Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1940 on: January 07, 2017, 07:12:44 PM »
I think they did use propoganda.  Like fake news.

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1941 on: January 07, 2017, 07:25:42 PM »
Assuming the information was presented to them by a foreign agent (even though a lot of it was presented by the US State Department in response to a FOI request, but I guess they're foreign now ¯\_(ツ)_/¯), are you suggesting that foreign individuals should be prohibited from whistleblowing? Why should they withhold information from the general public if said information is true and accurate? Should we expand this to US citizens as well, just so we can make Edward Snowden's case easier? Whistleblowing bad, mainstream media good, right?

Unless there was something illegal in the leaked E-mails, it wasn't whistleblowing, at least not under US law. It was a leak of embarrassing information. Are there any examples in the E-mail leaks of illegal activities taking place?

*

Online Hollocron

  • *
  • Posts: 1580
  • The sloth of swag
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1942 on: January 07, 2017, 11:29:17 PM »
Assuming the information was presented to them by a foreign agent (even though a lot of it was presented by the US State Department in response to a FOI request, but I guess they're foreign now ¯\_(ツ)_/¯), are you suggesting that foreign individuals should be prohibited from whistleblowing? Why should they withhold information from the general public if said information is true and accurate? Should we expand this to US citizens as well, just so we can make Edward Snowden's case easier? Whistleblowing bad, mainstream media good, right?

Unless there was something illegal in the leaked E-mails, it wasn't whistleblowing, at least not under US law. It was a leak of embarrassing information. Are there any examples in the E-mail leaks of illegal activities taking place?

Technically, one does not have to expose illegal information to be considered a whistleblower. Remember Snowden? The NSA wiretapping and surveillance was technically allowed with FISA court warrants, however what he exposed was still highly unethical.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5931
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1943 on: January 08, 2017, 12:35:15 AM »
Yeah, sorry, I don't agree with your understanding of what whistleblowing is under US law, and neither does Wikipedia. I must admit I much prefer the wording of UK law, which focuses on the public interest of the information more than the exact nature thereof, but the two definitions seem largely compatible with one another.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2017, 12:39:06 AM by SexWarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1944 on: January 08, 2017, 01:48:26 AM »
Yeah, sorry, I don't agree with your understanding of what whistleblowing is under US law, and neither does Wikipedia. I must admit I much prefer the wording of UK law, which focuses on the public interest of the information more than the exact nature thereof, but the two definitions seem largely compatible with one another.

It seems your right.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the government and political parties should be withholding information from the public, even thought that is always going to happen. I just do not think that illegal cybersecurity breaches from foreign powers that effect elections should go unpunished. If they do, then the elections just become a sham as nations continue to influence them for their own gain. Had Clinton won, and it turned out a foreign nation had leaked information on Trump to influence voters, I'm sure Trump supporters would also be up in arms about the election results.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2017, 01:50:37 AM by trekky0623 »

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5931
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1945 on: January 08, 2017, 01:57:53 AM »
I just do not think that illegal cybersecurity breaches from foreign powers that effect elections should go unpunished.
Would this be different if the much more likely scenario was true, and the breach came from a hobbyist or a Nigerian prince? Let's say, hypothetically, that he was an American citizen and a committed Democrat, to make things less ambiguous. Should he be punished for releasing information of public interest to the public?

If they do, then the elections just become a sham as nations continue to influence them for their own gain.
Again, America's been doing it for ages.

Had Clinton won, and it turned out a foreign nation had leaked information on Trump to influence voters, I'm sure Trump supporters would also be up in arms about the election results.
Of course, but you most certainly wouldn't see Obama double down on trying to instigate international crises (unsuccessfully, thank fuck) over unsubstantiated allegations.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1946 on: January 08, 2017, 11:39:57 AM »
{stuff directed at me}
I'm not ignoring you, but I have determined that I can not debate with you on this subject, so I conced.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2017, 12:09:40 PM by Lord Dave »

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1947 on: January 08, 2017, 01:44:45 PM »
Would this be different if the much more likely scenario was true, and the breach came from a hobbyist or a Nigerian prince? Let's say, hypothetically, that he was an American citizen and a committed Democrat, to make things less ambiguous. Should he be punished for releasing information of public interest to the public?

Well, what they did would be illegal, first off, and I don't think illegal cybersecurity breaches should go unpunished either just because it happens to help the guy in power.

Again, America's been doing it for ages.

And? That doesn't make it right. I am not defending every action the US makes.

Had Clinton won, and it turned out a foreign nation had leaked information on Trump to influence voters, I'm sure Trump supporters would also be up in arms about the election results.
Of course, but you most certainly wouldn't see Obama double down on trying to instigate international crises (unsuccessfully, thank fuck) over unsubstantiated allegations.

Had Clinton won, and it turned out that, say, China had hacked the Trump campaign and released info to help her, I would place good money on Trump supporters calling for sanctions or some sort of international response at this gross invasion into our electoral process. And given the information Obama presumably has, I don't think his actions are unjustified, and they certainly aren't going to lead to international crises. Again, if Clinton had won due to Chinese espionage, would it be undesirable to expel Chinese diplomats and intelligence workers?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5931
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1948 on: January 08, 2017, 06:41:58 PM »
Well, what they did would be illegal, first off, and I don't think illegal cybersecurity breaches should go unpunished either just because it happens to help the guy in power.
That's great, but please answer the question. I was asking about public interest, not whether or not it helps Trump. Unless you dispute that the DNC's dirt is a matter of public interest (as much as RNC's dirt would be)?

And? That doesn't make it right. I am not defending every action the US makes.
Right, you're doing the same thing Gary was doing earlier. I'm not criticising you, I'm criticising Obama. I'm sure you wouldn't try and undermine the electoral process of a foreign country, but Obama is POTUS.

Had Clinton won, and it turned out that, say, China had hacked the Trump campaign and released info to help her, I would place good money on Trump supporters calling for sanctions or some sort of international response at this gross invasion into our electoral process.
Of course, but once again you changed the subject. I'm not suggesting that Trump supporters wouldn't be up in arms about it, I'm suggesting that Obama wouldn't have done anything about it. He'd probably tell Trump to stop whi- oh wait.

And given the information Obama presumably has, I don't think his actions are unjustified
That's the thing, I'm not willing to take the FBI's word for it. If they throw the public a bone and explain even in the broadest of strokes why they're so unbelievably confident of something that's so difficult to be confident about, I'll be happy to consider it. But this is not something to be presumed.

and they certainly aren't going to lead to international crises.
We have Putin and Netanyahu to thank for that. Again, I'm criticising Obama for trying to start shit, regardless of whether he was competent enough to succeed or not.

Again, if Clinton had won due to Chinese espionage, would it be undesirable to expel Chinese diplomats and intelligence workers?
See, this is where you and I differ on a fundamental level - I struggle to reason about extreme hypotheticals.

Because of my (limited, but probably above average) understanding of cybersec, I find the premise of this question to be so unlikely that I find it very difficult to even think about the consequences. It really reads to me like something along the lines of "If China built a big gravity gun and pulled the moon into the Earth, should we <some sanctions go here>?" I kind of stop reading the sentence halfway and go "whoaa there, slow down". I think I would be on the fence with a slight lean towards "no, whistleblowing should not be treated as anything else when it's performed by a foreign government. Should the information provided prove to be false, fair enough, but otherwise releasing truthful information about wrongdoings in public interest should be protected and encouraged".
« Last Edit: January 08, 2017, 06:46:00 PM by SexWarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1949 on: January 08, 2017, 09:16:11 PM »
That's great, but please answer the question. I was asking about public interest, not whether or not it helps Trump. Unless you dispute that the DNC's dirt is a matter of public interest (as much as RNC's dirt would be)?

You asked if he should be punished, actually, which I answered. The fact that it's a matter of public interest doesn't change that a crime was committed.

Right, you're doing the same thing Gary was doing earlier. I'm not criticising you, I'm criticising Obama. I'm sure you wouldn't try and undermine the electoral process of a foreign country, but Obama is POTUS.

I don't think Obama is defending every action the US has done either. You're trying to appeal to hypocrisy, which I don't deny. The US is a hypocrite, but that doesn't make it wrong in this instance.

Of course, but once again you changed the subject. I'm not suggesting that Trump supporters wouldn't be up in arms about it, I'm suggesting that Obama wouldn't have done anything about it. He'd probably tell Trump to stop whi- oh wait.

He might not, no, because his party won, and that would be bad of him, and Trump supporters would be right in being upset.

We have Putin and Netanyahu to thank for that. Again, I'm criticising Obama for trying to start shit, regardless of whether he was competent enough to succeed or not.

Just a question, but do you criticize Trump for the same things when he, for instance, accepts calls from Taiwan? The US shouldn't just lay down and take whatever foreign governments throw at it.

Again, if Clinton had won due to Chinese espionage, would it be undesirable to expel Chinese diplomats and intelligence workers?
See, this is where you and I differ on a fundamental level - I struggle to reason about extreme hypotheticals.

Because of my (limited, but probably above average) understanding of cybersec, I find the premise of this question to be so unlikely that I find it very difficult to even think about the consequences. It really reads to me like something along the lines of "If China built a big gravity gun and pulled the moon into the Earth, should we <some sanctions go here>?" I kind of stop reading the sentence halfway and go "whoaa there, slow down". I think I would be on the fence with a slight lean towards "no, whistleblowing should not be treated as anything else when it's performed by a foreign government. Should the information provided prove to be false, fair enough, but otherwise releasing truthful information about wrongdoings in public interest should be protected and encouraged".

This just sounds like climate change denialism at this point, to think that foreign espionage to influence an eleciton is the same as a "gravity gun", especially when you yourself admit the US has done the same thing in the past.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5931
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1950 on: January 08, 2017, 09:40:56 PM »
You asked if he should be punished, actually, which I answered. The fact that it's a matter of public interest doesn't change that a crime was committed.
It literally does change it. I asked about whistleblowing (which, by US law, it would be illegal to retaliate against -- not that stuff being illegal has ever stopped Obama before :^)), and your answer conveniently stripped that away. If this makes no functional difference for you, just tell us you think whistleblowing protections should be repealed and be done with it.

I don't think Obama is defending every action the US has done either. You're trying to appeal to hypocrisy, which I don't deny. The US is a hypocrite, but that doesn't make it wrong in this instance.
I'm taking it farther than that. It's not just that the USA is a hypocrite. It's also not just that Obama, personally, is a hypocrite. What makes this truly hilarious is that one of Obama's crowning achievements was undermining and destabilising multiple nations' governments through similar means. It's a particularly amusing sort of hypocrisy.

He might not, no, because his party won, and that would be bad of him, and Trump supporters would be right in being upset.
*shrug* All I can say to that is "nope", to which you can probably not say much more than "nope" back. Agree to disagree?

Just a question, but do you criticize Trump for the same things when he, for instance, accepts calls from Taiwan? The US shouldn't just lay down and take whatever foreign governments throw at it.
Given that one of the key overtones of the Trump campaign was "haha fuck China", it's more a case of him doing exactly what he promised. I strongly suspect that he deliberately set the call up, although my response when that happened was that of enthusiasm, not of criticism.

This just sounds like climate change denialism at this point, to think that foreign espionage to influence an eleciton is the same as a "gravity gun"
Once again you misrepresent what I said. It was an exaggeration meant to illustrate a difference in how we think, and blatantly not a direct comparison - that's why I went for an abstract claim instead of, say, nukes. Looks like it worked too well - we've unearthed a whole bunch of differences, just not the right one.

Ultimately, your position is religious. There exists something you cannot see, touch, experience, or perceive in any way. BUT IT EXISTS I PROMISE!! It's bad and dangerous to disbelieve it, and it's unfair to demand proof. This magical thing has achieved things that have previously been thought impossible, and I can reassure you with great confidence that it's all totally true!

especially when you yourself admit the US has done the same thing in the past.
Yes, the fact that we've observed similar things in the past gives us something tangible to compare this claim against. It is perhaps the most damning piece of evidence suggesting that American intelligence agencies are simply lying. The very important thing to learn from this precedent is that we only know that it happened because the US openly admits their meddling and takes pride in it. There was no mysterious totally-true-but-plz-no-peeking proof that the victims of US attacks held. And no, American cybersec experts aren't far enough ahead of the rest of the world to explain this anomaly away.

To be clear: It's completely possible that the FBI/CIA/NSA have achieved a previously unprecedented feat while simultaneously failing spectacularly to disseminate it to the general public; but it's an unintuitive interpretation of the situation which goes against the evidence we do have at our disposal.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2017, 10:04:58 PM by SexWarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!

Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1951 on: January 08, 2017, 09:49:51 PM »
It literally does change it. I asked about whistleblowing (which, by US law, it would be illegal to retaliate against -- not that stuff being illegal has ever stopped Obama before :^)), and your answer conveniently stripped that away. If this makes no functional difference for you, just tell us you think whistleblowing protections should be repealed and be done with it.

Whistleblowing has to be done through the correct channels. It does not mean unilaterally hacking into a computer and leaking files to the public because you believe something wrong was done.

The rest of the post I think I agree with. The US is hypocritical, and we have to agree to disagree about Trump supporter reactions to a hypothetical.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5931
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: 2016 US Presidential Race
« Reply #1952 on: January 08, 2017, 11:01:55 PM »
Whistleblowing has to be done through the correct channels. It does not mean unilaterally hacking into a computer and leaking files to the public because you believe something wrong was done.
Fair enough, I suppose thanks to my favourite president we now have the precedent of Snowden. Oh well, one more thing to add to Obama's legacy, here's hoping it can be undone.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!