” “Every person remembers some moment in their life where they witnessed some injustice, big or small, and looked away, because the consequences of intervening seemed too intimidating,” former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden tells Vanity Fair about his motivation for leaking tens of thousands of secret documents. “But there’s a limit to the amount of incivility and inequality and inhumanity that each individual can tolerate. I crossed that line. And I’m no longer alone.”
Snowden’s extensive response is part of a 20,000-word narrative in Vanity Fair’s May issue, by special correspondent Bryan Burrough and contributing editors Suzanna Andrews and Sarah Ellison. The article is the first comprehensive account—bolstered by interviews with dozens of key players—providing an inside look at how a geeky dropout from the Maryland suburbs found himself alone in a Hong Kong hotel room, releasing some of America’s most carefully guarded secrets to the world.
Snowden writes to Vanity Fair about the N.S.A.’s allegations that he never filed a formal complaint (and directly challenges it to deny he contacted internal oversight); about why he’s not a spy; about what he calls the “post-terror generation”’s views on defending the Constitution; about the crucial ways in which he differs from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange; about his amusement at being labeled a right-winger; and more.
Among the highlights of Snowden’s response: “
Read the interview at Vanity Fair
” DuckDuckGo bills itself as “the search engine that doesn’t track you”. After the revelations in the US National Security Agency files, that sounds tempting.
Named after the playground game duck duck goose, the site is not just banking on the support of people paranoid about GCHQ and the NSA. Its founder, Gabriel Weinberg, argues that privacy makes the web search better, not worse. Since it doesn’t store your previous searches, it does not and cannot present personalized search results. That frees users from the filter bubble – the fear that, as search results are increasingly personalized, they are less likely to be presented with information that challenges their existing ideas.
It also means that DuckDuckGo is forced to keep its focus purely on search. With no stores or data to tap, it cannot become an advertising behemoth, it has no motivation to start trying to build a social network and it doesn’t get anything out of scanning your emails to create a personal profile.
Having answered one billion queries in 2013 alone, DuckDuckGo is on the rise. We asked Weinberg about his website’s journey.”
Read more about private , or more private anyway , web browsing with DuckDuckGo here .
” Millions of individuals who recently entrusted personal, medical, and financial information to the federal government while enrolling in Obamacare via Healthcare.gov may find a recent trend reported by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) rather unsettling. The number of security breaches involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) at federal agencies more than doubled in recent years, increasing from 10,481 in 2009 to 25,566 in 2013. Perhaps even more disturbing, the GOA found that “none of the seven agencies [in a related study] consistently documented lessons learned from PII breaches.”
A graph accompanying the GAO report illustrates the dramatic and consistent upward trend in PII-related breaches over the last several years”
See the Weekly Standard for more . We find this disturbing trend to be remarkably suspicious , yet hardly surprising given the current administration’s total lack of regard for our basic Constitutional protections .
” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) received a warm welcome from a packed audience at the University of California-Berkeley on Wednesday afternoon, as he addressed the Berkeley Forum at International House.
Paul’s message of investigating and restraining the Central Intelligence Agency and other security arms of the federal government went down well on a campus that was the core of the anti-war movement in the Vietnam era. Yet there were quite a few conservative Republicans in the audience as well, on hand to hear one of their party’s new leaders–and, many expect, a likely contender for the presidential nomination in 2016.
” Maybe,” Paul said, when asked by the moderator whether he would run for president.”
Breitbart has more and we are pleased to present Senator Paul’s address in the official Berkeley version above and an unedited version from an audience member below .
” For Sen. Dianne Feinstein, regulation of unmanned aerial vehicles has gotten personal.
In an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes” that aired on Sunday night, the California Democrat said a drone spied into the window of her home during a protest outside her house, and that privacy concerns for the technology were “major.”
“ I’m in my home and there’s a demonstration out front, and I go to peek out the window and there’s a drone facing me,” she recalled.
Demonstrators from Code Pink who were protesting government surveillance at the time, said the device was merely a toy helicopter, but Feinstein used the instance to sound off about the importance of controlling the technology through government regulation.”
We can be sure that the authoritarian proclivities of Madam Feinstein preclude any hindrance of State operated drones and confine themselves to the use of the technology by private citizens only . Continue reading
” Mark Zuckerberg is not happy with the way the American government conducts surveillance on the Internet, so much so that he called President Obama to complain about it and then wrote a post Thursday on Facebook to vent his frustration. “The U.S. government should be the champion for the internet, not a threat,” he said.
But it is worth noting that Mr. Zuckerberg never mentions the word “privacy” in his post.”
All appearances to the contrary , Zuckerberg’s concerns lie with profit not privacy . The man cares not a whit for your privacy or anyone else’s . He only cares that the NSA surveillance has unmasked exactly how co-operative the web giants have been with the Feds and so is interfering with their bottom lines . Typical hypocrisy .
” In other words, Mr. Zuckerberg has not really transformed into an advocate for greater privacy. He is just protecting the interests of his company.”
Read the entire Times piece