Gambare, anime fans:
On August 3rd, Twitter broke its previous tweets-per-second record by over 100,000. Castle in the Sky, a 1986 Hayao Miyazaki film, was the cause of all the ruckus—to the tune of 143,199 tweets in one second, most of them coming from Japanese viewers broadcasting a single word…
Castle in the Sky carries a tradition of en-masse internet participation. During the climax of the beloved film, a magic word—balus—is spoken by the characters to trigger a spell of destruction to crumble the movie’s titular fortress. According to the Wall Street Journal, during the 13 times that the movie has aired in Japan, fans have built up a tradition of saying the word together at the exact same moment (115 minutes and five seconds into the film). In the age of the internet, this tradition moved to message boards (and reportedly crashed them) and it seems that it’s now been adapted for Twitter.
The spike marks a milestone for Twitter, according to a post on the site’s blog, and not just because of the record that was broken, but because no significant outages were reported. This is in sharp contrast to three years ago, when the 2010 World Cup shut Twitter down repeatedly. Twitter reps told the Wall Street Journal the site’s servers had been fortified since then, and so indeed it seems…
Quartz separately reports that “Burning Man has released instructions for attendees who wish to fly drones and full sized UAVs”:
…[D]rones that have cameras attached have been warned not to record footage of people (due to the difficulties of getting their explicit consent). Drones and UAVs are not permitted to be flown over large crowds where crashing could cause injuries. They are also banned from being flown within the main circle during the “day of the Man burn,” when an effigy is burnt, due to safety precautions.
Robert
Speaking of anime, SyFy’s Heroes of Cosplay is a terrible show. I know half of the cosplayers on the show and they’re not exactly thrilled with how SyFy ran the production. The ones on the first episode are not happy with the edit. All of these cosplayers, even the mean ones (Yaya) deserve better.
I also launched a new art/craft/pop culture web series today. For the first stretch of episodes, I’m taking SyFy’s Face Off challenges and using them as inspiration to build Halloween props. Really happy with how my little warrior faun sculpt turned out.
johio
Just walked in from dinner out to find This is Spinal Tap playing on BBC America. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh.
MikeJ
@johio: Other than fake British accents, what does Spın̈al Tap have to do with the BBC? This is one of the things I hate about BBCA. It’s just Star Trek TNG, old people driving cars, and movies that aren’t British.
BruinKid
Horrific murder of an Australian baseball player in Oklahoma by three teens who did it… just because. Comments sections on any article on this have already turned very, very racial, as the three teens were originally thought to all be black. Turns out one is black, one is biracial, and one is white. Still, expect Rush Limbaugh to say something incredibly racist about this tragedy.
the Conster
The original burning man is Zozobra which has been going on in Santa Fe since 1924. It’s one of the most amazing mainstream cultural celebrations no one has ever heard of, and anyone who has had the pleasure to witness it knows that the other Burning Man is a derivative fraud.
JPL
@BruinKid: UHOH… The black male is going to be charged as a juvenile. If the President was white, this would not happen. .. plus Zimmerman…
A former defense Minister in Australia wants to notify his citizens, that the United States is to dangerous to visit. He might be right.
srv
Oh, and I was looking to burning drones flying around like the doves at the Olympics in an ironical homage to The Man Obama.
Baud
Over 20 minutes and Cole hasn’t stomped on this thread. Is that a new record?
srv
Damn, this restored Gone With the Wind looks like it was filmed with a first generation Red One.
Yatsuno
AL did you see the new Ghibli trailer? I’ll see of I can dig it up but I am at work. It looks fascinating.
piratedan
@Robert: well the last time that SyFy ventured into Anime, they completely missed the boat, they promoted poorly, scheduled abyssmally, although the titles that they latched onto were a mixed bag of dreck (Ninja Scroll) and nifty old school (Patlabor). It’s like most of SyFy tbh, it’s run by people who aren’t fans of the genre itself.
PhoenixRising
The crisis in Cambodia was our dinnertime current events topic for back to school.
Politics is more interesting when it happens to cute boys with fancy hair, is what I learned. My kid learned that it’s complicated. Wants to attend a protest in favor of fairly administered democracy in Cambodia. I’m not sure we’re providing transport for that…
Bruce S
I’m not someone who is obsessed with the NSA story and pretty much consider this situation to be inevitable in our current globalized wireless information environment, but I have to say that checking in on some of the relevant threads, anyone whose response to the questions being raised (you know, the debate that POTUS “welcomes”, an assertion which was almost as embarrassing as his punching way, way down in commenting negatively on Snowden’s “patriotism”) by serially crapping on the messenger Glenn Greenwald is – to put it in terms that the invective-lovers might actually be able to comprehend – a piece of shit. Foremost among them are the disingenuous fucks who tried to litigate whether he came to opposition to the Iraq war too late to be a legitimate critic of…uh…anything. What weak, embarrassing shit. I recognize most of these clowns, of course, as the geniuses who resort to “Firebagger!” as the easiest retort to any questions they want to shut down. Or shout down. What a bunch of punks and cowards. And given the level of discourse they’ve chosen, this is the most appropriate and polite response they could possibly deserve.
johio
@MikeJ: Generally I agree with you, altho they do have some series actually made in the Uk. I’v recorded Broadchurch, but not watched it yet. But Spinal Tap is funny no matter where it’s made.
Yatsuno
@PhoenixRising: There was a demonstration about this outside my building in fact. It was peaceful but it was spirited from what I understand. It’s hard to tell from 20 stories up sometimes.
dmsilev
@BruinKid: Just look down a thread or two here and you’ll see one of our pet gibbering loons already working himself up into a froth over the issue.
MikeJ
@johio:
That is something with which I will never argue.
SiubhanDuinne
@BruinKid:
Fixed for total, real, authentic accuracy.
cathyx
@Bruce S: You know, you’re referring to most of the commenters here.
The Sailor
Spinal Tap & The Player are both on.
I’m flipping back and forth.
Belafon
@MikeJ: I’m pretty sure it’s because of Christopher Guest, who is the ” 5th Baron Haden-Guest, of Saling in the County of Essex, when his father died in 1996,” according to imdb and wikipedia.
HeartlandLiberal
Castle In The Sky is one of my absolute favorite films.
If you have never watched Miyazaki, then do NOT be put off if you have had the misfortune to be exposed to typical Japanese anime.
There is no comparison. It is like comparing a work by Andrew Wyeth to some random back alley graffiti.
Miyazaki’s films are absolutely beautiful, the art still done by hand for the most part. And the plots all hinge on drawing out the best and most humane in human beings.
I have lost count of how many times I have watched Castle In The Sky. If I need to lift my spirits, I watch it or any of the other Miyazaki films. I even have a 4 x 3 foot poster of the main character from one of his earliest films, Nausicca of the Vally of the Wind hanging in my downstairs office / study. On the same wall as a 5 x 4 foot poster of Daniel Day Lewis in Last of the Mohicans running directly at the camera with a hatchet in his hand. Another of my all time favorite films.
Of course, there is also a large poster of the Marvel comic character The Punisher. It was a large format early edition, I lucked into two different ones that size very early in the character’s publication history. I googled them recently and discovered each is selling for a couple hundred bucks a piece. Considering I paid five bucks, not a bad deal.
Gravenstone
@johio: I was working on campus in a little podunk Indiana town the summer “This is Spinal Tap” came out. It opened in our little one screen theater, and promptly closed after one showing. The owners had absolutely no clue how to take the movie, so they just tossed it.
the Conster
@The Sailor:
The Player is great. The homage to the long uninterrupted tracking shot is genius, and the movie pitches are hilarious.
schrodinger's cat
Ok I has two kitteh captions to share. For one my mews was Samuelson of the Washpost who does not like the internet and for the other it was Lady Gaga.
Editor Kitteh and Kitteh Gaga.
PhoenixRising
@Yatsuno: When Khmer crowds become other than peaceful, you can tell from 20 stories up, in my experience. Language barrier my a**, I can run faster than I thought!
Where do you live, if I may ask?
srv
@Bruce S: Obama has never wanted anything more than to have a serious discussion about these issues.
Sherlock Hound
@Yatsuno:
Do you mean “From Up On Poppy Hill”? Very sweet homage to Yokohama. It’ll be out on disc in a few weeks. Wish I’d gotten to crash Twitter.jp–“Laputa” is 17 years old!
Belafon
@Bruce S: I have two beefs with GG:
1. All of his stories have the following pattern: “The government is watching you go to the bathroom” in the first paragraph, and “Well, not really, they just could, if they wanted to” in the next to the last paragraph.
2. He wants to affect US politics without understanding US politics. He thinks he’s a libertarian, and thinks that anyone that says they’re a libertarian must be one. Therefore, the Pauls are the ultimate politicians in his mind, when neither are libertarians; at best they are federalists, and they’ve never been at best.
Belafon
@HeartlandLiberal: My favorite is How’s Moving Castle.
Yatsuno
@Sherlock Hound: This one. Brand new.
cathyx
@Belafon: You’re displaying your ignorance.
1. Show me any example of this. He backs up everything he claims with proof, unlike you.
2. He’s a civil libertarian, which is very different than a libertarian. He has no fascination with the Pauls, like you claim.
Steeplejack
@Sherlock Hound:
No, Yatsuno means The Wind Rises.
The Sailor
@the Conster: They’re both great, and funny.
Having worked in music and Hollywood, they’re both dark comedies.
Way too accurate.
PurpleGirl
@MikeJ: I believe NBC co-owns BBCA. The foreign BBC channels have to raise their own operating funds, they are not funded by the British corporation. Most of the other foreign channels have more BBC representatives in the operation so they are more closely tied to the British core. But in the US, they developed this weird structure because of the way US television is run. And the channel is cheap. They don’t want to spend too much money on the licenses for British shows.
Mnemosyne
@srv:
I have two film degrees and I have never seen Gone With the Wind. At this point, it’s a deliberate choice and I probably never will see it unless someone can come up with a really good reason I should.
That would make a great thread some lazy Sunday afternoon: what’s the most famous movie you’ve never seen?
Mnemosyne
@cathyx:
You know who disagrees with you? Glenn Greenwald. In his own column.
jeffreyw
Threads needs moar laughing kittehs.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Bruce S: Really? You read Betty’s post on this yesterday and that’s what you came away with?
Okay. Eye of the beholder and all that.
PsiFighter37
Went out ziplining over some waterfalls near Hilo today. What flame wars have I missed so far as a result of my absence?
Belafon
Don’t moderate me, bro.
Bruce S
@Belafon:
What difference does it make who/what Greenwald believes. He was the vehicle for a story which is of legitimate concern in a constitutional democracy. I don’t think there’s any doubt that if this revelation had come down when Bush was President, 90%+ of the folks pissing on Greenwald here would have been in a pearl clutch over violations of civil liberties. I didn’t think there was much here that I didn’t think I already knew, but if the President himself is to be believed this issue is worthy of serious discussion – presumably with some knowledge by the public of the actual facts, which have been given us more by Snowden than our government. The reality is that it wasn’t the stuff of serious discussion before Snowden did his thing via Greenwald via The Guardian. And The Guardian in recent decades at least has been one of the best sources of insightful journalism in the world, bar none. But it’s easier to trash Greenwald with no mention of the fact that he’s being published by an indispensable source of information for anyone with their head screwed on. So trash Greenwald, but make sure you are also clear that you’re trashing The Guardian and their standards of journalism. Who are you joining in that venture, by the way – “guilt by association” suggested because you want to soil Greenwald (dubiously) with every bit of baggage ever carried by anyone named Paul. Most of this Greenwald-bashing is cheap and an obvious form of straw man.
Belafon
@cathyx: In response to the first statement, since the second one has been supplied, here:
Here’s the first paragraph:
Here’s what’s buried:
J
@HeartlandLiberal: This praise for Laputa: Castle in the sky is completely in order.
srv
@Mnemosyne: Number 95 for me, although several I’ve bailed on and did not finish in a single seating.
PsiFighter37
@Bruce S: Actually, for me, it is twofold:
1) As far as I know, Obama was not actively calling for breaking the law, whereas Bush was, and
2) Realpolitik, baby. We are fighting the crazyass motherfuckers on the other side of the aisle who are trying to do some seriously bad shit on the policy side on issues that are of far more pressing importance to the public. This can wait.
Of course, liberals are awful as shit when it comes to 2), so it’s no wonder they are tying themselves up and burning themselves at the stake over this issue. At least the purity trolls on the right are too stupid to do this. The ones on the left are smart enough to know better and do it anyways.
JPL
@Bruce S: The Guardian has been one of my sources for ages but now when I go on, it’s about Greenwald. Maybe it’s just me, but I have gone back to BBC for the news, overseas.
PurpleGirl
@Mnemosyne:
That would make a great thread some lazy Sunday afternoon: what’s the most famous movie you’ve never seen?
That would be a good topic for a Sunday afternoon post and thread. I hope AL develops it.
I’ve seen GWTW, twice I think. I thought my sister might have taken me, but thinking about harder, no, she didn’t take me to the movies. So that means I went by myself as an early teen, probably because my sister always talked about Clark Gable. I went a second time for one of the special anniversary releases. Not interested in it any more from costume and special effects angles. The story itself is trite and predictable.
Bruce S
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I’ve read a bunch of comments by a bunch of very stupid, hysterical people who are incapable of discussing anything without resorting to the most childish ad hominem. So I’m responding at the level they might be able to comprehend. This isn’t in response to that post, but chains of comment threads inhabited by cretins of the worst sort.
askew
Did anyone watch Glenn’s interview on AC360 tonight? I didn’t have the stomach to watch him. Also, the Guardian appears to have lied about their computers being crushed by the UK government or at least the pic they posted was a lie. Chris Hayes reported it as fact of course.
Sherlock Hound
@Yatsuno:
Miyazaki’s at it. Again. Doesn’t stop, does he? “Nausicaa”, the film, will be 30 years old next year.
gbear
@Bruce S: You’ve won me over Bruce. I’m hanging on every word.
Bruce S
@PsiFighter37:
I’m actually not in a hissy fit about the NSA issues. Honestly, I wasn’t sure what was new about the information when it came out. But it clearly set of a firestorm among insider National Security types – who are never to be trusted in any administration. That said and to put my own lack of “purity” in context, I’m one of those who supports the President on drone strikes. But I hate stupid forms of argument that are patently disingenuous and cheap. And in areas that are obviously problematic, complex and inherently ugly – like drones and surveillance – I don’t simply value arguments that validate my own predilections and judgement calls, but want to see disagreement and tension. Because my own judgement calls on these matters are a reflection of my own internal tensions. I’m not so perfect or so comfortable with this ugly and problematic stuff that I can afford to get smug in my own skin by simply trashing Glenn Greenwald when he’s raising issues this major. We need the Greenwalds on such matters, even when we disagree with them or think they’re hyperbolic.
Yatsuno
@Steeplejack: Your assistance, as always, is greatly appreicated good sir.
@Mnemosyne: I read the book. Meh.
Miz Conception
@Bruce S:
The longer this story goes on, the more GG is starting to smell like James O’Keefe to me. He calls himself a “journalist” but he’s not content to report the news, he wants to make the news.
Snowden and Greenwald & Poitras admitted to
conspiringconsulting before Snowden went to work for Booz Allen.Do we know what David Miranda wore to the airport?
Bruce S
@gbear:
Yeah, like you’ve won me over…GFY!
Belafon
@Bruce S: I brought up GG because you mentioned that you use his presence as basically a filter on whether you pay attention to the comment. I personally think that if he had any other ideals than his own self-promotion, they’ve been hurt by said self-promotion. Having seen his articles over the years, I don’t even consider him a social-libertarian, because I don’t believe you can be one of those any more than you can be a fiscal libertarian.
As to the matter at hand, I personally don’t think that the freakout over the NSA has been worth the effort. I’ve generally waved my hand in a “when you’re dealing with the internets worth of data, or the number of cell phone calls per day, you can’t actually do anything with that amount of data unless you know what you are looking for” kind of way (ok, that’s more or less what I have been saying). Here’s an interesting article that puts numbers to my handwaving. I would have to nearly quote the whole thing in order to pull a piece out, but the summary is that if 1 byte of data were one penny, the internet carries about 180 times the net worth of China and Japan combined per day, and the NSA mishandles about $2500 of that data. It only “sees” about 1.6% of the original amount, and stores about .0025% of that for analysis.
This article finally made me realize what made me feel weird about all the freakout: It’s kind of like spending $200 per day since the birth of Christ to try to explain our debt.
Bruce S
@Miz Conception:
You’ve validated my “piece of shit” perspective on such as yourself with that bit of innane, chidlish, intellectually incompetent garbage.
Yatsuno
@Sherlock Hound: It’s a family business now; there’s a documentary that was released in Japan about his son growing up under his father’s immense shadow and trying to find his own way only to discover he did indeed have the same passion. The old man does keep plugging along.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bruce S: You seem angry.
PsiFighter37
@Bruce S: Perhapd the GGs of the world are needed (I’m not convinced, since this whole Snowden thing seems so blatantly contrived that GG had to have played some premeditated part in it), but he’s not useful at all when it comes to talking about the real issues – all he does is say something sensational (true or not, relevant or not, important or not) and HE becomes the issue.
The man’s a fucking narcissist who probably couldn’t care less about what the outcome of this is. He gets attention, and that’s enough. Some of that attention is invariably in the $$ kind, which means he’s no better than a grifter.
PsiFighter37
@Yatsuno: Without context, I thought you were talking about Jiro (saw the documentary on him last night). Probably not an uncommon thing in Japan…
BruinKid
@cathyx: Uhh…
1) Greenwald distorts the truth
2) Greenwald talks with Ron Paul
The Guardian also had to retract their characterization of what Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) said about Snowden after he had to issue a press release over them misrepresenting his words.
Sherlock Hound
@Yatsuno:
His son did good with “Poppy Hill”. I saw it at a nice little indie theatre just steps from my house!
Walker
@Robert:
Remember, “syfy” is the Polish plural of “syf”, the word for “crap”.
billB
Bruce, thanks for a voice of reason. The big picture is that our Constitution has been tread upon.
History will look upon that and not any of the bit players like GG or ES. Are we as a people going to do anything, or is the brief shining moment of MLK and the voice of Democracy over. Anyone who bitches about GG is a fool, and is grossly missing the point [or a plant].
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Bruce S: So because you’re angry at “a bunch” of unnamed people, you stomp into an unrelated thread with your rage set at 11 and start shootin’ like Yosemite Sam? But you want to set the model of how things should be discussed? You come across as a tad bit hysterical yourself.
Mnemosyne
@srv:
Number 95 is worth it just for Thelma Ritter, one of the all-time great character actresses, because Mankiewicz gives her some classic lines.
“What a story! Everything but the bloodhounds snappin’ at her rear end.”
MikeJ
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Confirmation that anyone who is the first to bring up Greenwald is trolling.
Bruce S
@Belafon:
I don’t use Greenwald as a filter in judging a comment. I use unhinged ad hominem and hysterical characterizations – with next to nothing in terms of a coherent defense of sweeping meta-data filtering programs that are ongoing products of the Bush/Cheney era – to judge the comments I’m referring to. These people know who they are. I’m assuming no one here is so delusional or stupid to think we would be having this discussion without Snowden’s revelations. (Senators who knew about it couldn’t bring it into public discourse.) But there seems to be no one with the guts to simply state, Cheneyesque, “The people shouldn’t know!” and leave it at that. Snowden deserves prosecution, but he also deserves – despite Obama’s punching down at him – the assumption that he did what he did, as does Greenwald, out of concern for constitutionalism and traditional views of civil liberties, a la the ACLU, et al.
Bruce S
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Do I really have to name these folks? They are well known in these comments threads. And I’m not angry – just wanted to lay down some well-deserved invective at their level. Impulsive at worst.
Now I’ve got stuff to do that’s not idle blog chatter.
Mike in NC
@PsiFighter37: When we were in Honolulu I really enjoyed hiking to the top of Diamond Head.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Bruce S: Or… just make your points about the issue at hand without bothering with “punks, cowards and disingenuous fucks” who don’t know how to discuss things calmly and rationally?
gbear
@srv: @Mnemosyne: That movie is just stuffed to the brim with great lines. The women seem to get all the best zingers, but everyone gets their shot. All About Eve is one of my favorite movies to put on when I’m not sure what I want to watch. It’s always fun.
Bruce S
@PsiFighter37:
read “bb” at 66 – the issue is whether what has been revealed is a violation of the constitution or not. You’re welcome to debate that one – comments on Greenwald’s psyche are pretty lame, at best.
fuckwit
@MikeJ: It’s the new Godwin Rule: the Greenwald Rule. As soon as someone mentions Greenwald, the thread is done.
Miz Conception
Sorry if the truth hurts. But they way they launched this story doomed it to being more about the messengers than the message.
I have no patience for anyone (from the right or left) who tries to manufacture news and insists on telling me how important their story is, and how I’m the idiot if I can’t see that. A real journalist presents the facts and trusts them to speak for themselves.
gbear
@MikeJ: Can this be a new Godwin’s Law? Who can we name it after?
Bruce S
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
That’s what a bunch of the commenters here are and deserve – given that in the face of some legitimately large issues Greenwald’s values, psyche, blogging history, place of residence, “grifterness” and moral courage or lack thereof seem to be the important things that they deemed worth questioning.
Now I’ve got to be done with this – it’s not a big deal. More like “just saying…”
Mnemosyne
@Bruce S:
Back in December, we wouldn’t have been discussing gun control if not for the actions of the Sandy Hook shooter, but I hope you’re not going to claim he was some sort of hero for bringing the laxity of our gun laws to the forefront of the public mind.
To me, the true horror of Snowden’s revelations is, “Holy shit, they parked this immature, self-aggrandizing asshole at a console and let him romp through people’s data?”
ETA: And, yes, I’m using an extreme example, but my point is that the person who brings an issue to public attention is not necessarily a hero simply for that fact. Sometimes things come to public attention because of assholes being assholes. Who outside of Florida gave much thought to Stand Your Ground laws before Zimmerman?
Jane2
@JPL: The Guardian also stood behind reporters like Nick Davies, when there was incredible pressure to stop investigating phone hacking. The paper is about the story, not the personality.
MomSense
@PsiFighter37:
I started dreaming of sushi after seeing that documentary. And the fish market with the singing auction–fantastic!
fuckwit
@PsiFighter37: What sucks is that so much of what we consider useful or important has been given to us by narcissists or people with other similarly deep, severely-fucked-up personality flaws. Often times their great gifts were a direct outcome of them wrestling with their own internal demons. I’m not sure if I even need to name names. Pick a hero, pick someone who did anything that changed the world, and if you read their biography you’ll find out what a fuckup they were, how chilling their dark side and personality flaws were. Some kept it hidden better than others. Some were born in an era where it was easier to keep skeletons in their closet, and such things weren’t openly discussed. Others are well known now but just overlooked, often deliberately (i.e. a canonical example being the womanizing of FDR, JFK, MLK, etc.). But unless you’re looking at a very few truly saintly people like Gandhi maybe, most of the big movers and shakers, in politics especially but also in business, the arts, science, anything, were deeply troubled people. All that said, I don’t trust Greenwald or Snowden or their motives, and am not a fanboi of either, but I’m damn glad they brought this issue out to the mainstream consciousness, where it belongs.
Miz Conception
On a lighter note, is anyone else watching Al Jazeera America?
I’m liking the lack of political talking heads and the focus on straight news, but the fact that their evening news anchor is the same guy who narrates the MSNBC Lockup shows has me LOL’ing a bit.
Jane2
@Mnemosyne: Regardless of the messenger, there are certain things that deserve public discussion, and Snowden’s revelations are one of them…Greenwald, Snowden, and all of the other players notwithstanding.
gbear
@fuckwit: Rats. Sorry for the repeat. That’s what I get for not reading all the way down before posting.
fuckwit
@the Conster: Zozobra is a hesher? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/66/Zozobra_Dusk.jpg/450px-Zozobra_Dusk.jpg Based on that hand gesture, looks like he just came back from a Motley Crue concert. Either that or he went to UT.
Belafon
@fuckwit: The longer this goes on, the more I actually feel sorry for Snowden. Yeah, he should get into trouble, mostly to learn a lesson, but he was used by Greenwald, and currently he’s the one paying the price.
Bruce S
@BruinKid:
Read Lewis’ press release. He doesn’t say the Guardian misrepresented or inaccurately quoted his words. He says that “press accounts” of the interview with the Guardian didn’t reflect his “complete opinions.”
There’s a big difference. You’re doing what you accuse the Guardian of doing. Not surprisingly. And if you read what Lewis is quoted as saying and did not retract or characterize as inaccurate quotes, the Guardian characterization was quite fair. This looks like Lewis had some second thoughts, more than that his words were twisted, misquoted or taken out of context.
Ugh…walk away from the screen…
Bruce S
@Mnemosyne:
“two film degrees’
Have you ever made a film? Just curious…
Mnemosyne
@Bruce S:
Not a production major. Critical studies and screenwriting.
ETA: I made short films when required at school, but they were very bad. I don’t have much of a visual sense, which is why I’m a writer.
ETA 2: My current job means I now have an IMDB entry, but you have to wait until waaaaaaaayyyyy at the end of the credits to spot my name in miniature type. The caterers get better billing than my job does.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bruce S: Mnem is right on this. She is way the fuck off base on the broader issue of surveillance and privacy, but her limited point is valid.
FlipYrWhig
Is it that hard to understand that a person can, in response to the same story, choose from among several reactions? For instance “This story sounds like bullshit” or, if you want more nuance, “The person who wrote this story takes leaps at some key points.” These are in fact valid reactions to stories EVEN WHEN the issues raised by the story are important.
Case in point. “Death panels” is a bullshit story. Cost control via assessing the comparative effectiveness of different medical procedures is… sort of an important issue. I don’t remember anyone being all huffy about how focusing on the misleadingness and innuendo of “death panels” was smearing the messenger and we should all thank her for bringing up an important aspect of health care policy.
Another one for you. The IRS auditing conservative groups… Bullshit story. Not because something along those lines wasn’t happening, but because a lot of other stuff was also happening to progressive groups, and because scrutinizing political groups for nonprofit status is actually a good idea. The total effect is to complicate the original story to the point where the polemical intent and effect of the way it was first told became clear.
Now, it is ALSO true that _another_ reaction to the NSA/surveillance stories has been more in the form of “Even if the worst-case scenario described in these stories is happening, I don’t give a shit.” I think a lot of the regulars and front-pagers here who have been venting about other people’s reactions are locking in on that element. I don’t think that’s the dominant element, though. But pretending that it is gives people the chance to call skeptics of any kind “authoritarians” and some such shit.
There really is a difference between calling bullshit on Snowden ans Greenwald (ans Ackerman, Gellman, The Guardian, etc.) and cheering on the NSA set to Maximum Brother. I don’t think it’s a hard difference to perceive. And yet a lot of Juicers are getting a shitload of mileage out of pretending they can’t tell the difference.
Mnemosyne
@Omnes Omnibus:
Well, thanks for that ringing endorsement. ;-p
But, yes, I am trying to make a limited point that a bad messenger can point out an issue just as well as a good messenger — even better, sometimes — so you can’t automatically say that Snowden (or Greenwald) is a hero just because of the information they brought to light.
chopper
@Omnes Omnibus:
but bruce is angry! that should count for something, right?
gwangung
@FlipYrWhig:
It’s not that, but some people not only don’t do nuance well, they don’t WANT to. It’s harder to maintain the outrage otherwise.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mnemosyne: Well, you know I disagree with you on these issues.
Mnemosyne
@Omnes Omnibus:
Or to put it another way, an asshole is just as good of a vehicle for talking about an issue as a saint is. The tricky part comes when the asshole tries to portray himself as a saint when he probably should have just been up-front and said, Yep, I’m the kind of jerkoff that’s been put in charge of top secret, highly confidential information including (potentially) your information. Scared yet?
ETA: Governmental incompetence scares me more than governmental competence. Maybe I just saw Brazil too young.
Mnemosyne
@Omnes Omnibus:
I know. Hence the emoticon.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mnemosyne: People usually want to present themselves in the best light.
Mandalay
@Bruce S:
Incorrect assumption, unfortunately. A few here cogently argue in favor of what the government is up to in general, but much of the discourse is still stuck on accusations that Snowden gave all our secrets to the Russians, or he sold information on his laptops to the Chinese, or he is no MLK, and Greenwald is in the p0rn industry, and doesn’t pay his taxes. Standard smear-the-messenger fare.
And some posters here still argue that the information Snowden has revealed – much of it astonishing to the media, Congress and foreign governments – is just old news. Every fucking week we still have posters here insisting that Snowden has not revealed anything that we didn’t already know.
Just bear in mind that the people who appear to be causing you such frustration are incredibly dumb and/or willfully blind, and calibrate your own reactions accordingly.
FlipYrWhig
@Mnemosyne: Andrew Breitbart would probably say he was attempting to expose corruption and cronyism in the government when he worked up the whole Shirley Sherrod bullshit. The underlying issue is legitimate. But it was not considered inappropriate or angry-making to point out that Breitbart pulled a few fast ones along the way, so that the story initially sounded worse than it turned out to be.
Mike E
@fuckwit: @gbear: You know who else said “Hitler” a lot…
Mike E
Ooh, the rare double post…must be the “H” word.
chopper
@Mandalay:
well duh, this is the Internet. anyone who disagrees with you on anything is dumb and/or willfully blind.
FlipYrWhig
@FlipYrWhig: nor, to finish my thought, was it considered to be the case that mocking Breitbart was equivalent to encouraging reverse racism in the Dept. of Agriculture. Well, some people thought that, but they were crazy wingnuts, so we laughed when they talked about it.
FlipYrWhig
@chopper: Good thing Glenn Greenwald isn’t at all like that. :P
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Mnemosyne:
If only…But then you’d just be talking about enacting better personnel oversight in order to reform the system rather than tearing the system down for good.
I’ve been thinking this over for the past few days. I’m going to throw out a scenario and pose a question to see if I get the answer that I came up with. Here goes:
Let’s say that, somehow or another, we had an general election with similar results to those of 1932. We get a very liberal, progressive, populist government. We put an end to the 4th Amendment abuses of programs such as Stop and Frisk. We end the drug wars, we end the GWOT. We’re at peace with the rest of the world. Who (ETA) inside the US(end edit) would have the most to fear from the NSA?
Narcissus
@Mandalay:
It is old news.
Some of us wonder why it is suddenly so important now simply because we have “confirmation” from Snowden, Greenwald, et al. We’ve had various types of confirmation before.
But then again immigration reform appears to be dead, and the government is more dysfunctional than ever, so I guess that’s how this round of “confirmation” differs from others.
Omnes Omnibus
@chopper: Or the sock puppet of someone else.
Villago Delenda Est
@Jane2:
The problem is the message, in this case, has been overwhelmed by the messengers basically mugging for cameras.
Villago Delenda Est
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
Well, given that the NSA’s charter excludes inside the United States, no one. IF the NSA is held to its charter, that is.
The problem is in the world of communications, especially that of the internet, the boundaries are just not all that brightly illuminated.
Also, these flawed things called humans are involved.
ruemara
@Omnes Omnibus: He seems planty.
Mandalay
@Narcissus:
Er….your link is old news. It is dated June 9, so it is inherently irrelevant.
But if you sincerely believe that Snowden has not revealed any new information then there is probably nothing anyone can do to change your mind.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Villago Delenda Est:
I’d like to say you’re right, but…Follow the money.
Bruce S
@FlipYrWhig:
Uh, no – nothing about that Sherrod story was “legitimate” – it was founded on a lie. The Snowden data is causing extreme discomfort because it’s description of the program is true, whether or not you think Greenwald might be hyperbolic in his implications. You guys keep making my point for me… The funny thing is while I’m kind of sitting the actual debate out, I tend in the direction of being persuaded that this is an essential program that needs more critical oversight, that Snowden belongs in jail AND that the revelations are much healthier than the lies by such as Clapper. The low point for me frankly was the President soiling himself with a cheap response to a dumb press bait about Snowden’s patriotism. It was way too much like a BJ comment for a man of his innate decency.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: Let me ask you a question. Does the old news v. new revelation issue actually matter? It is in the public eye now. So… If you care about it, stop worrying about semantic fights and push for changes. N’est-ce pas?
Mandalay
@FlipYrWhig:
This is a false analogy. When have Snowden or Greenwald ever told whoppers of this magnitude regarding national security?
celticdragonchick
Since it is open thread time, I just wanted to point out that Charles at LGF has front paged one of my posts about the latest pants shitting screed from Rod Dreher…
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42422_Rod_Dreher_Is_Jumping_The_Shark_Again…
Enjoy.
Villago Delenda Est
@Mandalay:
The NSA’s capabilities, and its plans for capabilities, have been out there for at least 20 years. James Bamford was writing about this in the 80’s. The extent that the private sector has both acquiesced and aided the NSA in the expansion of its capabilities is news to some, but not to those who have been paying attention. Just how so much of this is contracted out for private profit feeding from the taxpayer’s purse is underreported, because it’s not in the interest of the Ferengi to make a fuss over it.
So this is not really news. It’s just splashier.
Steve Crickmore
@Mandalay: @ Yes, if the Snowden revelations are such old news to cynics at Balloon Juice, why is the UK going to such astonishing lengths to prevent publication of the contents? The Independent is reporting that Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood was directed by Prime Minister David Cameron to contact the Guardian about the classified material handed over by Edward Snowden. The intention was to spell out the serious consequences of continuing to publish material about UK and US intelligence operations, such as the Snowden revelation that the National Security Agency (NSA) has substantially funded GCHQ, the British Intelligence Sevice, 100 milion pounds over the last three years, to secure access to, and influence over, Britain’s intelligence-gathering programs. You don’t think that the British or American public should know about this, or that journalists should publish it?
chopper
@Mandalay:
I dunno if it rises to the level of ‘death panels’ but snowden’s assertion that he had the authority to wiretap the president was some cask-strength horseshit.
Omnes Omnibus
@Steve Crickmore: Specifics v. generalities.
Mnemosyne
@Mandalay:
Okay, but now you have to state your terms when you’re talking about “revelations.” Do you mean the allegations about domestic spying by the NSA? The revelations about what the exact targets were in China? The revelations about the British government spying on G20 attendees?
Which “revelations” are you discussing right now? Because some of them were more revelatory than others, but you keep acting like they’re all exactly the same and allegations of the NSA spying on US citizens inside the US is exactly the same as revelations of the exact targets of NSA spying in China.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Well, I didn’t really raise that issue; I was directly responding to Bruce’s question in post 71 (I’m assuming no one here is so delusional or stupid to think we would be having this discussion without Snowden’s revelations.). Following that, see post #114 which is sincerely (?) arguing that Snowden’s information is old news.
In the scheme of things nothing anyone posts here will “matter” twelve hours later, but I think you know that anyway, so I am not sure why you raise the issue. But the point is not merely one of semantics; the fact that some folks here truly believe Snowden has told us nothing new is worth bearing in mind.
ruemara
I hate to bring this tired subject up in an open thread, but I think Snowden et al have done more damage to the attempts to reign in the NSA and the security state. Why? For one, the methods taken have turned them into the story. You may say that they were right to run because they broke the law and feared the consequences while viewing the content to be too important to ignore. Fine. But, in particular because Snowden went straight to countries we have a tumultuous relationship with, we’re more focused on that. Because the sooper secret government bringing down stuff that GG keeps waving around is being released by some weird protocol we can’t even get a schedule on, we speculate. Because we have all forgotten what real reporting is, as opposed to punditry we agree with, we’re arguing “might have, could be, could have been, may be used” and that’s not “this is what is, this is what happened”. As a person who has to write articles, I have no patience for that. If I can’t use suppositions when I write about something as banal as available regional produce, then I don’t expect that from people who are savvy and smart and trying to teach me things. I want clear facts, no opinions and if you expect me to take it seriously, don’t act like I should give up thinking on my own and listen to you tell me what could possibly be. GG and Snowden could have done bang up work just with the fact that someone of Snowden’s age and intention could easily get clearance and have access to data, smuggle it the hell out and pass it to anyone. Fucking scary. The outsourcing of analysis and maybe even storage; fucking scary. Snowden is correct on the tech, but in the very broad sense of it. With the right passwords, software and equipment and time, anyone can get into anything, THAT’S THE POINT OF HACKERS. This isn’t new. Privacy is not an absolute on the internet. This is correct. The companies we use for email or isps are using public infrastructure, they connect good, bad and middle ground people to each other and if we want to stay safe, just as cops police the streets (and commit crimes against certain populations), we have cops policing the internet-we just slide our eyes past TOS’ and the obvious fact that our government is watching the internet. It’s easier and Snowden is right on that. We shouldn’t be so oblivious. But he and GG are wrong that it should be their right to hand out classified info, cart it abroad and that the whole process should be laid out publicly for everyone’s approval. It’s national security, not a potluck. We need to have a good look at FISA, we need to repeal these anti-terror laws, we need to know that the meta-data has better security. I agree. But I do not see a discussion of that. I see journalism is some sacrosant occupation that has complete immunity from all laws, national and international, if you have a loud enough fan base. I see that as long as it affects affluent types whose most radical action is posting on message boards-it trumps real civil rights violations. GG is strangely silent on the death-real deaths-of journos in Brazil at the hands of police, yet America is no longer a free country? Bullshit. I don’t even see what the goal is of the secret releasing. If it’s to discuss things, then why the drips and drabs? Why so much personal animus? Why couch everything in potential so that people are discussing that as if it’s real? It’s scary enough as it is, why play to consipracy? People truly believe now that Obama orders drone strikes on American citizens overseas if he wills it. The truth of Americans sitting down in an AQ camp can hardly have expectation of arrest and mirandization as they sit with a group we are in conflict with-that’s lost. We need to stop pandering to conspiracy and deal with the issues. The hyperbole attending this is not good and has taken away from dismantling the security state theatre. I hope we can get something done, but I fear this release has done more harm than good. My opinion, not a fact. Which is all I want in news.
trollhattan
And in raccoon news, we don’t dance with them in Cali, apparently. Sheesh.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/crime/archives/2013/08/alleged-raccoon-skinning-leads-to-arrest-of-sex-offender.html#storylink=cpy
Villago Delenda Est
@ruemara:
The Dark Side of the Moon. Side 2. Track 1.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: Do you care? Come on. The issue is briefly in the public eye. What point do you want to make? I was right or there is a problem? I know my choice.
Mandalay
@chopper:
Well, to be accurate this is what he said:
How do you know that isn’t true? Are you claiming that nobody could wiretap the president or a federal judge, or that it is possible but you are certain that Snowden could not have done it? And how do you know whatever you claim is true?
And can you truly not think of any scenario under the moon and stars where it would be in the interests of national security to be able to wiretap the president or a federal judge?
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Not for the first time, I have no clue what you are talking about. Bruce asked a question, and I gave a relevant answer. Why the fuck are you so uptight, and going on about it? Jesus H Christ.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Villago Delenda Est: @Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
Okay, if I’ve been too cryptic, it’s the people with offshore bank accounts. It’s the exceedingly wealthy people who might use those accounts to launder payoffs to dictators of former S.S.R.s in order to put an end to strikes by the workers in the fossil fuel fields, or in any other spot where people are cutting into profits. You can bet your ass that the NSA has the capabilities to track this shit.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: I am sorry my meaning was not clear. Do you care about the issue or do you care about being proved right?
Anybodybuther2016
@PsiFighter37:
That’s because they’re cowards. They wouldn’t dare confront the teabaggers at all those town halls to fight for the public option, I don’t remember any of them chaining themselves to the whitehouse gates to “force” Bush to recognize gay rights and sure as hell don’t remember people in trusted positions leaking sensitive intel to our enemies and claiming hero status for exposing it.
Bruce S
@Villago Delenda Est:
Strikes me that you can’t make the messenger the main focus of a critique and also complain that the messenger has become the main focus…
Mnemosyne
@Mandalay:
But you’re changing the argument from actual practice to capabilities. The government absolutely has the capability to, say, violate the Third Amendment and forcibly house soldiers in your apartment. But they don’t, because the Third Amendment prevents them from doing it.
Snowden is correct that (assuming he had the correct e-mail address), he could have violated the law and the procedures set up at his workplace and spied on someone without a warrant. But his defenders tend to elide over the whole violating the law part of his scenario.
Several employees at UCLA Medical Center have been fired because they violated HIPAA and released information about famous patients to the press, and UCLA was forced to pay a large fine. Does that mean that we should stop keeping medical records since people who are willing to break the law can get to the information?
Omnes Omnibus
@Anybodybuther2016: or they believe in process.
Steve Crickmore
@Omnes Omnibus: You want specifics about who are the law breakers or who are doing the illegal actions?.
but i’m sure you are with the chorous of many, that politicians in power even conservative ones, if they are on the same page as Obama, until he turns it, should be allowed do pretty much as they please, to some one who is trying to expose and embarrass them, their allies or paymasters.
Mandalay
@ruemara:
This comes up a lot. Given that Snowden did not want to remain here and end up in jail, he had very limited options on which countries he could go to. That speaks of the diplomatic, political and economic power that the USA wields.
I suspect that Snowden had hoped to remain in Hong Kong, and that he does not want to remain in Russia permanently. But where else can he go? The only alternatives I am aware of at the moment are Nicaragua and Venezuela. Would going to either of those countries really change anything?
chopper
@Mandalay:
since when does being the guy who reboots the server when it flips out give you the legal authority to wiretap anybody, much less the president?
I used to work at a credit card company. I had access to everyone’s account info and purchase history and everything, but only as those people called in and needed information. if i decided on a whim to punch in oprah’s name and root through her last statement a flag would go off and I’d get escorted off the premises. it would have been a big violation of the company’s privacy policy. Because I didn’t have the authority to access that shit, and bragging about how I did would have been a huge, stinking line of bullshit.
gwangung
I think you can make a better argument than this. This assumes your conclusion.
Villago Delenda Est
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
Oh, well, yes. The instant the signal leaves the shore, it’s subject, BY CHARTER, to NSA monitoring. You’re quite correct.
Some people DO have things to hide.
Miz Conception
@Bruce S:
OK, I get it. Snowden’s story is true… because SHUT UP, it’s true?
I’ll admit that I’m mostly just fucking with you now, and I’m no Breitbart sympathizer at all, I literally fist-pumped in my car when the news broke that he had died so I’m surely going to hell for that.
But your post that I quoted is pretty much a textbook example of how a person’s feelings about the messenger are going to taint how they accept the veracity of the message. You trust Green/Snow so you accept the message, and folks like me see them as famewhores who wanted to break The Next Big Story, so I mistrust even the facts they cite.
And @ruemara: @ruemara:
ruemara, I agree with pretty much everything you said. What pisses me off most about this story is not as much what the NSA might have been gathering, but that our govt contractors are so incompetent that they couldn’t stop an asswipe like Snowden from getting to data he had no right to access.
Villago Delenda Est
@Bruce S:
I’m not the one jumping up and down in front of the cameras shouting “look at me! look at me!”
That’s Snowden and Greenwald’s department.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Gotcha. I am sympathetic to Bruce’s obvious frustration, and was predisposed to answer his question
since I have raised that issue in various guises several times myself in the past.
That is the best I can do for you, since you appear to be asking in good faith, but I am still unclear about why you care about this specific point so much. Neither his question, nor my response, seemed especially contentious.
Omnes Omnibus
@Steve Crickmore: No, darling, my question was whether the Snowden revelations provided anything that was really new in specifics or if it simply publicized again things that had been published before. But do be an asshole. I think this admin is crap on civil liberties. The thing is, I truly doubt that someone who is better had a chance in hell of being elected. So I had a choice of someone not good on civil liberties but decent on other things or a person not good on civil liberties who sucks on everything else.
Steve Crickmore
or Snowden could have been a legal whistleblower as Obama suggested?
Mandalay
@chopper:
Right, but a credit card company and the NSA are different animals. Also, Snowden explictly said that he would also need a personal email to wiretap the president. Maybe he specifically needed information in that email to be able to do it – who knows?
And you just said yourself that at the credit card company you had access to everyone’s account. So why is it so astounding to you that Snowden would be able to wiretap the president as long as he had authorization?
Again, are you claiming that the NSA is incapable of wiretapping the president, or that Snowden (as opposed to others) was incapable of wiretapping the president? And how do you know?
Your obvious dislike for Snowden has no impact on whether his claim is true or not.
FlipYrWhig
@Bruce S: its description of the program is not fucking true. It is not true that the NSA has unfettered direct access to all our shit. It is bullshit.
@Mandalay: “Direct access” is a steaming load of bullshit. They build a giant database, tie their own hands in various ways to be compliant with the law, then get court orders to query it. AT THAT POINT the criticism, i.e. that it’s too easy to get those orders, that they’re issued in a blanket way rather than a targeted way, etc., becomes valid. That’s the _issue_ Snowden and Greenwald raised, which no one would be talking about if not for them. But that’s not the story they told, at all, ever.
Villago Delenda Est
@Mandalay:
Now who’s being naive, Kay?
Arclite
Love Castle in the Sky, or Laputa as it’s known in Japan. Saw it for the first time in Japan in the 90s, and have watched it several times since then, along with most of Miyazaki’s other movies. Great stuff.
EDIT: Dammit, now I have a hankering to watch Kaze no Tani no Nausicaa (Valley of the Wind)
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Villago Delenda Est:
Yes, they do.
I’ll tell you why I was thinking about this. A few nights ago, someone here(I don’t recall who) made the claim that Greenwald was a liberal, no bones about it. I was in too good a mood to go there at the time, but I couldn’t help but think of GG’s defense of Joshua Foust, a libertarian shill for Chevron, against Mark Ames (if you aren’t familiar with the incident, read this, including the comments). I thought about GG’s weak response to the Citizens United decision. I thought about GG’s prior (and possibly ongoing) relationship with the Koch’s.
Let’s revisit Mnemosyne:
Of course GG could go the route of laying things out without misleading people into thinking there’s evidence of abuse when the evidence shows only that there’s a potential for abuse. He could offer reforms that allow the system to operate within Constitutional boundaries. But he doesn’t do that. He just keeps saying “NSA bad! Kill it!” Why?
Because he isn’t a liberal, that’s why. Foust, Citizens United, Kochs. He’s a shill for oligarchs. Foust, Citizens United. Kochs. Reforms will make the government work better. Foust. Citizens United. Kochs. No government means no intrusion at all. Foust Citizens United. Kochs. He’s the Grover Norquist of civil liberties. Foust. Citizens United. Kochs. He doesn’t want to reform government, he wants to drown it in the tub. Foust. Citizens United. Kochs. Who benefits from that? Foust. Citizens United. Kochs.
FlipYrWhig
@Mandalay: There’s no way he has the “authorities” to do it, insofar as the sense of that word can be understood to mean it would be legal if he did it. He could do it, but it would not be legal without the approval of the FISA Court at some level, and since Trump to the contrary Obama isn’t foreign, the NSA probably shouldn’t be expecting that to be approved. He probably meant “ability” to do it because he’s one of those l33t haXX0rz, or that he could do the hacker equivalent of red-flagging a number or an account. But that’s the thing: if he did it, it wouldn’t be legal, and the NSA does audits and shit as we know, so it would probably come to light, and then he might have w problem. I actually wondered if any of the 2,776 misuses documented in Barton Gellman’s article could have been Snowden fucking around at his desk doing what chopper described above.
Mnemosyne
@Mandalay:
Once again, you’re conflating capability with action. The fact that Snowden had the technical capability to tap into the president’s email doesn’t mean he would not have been fired for doing so without a warrant. If the FISA court had issued a warrant to monitor the President of the United States, that would have been a huge story. If it had happened. Which it did not.
You seem shocked and surprised to find out that your email is not actually secure. I hope you weren’t sending credit card numbers or other confidential information via email up until the Snowden story broke, because even my mom could have told you that email is not secure.
Steve Crickmore
@Omnes Omnibus I think there were lots of new documents that confirmed what many people had foresaw but though widely accepted the doublé standard on spying on foreigners, is not so popular in their countries as it is condoned by Americans The US was supposed to have changed it’s image. You remember Obama wanted to speak even to his enemies. Well if they are planting bugs on everyone but their english speaking allies Austraila, the UK and Canada, maybe that is why? These practices (which have nothing to to with terrorism) by stealth and deceit by the hyperpowers are always a step backwards and they are normallly found out, and now the world wide public once again sees in practice what America means by US exceptionism; they want every country in the world to give up the dissident Snowden because he exposed to the world that America was spying (or checking their emails) on all of them, with the exception of three or four countries.
FlipYrWhig
@Bruce S: To reiterate: the story is causing agitation for two reasons. One is that we hadn’t particularly been thinking about the NSA or surveillance, and now we are. So far so good. Another, a very important reason at that, is that Snowden and Snowden-related stories seem to have a few holes in them, or get told in spun and partial ways. That is in and of itself agitating. And yet if you, or, well, I, get agitated about it, then I get these lectures about how the only important issue is surveillance. OK, fine, surveillance is an important issue. So is not falling for bullshit because it flatters your intelligence and your politics.
FlipYrWhig
@Mnemosyne: to think of it another way, the local cops could knock on your door at any time, dump out your stuff, take all your scotch, and leave without an explanation. They have cars, they have boots, they have guns, they have hands well suited to carrying bottles. They have the capability of doing it to anyone. Are we spending a lot of time being frightened about that? Not really. _Even though_ that _sort_ of thing actually happens to a lot of different people, some of whom end up dead. You can still say that the capability is worrisome, that there are practices in place to make it unlikely, and that cases of abuse should be brought to court and the bastards severely punished. Q.e.d.
Mnemosyne
@Steve Crickmore:
Wait, I’m sorry, you thought the Chinese and the Russians were shocked and astonished to find out the US was spying on them because they had never realized it before?
Was that before or after they read the reports their own spies provided about the US?
And if you think our allies like Germany and France don’t surveil US sources, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn, cheap. They’d be fools not to.
Mandalay
@FlipYrWhig:
Snowden explicitly said that he would need a personal email to authorize him to do it. It is telling that Snowden haters conveniently ignore this everytime the issue comes up.
You are free to have whatever opinion you want about his claim, but unless you work within the relevant part of the NSA you simply don’t know whether he is lying. Your opinion is not an informed opinion.
Omnes Omnibus
@Steve Crickmore: You expected too much,
Mnemosyne
@Mandalay:
A personal e-mail from whom? I was assuming you meant that all he would need was to know what the president’s personal e-mail address was, but obtaining information about a person is not the same as authorization to use that information.
Who would this personal e-mail come from that would authorize Snowden to access the president’s e-mail? Not give him the ability to do it, but give him the legal authority to do it? The people at UCLA who released medical records had the ability to do it, but not the authority, which is why UCLA got in trouble.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Mandalay:
FIFY
Yeah, and if he had a badge, a gun and a human target, he could kill someone. Doesn’t make him a double-ought spy with a license to kill, just a murderer.
Mnemosyne
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
I’m sensing a confusion between “ability” and “authority.” Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you have the proper authorization to do it.
There are lots of things I have the ability to do at work — like, say, place Amazon orders on my boss’s credit card — that would be considered theft if I did them without her authorization, and arguing that I had access to her card wouldn’t do me much good if she didn’t authorize me to make the charge.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Mnemosyne:
I’m not sure it’s confusion as much as it is a refusal to admit to that which is right in front of the face.
ETA: That is that while I disagree with Mandalay a lot, I don’t think that s/he (sorry, don’t know if that’s ever been settled) is stupid.
Yatsuno
@Mnemosyne: I have the capability at my job not only to view but also to adjust any tax record in the IRS database. I don’t. You know why? Because every access to a case is monitored. Yes, every single one. And there would be a massive shitstorm if I accessed a record I had no legitimate business in. There are many other safeguards all across the government. The fact that Snowden took it upon himself to break through those safeguards to prove a point just means he took it upon himself to do so.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Mnemosyne:
Revisiting something (non-Snowden) you mentioned earlier…Screenwriting, huh? Ever do the Channel 101 thing?
Mnemosyne
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
I think I really meant “conflation” — throughout this whole story, Snowden and Greenwald have been conflating what the government has the ability to do and what it actually does when those are actually two different things. The fact that Snowden would have been able to tap into the president’s email doesn’t mean he would have been authorized to do it.
There are a lot of things that the government could do if it were not constrained by law. But it is, and it’s silly to pretend that knowing the president’s personal email address automatically gave Snowden legal authorization to monitor to president’s email.
Weren’t there a few cases in the last election of right-wingers attempting to commit election fraud to prove it could be done, only to be outraged at being arrested for attempting electoral fraud because who knew it was a crime to commit a crime to prove a point? That’s what Snowden is reminding me of.
Mnemosyne
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
Nope — I’ve been concentrating on nonfiction (and non-screenwriting) projects. I just peeked at the website, though, and it’s an interesting concept.
Steve Crickmore
@Mnemosyne:I have heard that refrain all my life at some pretty unethical places I ‘ve worked at, and our excuse for cheating the customer, is all our competitors are doing it , but it doesn’t make it right. We are expected to respect politicians because of the office they hold and listen endlessly to all their platitudes about hope and change, where the real important listening is going on in private conversations recorded in bathrooms..and save our outrage a little incoherently both for tabloid journalists that are hacking private citizen calls and at the same time for have outrage for any turncoat securty oficial and jounalist who dares exposes the shady goings on of our security forces. Wouldn’t be better to refrain from doing all this spying and have straightforward internet café without hidden surveillance or blackmail opportunites?http://euobserver.com/justice/120516 it might even win you know some good diplomacy or further our genuine international friends, how few the US or the UK has left. I know I’m beginning to sound like Obama (the candidate),how boring!.
ruemara
@Mandalay: I see you’ve noticed a tree and missed the forest. He should have stayed put. He could make his case right here and be the face of it, right here.
Mandalay
@Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):
Here are his words:
Now maybe he had intended to say “personal email address” but that isn’t what he said. His wording is odd if he actually meant “email address”, and I had (mis)taken him to be saying that he needed an email authorizing him to do the “wiretap” (which is also an odd term to use for emails).
Regardless, Snowden clarified
Now there is some weasel wording there….if Snowden had the president’s email address then apparently he could have used XKeyscore to access his emails, but whether he would also have got away with unapproved access is another matter.
YMMV but I find his raw claim credible.
(That said, email address is a pretty lame search criterion anyway. It is trivial for a web developer to send emails from “[email protected]”.)
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Mnemosyne:
Gotcha. Yes. Mucho conflation. To the point of disinformation. Par for the course.
@Mnemosyne:
I haven’t taken a peek in a while, but I used to check it out every month while my cousin (J.D. Ryznar, Yacht Rock) was contributing regularly. Not everything there is great, but Dan Harmon has helped teach (television) screenwriting through it. It’s helped a few people get some nice gigs.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Mandalay:
Okay, we’re half way there then.
Is the tool malevolent, or is it the user who’s malevolent?
Mandalay
@ruemara:
Hardly. Had he stayed he would have been in jail and we would not have heard anything from him until his trial. Do you really think he would have been granted bail, and been free to say here what he has been able to say from China and Russia?
It’s fine to argue that you believe he should have stayed, or that he would have shown more “character” by staying, but in terms of getting out his message, his leaving the USA was definitely the right thing to do.
Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again)
@Mandalay:
So there’s no way that he could release the information to journalists and have been back in the USA when the stories began to drop?
bago
@Yatsuno: However the NSA expanded so rapidly that audit trails were deprioritized in the Software Development Lifecycle. You’re a Fed. You have a pension to look forward to. Snowden is a contractor with the keys to the castle.
HeartlandLiberal
@Mnemosyne: We are 67, born and raised in Alabama from 1945 on, left in 1969. Thus, bona fides established, I encourage you to watch Gone with the Wind, and view it as a historical document. The novel the film was based on was incredibly popular. Yes, it romanticizes and glosses over much of the true evil that underlay the causes and consequences of the Civil War. But as an example of American Hollywood film classics from its era, it is virtually without parallel or equal. The only thing that surpasses it is the original Wizard of Oz.
I will say this, however. Last year we decided to watch the film again. It is LONG. We thoroughly enjoyed the first half, all the way through the burning of Atlanta. But about 20 minutes into the second half, we turned to each other, agreed we had just about enough of Scarlett O’Hara’s whining and bitching and selfishness, and really did not give a damn if she ever went hungry again or not, and popped the old VHS tape out of the player and put it back on the shelf to gather dust again.
But, all that aside, it really is a must see film for any student of American cinema.
And as long as we are on historical films from Hollywood, if you have never seen “Cleopatra” with Burton and Taylor, go get a copy and watch it now. The first half is just incredible, the second half really as good, but here, too, by the end, you want Burton’s Mark Antony to just quit whining and bitching and go throw himself on his sword, the sooner the better. But still, one of the greatest historical films ever made, beautiful to watch.
Bruce S
@chopper:
Not angry – mildly repulsed and in a mood of disdain – you’re giving yourself way toouch credit
Bruce S
@Miz Conception: @Miz Conception:
“You trust GreenSnow” Bullshit – read what I wrote. I trust that the program exists essentially as described by virtue of Snowden’s docs, as vetted by both the Guardian & Washington Post.
Apparently you don’t get how small & hysterical the attempts at character assassination appear in response to the larger story
Mnemosyne
@Mandalay:
But what meaning does the raw claim have? Again, to take the example of medical records — another thing that people want to keep very private for very good reasons — employees at your doctor’s office have the raw ability to send your records to anyone they want to send them to, but they don’t, because they would be fired.
So, yes, Snowden probably had the ability to look at anyone’s e-mail because he had been given the tools, but that doesn’t mean that he would not have been fired for doing so because doing so without a warrant is illegal.
Snowden and Greenwald love to rush over the fact that Snowden would have been disciplined and fired for using the system without authorization because they want people like you to panic at the thought that the mere ability exists, even though pretty much any garden-variety hacker has the same ability.
If, as Snowden and Greenwald claim, the only thing preventing the government from monitoring your e-mail is little things like the Constitution, then we may as well give up now, because rules, procedures, and laws are always the only thing standing between us and the government.
chopper
@Mandalay:
that’s meaningless as to whether or not he had the authority to wiretap anyone. you keep confusing ‘ability’ and ‘authority’. i may have the ability to hack into and steal secret CIA documents from a pentagon server, that doesn’t mean i ever had the authority to view them or take them anywhere.
i’m astounded that you keep missing the point. what legal authority did the server monkey have to wiretap anyone?
chopper
@Mandalay:
in short, you’re arguing that snowden could have wiretapped the president if he had authority to do so. what’s the “if” for? snowden said he had that authority.
putting aside the fact that the NSA isn’t going to give wiretapping rights to the IT guy (wiretaps are requested by analysts, not server monkeys or the guy what cleans the toilet at night either), snowden asserted that he had that authority.
you clearly think he had the legal authority to wiretap people. having access to the software used to wiretap people is not the legal authority to do so.
chopper
@Mnemosyne:
even if a warrant was there, i don’t see how snowden would have been necessarily involved. he’s an IT guy, not an analyst.
this is like the custodian at the police station bragging about how he has the authority to knock down your door and enter your house because he has keys to the equipment room where the cops keep the battering ram.
ruemara
@Mandalay: And you’re wrong. Why are you wrong? There’s enough whistleblowers who stayed right here in America who released info and we still heard about it. And again, you’re focusing on the tree, when I’ve been looking at the forest. Snowden and Greenwald are detracting from their supposed goal. Your focus on Snowden is part of the trouble.
Mnemosyne
@ruemara:
Remember when whistleblower Sibel Edmonds was jailed and disappeared?
That’s because it never happened.