Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive | Hacker News Reader

Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive

medium.com

Greenwald's response: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1106195880393297920

The author has published a follow-up article: “The Intercept’s editors couldn’t figure out why these leaked emails are important. Can you?”. [1]

[1] https://medium.com/@barrettbrown/the-intercepts-editors-coul...

I wonder if he's physically unable to write without being condescending. It really hurts the message.

Can someone explain this with context? I am not informed enough about this to understand, I assume others are experiencing something similar.

This article would be a lot better if it started with the introduction: TI decides to end funding for work on the Snowden archive to cut expenditures. Laura Poitras is very angry about this, here are her thoughts.

Anyone have a copy of the full archive? Will it live on at a torrent file somewhere?

Read Greenwald’s response, he specifically addressed this point.

To save you time - no because Snowden didn’t want it to be published in full. Ever.

Yes. He wanted journalists to select which documents were in the public's interest, and only those to be released.

No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.

Why put so much effort into protecting the privacy of people dead set on killing it for everyone else?

> Why put so much effort into protecting people dead set on killing everyone else?

FTFY ;)

How about: because Snowden isn't interested in murder.

What if the documents contained the identity of an American mole in ISIS, would you release that? Would you watch the execution video when they chop off his head because you blew his cover?

What if the documents contained details of a terrorist plot that the NSA has been tracking, would you release that? Would you apologize to the families of the dead because you tipped off the terrorists on how to avoid law enforcement?

That's why Snowden entrusted the documents to journalists that he drilled in security practices, and that's why he gives the Feds an opportunity to comment on or object to each new document release: there is some stuff that rightly deserves to be kept secret.

Just because the classification system is regularly abused doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.

     >...could literally get people killed if released.

Yes, that and the fact that the Snowden documents have served their purpose.

We now know how fucking far we actually are from being a free country and that we can't trust the people who operate the security apparatus of the USA. That's the key "take-away". The actual content of their dowdy-looking power point slides from 2013 is less important as time goes on.

Whatever Snowden got, it's just a snapshot in time. The projects, I'm sure, have since moved on. The acronyms changed, and I think it's fair to assume that they're exploring new initiatives and pushing towards new frontiers for violating privacy, freedom and law.

This was nonsense. thanks for correcting me.

>Just kidding! It’s only me, Barrett Brown

that's because it's actually (if I read it correctly) satire. That's an email from Barrett Brown speaking in the voice of Michael Bloom; later in the message he explains:

  Just kidding! It’s only me, Barrett Brown; I used to
  write that column for Intercept about comical prison
  stuff, and then later I got mad and quit, as is my custom.

My opinion of the whole Intercept operation/Snowden affair: "…When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com