Anyone who's read Dilbert know the sort of "management" we IT folk have to ... deal with, or work around, or hide behind, & etc. I've had a few very good ones, and a lot who were deer in the headlights clueless constantly.
Add "Authoritay" (TLAs) to the mix, and Snowden rises even further in stature in my eyes every day.
I spit on what these people do, and have always done, to the USA. The USA was intended to be the opposite of what it's become. Sic semper tyrannis.
I'm 44 and you've describe me - although I like having a car.
I'm fifty-nine and it describes me, and I resent age being brought into it at all. Wrong is wrong. I don't care what "generation" people who believe that come from, and you're very wrong in attempting to link this in any way to any specific "generation." A lot too many people are just forgiving these days saying, "That's just how the world is." It is, if you're too lazy to fix what's obviously broken.
The only way to protect the people’s privacy is not to allow the government to collect their information in the first place.
So, he's saying there is no way to prevent it since that's now proved to have failed to have any effect. Otherwise is like hoping for charity and mercy from a slavering predator as it circles you preparing to make a meal of you.
This whole thing reads like they're implementing all of this in the dumbest way possible. What, do they have 170 clerks using Outlook to forward emails to the TLAs? How can you spend millions of dollars on one phone tap?
I may be minimizing the magnitude of the job, but I'm sure pretty much any Unix/Linux Procmail user could replace those 170 clerks with a short recipe that searched a data file for the addressees in each incoming email, then forwards each hit off to the TLAs automatically, 24*7*365.25.
As for wiretaps, once you hook a sound activated recorder onto the line, you then need one person to sit and listen to and classify the contents of each call, and then what? Okay, watch the number the call comes from and based on calling number, some will be interesting and others can be automatically discounted. That costs millions of dollars, how?
I know the military is known for hundred dollar hammers and thousand dollar toilets. What's AT&T's and Verizon's excuse? This sounds incredibly ad hoc, wing it, didn't put *any* thought into it before just doing whatever some wingnut non-technical manager said to do.
I must be missing something important ... Or these people are getting away with highway robbery and shipping boatloads of cash off to the Caymans.
Who really thinks it is a good idea to have a for profit company doing security checks?
I do, and I think that's a silly question. Would you rather all of public commerce was nationalized and made a gov't monopoly? I think that would be ridiculous, and it wouldn't solve anything.
I'd like to know what's happening with these sluggards' managers. Did they do anything to verify their employees were actually doing what they were expected to do? This is management failure above all else. I've never had a job where my boss spent all his time on the golf course and just trusted us to not goof or slack off.
I wouldn't go so far as to say the NSA needs to be disbanded.
It is the simpler and most effective solution. Disband it and start over recognizing what went wrong, use proper oversight and determine what the rules are this time before you do it. Take your licks and accept the horrific waste of cash invested in the failed NSA as a learning experience; an expensive education. This time, do it right.
Just cutting off its heads (Alexander and Clapper) won't change much. An org that size will have built up a lot of inertia that needs to be overcome.
No, like what what they allowed it to do to Latin America (Bay of Pigs, Chile's Salvador Allende, United Fruit Co.), Viet Nam, "The War on *", and that sort of thing. I never suggest they've been angels, but the original premise behind their Declaration of Independence was spot on.
It wasn't my intention to cause you anger. I was just stating my opinion. You chose the perfect username for yourself. You're pragmatic to a fault. "Whatever works, damnit!" I, on the other hand, am an idealist. As Aristotle said, "Things as they could, and should be." "Whatever works" isn't good enough (for me; YMMV). I want things "done right." In IT, I want to make problems disappear never to return. I don't want a (pragmatic) quick fix that just gets me to tomorrow.
Try, "Somewhat conservative, but generally reasonable and as fair as possible.
See, to me, that says nothing. Compared to Frank Zappa, Jon Stewart is conservative, but compared to the Pope he's a flaming liberal. To me (and "Your Mileage May Vary", certainly), the left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative scales carry no meaning and are incapable of shedding any real light in a discussion. They're as empty as marketroid buzzwords; much sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Would you say Edward Snowden is conservative? He looks that way to me, but look at what he's done. Richard Stallman's never done anything even remotely like what Snowden's done, but Stallman's a flaming liberal!
Left, right, liberal, and conservative are out of their depth when trying to describe ideas. That's all I'm saying.
Learn to read. The post I replied to called Mike "center-right", and my reply was questioning the use of that empty phrase. I know the US is pretty much addicted to it (as well as liberal vs. conservative), but try to fight it. They both make you look foolish. The world and ideas are more complicated those things can describe, and you'll be better off (less easily manipulated) without them.
Good point (your whole post, not just this bit of it). For most of its existence, despite its many "hiccups" down through the years, the USA has been a beacon of hope to the entire world. I very much hope to see its people win this one against the forces of tyranny currently in its midst.
Happy Fourth, USA. Now buckle down and get to work! :-)