- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: It just seems like everyone is missing the point regarding leaks, anonymous sources, etc
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:46 pm to Y.A. Tittle
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:46 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Did you read the rest? What if that was the clearly understood ethical expectation?
Yeah.
But, that assumes that all information is 100% provable
Or, worse. What happens when you release true info that at some point, gets rebutted by shaky info and people assume you lied?
Does the reporter out you? Then, later, it turns out you're true but whoops, too late?
0
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:47 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Funny how nobody questions it when the unnamed sources are talking about Russell Wilson's leadership or what zany thing LeBron asked for to go back to Cleveland
people question unnamed sources in areas outside of politics all the time. Not sure what you are talking about.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:49 pm to GumboPot
quote:I know.
"Sauces" started on the TD coaching changes board.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:51 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
"Hey........how many frickers are NOT leaking but instead just using the information for their own personal ends"?
This. Just think of how much evil could be done and we'd have no idea. Just think about 1 rogue employee being able to do the following:
Listen in on phone calls and emails to steal trade secrets from companies to sell to foreign powers.
Obtain incriminating photos or phone logs to use to blackmail ex-lovers
Obtain un-PC text messages to get a rival fired from their job
Use surveillance camera and GPS info to notify criminals of the whereabouts of key witnesses
Use resources to gather information on possibly illegal, but common and inadvertent, actions of people to be prosecuted based on political or religious affiliation.
This post was edited on 6/9/17 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:54 pm to kingbob
quote:
This. Just think of how much evil could be done and we'd have no idea. Just think about 1 rogue employee being able to do the following
If some random 25 year old nobody can reach in and pull out info she feels is harmful to the POTUS, it seems self explanatory that there are people in the system who can do the same to
Judges
Congressman
Senators
Juries
etc
etc
It really seems obtuse to not operate under the assumption that this has happened multiple times.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:55 pm to ShortyRob
nice post.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:58 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
It really seems obtuse to not operate under the assumption that this has happened multiple times.
In my opinion, this is the real purpose of the Patriot Act. It is to give the political establishment access to the skeletons of all those who oppose them and the ability to expose those skeletons at any time. This gives them leverage to silence dissent, destroy political rivals, and hassle anyone who starts speaking out too loudly with IRS audits and criminal charges over innocuous things.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 1:59 pm to ShortyRob
quote:That hurt baw
ShortyRob
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:09 pm to kingbob
quote:
In my opinion, this is the real purpose of the Patriot Act. It is to give the political establishment access to the skeletons of all those who oppose them and the ability to expose those skeletons at any time. This gives them leverage to silence dissent, destroy political rivals, and hassle anyone who starts speaking out too loudly with IRS audits and criminal charges over innocuous things.
I'm frankly stunned that this isn't obvious to everyone. Even if it wasn't the INTENDED purpose, it's the OBVIOUS result that is impossible to avoid. The temptation is just too great to use it.
A lot of Americans have the whole "If you've done nothing wrong" mindset. But that's stupid.
VERY few people can pass the "I know everything you've ever said on the internet, phone, email, govt docs etc etc test.
And, it doesn't even have to be ACTUAL bad stuff. It can just be presented in such a way that looks bad.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:13 pm to ShortyRob
I would argue the point is that almost 2/3 of America thinks he is a liar - because he is a liar.
He has not yet faced a global crisis; but when he announces that NK launched a missile that landed 100 miles from Hawaii, who will actually believe him? Some may think he's exaggerating. Some will think he's making the whole thing up to deflect from his current troubles. How secure is america when that situation arises?
THAT is the point.
He has not yet faced a global crisis; but when he announces that NK launched a missile that landed 100 miles from Hawaii, who will actually believe him? Some may think he's exaggerating. Some will think he's making the whole thing up to deflect from his current troubles. How secure is america when that situation arises?
THAT is the point.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:14 pm to a want
quote:
I would argue the point is that almost 2/3 of America thinks he is a liar - because he is a liar.
What exactly does that have to do with my OP?
Did you just read the title and nothing else? I mean, are you THAT fricking much of a lazy hack?
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:15 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
And, it doesn't even have to be ACTUAL bad stuff. It can just be presented in such a way that looks bad.
Add in the fact that the average American unknowingly commits 3 felonies PER DAY, there are so many laws that the government has leverage on literally EVERYONE! There is not a single person in this country who could not be fined or jailed tomorrow for SOMETHING they did during the statute of limitations if someone is dedicated to finding it and pursuing charges.
That's what the surveillance state is all about. It is about giving those who have enemies access to every potential arrow with which to slay those enemies. When the enemies of the entrenched establishment is the American people, those arrows are inevitable turned against all of us, and that should be a rallying call to dismantle the leviathan that stands solely to exploit us all for the gain of the few.
This post was edited on 6/9/17 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:18 pm to kingbob
quote:
That's what the surveillance state is all about. It is about giving those who have enemies access to every potential arrow with which to slay those enemies.
A want's response is a classic example of the point of my OP.
Americans are COMPLETLEY OK with this surveillance state because they all perceive they might be able to use it to their political advantage and they completely fail to see that it goes FAR beyond politics.
Hell, the political angle of it is a tiny slice of the pie.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:22 pm to ShortyRob
Imagine having the power to do the following to anyone:
destroy their career, jail them, fine them into bankruptcy, seize all of their assets, destroy their business, destroy their marriage, use secrets for insider trading, commit identity theft, etc. Now imagine that power in the hands of someone fully unaccountable to anyone with no one having any knowledge that they're doing that.
We have literally tens of thousands of people employed by the federal government entrusted with that kind of power with exactly zero accountability. That should be concerning.
destroy their career, jail them, fine them into bankruptcy, seize all of their assets, destroy their business, destroy their marriage, use secrets for insider trading, commit identity theft, etc. Now imagine that power in the hands of someone fully unaccountable to anyone with no one having any knowledge that they're doing that.
We have literally tens of thousands of people employed by the federal government entrusted with that kind of power with exactly zero accountability. That should be concerning.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:33 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
But, that' misses the whole fricking point. The POINT is, we already knew we were living in an ever more grandiose surveillance state and now, it's pretty much irrefutable that the data collected is NOT exactly safe from whackos who would misuse it.
People want to talk about Snowden, this Reality chick, and anonymous people leaking classified info? Silliness. I want to talk about the OBVIOUS fact that if we have people who are able to access the info that can't be trusted not to go public with stuff, we also have people with access to this information not afraid to use it in ways we'll never hear about.
How many congressman, judges, Senators, businessmen, etc etc have received calls from people only too happy to use information resulting from the surveillance state? I mean, surely the people of this board don't believe that the only people in intel agencies willing to misuse info are people who leak political shite to the press! LOL
Good point...it has been made before during the Snowden leaks.
quote:
hen a reporter uses an anonymous source, we are unable to vet the source. We can't evaluate if the source is someone we should pay a lot of attention to or just a little. The ONLY way we can evaluate that is thru the lens of the reporter. So, we aren't really evaluating the source's credibility. We are evaluating the writer's credibility. Did that writer double check the info? Was the info even checkable? Stuff like that.
I think you need to distinguish between leaks like Snowden and Reality who leaked actual information about gov intel, programs etc and leaks where someone inside an agency tells a reporter Trump is mad.
Not always, but often with a real leak of information such as Snowden and this cuckoo the reporter usually calls the "owner" of the leaked information and asks for comments before publishing - it's a way of verifying. Then the info is public and the light of day often reveals the veracity.
I prefer a world where leaks happen to one where they don't...it's not going to be perfect but I think it's a way to keep the gov honest.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:39 pm to kingbob
quote:
We have literally tens of thousands of people employed by the federal government entrusted with that kind of power with exactly zero accountability. That should be concerning.
It's probably unfair to say "exactly zero accountability" but, I think it's pretty fricking clear, we don't have a handle on it!
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:43 pm to cwill
quote:I think you need to recognize that there is an entire OCEAN of categories of information that lie between "Trump is mad" and "Released critical national security information". It is THAT information that I'm talking about.
I think you need to distinguish between leaks like Snowden and Reality who leaked actual information about gov intel, programs etc and leaks where someone inside an agency tells a reporter Trump is mad.
quote:The problem is, I'm expected to trust the same person that I watched nearly curl up in a ball of tears in early November to handle vetting information they get in a manner that is acceptable.
Not always, but often with a real leak of information such as Snowden and this cuckoo the reporter usually calls the "owner" of the leaked information and asks for comments before publishing - it's a way of verifying. Then the info is public and the light of day often reveals the veracity.
That seems a pretty big reach.
quote:
I prefer a world where leaks happen to one where they don't...it's not going to be perfect but I think it's a way to keep the gov honest.
I do too.
Two different issues really.
1)I'm talking about the reality that in the absence of knowing who the leaker is, the ONLY way to judge veracity is to evaluate the person who took the leak.
2)The sheer volume of leaks of information that is clearly derived from surveillance goes to the other point I'm speaking about in this thread.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:49 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
1)I'm talking about the reality that in the absence of knowing who the leaker is, the ONLY way to judge veracity is to evaluate the person who took the leak.
I think that's a sliding scale...if leaked to infowars I would doubt it almost without review because anyone with real, critical information would never go to a kook, conspiracy site. I tend to let the information and the reaction to that information and the reporting done on it thereafter by other news agencies steer my evaluation when the leak info is revealed by a major news source.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:51 pm to cwill
quote:True.
I think that's a sliding scale...if leaked to infowars I would doubt it almost without review because anyone with real, critical information would never go to a kook, conspiracy site
But, I'm just going to be blunt here.
If you're leaking to one of the election night criers, you should be held in about the same regard.
quote:Half the time the "reporting by other outlets" amounts to restating the information from the first.
I tend to let the information and the reaction to that information and the reporting done on it thereafter by other news agencies steer my evaluation when the leak info is revealed by a major news source.
It isn't like they ALL have their own cool source of the same info.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 2:53 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
If you're leaking to one of the election night criers, you should be held in about the same regard.
And here. I'll just be blunt here.
In any large organization, there are going to be people from a wide spectrum of political viewpoints.
When you see "a source at the X...." and X is a place with 5000 employees, how in the frick do we even know the source is in a position to be worth a shite?
And, here. Let's just get real. At this point, how do you even know for certain there's a source?
I mean, let's not pretend that these supposedly respectable outlets haven't been busted on that before.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News