Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States

NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure 106

Posted by samzenpus
from the for-our-eyes-only dept.
AHuxley (892839) writes "The Desk reports on a FOIA request covering "... all e-mails sent by Edward Snowden" and the NSA's refusal to release all documents. "The National Security Agency has acknowledged it retains a record of e-mail communications from former contractor turned whistleblower Edward Snowden, but says those records are exempt from public disclosure under the federal Freedom of Information Act. In a letter responding to a June 27 FOIA request from The Desk, the NSA’s chief FOIA officer Pamela Phillips wrote that while the agency has retained records related to Snowden’s employment as a contractor, they are being withheld from public examination because, among other things, releasing the records 'could interfere with law enforcement proceedings, could cause an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, could reveal the identities of confidential sources or would reveal law enforcement techniques and procedures.' Other records are being withheld because those documents were 'also found to be currently and properly classifiedand remains classified TOP SECRET, SECRET and CONFIDENTIAL.' The letter marks the first time the NSA has publicly acknowledged retaining communication and employment records related to Snowden’s time as a contractor."

Comment: Re:I want a faux smart watch (Score 1) 337

by Jhon (#47440075) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: Do You Want a Smart Watch?

My guess would be end-cost and interest. Would enough people buy it? My pebble runs about $150. I would NEVER spend that much and certainly not more for something like this.

I received it as a gift -- and love it. I MAY replace it if it breaks or something. I'm unsure. But I really like the notifications on the wrist.

Comment: Re:No and here's why... (Score 1) 337

by Jhon (#47440043) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: Do You Want a Smart Watch?

Bifocals. I have a pair with clear glass on top and my reading (1.5) at the bottom. Work great for 99% of my day (and pebble watch reading needs). I also have a pair of "birth control glasses" as my wife calls them. Basically, Ben-Franklin type half sized glasses I hang off the tip of my nose and push up to my eyes as I need to work/use the computer. I use those just like bifocals during my "work day".

I felt the same way about watches until recently when I got a pebble. It makes a difference not taking out my phone a few dozen times a day. I also like the fact that it "buzzes" at me when I get more than 30 ft or so away from my phone. It's kept me from forgetting it either in the car or desk more than once.

Comment: Re:"Smart earrings" or "smart necklaces" too? (Score 1) 337

by Jhon (#47439857) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: Do You Want a Smart Watch?

"If all you want is to know the time, your phone already solves that problem for you "

I haven't owned/used a watch in over a decade for that very reason -- until recently. I got a pebble. And my opinion has completely changed. I LIKE not needing to take my phone out every a few dozen times a day. I like seeing who I calling an sending them to VM or not without taking out my phone.

As far beauty goes, the pebble isn't the fugliest thing around. It actually looks half way decent. And the newer versions are even better.

Comment: Re:Doesn't have to be that smart. (Score 1) 337

by Jhon (#47439815) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: Do You Want a Smart Watch?

I completely agree. I have a pebble and just being able to glance at it while on the road to see who is calling or texting/emailing is a huge convenience. Or in a theater where it makes virtually no noise and I can see it without lifting my arm up and the "glow" is next to non-existent but readable.

I STOPED wearing a watch over a decade ago because I had a phone which told me the time. Oh how things have come full circle.

Forget the apps -- it's the alerts that make it useful.

Comment: Re:No safe uses (Score 1) 178

by ScentCone (#47439777) Attached to: FAA Pressures Coldwell, Other Realtors To Stop Using Drone Footage

I doubt there are any safe uses for a drone. Do we really want a remotely controlled small aircraft flying around our homes and communities?

You're right. You're definitely on to something there. And while we're making sure that a professional real estate photographer with his reputation on the line is not to be trusted with a three and a half pound quadcopter, we should be even MORE restrictive of the OTHER dangerous stuff that's moving around our homes and communities. Like, pre-occupied 19 year olds driving cars. Like large dogs on cheap leashes. Like idiots on mountain bikes hopping curbs and cutting through read lights. Definitely start with the Evil Drones, but please don't stop there! There are so many dangers! Oh, definitely don't forget steak knives and riding lawnmowers.

Comment: Re:Define "safe commercial use of drones" (Score 1) 178

by ScentCone (#47439755) Attached to: FAA Pressures Coldwell, Other Realtors To Stop Using Drone Footage

How do you know that all those real estate agents are using the drones safely?

Never mind the tiny number of people shooting a few real estate stills from treetop level. How do you know that the many, many thousands of people who are flying around for fun are being safe? But the FAA (so far) is honoring congress's mandate that hobbyists be left alone, even though they just said that hobbyists flying FPV style are no longer allowed. Regardless, the hobby drone market has hundreds of thousands of customers. There might be a few hundred people shooting real estate. Can you explain why you think it's a good thing to hurt them, but not to care about all sorts of reckless hobby newbies (just search on YouTube)? Please be specific.

How do you know that the real estate agent really knows how to fly one of the drones

How do you know that your neighor, who just had a ready-to-fly quad dropped off by UPS and who's in the air 30 minutes later, is safe? Really. How do you know? And why do you think that people who are doing it professionally, with their businesses and reputations on the line, are more dangerous than a 12 year old kid next door who's on his third quad having crashed the first two in spectacular fashion? How do you know? Please be specific. Because the FAA thinkks the 12 year old kid is fine, but the person who takes great care to avoid endangering their real estate business liability coverage while shooting the occasional photo should be stopped. An odd thing for you to support.

10 to the 6th power Bicycles = 2 megacycles

Working...