mrt0mat0

i interpreted it the same way. Saying, even if he was tortured, he wouldn't be able to give up access to documentation. I think it's funny that we don't even second thought about the concept of torture. It has become too common.

Edward Snowden makes me proud of my country, and the people that fight for it. But he also makes me ashamed of my Government and the people that hide behind it.

this is why you have to keep mainstream out of technology. We're going to start acting like gossip girl. I've worked in all different fields, and IT has been the most efficient field by far, mostly because of the lack of coddling. I've done the nice thing, and all it does is create more work for me. Being more direct, and yes, rude may not be your favorite way to communicate, but it is direct, and at the end you have no doubts about what needs to be done, and what people consider important. Plus, people are a bit sensitive

i think articles like this are the actual problem. Stop playing the woman card, get a job and shut your mouth. If you don't think you will be treated well because you're a woman, don't work there. I honestly am shocked that women care. This job is saying that there are already women here, which means you have a high chance of getting hired. The more women there, the less sexual harassment in the work place. I'm a white male, so I don't have any cards to play which is good because the game is stupid and i would have folded a long time ago anyway.

this is akin to having to put all of your snail mail in a lock box and set up your own post offices just to get mail to where you want it to, hoping it won't get intercepted along the way. I think the government needs to change, not us.

i agree and disagreee. i think unions were a good idea, but yes, were given too much power. I don't think anyone can doubt that. I actually also agree with you that they don't benefit anyone in a company anymore. we have more regulations and restrictions than we ever did in (someone said this decade) the 1920s and that pretty much makes the unions benefits moot. I've worked in union and non union shops for the auto industry (detroit) and I think that the non union shops ran better, and were better to their employees. I know this is just my experience but i talked to many people that i worked with and they agreed. When your boss has to confirm with the union rep before he can make a change, that's a problem. when you can't fire an incompetent employee because he's union, is wrong. HOWEVER... dangerous jobs should be avoided regardless. there are jobs out there that will be dangerous regardless of regulations, but can be minimized. I don't think it's callous. i think the concept of everyone getting their hands held through the job market is the problem. "you don't want to work hard, no problem, here's your union card." is a concept that i've witnessed and if that fails, there's always unemployment. i'd prefer people felt some sort of drive to improve their living or working conditions. too much coddling. now i'm just ranting. ;)

a lot of my friends knew nothing about the NSA illegalities going on. if they read this, they probably wouldn't get that it's a joke. They'd start searching for the sign up page online... i need new friends

why is everyone under the impression that they don't already have these in a digital format? I mean.... Utah people. i think they have the storage space. you think they're going to store all this data on americans in a digital format, but when it comes to fbi profiles, they store them in a filing cabinet?

i think that it's beyond that. I think that someone suggested the idea of limited elections. People make careers out of being politicians, and that wasn't the intent. If they can only be in a political position for a limited time, they would then be likely to focus on their lives outside of the government, and hopefully consider what the laws they pass will do to their lives after they are done "serving"

thanks. i hope he noticed. i'll mention it to him.

I know this doesn't necessarily belong in THIS article, but it's a general response to a lot of these governmental articles. Where are the debates at in the government? I never see debates taking place in Congress. I hear speeches and "thank yous" and even opinions, but no true debate. I know that I tune in to watch the presidential debates because even though they aren't always held accountable for what they say, there is the opportunity to be. I wish we had more debates like i see in these comments.

I used to be IT manager of a company that wanted to save money and they had me switch them to google business. it was a smooth transition, but the company wanted it's employees (50ish non tech salespeople) to still use Outlook. It was ok. google had an app that allowed this. All was good. I left the company but my friend took my job from me when i left. He now has come across the problem of google not supporting the newest outlook. he gets new computers in and has to downgrade the outlook just to get email to work. headache

i think it's hilarious that we tell other countries that we're a free market but clearly we're not if you have to ask law makers to allow you to do business.

that's cool! i hope they can take a beating though, because they look like a good swing could take them down, and the types of people that will be near the places their marketing have a tendencty to smash things.

i said the same thing... why?

interesting observation. he wasn't mentioned in the original one either, i believe. This could be a good thing though. more whistleblowers. I have a feeling this is all part of the snowden thing though. just my feeling

I agree. I think after 9/11, Americans were emotionally shocked into agreeing to all of this, not thinking what they were giving up. I get that, but it's been over 10 years. We need to snap out of it

So Edward Snowden wasn't bluffing when he said there was more... I'm thinking the government is going to try to step up the efforts to bring him (and this will need to include Greenwald) in to stop it all. This is better than tv!

I actually agree with this argument. I do believe terrorism shouldn't be ignored, but terrorism isn't about killing. it's about terror. we are terrified of terrorists and anything that resembles them. therefore: the terrorists have already won. when we give up our basic civil rights to protect ourselves from them, that's terror. I'm honestly more threatened by my government than terrorists. Terrorists have one thing they can do, kill. They know it will probably cause their death and the death of their citizens. The government can torture you, ruin your life in many ways, and still kill you, and there seems to be no repercussions. Look at the NSA guy that lied on live television under oath, and got caught on it two weeks later. where's the purjery? I fear MY government... that's messed up

I don't know if anyone noticed this, but LinkedIn didn't store their passwords in plain text. they were stored in SHA1, with no salt, which is as close to plain text as you can get without being plain text, but there is a difference :)

by saying "anywhere", aren't you dealing in absolutes?

I may be way off, but I feel that this issue is similar to Debt a few generations ago. they put it off to let the next generations down the road deal with it. Are we not doing the same thing with our civil liberties now? "why worry about it now, it's not a complete catastrophe yet." - narrow minded thinking in my opinion.

"For society to function well, there have to be basic levels of trust and cooperation, a respect for institutions and deference to common procedures." two-way street

why not just flood the NSA with false data? We know what they monitor all data through those big ten companies. Couldn't botnets be configured to just start surfing the internet, maybe doing keywords that would trigger the government monitoring. I assume that enough junk information would fill up the gov. databases that they would have a harder time trying to figure out what's real and what's just useless data.