The military loved Discord for Gen Z recruiting. Then the leaks began

I'm one of those people who believes very strongly that Snowden was a hero for exposing grossly illegal and immoral activity, and should be pardoned.

But I do not feel this way about this case. Why? Because the leak did not expose government malfeasance, and therefore wasn't in the interest of the American people. Ordinary anti-espionage rules can and should apply.

The documents I've seen revealed Ukrainian secrets. For example, they revealed Ukrainian casualty numbers and Ukrainian estimates of Russian casualty numbers.

Everyone paying attention before this leak knew that the US is giving significant support in the form of advice, money, and arms. Everyone knew that the US has a small number of military personnel in the embassy but isn't fighting in the war. Some people think this is bad, but it's not a secret.

You did not write that, but just to make it clear to people who do not know - there were no EU sanctions on Russian gas, but Russia cut off (most of) the supply unilaterally.

Am I misremembering? Maybe it was only that no warrant was required to monitor me on company systems, but (it's been 20 years), I thought I was generally signing away an expectation of privacy in exchange for access to classified information. (So, indirectly gaining extra pay, job security, and access to interesting technology in exchange for signing away privacy... not sure how I feel about that 20 years later, but it seemed a good trade at the time.)

If I'm remembering things properly, no extra legislation is necessary for monitoring people with DoD security clearances. Even if monitoring were warranted, I believe these powers already exist to cover this case, and any extra legislation is a power grab.

Allowing them to enlarge their share then consolidate, regroup, rebuild their forces, and ease out of financial straights and better prepare to take the rest of it in a few years and once again sally forth to murder, rape, and destroy is a bargain no reasonable person would take.

If you are suggesting that we stop providing them weapons in hopes that they be more inclined to negotiate you have misjudged the situation and you would have us only condemn people to murder and horror as punishment for your failure to analyze what is ultimately a simple situation explained in simple terms by Putin's own words on the topic.

Furthermore you seem to have analyzed the article in question based mostly on the title as the shallow straw man you scoff at seems absent from the actual reporting. In fact it does a better job than you of dismissing the argument you foist upon it.

>----------------------------- “We do not have nor do we want a system where the United States government monitors private internet chats,” Glenn Gerstell, the former general counsel of the National Security Agency, told NBC on Wednesday.

On Discord, some servers already joke about the possibility of being surreptitiously infiltrated by the government. Using a word first coined on the anything-goes message board 4chan, people commonly accuse others of being “glowies” — federal agents whose out-of-place behaviors are so obvious that they practically glow.

But surveilling gamer chatrooms might also end up pushing away the same young recruits the military desperately needs, all for questionable practical gain: The internet is full of ways to anonymously share images, videos and documents. >-----------------------------

I invite you to read more of it as its actually fairly well thought out

No negotiation is possible when Russia's starting position is that Ukraine is not a real country and Ukrainians are not a real people. Putin's held that position for years:

https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-denies-reviving-russia...

The way the war ends is Russia is first defeated and the negotiations that will then follow will be about the reparations Russia must pay and the war criminals Russia must extradite.

We look more like china everyday.

What is humorous is the vast amount of comments surrounding this event on HN that have no idea how security clearances, compartmentalization of information, federal and military law work.

I believe Chelsea Manning was 23 when she leaked intel?

I'd actually argue this is why the military wants recruits in the sweet spot when they're legally adults, but haven't fully developed their decision making. You just don't give them sensitive intel. You give them a gun and a CO.

This variant of "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide" shares the same naïve worldview of those who do not understand there are pragmatic reasons for privacy both for individuals and nation-states. One would do well to reflect on the old chestnut that knowledge is power and consider who or what should have that power over, say, one's country.

As for narratives for the young, the obvious education is to have a clear and immediate consequence for a specific action. It's what they call "fucked around and found out" nowadays.

Nice in theory, but doesn't stand up to basic scrutiny. I have secrets. Hundreds of them. Mostly passwords. And I mostly keep them secret because if I don't, naughty people will take the things I need from me or generally cause chaos for me and my family.

You're absolutely right that young people are more likely to question traditional narratives, but they are less likely to have the context (or apply it, anyway) necessary to form a coherent narrative in its place, which will often lead you to at least some variation on a traditional narrative.

I think where young people often do good by questioning authority is when a traditional narrative used to apply but in recent history no longer does for some reason or another. If you're an old, you've likely already mentally examined some idea or process and found it to be sound, and now you're less likely to come back and question it later. Young people come along later and question it and find it to not be sound anymore, and the olds realize they might be right.

For most other things... You don't have to be young to smell the bullshit.

The vast majority of young people with access to secret information aren't leaking it. The inane, incredibly naive trend you are suggesting simply doesn't exist (thank goodness.) Most of them take their jobs seriously and have a lot more sense than you.