Thursday, August 8, 2013

A Few More Thinking Points For the Snowden Cult To Consider

Update response as prelude:  What people were getting worked up about was that the NSA were collecting the records of communications between the United States and other countries.  Even if they weren't collecting that information here THE COMMUNICATIONS WERE TO OTHER COUNTRIES, MANY OF WHICH HAVE NO RESTRICTIONS ON TAPPING INTO THE COMMUNICATIONS OF THOSE ON THEIR END INCLUDING THAT SAME INFORMATION YOU'RE WORKED UP ABOUT BEING COLLECTED BY THE U. S. GOVERNMENT.  It really isn't hard to figure these things out, all of the information required is contained in the same news stories, only, you've got to do something called thinking about them.   No reason to be so rude about it.  On the other hand, comment moderation is making my life a lot easier.

As pointed out, whatever Snowden brought with him from his position sort of at the NSA is now certainly in the hands of the Chinese and Russian intelligence.   They would never have let him leave Hong Kong for anywhere else but American custody or allowed him to stay in Russia without him surrendering everything he had with him, including the keys to any encryption he had it "protected" by.  Possibly that information could open up even more information that they have access to through espionage or hacking. That could very well mean they've now got access to whatever it is you were upset with the NSA having and the means to get more.

The point made in a comment below about what a Chinese or Russian incarnation of Alan Turing could do with the clues embedded in any material Snowden surrendered to those intelligence agencies could allow them to reproduce a lot of if not all of the same apparatus that you're so worked up about the NSA having, including whatever of Snowden's  claims about the close to all-seeing, all-knowing powers the NSA and its contractors actually have.   Now in addition to the American system with FISA, you'll have the intelligence services in those two countries to worry about and I'm not aware of them having anything like the FISA courts to keep them from snooping into your records etc.   You figure they're more open than even that far from transparent process meant to protect U.S. citizens in a way that is going to protect you?   Oh, if you hadn't considered the possibility of either of those countries producing someone who could figure that out, consider it now.  Turing's task was a lot harder in his day than this one would be today and Turing had far, far less evidence to go on than would be contained in the codes copied by  Snowden. 

You still think Snowden is a hero?   I thought he might be before thinking about what he's done and who he stupidly put himself in the hands of.   That he isn't is one of the few things about this that I'm certain of now.   If you hadn't thought about those things, try it.  I'm sure they did in Hong Kong and Moscow.

Update:  Oh, and something for all of us to consider.   The Republicans, mostly, who were so hot on privatizing all of this stuff, especially the Bush family and its allies, are responsible for creating a system in which the highest level of spying and espionage is guaranteed.   Edward Snowden was a creation of the privatization cult and the ideology that invented it.   If there's one thing that this proves it is that the system they created destroys national security.   Who knows how much of the information that goes through corporations owned by the Carlyle Group and others isn't being skimmed for their corporate use?  You want to bet that their sense of honor, morality and patriotism would keep them from stealing data in their financial interest? 

1 comment:

  1. My expertise on this is nil, but one argument for TIA (Total Information Awareness) was that a computer program could do the data mining that millions of humans at millions of computers couldn't possibly do (okay, maybe I exaggerate the "millions"). The idea was with teraflops of data, human beings couldn't possibly sift through it all, but a computer program could.

    Of course, it turns out we need a small army of humans just to keep up with bringing all that data in and coralling it and (maybe) even making sense of it. And the point of all this is to, what? find the needle in the haystack which we are sure is there if the haystack is big enough?

    But we're still looking for a needle, regardless. And we still need an army of people just (apparently) to manage the data collection. And maybe some of the analysis, or at least organization, or at least....

    Weren't we supposed to be able to do this without half the world becoming the jailors for the other half of the world, in other words? Isn't there an inherent problem in needing so many people to have access to this data just so we can collect this data just so we can do all this in secret just so we can be safe? If "total information" means it has to be subcontracted out in bits and pieces to hundreds (or thousands?) of individuals, do we really have 'total information'?

    Or do we just have a big mountain of data, and way too many people looking at even a little of it?

    ReplyDelete