Hacker News Reader

Comment by anonymoushn | Hacker News Reader

"You have seen concrete proof that maybe places where you used to be able to listen to are now silent?"

"We have concrete proof that terrorist groups and others are taking action, making changes, and it's gonna make our job tougher."

Although the lead-in mentions that intelligence collection has been hindered (in the past tense), Keith Alexander is only willing to say that it will be hindered in the future.

View on HN

Because clearly our entire legal framework should be designed around making the NSA's job easier. Why not put surveillance cameras in everyone's houses? Why not implant everyone with tracking chips? Why not have TSA agents look up our assholes with a flashlight at airport security? All these things would certainly make the country safer.

Just as concerning as the programs themselves are these kinds of idiotic arguments that their proponents make to justify them. I'm not hugely keen on trusting someone who can't avoid extremely simplistic logical fallacies in his reasoning to oversee the surveillance of all humanity.

Don't joke about it. This sort of thing is all to plausible. Think about the data collected by fitness-tracking devices. What about when these are mandated by your insurance provider? After all, some car insurance companies are already promoting the use of tracking devices in your car. There are all sorts of ways that we can be induced to buy and install the infrastructure that facilitates an Orwellian police state. This book does a good job of laying out how it could (all to plausibly) come about: http://amzn.com/1841499390

Provider-issued set top boxes and routers are scarier, IMO.

Don't forget about the black boxes in cars- they are already there.

In what way?

The ISP usually has a remote login to the devices, where they are able to capture any LAN traffic they feel like, for instance.

As the other reply said, the provider has remote access to those devices. That amounts to them having a fully functional computer(or 2 or 3) replete with wireless radios and other goodies in your house(at least, in theory).

your cellphone reports your gps location + surrounding wifi BSSIDs to Google and Apple for AGPS purposes.

I really don't understand why this isn't a larger issue

I think insurance companies tracking your whereabouts is a very very bad thing, but I think them tracking how safe you drive is a very good thing. If it makes drivers drive safer to save money, and thus makes the roads safer for everyone, I can't imagine this to be a bad thing. These devices can also fine tune your premiums. They track how often you drive (drivers who drive less pay less, which makes sense, someone who drives 5,000 miles a year is less likely to get into an accident than someone who drives 20,000 miles a year).

I also think dashboard cameras, Russian style, would help in documenting accidents and curbing aggressive and substandard drivers. As a automotive commuter I'd gladly send videos of the dangerous crap that nearly kills me daily to a central insurance agency.

You can buy a dashboard camera now (example: http://www.amazon.com/DashBoard-Camera-Vehicle-Accident-Reco...) for your own protection if you'd like. They aren't widely used in the US though, you are right.

Yup. There is a lot of benefit to be gained from all of these sensors - both societal and personal. It gives us the tools that we need to manage our lives better, and to make better informed decisions. There is no way that we are going to turn down these benefits.

However, the security services of the US, Russia, China, India, and various European nations will also get this data, as will assorted criminal organizations.

We should start a campaign where we get everyone to email dick-pics to every NSA email address we can find.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com