[tomelders]

And for what, with surveillance like this, how is there still crime and terrorism?

either it's ineffective or they're overselling the capabilities or they're more interested in dissidents, and judging by the way activists and whistle blowers are being treated, i suspect this is the real reason these systems exist.

EDIT: Or there's some other threat none of us know about and these systems are working perfectly at keeping us all safe... but that's a long shot.

[a3n]

We have never been attacked by space aliens. The system works.

[TeMPOraL]

Actually, we have been. Twice. That you never heard about this is the proof the system works.

(don't ask me how I know about those attacks)

[lttlrck]

You think this means there should be no crime by now? How would that work exactly?

[tomelders]

You're straining my point I feel. I simply think that this sort of surveillance would have made a big impact on the $36 billion drug trade, what with the war on drugs being such a hot topic an all.

But no. It seems drug dealers don't use phones or computers or send mail to communicate with any of the cartels or drug lords we know of, and presumably coordinate their gargantuan logistical operations via telepathy.

Or, the government doesn't deem the drug trade worthy of scrutiny, despite the warnings that it funds terrorism.

[threeseed]

So the government is NOT trying to prevent terrorism but instead has setup these elaborate systems just to prevent activism and whistle blowing. You sure that aliens aren't involved somewhere in there ?

The FACTS are this. The head of the NSA has testified in front of congress that over 50 potential terrorist acts were thwarted because of PRISM since 9/11 including bombing of the NY subways and stock exchange. And there is no evidence that the infrastructure the NSA has is available to every single cop in every town in order to fight crime.

[asynchronous13]

The head of National Intelligence testified in front of congress, too. When asked if they were collecting "any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans", he said, "No.". When the question was repeated, he said, "Not wittingly."

So he outright lied to congress. The information that you claim is a fact is from a source that I no longer believe.

[tomelders]

The only real fact that we have in this context is that the NSA and POUTS are both willing to lie.

[PavlovsCat]

That it's a fact that he said that doesn't make it a fact that it is so.

Oh, and the irony of thinking otherwise and mocking "tinfoil"; I never saw anyone resorting to that who didn't strike me as projecting. It's for example a conspiracy theory to simply note that buildings don't just fall into themselves because of office furniture fires, but it's not a conspiracy theory to believe Saddam is about to unleash WMD without even being able to name what he'd gain from it. It doesn't take genius to note that the deciding factor is not how realistic or dumb fucking stupid something is, or even physically possible for that matter, but wether it goes against or with power.

[dragonwriter]

> It's for example a conspiracy theory to simply note that buildings don't just fall into themselves because of office furniture fires, but it's not a conspiracy theory to believe Saddam is about to unleash WMD without even being able to name what he'd gain from it. It doesn't take genius to note that the deciding factor is not how realistic or dumb fucking stupid something is, or even physically possible for that matter, but wether it goes against or with power.

Well, yeah, the phrase "conspiracy theory" refers to a theory that involves a massive conspiracy among the power elites to keep the truth about some important thing from the public.

So, yeah, the claims about Saddam's WMD's weren't a conspiracy theory, they were just lies by those in power (an accurate description of the nature and motivation of those claims would have been a conspiracy theory, which demonstrates also that "conspiracy theory" and "false" aren't the same thing.)

[PavlovsCat]

One thing I find helpful to keep in mind that if you hang a wall full of analog clocks, they will synchronize. That's just what happens, without any of the clocks ever formulating a plan and the rest agreeing to it.

In the same way, it's just common sense that powerful entities, while also competing with each other, synchronize in keeping the unwashed masses in check. If ants can do it, so can people. That in itself doesn't make any old claim valid, but it means looking out for signs of such "unspoken conspiracy" is simply paying attention instead of acting like a goldfish (by which I don't mean to diss goldfish, just trying to make a point).

I expect snow in winter; that doesn't mean I may claim rain is snow, but it means I wont stare for 30 minutes when it does start snowing, and wonder what all the white stuff is. It also means I sometimes get irritated with people who do.

Yes, there are nutty theories and nutty claims. But they are so in their own right, not "because it's a conspiracy theory". This is exactly as logically valid as saying "that's a Jewish-sounding argument", to Godwin this thing for good measure.

Not that you don't know all of this, I just felt like rambling a bit. HN prides itself in having argument instead of memes, but it's still tinfoil this and tinfoil that without even blushing sometimes, which is the lolcat of the domesticated pseudo-intellectual if you ask me.

[liberte9]

A wall of analog clocks will synchronize? Elaborate?

[PavlovsCat]

I'm sorry, I meant the really old style analog clocks with a pendulum. After a while, they will swing in unison.

http://www.math.kyushu-u.ac.jp/eng/pages/laboratory04.html

Technically, they do "talk" to each other: "the two pendulums would exert a force on each other through minute vibrations in the wall". I would argue humans do the same. And not just "the" powerful either, everybody does. Sometimes for fun, sometimes for gain, sometimes just to be social, but hardly ever with a clearly formulated "plan", or meetings in dimly lit rooms. That's just not necessary when you already noticed you're in agreement with someone about crucial things, simply because you're both doing them.

Also, it's perfectly normal for people to "conspire" to do something without any of them even reflecting on what they're doing individually, much less as a group. It's possible to work in unison towards a common goal without even being consciously aware of that. Kinda like a flock of birds, or pendulum clocks :P