Hacker News Reader

Comment by mbreese | Hacker News Reader

Which in and of itself is tricky because a slidedeck without the presentation itself is hard to interpret. I don't know how much of the slidedeck is historical vs aspirational. And who made the slides in the first place - did they have a better picture of the program than Snowden?

View on HN

If I'm being asked who I believe more, the person who authored a slide deck selling some kind of surveillance tool to the NSA, or Google's chief architect, their general counsel, and Larry Page, I'm going to go with the Googlers.

"PRISM Collection Manager", "April 2013", "ORCON", "You should use both" and the classification date in relation to the date slide doesn't suggest sales material to me.

Note that the slides have different degrees of redaction across sources. These links should together cover what's available on PRISM.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-n... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-prism-server...

You know what: stipulate that this is an internal presentation by a manager at NSA. My opinion is unchanged about who's more credible.

A collection manager is someone who works with collection management and not necessarily a manager, as in boss.

Exactly. Google at least has some room for transparency in all of this. Not to mention an economic incentive to get an accurate picture of this out in the public.

Google has motivation to bring clarity to their role in all of this. The NSA would rather keep everything secret. I'd believe Google more too...

On what basis? Personality?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com