Government Surveillance: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

That is a good question because it comes up a lot and people start explaining ideologies rather than showing real world examples. I believe John Oliver provided the best example when he interviewed Edward Snowden. John walked around town asking people how they felt about the government monitoring their phone communications, text messages, etc... People were mostly indifferent until he rephrased the question asking if it was alright if someone was monitoring the pictures and videos (sexting) between they and their spouse/partner. When that topic came up, the nearly unanimous answer is that they would be furious if someone was watching their sexting content. [1] So in summary, I believe the answer is to find something that people actually wish to keep private when discussing it. [1] - ▶ this video

Last Week Tonight did this bit brilliantly when they interviewed Edward Snowden - ▶ this video - in essence we need to get dramatically better at telling this story so everyone understands.

"(Likely an overabundance of trust or a lack of understanding of all the real implications and potential for exploit.)" I think that's a lot of it. People aren't trading privacy for convenience... people are taking convenience. It makes a lot more sense when you think of it that way. You can do an experiment yourself to show this; take 5 non-techie/non-HN people and explain to them exactly what this thing does and how it works. You'll find people's attitudes change, rationally or otherwise, which I present only as evidence that they haven't thought about this and incorporated it into their worldview, not that they are right or wrong. Or watch this: ▶ this video John Oliver on Government Surveillance. Perhaps ironically, mere nude photos of myself aren't really what I'm worried about. I mean, I wouldn't be happy if they got out, and since I'm not in the habit of texting them about I have questions about where they came from, but by and large, nobody would care and it would affect my life only briefly. I'm far more worried about the government scraping everybody's postings on Facebook and building up a GoodThink/BadThink database, which I know basically already exists, because our political parties (let alone our intelligence community) build voter databases that are probably at least 90% accurate on that front. A concrete list of Everyone Who Disagrees With Me, one accurate enough for someone powerful to decide the rest of the inaccuracy is acceptable collateral damage, is scary.

John Oliver's "Dick Pics" seem like a pretty good argument that can reach average citizens. ▶ this video

This paints an unfair portrait of the average American. It isn't that they don't care, they just aren't as technologically savvy as this audience. Take the Edward Snowden leaks. John Oliver did a wonderful segment interviewing people about NSA surveillance.[1] If you ask an average citizen if they are for or against "Section 215" or "X-Keyscore", they'll fall back on vague national security scare quotes. If you ask them if the government should see your dick-pics, then they start to understand what is at stake. In many people's minds, what the FBI is saying makes sense. What's the big deal? They want to access a single iPhone from a terrorist . Teach people that it means their nude photos could be accessed by any law enforcement official and I think you'll find that people really do care. [1]: ▶ this video

"it's debatable whether the USA as a whole got a positive outcome from his actions." I could make the case that while what Snowden did was heroic, and praiseworthy in a just and educated nation, the US is ultimately neither a just nor educated nation, and too little changed as a result of his whistleblowing. Go ask 100 truly random people what they think of Snowden's revelations and you may find yourself quite disappointed. John Oliver did an episode on this and it was more than a little depressing: ▶ this video

You can tilt any poll any way you want with exaggerated language. Surely you know this, and it's why you biased the question the way you did. > Should phone carriers be required to divulge text messages to law enforcement who have obtained a proper court order? vs. > Should government workers be allowed to spy on your dick pics? ▶ this video

> And so what if the government looks at my holiday pictures, they think. Holiday pics, sure. Dick pics? Joe public doesn't like that one! ▶ this video

Public knowledge and widely known are two different things. There are things that everyone could know (A), things that everyone knows (B), and things that everyone knows that everyone knows[3] (C). These are distinct sets. The fact that direct access to FAANG servers[2] is granted without a warrant to the US government was widely publicized, yet most people still don't realize that the NSA is regularly looking at naked pictures of Americans stored in cloud services[1]. You might even be aware of this, but have missed the (reported at the same time) fact that this is the #1 source, the most-often used, in US intelligence reports. It's where they do most of their spying. People haven't moved on to C about the non-privacy of gmail, for instance. Everyone savvy knows that gmail is compromised, yet because not everyone knows that everyone knows that, it's still pretended that your email box is private. Publicity is helpful. Most people are too busy to realize what is being done by their military in their name. Repetition helps. [1]: ▶ this video [2]: FISA Amendments Act Section 702, internal codename PRISM, reported in FAANG transparency reports as FISA orders [3]: link and link

John Oliver did an episode on surveillance where he actually interviewed Snowden as well as "people on the street". Although most had no idea who Snowden was, there was (among the people shown in his interviews - could have been selectively chosen) a heightened awareness of the surveillance state. ▶ this video

Probably because it's more concrete than some abstract threat like the ad industry building a dossier on you, or the NSA spying on your web browsing habits and phone records. John Oliver uses this to great effect when talking about NSA surveillance: ▶ this video

have you seen jon oliver trying to interview him in moscow [0]? i think it's naive to believe his actions aren't strictly controlled and approved by russia's intelligence agency. [0] ▶ this video