Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

When you know the end results, "connecting the dots" is much easier.

True, but "connecting the dots" is much easier when it's your job, and something you've spent decades practicing.

Not to say that you're wrong, but there's no evidence to back you up. We might as well assume that the NSA is behind everything, ever.



It occurs to me: a great tool of a "know everything" government is the ability to exclude dots, leaving the dots which merely need connecting. Just like the sculptor's aphorism "I just remove everything that isn't the subject, and there it is", a near-omniscient police force can address a crime by eliminating everyone it knows wasn't involved (by their near-continuous presence on metadata, cell tower triangulation, security cameras, etc.), eliminating everywhere it knows the remaining 'dots' couldn't have been, and eliminating every action it knows couldn't have been performed ... leaving a very limited "negative space" for the inferred suspects to operate in. A lot of data to mine, but given NSA-levels of awareness, NSA et al could respond (legally!) to requests for information with a vast list of who/what/where wasn't involved, leaving a conspicuous implication of the guilty.


Thats the general idea of police work, you start with everyone as a suspect and then use evidence to narrow it down.

It tends to work well from a prosecutorial POV as well because anyone who is accused by that process has little evidence to exclude them.


General idea yes, but takes on new implications & scope when operating at NSA levels of universal surveillance exceeding police work by orders of magnitude of orders of magnitude.


In this current age, its more likely that the NSA is behind it. We are at a point where we need evidence that the NSA didn't help.


We are at a point where we need evidence that the NSA didn't help.

So we now have to prove a negative or the NSA did it? Logic has officially left the building.


Ah, so the NSA's spying does have positive effects. It helped capture a drug king-pin who hires hitmen. I'd believed that dragnet capture of Internet traffic presents problems in trying to isolate relevant evidence, but you claim that this is not an issue.

This certainly bolsters the claim that the NSA's surveillance is doing society good. I'm not comfortable with that, but there it is.


Then at that point you are no better than 9/11 truthers and moon landing hoaxers.


I see what you did there, Mr NSA.

No seriously, the whole parallel construction dialogue for NSA feeding DEA tips is exactly the situation suggested here. Why do you equate published journalism with hoaxes and factually devoid crazies. It is insulting to a fairly civil discussion.


Theres no basis in reality for 9/11 truthers and moon landing hoaxers though


That's the point.



Delusions of Grandeur aren't either.


Not sure why this appears to have been downvoted. Seems like a pretty reasonable point, even if you happen not to agree with it.


Well, we know the NSA is behind some things, or else it wouldn't exist.

We also know this is an incredibly high profile case. It's in the interests of the DEA and FBI to lean on their contacts in the NSA, even.

That said, the FBI is very good at what it does, and finding this sort of thing isn't just what the FBI does, it's what any investigator does. (I have personal experience with this area that I can't disclose, but trust me, everyone knows how to link usernames between websites.)


First and foremost, I didn't state as a definite fact. The rest of your argument ...oh well.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: