Comment by knz | Hacker News Reader

Comment by knz | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I agree but unless every other nation stops doing this there is little value in being the only "clean" country (assuming somehow we stop). And what are the implications of doing so? We used to believe that free and open societies would naturally prosper compared to authoritarian/totalitarian societies but what if that was all a lie? "Five Eyes" dates back to the 1940's, ECHELON at least the 1980's - none of this is new. Maybe we are all just naive to the realities of geopolitics? Is this just the modern version of "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."?

Personally, I'd rather live in a world dominated by America/Europe than one dominated by Russia or China. All parties have lengthy histories of atrocious behaviour but the US/Europe doesn't have a "Great Firewall" and critics of our leadership are not disappeared (yet?). I just hope "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." remains fictional....

If we are ever going to be dominated by something, I wish it's an Artificial Superintelligence

> We used to believe that free and open societies would naturally prosper compared to authoritarian/totalitarian societies but what if that was all a lie?

Then give up your freedom and start advocating for monarchy in America.

Wouldn't it be easier to try and push for a return to a more open/free society? I don't see how a monarchy solves anything in the US.

How do you justify that with

> unless every other nation stops doing this there is little value in being the only "clean" country (assuming somehow we stop)

If there is little value in being "clean", intelligence agencies have minimal to 0 oversight and accountability, and a non-trivial percentage of the population wants them to dominate geopolitics through any means necessary, how will we ever have an open/free society again?

Domestic surveillance using these tools seems like a different issue than whether the US or its allies use these tools for geopolitical advantage?

Hypocrisy aside, in theory it would be possible to have an open society domestically even if these tools are used internationally.

Given the track records of the US intelligence community in that regard [1-4], I honestly don't understand how anyone could possibly believe them when they say they aren't using their tools domestically. There is insufficient oversight of their activities for anything they say to be believed, given their long history of lying directly to the American public. Saying the CIA doesn't use their hacking tools on the American public is like arguing the sky is green.

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/magazine/what-an-uncensor...

2. https://www.thenation.com/article/cias-student-activism-phas...

3. https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000538627....

4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist)

I think you are confusing my hypothetical question with me somehow condoning mass surveillance, disagreeing that it is currently happening, or disagreeing that it wouldn't happen in a hypothetical future?

I have no doubt that these tools are used against domestic targets, perhaps not from the CIA but certainly by agencies like the FBI - I work in aviation and routinely see mystery flights. Everyone in the office can guess what they are (http://imgur.com/a/17hSR - 6 hours of circling - Maybe they had a warrant, who knows.

My point was that even if we could somehow stop domestic mass surveillance, I'm not sure it we would stop using them internationally or even have any obligation to do so?

Nothing will stop them from using their tools anywhere, which is my point. When the agencies themselves are fundamentally untrustworthy, as they have repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be, the distinction between surveillance domestically and abroad isn't meaningful. Especially with the data sharing rules Obama pushed through at the end of his presidency.

I don't think it's possible to value open and free societies while spying on the entire world for the purposes of asserting your geopolitical dominance. Freedom for me but not for thee.

We have one and this shit is what we came up with.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com