It is 2014. The world is a smaller, more interconnected place than the place your foreign policy came from. When our founding philosophers talked about inalienable rights, and layed down such things as our Bill of Rights, do you really think that they meant for those comforts in life not to be owed to an average Chinese citizen or even a human woman named Angela Merkel?

The days of foreign policy considering it to shit on everybody outside its borders should be over. The world is Growing Up. Look at the population, what 7 billion today, how many billion was it 100, 200, 1000 years ago? Things are going to get inhumanely ugly if we don't start growing the fuck up and talking openly as respectful adults about these issues Real Soon Now. The Stasi with the internet and modern mobile phone network are an unnacceptable threat to humanity. Like Slavery.

The ability for the government to literally enslave its citizens with a recipe of technology including cheap solar powered drones, and the existing cloud of modern smart phones is utterly fucking terrifying to me. I self medicate with copius quantities of alcohol and cannabis. I have slept much better in the 7 months since the Snowden revelations, because now it seems like we actually get to talk this shit out in public, without *realistic* estimations of what is going on with the secret government being shouted down as tinfoil hat theories.

huh? My understanding was that Snowden pilfered a very large dataset, then handed it over to a select group of journalists. I suppose Snowden may have investigated the dataset enough himself to know some things he could divulge that the journalists wouldn't for ethical reasons. In that case, maybe there is a tiny bit to what you said. But in the general case, I think and hope it is safe to assume now that if there is anything in the dataset that one of the journalists has access to that the journalist believes should be released to the public for ethical reasons- well, I think and hope that whatever happens to Snowden is as irrelevant to that journalists decision as possible.

I guess maybe I've lived a pretty long life and now you are making me unsure of the law. I would have thought the espionage itself was illegal. Something about the government having to pay you for your pig if they take it or some such.

The problem is *that does not happen*. I think our goal should not be either to create, or eradicate such "poison gardens". But rather to understand that they exist, can be created, and can be used for ethical or unethical purposes. The real dark side to all of this is how much unethical behavior goes on to cover up lesser instances of unethical behavior relating to these poison gardens. And such amplification of unethical behavior can lead to very bad places. I'll admit, that for much of my paranoia, the place I live isn't as bad as I feared it could become 10 years ago. But it's pretty bad. I'd rather be reading more slashdot articles about humanity cleverly engineering solutions to its problems, than cleverly creating what this human being considers to be very big problems. I hope I've been alarmist. I hope 20 years from now we look back and say- oh those animal-house/night-shift whackos at the NSA and GITMO and AbuGhraib, what *exceptions to the rule they were*. I really, really, really pray and hope for that. Because I also really really really fear that the dark impulses of humanity that led to widespread slavery, and hitler and all that.... well, I'm a lot less comfortable with our distance in years from those things than most of society seems to be.

I suppose then, that in an information warfare[1] sense, it is good that the objective of my communication was not to persuade you of that. Some people read other's comments to gain wisdom, either directly, or through thought inspiration. Others have different motives. To phrase it differently- if that response is all you got out of my 'rant', then you were missing the point. For the sake of argument (at least), let's just presume that I am crazy. That alone, doesn't by itself make the rest of my points irrelevant, or no longer in need of further dispersal. What will really cook your noodle is when you imagine that the powers that be, have the technical capability to drive anyone they want as crazy as I am, and get away with it. Or rather, until someone leaks the classified documents exposing the crime.

[1] http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

Dear God, it's sunday and here I am on slashdot, oh why, oh why?

Short answer is probably mainly because I've been unemployed for years since I walked out on a six figure salary and a hardwalled office in the historic Xerox-Parc after I walked out on VMWare in January of 2009. Well, we'll set asside my educational 2 months stint working at Wendy's, which truly was more rewarding in every way other than financially than working for VMWare or others.

Why did I do that? I did it because of GITMO. Which oddly enough, I'm going to stretch to being connected with SnowdenPRISMCrash.

I wish I could better quote 'The Matrix' and the 'any one of them can be an agent' speech from Morpheus. But the spirit of those words is my answer to your question about how the 'average googler' is harming the 'peasants'. The fact of the matter is that the 'average googler' works for a system of control. That system of control, has been using the worst kinds of violations of human rights for the last decade to deprive us peasants of the ability to secure our networked digital communications. The 'average googler' has been parroting the party line for the last 10 pre-Snowden years about how - 'you are crazy and paranoid, and there is nothing to worry about, you have no idea how profoundly smart we are here at google and how we know what is best for you. Please, avert your eyes from the man with the NSA hat in the corner fiddling with those cables and that black box he is unpacking'.

Sweet Jesus, don't you get it? Pick your pill. Red or Blue, it's your only choice.

Now follow me as I stumble down the bunny trail...

* note, while the timing of my departure from the realm of the highly paid was more about GITMO, it also was at the same time VMWare was trying to convince me that a non-smart-card fingerprint authd USB stick was sufficient security for the guest tools package signing key connected to an internet connected system. Yes, they wanted me to be one of 4 people whose fingerprint had auth to the guest tools rpm packages private key material. Later I would go on to spout my crazy 'build and signing systems should be airgapped from the internet' theories to ScientificLinux. They hounded me out of the community as a loon as many other communities have as well. Now I have the Snowden revelations to keep my spirit warm at night. Not quite the same warmth as the kind of financial security and ability to build and support and protect a family that the 'average googler' has, but it ain't nothin. Thanks God.

Google Pwnz the NSA, or was it vice versa... Can't believe there are people who still don't know that one of those is true.

my theory is that the Russians have less qualms and impediments to using the same types of tricks and tools as the US, however perhaps less technical ability. I say that latter thinking of Silicon Valley in the US and the history of the internet, though like the moon-landing style got-there-firsts, perhaps now the internet is mature enough that an early lead has evaporated.

Back to your question though- another reason to consider the Russians not wanting Snowden to speak out is because it would anger the U.S, and perhaps in a real-politik sense, Russia is still afraid of what a really-pissed-off USA-intelligence-inner-circle-elite can do to Russia. Or again as before, perhaps there is no superpower-imbalance in this day and age to enable that silenced-by-fear effect.

While I don't disagree that slashdot seems to put trollish/public-subset-opinion-polling/alarmist style headlines all over the front page more often than optimal, I have to disagree here about Snowden. I believe the Snowden revelations, and the way they came about, and continue to transpire as so, have so paradigm-shifted the computer and network security landscape, that articles such as this one are more than appropriate. First, it's merely a side-effect conveniency issue. While yes, some of your points may have merit, you have to forgive a bit that the slashdot audience really is that interested in how the Snowden saga transpires. I mean, this is some Epic War and Peace Shit going on here. A martyr being martyred slowly over years. How exactly, and how much pain and vindication end up in that story, I really think will have a profound place in the history of the internet's chapter in the history of humanity. This is a *BIG DEAL*.

And even setting asside that real-politik drama and the slashdot audience's 'non-technical' interest, you must look at the legitimate 'technical' interest of the slashdot audience. How Snowden is handled by the overwhelming powers that be, truly does shape how many of us here will be developing technology throughout the remaining future of our carreers. At some point, one is tempted to say - 'if computer security matters are treated this profoundly by the un-(directly)-opposable powers that be, then you know what, I'm actually going to stop worrying about whether the firmware in my BIGNAMEBRAND computer system or consumer device is a security risk or not. But if Snowden is fully vindicated, and reclaims the rights and protections of a free citizen of the United States of America, including rigourous protection of his freedom of speech, then I may well say- I'd like to spend more of my carreer working on more secure open source firmware.

Dunno...

wow, maybe the first time I've ever been personally _asked_ for an opinion on slashdot. No, that AC was not me. The Bro thing was nothing personal, just think of it as a snark tag.

Here is your response- First, my response was instigated by your comments here -

My personal reaction was sufficiently summed up by another comment which basically quoted and explained the 4th ammendment.

My secondary reaction was to get a little snarky, and bring up- not strawmen, but real similar scenarios. The 4th ammendment is (somewhat sadly) all about a subjective interpretation of the word 'reasonable'. Obviously, if the feds and police were perfectly trustworthy, letting them have keys to all of our houses, and letting them search any house they like, whenever they like, when the home is empty, would give the authorities an obviously useful and efficient tool to fight crime. Lives would be saved, more rapists and thieves put in jail, etc. So, clearly as a society we have decided that that is not 'reasonable'. We want more privacy than that, even if it costs lives and victims. The same thing with mandating microphones tapped into the phonesystem embedded in every home/apartement wall. Again, an amazingly useful intelligence tool for the authorities to combat crime and terrorism. And again as a society we've decided that it is 'unreasonable' to go that far.

I brought up the cheap 3d printed solar powered drone w/ parabolic mic theory because I think it is usefully analagous in the current situation between the tech-capability jump between pre-internet and internet, and current-internet and - future with $1 solar drones with parabolic mics.

I believe the problem with the internet, and the related interp of 4th ammendment 'reasonable', is that recently much of society was simply ignorant of internet technology. They largely still are (think net neutrality, metered bandwidth, peak vs non-peak, etc). What is really horrible is I believe the NSA engaged in a massive decade long campaign of disinformation and other deeds to keep the public basically ignorant of the internet, and related security concerns.

Anyway, I can blather on at length, but the short answer is - I think the policy should follow the spirit of the 4th ammendment. And this human being doesn't consider the collection of internet SIGINT/LOVINT indiscriminately from all citizens all the time is 'reasonable'. I think it would be reasonable to _start collection after targeting and getting a judge to sign a warrant_. But I don't consider it reasonable to collect SIGINT/LOVINT in a database that _could be used politically against every citizen_ _before_ a target has been selected, and a legal warrant issued by the judicial branch.

$0.02...

It's also false because bedbugs are insanely awesome hiders (advanced persistent parasites). As someone that had them for 2 years spanning 2 residences, and was finally able to out-smart/engineer them (with heat in addition to ridiculous housekeeping measures), and now been rid of them for more than 2 years... I'm just saying, you gotta respect them. They are _nothing_ like roaches when it comes to 'poor housekeeping'. With roaches, you can do pretty well just by working on better housekeeping. With bedbugs, there is no fucking hope without further measures (heat- but done right, took me 3 months of 'heat waves' before I finally achieved full eradication, and my problem-space was much simpler than most peoples.

The globe is getting more crowded. The children are developing the appropriate social skills to their day and age and local population density.

No, I think it's the existence of the internet that allows the internet to somewhat supplant face to face contact. The internet is where life goes on these days. For our parents, that technology did not exist, and gasoline was much cheaper. As a result their lives were lived more often in cars and places you can get to with cars (your local downtown, parks and other points of interest say 50 miles away, etc).

You do realize China is a pretty completely fucked up place to live right? 1989, Tiananmen Square- go watch some mainstream news coverage (from '89, not from the last 10 years) of that. Then read about the working conditions, and thoughtful 'suicide nets' at factories like Foxconn that make all those wonderful Apple and Samsung products. Then read about the history of the Great Firewall, and the history of Yahoo, Microsoft, and then Google caving into free speech pressure to do business there. I.e. Yahoo revealing the identity of yahoo-email users that were clearly only criminal (in China) for wanting to excercise what we in the U.S. consider as an 'inalienable right' (free speech). Google agreeing to censor search results for information about the Tiananmen Square Mass^H^H Incident.

Probably yes, there is some dimension of the influence of the One Child Policy here. But you won't get anywhere in understanding if you ignore the obvious importance of those other things. China wants to control it's citizen's political expression. Massively over-diagnosing schizophria, or homosexuality as a psychological illness, or those sort of things is a little too passe for state oppression. These day's you just send the free-speech loving dissidents to "internet addiction rehab".

Bro, what is your fetish with 'digital communications'? Imagine all of the thoughts you expressed, but instead of the context of a voice conversation using the internet, imagine a voice conversation between you and your wife as you stroll in the park, or sit in your back yard.

Just because the government _has the technical capability_ to inexpensively (if not today, watch out for next week) fly solar drones infinitely recording via parabolic microphones everyone's backyards and every public park- DOESN'T MEAN THEY SHOULD, just because it will probably help them prevent some amount of lawbreaking, and save some amount of lives. Just because the government _could_ send local police departments to do random inspections of everyone's houses (conveniently while they are not at home perhaps), DOESN'T MEAN THEY SHOULD, just because it will probably help them prevent some amount of lawbreaking, and save some amount of lives.

Now think to the current headlines about Obama's theories on restructuring the program. The concept that doesn't seem to get much airplay is- maybe ever single bit flowing across the internet does not need to be stored and accessible to the government forever, or even for a limited time with their promise that they will delete their copy eventually. Maybe, *just maybe*, in a couple years when the government can 3D print a swarm of a million solar powered drones with parabolic microphones to cover the world, humanity will decide that it doesn't need to be able to listen to every conversation between every married couple whispering to each other in a public park or their own backyard. Maybe. But probably not. They are addicted to spying. It gives them a rush of power, a sense of control. It's about domination, and the ability to have comforts in your world, at the expense of the victims.

I'm 38, my father is about twice my age. When I was a child I remember some philosophically strong arguments against the use of SSNs in any venue other than the government program they were created for. My father wasn't religious, though later I discovered myself the whole "number of the beast" thing (i.e. christian prophecy about things like the tattooed ID numbers on jewish prisoners of the nazis. To a lesser extent, the idea of humans viewed as consumer cattle by society. I.e. you can't buy or sell or basically function in society without providing your unique numerical identifier to help you be tracked to that level of detail.

Now it seems we've infected south korea with our Social Security Number system. Que Sera Sera.

I disagree. Though agree that is the "bothersome" (your words, mine is "terrifying") part. I disagree that the problem isn't caused by the advertisers and marketers. While the government also would like to be able to cause the situation, it really takes the full force of the advertisers to get it past the otherwise wise historical teachings against state power. If it weren't for the advertisers raking in countless dollars with the system, the people would demand that their data be completely under their control, and completely encrypted in transit, and not correlatable with other data, unless they are explicitly paid for the privilege of having their data correlated in a database.

You should review the historical tactics of the East German Stasi if you want to properly elevate your sense of "bothersome" to my sense of "terrifying". If you argue that the U.S. govt is an entirely different breed, with some higher moral ground, then I can only say - "have you been reading the news headlines these past 10 years?" I have ZERO faith that the evil human motivations that drove the Stasi to wantonly violate the privacy of all citizens are absent and/or powerless within the humans of the U.S. govt. Within myself even. This is why hard-lines on privacy must be taken. There are slippery slopes. We are probably sliding fast down a few already.

Won't someone, but someone, please think of the lawyers. Oh the humanity...

you know, in some sense you just convinced me that the CentOS 6 debacle could well have been the motivating factor here. Basically RH was cheapskately depending on CentOS for it's overall business strategy (same way microsoft turned a blind eye to piracy in China), and CentOS basically retaliated by being unable or unwilling to invest energy to get the early v6 releases done anywhere near in time to the corresponding RH releases. And thusly, RH now has to respond by actually ponying up the effort to keep the CentOS community more viable. I.e. the quicker they can get people on CentOS-7, the quicker they can cash in on the substantial percentage of those that eventually want the RHEL7 support level. For this and other good reasons mentioned in the comments, I wonder why I'm still so shocked by this move... I guess it's like the end of cannabis prohibition. Something so blazingly obviously ignored for so long, that when people finally get around to doing the obvious right thing, it's - breathtaking. Sad, but true.