Hold on... On Jun 11, 2013 12:27 AM, "Yosem Companys" <compa...@stanford.edu> wrote: > <snip> The distinction between direct or indirect access is semantic, not substantive, and likely irrelevant to most Americans. <snip>
And then... > > As I said, a recent NY Times article spoke specifically of the embedding of NSA employees at US tech firms via firms' corporate legal departments, and we know how it happened at AT&T, with the employee getting cart blanche to do whatever he wanted at the firm and take as much data as he wanted with no questions asked. <highlight > we know how it happened at AT&T, with the employee getting cart blanche to do whatever he wanted <snip> That's not substantively different from a FISC finding being issued in each case? *that * is EXACTLY the difference between direct and indirect and it IS substantive. This AT&T issue involved an individual being trusted solely to "do the right thing." Whether we like it or not, an FISC ruling is a big difference, even if is not public, for the individual being monitored by a stalker ex, for example. Indirect access doesn't make it more acceptable, but direct could and should make it LESS. > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jacob Appelbaum <ja...@appelbaum.net> wrote: >> >> x z: >> > @Jacob, I agree with your points regarding American exceptionalism. >> > @Eugen, to prepare for the worst scenario is one thing, to advocate some >> > shady rumor as fact is another. >> > @Rich, those are good movie scripts :-). But it does not work for 9 firms, >> > and hundreds of execs all with diverse values and objectives. >> > @Nadim, when you say "we all always 'knew' this was happening", I don't >> > know what "this" refers to. Is it NSA surveillance, or is it the "direct >> > access" bit? >> > >> > To me, the crucial point is the "*direct access*", and also Guardian's >> > claim of these firms "willingly participating" in PRISM. I argued that >> > "direct access" is untrue in my previous email, but none of your replies >> > (except Rich's) are relevant to my arguments. >> >> What would you call a FISA API for government agents to query a system >> and return data on a target? Would you call that direct access or an >> indirect access? If Google runs the FISA API server, does that make it >> more or less direct than if the FISA API server is a blackbox run by the >> NSA? >> >> > >> > The "direct access" bit is what made this story sensational. Without this >> > bit, the story would be much less juicy but more true. In the long run, >> > truth gives more power than lies. Washington Post has backed down to >> > reality, for which I applaud their judgment. Guardian has not, and keeps on >> > defending their misinformation and bad reporting, for which I resent deeply. >> > >> >> You don't know the truth and you seem to think you do. The story that is >> important is that Google makes one claim, while the NSA slide makes >> another. Note that the law doesn't allow Google to even tell the press >> the whole truth. >> >> > If Snowden and Greenwald do not mislead the world on 'direct access" and >> > just report it rationally, I'd applaud their courage. Now I think Snowden >> > is not more than a self-aggrandizing douche. >> > >> >> I'm sorry, did you watch his video interview? On what grounds to you >> call him a self-aggrandizing douche exactly? >> >> > I hope internet freedom can advance with accurate awareness, not by public >> > paranoia. >> >> You take issue with a very weird semantic bit of the larger story. How >> does such semantic nitpicking, where you don't actually even know the >> facts behind your speculations, help advance any cause, anywhere? >> >> All the best, >> Jacob >> -- >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech > > > > -- > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
-- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
