General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow a Wild Theoretical Claim About the NSA Magically Transformed Into Factual Reality
** Interesting breakdown of how information is distorted by news sources quoting one another a la the children's game "telephone"
http://thedailybanter.com/2013/07/how-a-wild-theoretical-claim-about-the-nsa-transformed-into-factual-reality/
For the last month or so, weve talked a lot about how sloppy, scattered reporting has served to mislead readers perhaps deliberately about the details of various bombshell National Security Agency (NSA) stories presented by Glenn Greenwald and others. Outrage-porn and link-bait has on more than one occasion miraculously transformed into factual reality. The following is a case study in how it happens.
On Thursday, I watched a video monologue by Cenk Uygur via the following tweet:
Millions Of Gigabytes Collected Daily UNDERWATER By US, England http://bit.ly/1aToyme via @CenkUygur
Theres one major problem with Cenks big screamer headline: its simply incorrect.
----snip
Based on the post by The Atlantic, Cenk reported that, yes, the GCHQ taps into underwater cables and subsequently shares its intelligence with NSA
Nevertheless, Cenks monologue finally arrived at the content of his headline: the millions of gigabytes of information thats evidently being collected daily. Again, drawn from The Atlantics article, Cenk said that this operation, called Tempora, is literally gathering 21 million gigabytes, or 21 petabytes of data per day. Thats 21 times more data than the entire Netflix streaming library. Per day. Heres The Atlantic:
----
[T]he tapped cables had the capacity, in theory, to deliver more than 21 petabytes a day
In theory. The entire 21 million gigabytes line was drawn from a theoretical notion presented by the five reporters who authored the article for The Guardian. Put another way, no! NSA and GCHQ are absolutely not gathering and/or analyzing that much data per day.
This entirely invalidates Cenks screamer headline and the central focus of his rant. But it grew out of a wild, theoretical assertion by The Guardian, which was later transformed into a fact by the New Scientist and repeated by The Atlantic. Had any of the subsequent writers bothered to read the original piece in The Guardian they wouldve discovered that it was a theoretical claim not a statement of fact.
To recap the Telephone game:
ret5hd
(20,564 posts)Not the fact of capturing every byte, but the mistake concerning the number of bytes.
flamingdem
(39,341 posts)or knowing what the 'ell they're talking about when it comes to technology
---- and of course Greenwald and Co. are using the chaos to promote themselves
This Telephone game, sparked by coy, agenda-driven articles by Greenwald and his colleagues at The Guardian, has occurred throughout the entirety of the Snowden/NSA saga. It happened at the very beginning with the deceptive direct access claim and it continues today. Its become so pervasive that elected members of Congress are behaving almost as if theyd never heard about NSA surveillance prior to June, 2013.
Ultimately, if were going to engage in a debate about all of this, certain people need to calm the hell down and very carefully read everything that drops. Its a complicated issue that demands an even-keel and a clear understanding of whats being reported. Nothing should be taken at face value because, to paraphrase a line thats become synonymous with this story, inaccuracies and outright lies have circled the globe before reality gets its pants on.
frylock
(34,825 posts)what are your bona fides?
flamingdem
(39,341 posts)That article was written for laymen.
frylock
(34,825 posts)flamingdem
(39,341 posts)add your 2 cents about why you think you understand something others don't if you want.
frylock
(34,825 posts)than how to open a browser. you've been discredited time and again. when it's pointed out that you're wrong, you refuse to acknowledge that, or answer questions that are put to you. in short, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. you simply parrot the company line.
flamingdem
(39,341 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)flamingdem
(39,341 posts)It's disgusting. Just put me on ignore, I'm done.
frylock
(34,825 posts)i'm sure you would love that I, and all the others calling you out on your bullshit, put you on ignore.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Bob Cesca's blog, linked, is not an expert, well-informed or reliable source on this topic.
NSA's data processing and storage capabilities exceed those of even the biggest commercial IT companies. This article asserts that it's basically impossible for NSA to process 21 petabytes of data daily from the cables. However, Google processes more than that in 2009, as this Wike article shows -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petabyte -- and, that was pointed out on DU weeks ago. Yet, we're hearing this fatuous argument raised again.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)You haven't made a single actual argument yet - other than you are a "system admin", which means nothing.
And imagining being "systems administrator" somehow makes you an expert at doing anything other than manning the help-support hotline to reset people's passwords, and maybe writing shell-scripts, shows how exceedingly junior you are.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
flamingdem
(39,341 posts)And it's more than obvious.
The Snowden supporters want to block posts on these topics if they don't suit their ideology.
frylock
(34,825 posts)over and over and over? the OP continues to post the same shit that has been debunked, and claims that it hasn't been debunked. look up and down this thread and you see the argument.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)It's not just for Republicans anymore.
flamingdem
(39,341 posts)How many people on DU know the numbers? More likely they just repeat the outrage.
longship
(40,416 posts)Two reasons:
1. Just storing that much data daily is not likely possible. Not just the fact of storage capacity, but also network throughput.
2. What good is vacuuming up all that data going to do if one cannot analyze it. This goes way beyond a needle in the haystack. This is a needle in millions of haystacks. By vacuuming up everything the NSA would be making their job much more difficult.
I don't like the NSA spying, but people somehow think that they're omnipotent or something. Technologies have limits.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)Vacuuming up more data doesn't help them find terrorists, it makes it more difficult. I think that the NSA is smart enough to know that.
And claims that they are recording all phone calls is utterly ridiculous, too. Who is listening to those calls? A computer program like Siri? Right! Like that works well with conversational language. Even if they could translate all that audio into text, which is doubtful, what the fuck are you going to do with it all?
There has to be some perceived benefit to all this beyond assuaging some paranoia that there are microphones under all of our beds.
I despise what the NSA is doing. But it does no good to start making shit up. When one makes claims that go beyond the verifiable evidence one is only setting oneself up to be shot down when the claim turns out to be false. That helps the fucking people who are actually doing this shit.
Stick to known, verifiable facts. Meta-data, FISA, etc. We can fight this, but stick to the facts.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)The more information the government has on us, the greater is its control over us.
We do indeed need to to stick to the facts. I couldn't agree more.
longship
(40,416 posts)But there's just too damned much wild speculation on this issue. That hurts our case!!
Thanks for your reply.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)This is one of the weakest excuses I have seen yet to defend our government's reckless endangerment of the 4th Amendment.
It is, truly, pathetic.
-Laelth
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)It's just one more irrelevant distraction from the over-arching issue of existing in a state of universal surveillance by power elites.
flamingdem
(39,341 posts)This Telephone game, sparked by coy, agenda-driven articles by Greenwald and his colleagues at The Guardian, has occurred throughout the entirety of the Snowden/NSA saga. It happened at the very beginning with the deceptive direct access claim and it continues today. Its become so pervasive that elected members of Congress are behaving almost as if theyd never heard about NSA surveillance prior to June, 2013.
Ultimately, if were going to engage in a debate about all of this, certain people need to calm the hell down and very carefully read everything that drops. Its a complicated issue that demands an even-keel and a clear understanding of whats being reported. Nothing should be taken at face value because, to paraphrase a line thats become synonymous with this story, inaccuracies and outright lies have circled the globe before reality gets its pants on.
ret5hd
(20,564 posts)flamingdem
(39,341 posts)that's the point. The facts are being thrown around and distorted via sourcing incorrect facts.
ret5hd
(20,564 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)Exactly what the OP is pointing out-
(The line)
That is meaningless term in communications. People think they know a couple keywords and all of a sudden they are an expert in communications.
ret5hd
(20,564 posts)But if your defense lies in parsing the precise meaning of technical lingo rather than imparting useful information that may dispel misconceptions us lowly lay people may or may not have...please, carry on.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)He gets the layperson because they don't have a grasp of the size of communication networks.
Shit, one piece of multi-mode fiber and some DWDM gear would blow the layman's mind much less undersea cable routes LOL.
Go look at Level 3's website. They have maps of their fiber routes around the World. And trust me. If you are going to spend Billions of dollars laying a route across an ocean, it's more than one strand of fiber.
When Ted Stevens said the Internet is a series of tubes, in retrospect I'm think a LOT of folks had no right making fun of him. I know see that most people really do think the Internet "is a bunch of tubes"
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center
I get the distinct impression you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)I've posted numerous threads since Snowy hit the scene.
There is a big difference from being able to "process" information and "collecting" all the data in the World. I can walk down the hall here and grab one of our sequel server gurus and be able to process all kinds of data.
You know how many class5 switches exist in the United States? You know how CALEA really works? You ever work with trusted third parties? How many hops does a phone call take when you pick up your Sprint Cellphone and call somebody who has a POTS line with Birch Communications?
Don't worry though, it's just a series of tubes, like 7 LOL. PM me your phone number and I'll show you a cool trick, actually, give me two numbers and I'll do a really cool trick for you
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)I didn't see a login called "NSA" LOL
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)Everything will be fine? We just need to let the corporations and politicians take care of everything for us and wage their 'war on terror' as they see fit?
snooper2
(30,151 posts)The NSA doesn't care about the conversation we are having right now..
Nor can they "tap" any call real time. That's why folks like me have a job...We get warrant, we put LI in place, content then streams to Quantico...
frylock
(34,825 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)How many CALEA-compliant switches and servers are there, and what's your source?
snooper2
(30,151 posts)That doesn't make any sense-
whttevrr
(2,345 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)1) Do you believe that NSA can and does intercept the data (the "take" that flows through fiber cables, as illustrated in the slide below?
2) Do you believe that NSA can and does "process" that data, i.e., data mines it in whole or part?
3) Do you believe that NSA can and does "store" that data, i.e., warehouses it in whole or part?
Kapeche? And, please answer the other questions as well as you can.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)He explains "direct access", among other things, here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/edward-snowden-nsa-files-whistleblower
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)nothing more than a circle jerk by the Faithful Few, don't you? It's even ceased to be amusing and now is bordering on the pathetic. Honestly, I almost feel sorry for you guys. Almost.
flamingdem
(39,341 posts)This story is not going away anytime soon and it grows legs daily.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)I have a bet with a couple of other DUers on something that involves you guys so at this point, there's a monetary interest involved.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)flamingdem
(39,341 posts)to stop reporting on this -- if it's too much for your brain then trash the thread
Laelth
(32,017 posts)You are too kind.
It is flat out and without a doubt pathetic.
-Laelth
AllINeedIsCoffee
(772 posts)And people that have built their brands around outrage, disguised as advocacy, take advantage of it all the time.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Not to mention hair on fire panicked.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Interesting. Since we pioneered the technology in the 1960's, improved it through the 1970's, and 1980's. God and those with Top Secret Clearances probably know what it is capable of today.
Operation IVY BELLS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ivy_Bells
Underwater Telephone Cable Tap Pod from the 1970's. This one is in a Russian Museum because they found and captured and after examining the technology, put it on display to prove American criminal invasions of Russian Territorial Waters. So that way it was easy to prove the Americans were breaking international law to spy on the Soviets, because we were breaking international law to spy on the Soviets.
But somehow we've gone backwards in technology. Now, we couldn't possibly invent a similar pod that would capture all that data and sort it out. RIGHT.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)They can sort any volume of data, it anyway they wish.
whttevrr
(2,345 posts)As our technology intelligence increases our ability to store and sift data decreases. That's why we need "The Cloud".
Duhhhh... the cloud is effervescent. It allows data to flow through the air without being molested by prying eyes{spies}.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Navy Unveils UUV Master Plan
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_26/uuv.html
The Navy is also studying alternative offensive roles for UUVs, such as emitting jamming or false data transmissions into an adversarys command, control, and communications network. The UUV Master Plan also envisions the eventual development of UUVs armed with land-attack weapons to provide time-critical strike capability.
The plan highlights another important, inherent capability of unmanned systems: that of serving as communication and navigation network nodes (CN3). The significance of this capability lies in the UUVs ability to act as a bridge interface between above-water radio communications, high-bandwidth, long-range networks, and lower-bandwidth, below-water transmission systems.
As CN3, unmanned vehicles may provide additional redundancy for GPS and other position location systems. UUVs may also relay communication signals from various emitterssuch as local radios and satellitesproviding connectivity for forces operating clandestinely or in remote areas. As networking nodes, sharing and relaying data, UUVs may assist the Navys submarine force in achieving communication capability at speed and depth.
Of course this is years old, so we're probably using something far more primitive now. Derp.
whttevrr
(2,345 posts)Uhhhhnnn... Nerd Bumps*
*Nerd Bumps: Much like goose bumps but exist and spread across the brain synapses.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)JIMMY CARTER: SUPER SPY?
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001397.html
Secrecy Power Sinks Patent Case
http://www.wired.com/print/science/discoveries/news/200...
CRATER CORPORATION,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
and AT&T COMPANY,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee.
http://fas.org/sgp/jud/crater090705.pdf
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)So what you are saying is that until the reporters get the specific size of the data dump correct, you're okay with fascist tactics.
Right.
whttevrr
(2,345 posts)Doesn't seem too far fetched that 2 Billion dollars could buy more than enough storage to hold more information than most people could comprehend to even exist.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)"Data mining" is specific and doesn't sound scary enough ... Better to use "spying" which is more amorphous and generates more outrage and outrage generates eyeballs
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)K & R
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)doing their best to sweep it under the rug. Playing cute little word games won't make it disappear.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)21 petabytes is less than the 24 that Google processes every day.
We had this argument weeks ago, when the Patriot Act defenders said it was impossible for NSA to be processing and storing that much data and here it pops back up like a BoBo doll.
Pholus
(4,062 posts)who was claiming that arbitration was working because employees prevailed 63% of the time.
Franken knocked that one out of the park. First he asked if a $50 settlement would have counted to have prevailed and the executive hemmed and hawed but ended on "No" and tried to deflect.
Then Franken asked about $100. Silence for a few seconds. Then much prevarication.
Are you really worried that it is a matter of the exact number? Perhaps we should ask that that number be declassified. Then we'd all be happy.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)from the article
Ultimately, if were going to engage in a debate about all of this, certain people need to calm the hell down and very carefully read everything that drops. Its a complicated issue that demands an even-keel and a clear understanding of whats being reported. Nothing should be taken at face value because, to paraphrase a line thats become synonymous with this story, inaccuracies and outright lies have circled the globe before reality gets its pants on.
whttevrr
(2,345 posts)1 zettabyte =
1 048 576 petabytes
or... 1 billion terabytes.
5 zettabytes?
So let me get this straight:
4 years ago a private company (Google) was processing 21 petabytes per day. But today we cannot process that much information?
Is there some kind of inverse technological regression going on?
Or is this just a bunch of BS?