Page 16 of 48 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 477

Thread: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

  1. #151
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,530

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No, it doesn't.
    Oh please you're just splitting hairs trying to prove your "prowess".

    'NSA agents'? The odd use of terms would leave me to believe you don't get this: certain people get access to 'raw SIGINT'. Not many, but they're not particularly high-ranking or anything. It's people doing a certain job. They can query a database and there's a lot of options. But they only have the legal power to go after certain targets. It has nothing to do with IT access. Zero. If they query something they shouldn't, it pops up and they're ****ed. Well, actually everything they query comes up, but you know what I mean.
    Again you're trying to prove yourself. You talk about authorization in an inconsistent manner. You say some need it to access raw SIGINT data to do their job, fine, that's business as usual. Then you say "people", anyone? can query a database but if they query the wrong thing they get flagged after the fact? That's kind of strange, why would they do that? Does the system routinely audit itself and filter keywords that are association outliers and then redact prior authorization and file a report? Why wouldn't it filter before and deny access? What are the key business rules that dictate the data access and auditing?

  2. #152
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    I do not recall ever making that claim.
    Right. Which begs the question of why you responded to me when I told verax that IT wasn't SIGINT.
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  3. #153
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    If I don't think he is paying attention I will support his opponent. One very important reason why democracies fail is that we stop sending men and women with integrity to occupy those temporary offices.
    His opponent will probably feel the same way. Sorry?
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  4. #154
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    Oh please you're just splitting hairs trying to prove your "prowess".
    No, I'm not.

    Again you're trying to prove yourself.
    I don't need to prove myself.

    You talk about authorization in an inconsistent manner. You say some need it to access raw SIGINT data to do their job, fine, that's business as usual. Then you say "people", anyone? can query a database but if they query the wrong thing they get flagged after the fact? That's kind of strange, why would they do that?
    Why wouldn't it?

    Does the system routinely audit itself and filter keywords that are association outliers and then redact prior authorization and file a report? Why wouldn't it filter before and deny access? What are the key business rules that dictate the data access and auditing?
    No. There's an oversight manager for everyone.

    This isn't IT. It's not close to the same thing.
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  5. #155
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Right. Which begs the question of why you responded to me when I told verax that IT wasn't SIGINT.
    What I recall is a "snot-nosed" statement along the lines of "I don't think you know what sigint is."

    I was responding to your "superior" attitude. Usually bullies are small, insecure people.

  6. #156
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    His opponent will probably feel the same way. Sorry?
    If that is the case then the system is broken and needs to be swept away.

    You don't get to spy on me just because you can and you want to.

  7. #157
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    As with nuclear weapons, Pandora's box has been opened. What can we do about it? We can change laws, defund programs, and demand more transparency and oversight. For any of these efforts to be worthwhile, we need to restrict commercial information gathering as well as governmental activity. These political and legal changes are worth doing and might help, but I doubt these privacy protection efforts will be enforceable and effective over the long term.

    There are two other strategies to consider:

    1. Stop using technology that enables information gathering. The downside is losing all the convenience, efficiency and entertainment that these devices offer.

    2. Sabotage the systems.

    I'm not advocating anything illegal, violent or destructive, but there are several legal ways surveillance-state opponents could disrupt information gathering by jamming the system with inaccurate and excessive information.

    Tactics might include:

    • They can act suspicious. What if every surveillance opponent in the world made a point of doing searches and visiting websites that are likely to trigger government suspicion? If everyone does it, then there is no useful information to be obtained by monitoring such activity.
    • Whenever practical and legal, they can put inaccurate information in their internet forms. For example, while it is still legal, you can give Facebook inaccurate data. In my opinion, it is foolish to give accurate information to any website unless you have a reason to do so.
    • They can also create new meanings or uses for words that are likely to trigger government suspicion. If everyone decide to use the word "Al Qeda" to mean "thank you" in their e-mail, cell phone and online messages, it would make that trigger useless.
    • They can send messages that appear to be encrypted, but aren't, or encrypt banal or bogus messages. Make them waste time trying to decode them.
    • When they go out in public, they can wear a disguise. They can all start wearing veils and masks, point laser pointers at video cameras, stage bogus suspicious activities, and publicize the location and type of surveillance systems.


    The possibilities are endless.

    The downside of this tactic is that it will allow terrorists and criminals to slip through these "protections" also. It is a choice to accept risk of attacks and crime in return for our human rights. What is more important: safety or freedom?
    Last edited by Hard Truth; 08-04-13 at 04:59 PM.

  8. #158
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    What I recall is a "snot-nosed" statement along the lines of "I don't think you know what sigint is."

    I was responding to your "superior" attitude. Usually bullies are small, insecure people.
    lol?

    This was the exchange:

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    I don't think you understand what IT is.
    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    I know you don't understand what SIGINT is, though.
    So why did you feel the need to respond to my attitude but not his? Is he small and insecure, too? lol Nice try, buddy. He attempted to tell me that SIGINT was part of IT. It's not even close. Even you should know that. Now why did only one person's attitude pique your interest? Hmmmm.
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  9. #159
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    If that is the case then the system is broken and needs to be swept away.

    You don't get to spy on me just because you can and you want to.
    Ah. Of course. If you disagree with something, that means it's broken. Perfect logic. I thought you weren't going to deal with me?
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  10. #160
    Professor
    Capster78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    08-24-15 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records

    Quote Originally Posted by Jango View Post
    Greenwald says 'low-level' NSA workers can tap into phone, Internet records | Fox News

    So how do you feel about this? Do you think that this dragnet that ensnares us all is necessary and just? How about Constitutional? Does it make you feel safer? What is the natural progression from here?
    It really does not matter at all to me.

    First of all, the amount of information that exists to be tapped into is so great, no one computer could possibly contain it.

    Second of all, even if there existed a computer that could contain all information for all internet users, it would be virtually impossible to process it into any kind of meaningful data to do anything with it. In essence, if you are concerned with your privacy you may even WANT this type of program to exist because it would be so ineffective that the amount of information gathered would cover any useful or personal information that would be gathered on any one individual. Now, what could be concerning is the targeted use of this technology, and not the blanket use of it. There does need to be a process in which those who use this technology must provide a lawful reason to do so. Saying this, I think we can conclude that the majority of us would never be effected by the use of this technology. Why would anyone use this technology against someone when the information gathered is of no use at all. Which is the category the vast majority of us are in. I am not sure where much of this fear comes from, where someone may use this technology to find out that your cheating on your wife or husband. Or that maybe you watch beastiality porn on the internet. Or that you were secretly rooting for the Steelers while all your friends were Ravens fans. For the most part, the vast majority of us live a life that is really not interesting enough for anyone to care to spy on us. No one really cares about the conversation you had with your mother-in-law over the phone about family matters. No one really cares about your fetish for S&M and all those S&M websites you visit. No one really cares about your religious trips to starbucks to start out the day before work. On the whole, 99.999999% of the information that could be gathered by a system that tracks every internet users use online, or phone conversations, or by your out and about errands are useless. Saying that, I really don't understand why people are being so alarmist about such a thing.
    - There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
    - Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
    - Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.

Page 16 of 48 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •