place? No one is going to go on the record over a subjective concept like honor. They're probably afraid to respond if the question is posed in non-specific way and they aren't sure if its treatment would be clearly treated by classification rules; they don't want people to get the impression they don't take it seriously. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Not to veer off subject, but it is a bit creepy the way the government and telecom companies are colluding to monitor everybodys communications. Do you think they would still be doing this if we the people were permitted to wire-tap government and corporate offices? Especially government offices since they are suposed to be public servants in the first place. I meen look at all of those nasty emails that came out of new mexico governors office during the email- gatehttp://www.sfreporter.com/santafe/article-7502-youve-got-email.htmlscandal, and that was tiny, imagine if we were able to actually wiretap the pentagon or something. Cody Smith On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:12 PM, glen g...@ropella.name wrote: I'm a particularly slow learner. So you're probably in the more advanced classes. I still haven't passed Social Etiquette 101. Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: I don't know, I think I saw School of Hard Knocks listed and I can attest I've been in that one for over 40 years and never saw you in class once... are you trying to say that there are multiple campuses? grin -- == glen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 7/15/13 9:59 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Nobody I ever worked with who had various high clearances seemed to be able to acknowledge that their honor might *require* them to break their oath? Is it that hard of a concept or did they not understand the nature of honor in the first place? No one is going to go on the record over a subjective concept like honor. They're probably afraid to respond if the question is posed in non-specific way and they aren't sure if its treatment would be clearly treated by classification rules; they don't want people to get the impression they don't take it seriously. Yeh... like that... exactly... I'm pretty sure there is no statute of limitations for treason, and I am incriminating myself when I say that I once broke my oath and effectively told a moderately important (but obscure) nuclear secret. Our friend Steve Younger made me painfully aware of my transgression the next day in an all-hands speech (collective berating?) he gave. He reminded us (before Admiral Peter G. Nanos brought us butthead/cowboy) that to divulge (nuclear) secrets was punishable by death and that even to confirm or deny something stated in the open, among uncleared individuals (or even cleared? individuals without a need to know) was equal to telling the secret. I had been sitting in a hot tub the night before with some uncleared folks who had plenty of (uninformed) bones to pick with LANL, the DOE and pretty much all of science and maybe even logic itself. There was a totally uninformed, inane conversation, but at one point someone said something acutely inane and I couldn't help myself, I *SNORTED* and the tub went quiet. People knew I was in a position to potentially know the factuality of what they were talking about. Listening to Younger berate us for something we hadn't done, I realized I had just done exactly that. I had confirmed a nuclear secret by denying an inane comment about it in a totally informal setting. Factually, I don't think anyone else in the hot-tub had the background to have a clue of the import of my snort, only that I very viscerally and directly announced something that if they'd been clue-full in those ways, might have been meaningful if not particularly useful to our enemies. This sobered me on several fronts. First, I realized I had thoughtlessly and frivolously betrayed my oath and honor (albeit unintentionally). Second, I realized that while I made a good salary, there was no hazard pay associated with the threat to my life (capital punishment) implied by my work. Third, the secret in question was pretty obscure and in some ways inane itself. All in all, I did not worry that in practice I would ever be held accountable. I knew that nobody there knew what I was snorting about really. I knew that nobody who cared knew that I'd snorted. I trusted that if they did, they would recognize point 1) and that it was innocent on my part. I trusted that even if they got a little bent about it, it would be a reprimand, not even a loss of clearance much less job, liberty or life. Nevertheless, it made me acutely aware of where I was, what those things I knew meant, etc. I'm sure I wasn't the first or only one to do such a thing. I wonder what would have happened if I'd had to go under polygraph and I was asked if I'd ever divulged a secret? And I was *still* willing to ask the questions... (refer to my to-fro with Glen about hard knocks). I admit it is easier to answer (think about) if you in fact have not made such oaths (with such stakes involved). Maybe my willingness to talk (think?) about such things makes me a security risk. I gave up the job 5 years ago and the clearance 3... I don't miss either (well, that regular paycheck was kinda handy... but ...)... - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Nobody I ever worked with who had various high clearances seemed to be able to acknowledge that their honor might *require* them to break their oath? Is it that hard of a concept or did they not understand the nature of honor in the first place? No one is going to go on the record over a subjective concept like honor. They're probably afraid to respond if the question is posed in non-specific way and they aren't sure if its treatment would be clearly treated by classification rules; they don't want people to get the impression they don't take it seriously. So... can anyone here give a hypothetical answer to my hypothetical question? Can honor ever trump oath? Using the Snowden case as an example (whose factual details may or may not apply, but in fact *might*). To make it less subjective or more specific: If you promised (took an oath) not to reveal anything declared Secret in the course of your employment for say ... Booz-Allen-Hamilton... while working on... say... NSA projects... and you find out that ... say the NSA is doing precisely something they are prohibited by law from doing which directly contradicts the Constitution (in the form of the 4th amendment), and they are doing it sweepingly and as a matter of agency-wide policy and apparently with the full knowledge of the rest of the Intelligence community as well as the entire staff in the White House, including and especially the President... My only excuses (to my conscience) for NOT speaking up might be: I am not sure I understand the entirety of the situation This fact, while technically dead-nuts wrong, is not really that important (everybody suspects and are not railing against it already?) I don't know Snowden's motives, but if I found myself in his shoes (pre-disclosure) I could very well be huddling in the Moscow Airport waiting for an offer of asylum and a mechanism to move into the care and protection of said government.Or more likely sitting in prison, listening to the wild hype being thrown around for/against me. I feel (now) like I dodged a bullet... I *was* careful what I exposed myself to (especially facts about specific current affairs, and controversial agency(s) policies) lest I end up in Snowden's Orange Jumpsuit. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Dooderson - Not to veer off subject, but it is a bit creepy the way the government and telecom companies are colluding to monitor everybodys communications. Do you think they would still be doing this if we the people were permitted to wire-tap government and corporate offices? Especially government offices since they are suposed to be public servants in the first place. I meen look at all of those nasty emails that came out of new mexico governors office during the email- gate http://www.sfreporter.com/santafe/article-7502-youve-got-email.html scandal, and that was tiny, imagine if we were able to actually wiretap the pentagon or something. Right on the mark. It has been suggested that one's privacy might be made to be reciprocal to one's power... the more power you have, the less privacy, and vice-versa. I think this was fairly natural at one time in history. Peons had relatively private lives if for no other reason than nobody gave a flying flip about them. Technology seems to have helped in inverting that relationship. Celebrities feel this somewhat. When they speak, millions listen, and when they fart, or have a wardrobe failure, we all hear about it within hours. The bulk of the Manning/Assange disclosures (that I'm interested in) did just that, they exposed the secret communications to/from/between US Embassies which were more *embarassing* than actionable. It was both highly responsible and disengenous at the same time to release *only* those which were primarily embarassing. And yet we have candidates for the highest office in the land who avoid sharing their tax returns with us. I can't refinance my house without sharing my tax returns! Yes, things are a bit askew. - Steve FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
More grist for this mill: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-17/apple-joins-facebook-microsoft-in-outlining-data-requests.html On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 5:48 AM, glen g...@ropella.name wrote: On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 17:09 -0400, mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote: However, I think many people do have impossible and unrealistic security expectations, and if you ask a lot of them (including me) on 9/12/2001 what would be appropriate, systematic cloud server intercepts and data mining wouldn't have even made a ripple in the water for me. So there's a alternative line of argumentation too that just isn't from today's batch of news. And it's not _merely_ the we live in a post-911 world rhetoric, either. There's a deeper argument that we really _do_ want the NSA to stay ahead of the best state-funded and independent hackers all over the universe. Even those of us who claim to dislike being spied upon by our own government tend to ooh and aah when they see hints of the fantastic technologies developed by agencies like the NSA. Anyone who likes James Bond, Mission Impossible, GI Joe, CSI, Person of Interest, etc. should admit that up front. The fact that the NSA is building entire data centers devoted to exploring more occult network patterns is fscking fantastic. And, to an extent, they'd be stupid to show their hand every time they came up with a new algorithm that worked ... and we vassals would be stupid to _want_ them to do so. But the real mistake is the loss of the mystique. Secret work used to, and still should, carry that I'd tell you but then I'd have to kill you romanticism. In our new age of lie like you mean it, with no hint-hint nudge-nudge know-what-I-mean know-what-I-mean, we've lost the deep, rich, language that allows us to know they're spying on us without knowing all the details. I'm a big fan of open-* (open source, open data, open access, etc). But there is a forcing toward banality that comes with it ... a dumbing down to a least common denominator. We've become so literal, it's kinda sad. We can't all be the cool kids. Some of us have to be left out, bullied and victimized by them. Some of us have to be the pretenders who claim to know things they don't actually know. Etc. And some of us have to bear the burden of being the dork trapped in the cool kid clique (as Snowden wants us to believe he was). Without such a class hierarchy, our language becomes robotic and lifeless. -- == glen e. p. ropella I have come undone FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 17:09 -0400, mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote: However, I think many people do have impossible and unrealistic security expectations, and if you ask a lot of them (including me) on 9/12/2001 what would be appropriate, systematic cloud server intercepts and data mining wouldn't have even made a ripple in the water for me. So there's a alternative line of argumentation too that just isn't from today's batch of news. And it's not _merely_ the we live in a post-911 world rhetoric, either. There's a deeper argument that we really _do_ want the NSA to stay ahead of the best state-funded and independent hackers all over the universe. Even those of us who claim to dislike being spied upon by our own government tend to ooh and aah when they see hints of the fantastic technologies developed by agencies like the NSA. Anyone who likes James Bond, Mission Impossible, GI Joe, CSI, Person of Interest, etc. should admit that up front. The fact that the NSA is building entire data centers devoted to exploring more occult network patterns is fscking fantastic. And, to an extent, they'd be stupid to show their hand every time they came up with a new algorithm that worked ... and we vassals would be stupid to _want_ them to do so. But the real mistake is the loss of the mystique. Secret work used to, and still should, carry that I'd tell you but then I'd have to kill you romanticism. In our new age of lie like you mean it, with no hint-hint nudge-nudge know-what-I-mean know-what-I-mean, we've lost the deep, rich, language that allows us to know they're spying on us without knowing all the details. I'm a big fan of open-* (open source, open data, open access, etc). But there is a forcing toward banality that comes with it ... a dumbing down to a least common denominator. We've become so literal, it's kinda sad. We can't all be the cool kids. Some of us have to be left out, bullied and victimized by them. Some of us have to be the pretenders who claim to know things they don't actually know. Etc. And some of us have to bear the burden of being the dork trapped in the cool kid clique (as Snowden wants us to believe he was). Without such a class hierarchy, our language becomes robotic and lifeless. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella I have come undone FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 6/12/13 3:42 PM, Steve Smith wrote: The crux to me seems to be what is the difference between a whistleblower and a snitch or a whistleblower and a treasonous bastard? And how can we sort this out (especially when most people align on one side of the tug-of-war pit or the other without much thought)? I think the terms you mention above only have meaning in the space of a group and the power structures and rules or conventions prevailing in the group. At best it is a legal question. At worst it is a question of who has or can gain influence to advocate the preferred term for a particular situation to their particular constituency. Few care to think that dangerous or unjust events are an unavoidable part of life. Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus - The crux to me seems to be what is the difference between a whistleblower and a snitch or a whistleblower and a treasonous bastard? And how can we sort this out (especially when most people align on one side of the tug-of-war pit or the other without much thought)? I think the terms you mention above only have meaning in the space of a group and the power structures and rules or conventions prevailing in the group. Naturally these are terms related to social constructs... At best it is a legal question. At worst it is a question of who has or can gain influence to advocate the preferred term for a particular situation to their particular constituency. At it's best I think it is an ethical question. I think there are three categories in this general domain... those who *know* they are doing something wrong and do it anyway, those who know they are doing the right thing for the right reasons, and those who *think* they are doing something right but in fact are doing something quite wrong. I think that legally one can have broken the letter of the law while upholding the spirit of our presumed nature (constitution, founding fathers, ladeeda). I see no room for doubt that both Manning and Snowden broke the letter of the law... what is in question (for me) is whether they acted out of pure motives and whether the results of their actions support the greater good. I'm not sure how that plays out legally... convictions with pardons, dropping of charges based on extenuating circumstances, sentences reduced to time served or waived? Few care to think that dangerous or unjust events are an unavoidable part of life. Yes we do seem to like to ignore that as much as possible. I found holding a security clearance to increase the likelihood that I would find myself participating in dangerous and/or unjust activities. Not as obviously as hoining the military would have, but probably yet more inevitably. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
On 6/13/13 1:10 AM, Steve Smith wrote: Few care to think that dangerous or unjust events are an unavoidable part of life. Yes we do seem to like to ignore that as much as possible. I found holding a security clearance to increase the likelihood that I would find myself participating in dangerous and/or unjust activities. I was trying to look at from Snowden's perspective. He had some awareness of how his action was dangerous to him. But did he think through how dangerous it was for the country and his colleagues? Did he recognize the extent of his own ignorance and consequences of `acting out of his pay scale'? What kind of activities did he _expect_ his company would be tasked with by the NSA? What would have been `reasonable' activities for BAH to be doing in his mind? It seems to me he opt-ed in, and apparently had not thought-through how his life might be after opting in; he was just naive. It's like someone that signs up for a marathon and says at the 5 mile mark This is really hard! Marcus FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Marcus - As someone who has almost been there, I agree... and THIS is the challenge, such a disclosure *could* be an over-reaction based on naivette. The point of above my pay grade is a sticky one, however and it gets stickier the more experience you have. While you may hit one glass ceiling of pay grade or another, you don't necessarily quit gaining perspective. There have been things I discovered myself which deserved not to be secrets... it was somewhat obvious to me when I was young and naive and it became even more obvious over the course of a lifetime/career... but they were small and somewhat ideosyncratic and the import of them did not justify the breaking of my sworn trust and the implications (not only to myself) that went with it. And, as you point out, there was always the doubt that if I was at a higher pay grade I would understand why these things were being done and support them myself? But with each such discovery, I lost a bit of naivete and trust of my government and it's representatives one small bit at a time. But had I discovered, for example, that someone within the apparatus of our government and it's huge machine of employees, programs, contractors, etc. was acting against the interests of the people of, by, and for which said government was created and maintained, it might have been different. Or if something fundamentally inhumane was being executed in the name of my government/nation/people. Everyone has different sensitivities and limits for moral outrage and one person's offense might be nothing more than anothers' minor irritation. Putting mascara in puppies eyes to make sure it isn't too toxic to put near women's eyes seems a bit off to me, but probably not enough to lead me to betray a national trust. Leaving men with syphilis to suffer the course of it's infection whilst pretending to treat it is a bit harder to look away from. Starting a war in the middle east based on made up evidence (say... the existence of WMD in Iraq) has an even higher profile (if only because of the magnitude of the potential suffering) on my moral radar. I have, for example, been in a position to know (almost directly) that the highest levels of our executive branch set domestic policy around the threat of bioterrorism that contradicted very well thought through, sound advice solicited from and developed by DOE labs... that was a shock but not a surprise. I think their policies were patently based on political rather than practical considerations. But as you say, this is above my pay grade and who am I to say that it isn't better to pretend to have a better solution to a threat than you in fact possibly (by any stretch of reality) could? I'm sure that when the scientists recruited to work on the Manhattan project discovered that they were being asked to help build a 'super bomb' that could annihilate entire cities with a single delivery that many quailed at the implications. But they were working in the context of the second worldwide war in the century where fleets of bombers using conventional and incendiary weapons were leveling entire cities already. While doing the same with a single Bomb was clearly a big leap in quantity and ease of destruction, it was not a new thing (wholesale destruction of entire cities). Had it been a program to develop a virus which selectively killed only Asians (or more to the times, Semitcs), I think many if not all would have refused and some might have even chosen to tell on us. In the case of Snowden, we don't know yet what all he has compromised but I don't think any lives are being threatened directly because of his disclosures. Similar with the Manning material. In the Snowden case, all I've seen so far is some evidence that what we suspected and feared was true about the NSA surviellance is true. Admittedly the news has spun and twisted and conflated things in ways that make it a little hard to tell exactly what is what. In both cases, the information was put in the hands of existing journalists with a motivation to help avoid causing direct harm to our interests. Something of a neutral party with some level of responsibility. Nobody blurted out secrets to the world, they put it through a process which has some chance of mitigating truly harsh real-world consequences. As I understand it (and I'm not in a position to know any of this for sure, so it is laced with speculation and opinion as I think *most* people's position is as well), the key point is that the NSA has been collecting data on US Citizens in a manner which is outside of their charter and the existing rules about spying on US Citizens and due process. To the extent that this is what it is about, even if Snowden is guilty of treason or similar for the disclosures he made, the result is a public awareness of fundamental wrongdoing in our intelligence apparatus. I would say that if
Re: [FRIAM] PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
Steve writes: How should Snowden (or Manning) be treated for what they have done; AND now that the cat is out of the bag, how do we followup and handle the implications of what we have discovered as a result? I think if people are really so upset about potential for domestic surveillance -- even though it's basically impossible to do foreign surveillance with out looking at U.S. networks and servers too -- then there is no choice but to demand he be pardoned, and then seek legislation to enable dealing with this kind of situation in some systematic fashion. It's a democracy. However, I think many people do have impossible and unrealistic security expectations, and if you ask a lot of them (including me) on 9/12/2001 what would be appropriate, systematic cloud server intercepts and data mining wouldn't have even made a ripple in the water for me. So there's a alternative line of argumentation too that just isn't from today's batch of news. Independent of how a particular government works, of course people can act on their own moral views and create consequences. Sometimes they just need to be prepared to accept them and recognize that no one will come to the rescue. If Snowden is proven to be right (like you I have no idea) and the abuses by BAH and NSA are beyond the pale, then he may have a future. Marcus mail2web LIVE Free email based on Microsoft® Exchange technology - http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
