It asks me to log in with Facebook (oh, the irony). I don't have an FB account, and I suppose I'm not alone among the potential supporters.

Super. I'll just neatly put my name next to a list of people (which the NSA has connected to) who oppose the surveillance state ... and hope I don't get black bagged to your fancy Cuban torture prisons if I ever cross into the USA.

>"and hope I don't get black bagged to your fancy Cuban torture prisons if I ever cross into the USA."

Oh give me a break with the hyperbole. The NSA likely doesn't give a fuck about your activity of pissing and moaning on hacker news.

You mean like (what I would call) illegal detainment and warrantless searches of David House, simply because he is a human rights activist and was raising money for Chelsea Bradley's defense? [1] The pigs stole his laptop and usb drive for more than two months, and took a copy of a supporters list. There was no reason to believe this man had anything to do with Chelsea or was doing anything but raising money for her defense.

[1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/05/govt-agrees-to-de...

People have been detained for pissing and moaning on twitter about the president.

But thanks for being so pleasant about sharing your assumptions.

You mean this? http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/09/12/3521473/man-who-...

...

That's one of many. The first one that comes to my mind is http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2093796/Emily-Buntin...

link?

Can you provide a link to prove this?

And come on, there's no need to be pleasant the umpteenth-thousand time that someone mades a snide, ultra-paranoid remark about America that scrapes the bottom of Godwin's law.

Your manner degenerates any productive conversation. Thank you for reaching Goodwin's law first.

It really doesn't though. The ease of consumption of the political topics is killing the depth of discussion on hackernews and forcing people elsewhere, especially when comments like "wow don't gitmo me bro" are now considered acceptable.

> The NSA likely doesn't give a fuck about your activity of pissing and moaning on hacker news.

Yeah, sure...

"Cyberscare: Ex-NSA chief calls transparency groups, hackers next terrorists"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6171836

If they don't (viewpoint that I agree with), them pissing and moaning on Hacker News is completely pointless.

That doesn't mean it's not fun!

How do you know? or do you mean that you hope the NSA doesn't give a fuck?

If it was only "being smug" that would probably be tolerable. The issue here is actively paying for them to challenge the legality of the NSA's actions - something that would really irritate the NSA, to say the least.

Because you're not dangerous or a threat. Not that I love the idea of someone awkwardly thumbing through content that my mind has created, but why would the NSA care to detain a foreign national over being smug?

"Because you're not dangerous or a threat"

Neither are most (all?) of the people who are detained at the airport, denied entry into America, or otherwise harassed by our government. What exactly is your point?

Stop trying to link the TSA and people denied at the border (there's no inalienable right to people coming into the country) with the NSA. What is your point?

The NSA might be greedy for info, but they're not stupid or act [as an agency] irrationally.

dangerous or a threat to whom exactly? Pray tell, to whom was Dr King a threat [1]?

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.#FBI_Sur...

Well, since you asked... MLK was a threat to capitalism, which many powerful people have a stake in.

I dont know.

That is rather the point though, isn't?

There are many other countries whose authorities would absolutely care to detain foreign nationals over being smug.

What makes you believe that some individuals within the NSA are not of that type of person?

>What makes you believe that some individuals within the NSA are not of that type of person?

Because the NSA just records the information, they don't get to make the call on detention. Gitmo isn't full of people that called the government a bunch of jerks or complained about wiretapping/taxes/etc.

In my humble opinion, the greatest abuse that could come from this wiretapping is much more mundane and offensive - NSA employees cyberstalking and mining data of sexual interests/current partners.

Do you have any idea what you talk about?

gitmo is actually full of people whose crime was to piss someone in off, get handed in for a bounty, then get caught in the middle of Republicans rousing their inbred base by opposing trials.

From the wiki article: "The Center for Policy and Research's 2006 report based on DOD released data, found that most detainees were low-level people who were not affiliated with organizations on U.S. terrorist lists." [1] One example: "The U.S. offered $5,000 per prisoner and distributed leaflets widely in the region. A perfect example would be Adel, a Chinese Uighur and dissident who had been sold to the US by Pakistani bounty hunters"

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp#D...

We have already seen a much greater abuse of this data: cooperation between the NSA and law enforcement agencies, along with a conspiracy to lie to judges, defense attorneys, and even prosecutors about how evidence was collected. If this were limited to spying on former love interests, it would be creepy; "parallel construction" is dangerous.

>We have already seen a much greater abuse of this data: cooperation between the NSA and law enforcement agencies, along with a conspiracy to lie to judges, defense attorneys, and even prosecutors about how evidence was collected.

Link to where this was abused to punish an innocent person?

The right to challenge the evidence is not limited to innocent people. That includes the right to challenge the evidence on constitutional grounds, and includes the right to prevent evidence from being presented if it was improperly or unconstitutionally collected. That includes smoking gun evidence that unambiguously demonstrates that a person committed the crime they are accused of.

It makes no difference whatsoever if these tactics were ever used against an innocent person. These tactics are violations of civil rights across the board. Yes, guilty people have civil rights in this country. No, our justice system is not meant to ensure that every single guilty person is punished for their crimes.

So the NSA will not be the specific people to decide to detain me based on my pissing and moaning? that doesn't sound like much comfort.

I dont know how you know what kinds of people are detained in Gitmo and other more secret locations? I believe that information is specifically kept secret?

EDIT: I am thinking you meant that you hope that Gitmo and other similar but more secret places do not contain people who piss and moan about government surveillance?

You're not required to use Facebook to donate. I just signed up and donated without using Facebook at all.

I wasn't required to login with Facebook. It allowed me to donate anonymously.

I support the cause, as I believe all people should have the right to privacy. However, I'm not American, and we have our own battles. Increasing awareness and visibility however, is something we all can do.

One thing that really puts me off is the emphasis on protecting privacy for american people. Why should privacy be a luxury of people who just happened to be born in a particular piece of land? Why is it ok to spy on everyone else?

Easy enough: only american people (or people in america) enjoy the legal protection of the american constitution. So the only fight that can be fought here is for americans. You'll need to convince your own government to fight for your rights.

please note: IANAL, but that's what I gathered so far.

I'm not sure convincing my government would make any difference since I'm connecting to an american server right now just to type this (I'm also working in the US). It's like saying that if you're connecting to a german server and they're violating your privacy then you should fill a complaint with your own government.

Am I the only one who sees this and thinks, "Why are international borders so important on the Internet?" Maybe we need to be thinking in terms of protocols and designs that do not allow the government to violate privacy rights regardless of where particular computers happen to be located...

The US Constitution doesn't "protect" anyone except insofar as it mandates/prohibits actions of the Federal and State governments, and those mandates/prohibitions apply wherever agents of the state act under constitutional authority.

Bingo. It's amazing how many people don't understand this.

If you have issues with privacy in your own country, take it up with your government. The US Constitution only guarantees rights to US citizens.

It's the US and UK governments mainly that are sh*tting on everyone else's rights within their own country that is the problem. Taking a singular view on this will not solve the problem, your government will just shift the processing to one of their "partner" countries.

In marketing terms, 25% [1] is a great conversion rate for something with non-obvious and far off benefits.

[1] Probably closer to an ordinary 5-15% once page views are factored in

I would happily donate bitcoins.

How am I to know if Lavabit is actually supporting privacy rights in its court case?

Yeah. Fund this project, not some silly thing on Kickstarter.