DoJ to Snowden: Hope your 15 minutes were worth it, pal

[DGuller]

I must admit that I am surprised, even bewildered, that Americans, who I had so far seen as very skeptical regarding their government, seem pretty nonchalant about this.

Freedom is an easy empty slogan to shout, but it's a hard value to defend.  We just go for low-hanging fruits.  It also doesn't help when Europeans disagree with us, because then it just makes us reflexively double down.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I guess for me I don't see why:

1. I should be concerned about the government knowing things about me.

2. Why I should be concerned about the government keeping track of who sends mail to whom.

3. What the government does in terms of overseas espionage. Everyone spies on each other in the international sphere.

I only personally view the right to privacy important depending on the circumstance. Most importantly here in the United States almost none of this information was obtained with a warrant, and thus would have little utility in court. That means they can't easily use this information against American citizens, if they tried I'm pretty convinced we have robust constitutional protections in place.

If they can't use the information they collect to prosecute me or interfere with my affairs, why should I care that they have it? The right to privacy I think is best understood in the concept of things like police executing warrantless searches of homes without it being a case of exigent circumstances or etc, the right is important not so much in that it says the government can't do that search but it says they can't prosecute us with any information obtained in that search and they're opened to civil liability for damage caused. It's also important in the context of medical rights and things of that nature, where government policy has in the past intruded into private decision making the right of privacy protected us from that. But I just guess I don't actually see why it matters that there's a huge data file out there somewhere with information that for most people is never read by a human but by a program.

[DGuller]

  Jesus Christ.  You do realize that the government doesn't need to use its information in courts to fuck with someone, they just have to leak it to someone?  Or that the government may not give two shits about you, but someone working in government can?

[grumbler]

I must admit that I am surprised, even bewildered, that Americans, who I had so far seen as very skeptical regarding their government, seem pretty nonchalant about this.

Those Americans who are skeptical about "government" tend to be skeptical about the legislative and executive branches, but not the judicial.  If a sheriff or congressman says that X is legal, those Americans may well doubt it.  If a judge says X is legal, even those Americans skeptical about government tend to accept that it is legal.  Thus the mail covers program, which US courts have ruled legal because there is no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding the information on the outside of the package or letter, doesn't get even skeptical people here as surprised and bewildered as you.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Jesus Christ.  You do realize that the government doesn't need to use its information in courts to fuck with someone, they just have to leak it to someone?  Or that the government may not give two shits about you, but someone working in government can?

Like I said, I'm not personally concerned about any of that. That doesn't mean I think the government needs to do it. But there's not a lot of evidence the government is doing those things, it looks like they're collecting large amounts of mostly not very personal information and storing it in vast databases where some very small percentage is subject to further analysis by an intelligence analyst. Like I said, I worry about things the government will do. My list of things was not intended to be a complete one, nor did I imply it was so. If the government was leaking it or using it in intimidation schemes, I'd want that stopped. But just collecting it does not particularly concern me. It's actually being done with cooperation and oversight from all three branches of government.

[garbon]

Jesus Christ.  You do realize that the government doesn't need to use its information in courts to fuck with someone, they just have to leak it to someone?  Or that the government may not give two shits about you, but someone working in government can?

Like I said, I'm not personally concerned about any of that. That doesn't mean I think the government needs to do it. But there's not a lot of evidence the government is doing those things, it looks like they're collecting large amounts of mostly not very personal information and storing it in vast databases where some very small percentage is subject to further analysis by an intelligence analyst. Like I said, I worry about things the government will do. My list of things was not intended to be a complete one, nor did I imply it was so. If the government was leaking it or using it in intimidation schemes, I'd want that stopped. But just collecting it does not particularly concern me. It's actually being done with cooperation and oversight from all three branches of government.

Actually I think a bigger concern for me are private individuals. As a hypothetical, let's say someone is very pissed at me. They know my name and look me up on linked in which provides (even if we aren't connected) a very handy list of people that other people who looked at my profile, also looked at. It wouldn't take very much effort for this pissed person to contact all of those people with some generic, possibly fake, crap about me that sours my relations or at least raises significant questions in their minds about me.  That's more likely and concerning than the idea that the gov't will leak info on me.

[DGuller]

Jesus Christ.  You do realize that the government doesn't need to use its information in courts to fuck with someone, they just have to leak it to someone?  Or that the government may not give two shits about you, but someone working in government can?

Like I said, I'm not personally concerned about any of that. That doesn't mean I think the government needs to do it. But there's not a lot of evidence the government is doing those things, it looks like they're collecting large amounts of mostly not very personal information and storing it in vast databases where some very small percentage is subject to further analysis by an intelligence analyst. Like I said, I worry about things the government will do. My list of things was not intended to be a complete one, nor did I imply it was so. If the government was leaking it or using it in intimidation schemes, I'd want that stopped. But just collecting it does not particularly concern me. It's actually being done with cooperation and oversight from all three branches of government.

So we should not be worried about potential for misuse of power on this particular issue?

[OttoVonBismarck]

Yes, we should be worried. What I've said since the beginning of Nerdgate is that what troubled me about the programs as explained is the oversight functions of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees and the FISA courts did not appear robust. I think thus it's good we know about this since the secret oversight bodies appeared to not be doing a great job. I even said I considered it good Snowden got this discussion in the sunlight. But my problems are more procedural, I want some stronger protections through the FISA review process and things of that nature, and I'm always skeptical of long-term blanket permissive grants from FISA courts. But I have no issue so far with what they actually collected or how they collected it or what they did with it once it was collected, aside from the singular point that they didn't appear to do very much to insure "incidental" communication taps of domestic conversations were properly explained or audited.

[Razgovory]

'Cause we don't care about the privacy of people in other countries?  That is sorta why we have a CIA, to spy on people in other countries.

The latest bit was about the US postal service photographing all mail and supposedly keeping that information for ten years now. It's just a guess, but I think that mainly aims at Americans, not foreigners. What astounds me is not that you don't care about the privacy of foreigners, but that don't seem to care about your own privacy in all of this.

Oh.  I thought you were still sore they wire tapped you.  Are photographing the inside of the mail or the outside?

[garbon]

Jesus Christ.  You do realize that the government doesn't need to use its information in courts to fuck with someone, they just have to leak it to someone?  Or that the government may not give two shits about you, but someone working in government can?

Like I said, I'm not personally concerned about any of that. That doesn't mean I think the government needs to do it. But there's not a lot of evidence the government is doing those things, it looks like they're collecting large amounts of mostly not very personal information and storing it in vast databases where some very small percentage is subject to further analysis by an intelligence analyst. Like I said, I worry about things the government will do. My list of things was not intended to be a complete one, nor did I imply it was so. If the government was leaking it or using it in intimidation schemes, I'd want that stopped. But just collecting it does not particularly concern me. It's actually being done with cooperation and oversight from all three branches of government.

So we should not be worried about potential for misuse of power on this particular issue?

No I think I said in a subnote to Zanza that I agree we should look at these things critically but like Otto said I'm not so sure I'm concerned about what has been collected/what they've done with the collected data.

[Razgovory]

I have concerns about privacy, but I do kind of want the government to at least look at the outside of the envelope.   I mean, that's where I wrote the address I want them to send it to.

[jimmy olsen]

Bolivia offers Snowden asylum

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/06/19321111-bolivian-president-offers-asylum-to-nsa-leaker-snowden?lite

[Razgovory]

I've been in asylums.  They aren't that much fun.

[dps]

I have concerns about privacy, but I do kind of want the government to at least look at the outside of the envelope.   I mean, that's where I wrote the address I want them to send it to.

There's considerable evidence that the Post Office isn't really looking at that all that closely.

[The Minsky Moment]

There are no valid grounds for Snowden to seek asylum.

He does not have a well-founded fear of persecution based on any of the eligible categories.

Fear of being prosecuted for breaking the law is not a valid basis for asylum.