LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

by vonklaus • 12 years ago

271 145 12 years ago

vonklaus2• 12 years ago

Link to the article Snowden authored earlier today about the subject : https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/15/snowden-new-ze...

EDIT: The segment has ended. You can view the video by skipping to 21:54 at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbps1EwAW-0#t=427

Indyan• 12 years ago

As far as I know, this is the first time Snowden is directly penning an article. He even has a staff page [1] now on The Intercept. This is interesting because to me because "At the NSA I routinely came across the communications of New Zealanders in my work" is much more impactful than "Snowden stated that he routinely came across the communications of New Zealanders in his work as an NSA Analyst".

[1] https://firstlook.org/theintercept/staff/edward-snowden/

ogijaoijfawje• 12 years ago

Snowden is a controlled pawn, though even he might not know it. This is all too....Hollywood.

Edit: Feel free to downvote as much as you like, the points don't mean anything. If it's determined later on I was right, I hope you remember this post and consider it for future events.

skidoo2• 12 years ago

Truth is stranger than fiction.

Intermernet2• 12 years ago

I understand what you think you mean (but disagree), but have you considered the larger implications of your statement?

If Snowden is a "controlled pawn", then isn't everyone in the entire debate a pawn? If so, where would you suggest we look to for updates on this situation?

Crito• 12 years ago

An account created for the sole purpose of criticizing Snowden/Greenwald/company accuses others of being a controlled pawn. Rich.

ericHosick3• 12 years ago

Will any of this really make any difference? I feel that, in the long run, it won't.

Edit: And to further clarify my question (since I'm being down-voted for a very legitimate question)... I know a lot of smart people and none of them (as in 0 of them) seem to take any notice to these conversations. There is a lot of apathy towards mass surveillance.

Sure, the conversation comes up a lot on HN but HN is not a very good sample of the general public.

vonklaus2• 12 years ago

I think a large amount of people don't understand the full extent more than intellectually. They are aware that it is happening but it doesn't have real context. They aren't aware that their position is tracked or logged, their porn habits monitored and that their is a subset of the population that has become wildly powerful and extremely clandestine. However, people are taking note. People like Ladar Levinson and others. They are combatting this with technology. This is also happening live in NZ right before an election, people will have more information to make that decision. So things are changing at their usual pace: slowly. Hopefully for the better.

prawn4• 12 years ago

I think base instincts and interests override any interest in acting. It's easier to pull up your favourite porn and hope no one cares or pays your actions any attention than it is to speak up and be seen as that guy walking against the crowd.

I also think "I've got nothing to hide" is overwhelmingly more popular than people understanding the slippery slopes involved.

nodata• 12 years ago

It won't if you push an attitude like that.

ericHosick3• 12 years ago

An attitude? This stuff seems to happen again and again throughout history. Me asking this may bring root cause problems to the conversation too.

You would think the world view of a large number of people would have changed considering things like the cold war with the U.S.S.R, Iran-Contra, Bay-of-Tonkin, etc. If it had, mass surveillance would be a lot more prevalent in every day communication.

general_failure2• 12 years ago

You should have a little faith in humanity. Just give it some time.

ericHosick3• 12 years ago

I think a majority of people (80/20 rule or even 90/10 in this case) have great intentions. Don't read into what I said as not having "faith".

Good intentions don't yield desired results: especially when people have very little understanding of the consequences of their actions.

jacquesm23• 12 years ago

I upvoted you because I believe this is a very valid question. In the really long term, none of it will make a difference. In the short term it will probably also not make a difference but I have some hope that there will be a major review of what we've done wrong historically at some point and then maybe this will carry some weight.

For sure there is plenty that - when looked at through the lens of history - will come back to haunt our future collective selves and that we will feel needs to be dealt with if we are to progress as humanity.

On that scale by the way (in my opinion) these are very minor issues.

thaumaturgy5• 12 years ago

It's making a difference. Maybe not the difference we all want, but the Snowden Leaks have made the National Surveillance Agency a worldwide topic of conversation.

Surveillance was sold to the public under vague terms: "we only use it to catch terrorists", "it's for your safety", "nobody's reading your email", "if you're innocent, you have nothing to worry about" ... and now there's solid evidence that these are all lies, and have been lies for a long time.

The man-on-the-street might be OK with surveillance to catch terr'ists, but they're not OK with a more personal form of surveillance, where someone, somewhere, might be looking at them at some point.

So our job is to continue to have these conversations about what kind of surveillance is actually happening, and what the implications are. New Zealand has been politically apathetic about surveillance so far; tonight's event might begin to change that tide.

And even in my small town, working with a lot of people who know only a little bit about computers, we've gotten a lot of unprompted questions about surveillance, and who to trust, and what to avoid. We've seen a number of customers that are moving, bit by bit, away from Google products, because they now perceive "Google = surveillance". Again, unprompted -- we don't nudge people in one way or another on this stuff.

Talk to more folks. I guarantee you'll find other people that are talking about it.

drinchev• 12 years ago

Ironically it's not available in Germany, because of "right issues"[1].

[1] screenshot : http://imgur.com/JFTYK5u

sschueller3• 12 years ago

Alternate: http://new.livestream.com/accounts/1473236/events/3389825/pl...

aw3c24• 12 years ago

thanks, this works well with https://github.com/chrippa/livestreamer

throwaway876876• 12 years ago

This is a Youtube/GEMA issue, however: [1]

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2853834?hl=en ("YouTube Live streams cannot be viewed from Germany.")

davidw• 12 years ago

One of these three things is not like the others.

skidoo2• 12 years ago

Politics make strange bedfellows. That said, I think that ideologically, all of these men are absolutely on the same page...

of persons who will never in their lifetimes be invited to any White House gala. And good for them.

jacquesm23• 12 years ago

That said, I think that ideologically, all of these men are absolutely on the same page...

I don't think even they would agree to that.

KDC is a serial criminal/fraudster with a ton of convictions to his name that will pursue a buck no matter what he has to do for it.

Glenn Greenwald is a journalist who will not be pushed or pressured into behaving as governments believe he should, who has taught a superb lesson in ethics to a large swath of the journalistic profession. He's this generations Woodward or Bernstein, take your pick.

Julian Assange is a person that I respect on a professional level for what he's done with WikiLeaks but who quite probably has some flaws and possibly something to answer for in his private life.

They couldn't be more different.

codeulike2• 12 years ago

People seem to be missing Skidoo's joke here:

"all of these men are absolutely on the same page...of persons who will never in their lifetimes be invited to any White House gala"

idlewords3• 12 years ago

We have got to get a halfway respectable public face for this movement. These are Bond villains.

jacquesm23• 12 years ago

Glenn Greenwald a Bond Villain?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald

I see no preference for white furry felines and plenty of journalistic awards. He's not planning to take over a military base in the pacific (or one in outer space), doesn't have a private submarine.

He probably does have some 'nation state' enemies but that's mostly their problem (that's something all three have in common).

Greenwald is as respectable as they come. Not that that stopped some from trying to use the fact that he is gay to smear him.

For instance:

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/368144189411704832

The real 'Bond Villains' are on the other side of the line and unlike the Bond movies they are not in camera but off to the side somewhere or behind a curtain.

adamnemecek• 12 years ago

Bond villains according to whom?

sschueller3• 12 years ago

I guess MI6 would make that declaration.

MrJagil• 12 years ago

There is an argument though, that this issue is so deeply ingrained that we need a rather rebellious approach to actually change anything...

What's more appropriate for a rebellious movement than rebellious leaders?

Just a thought...

idlewords3• 12 years ago

Maybe with less rape? I'd settle for that at this point.

mathetic• 12 years ago

Of course, the guy who sacrificed his life facing life in a shit hole if get caught, the guy who brought that news to you, the guy who let you learn about what your government is up to overseas.

Textbook bond villains, indeed.

It is astonishing how easy it is to throw mud at people and get up voted for it.

general_failure2• 12 years ago

Such trolling is not remotely funny.

Cthulhu_• 12 years ago

"No mister NSA, I expect you to die!" strokes EFF-stickered macbook

lucb1e• 12 years ago

Will it be available elsewhere later? I can't watch right now.

knotty66• 12 years ago

That non-stop banging and drilling under the embassy during the Julian Assange talk is pretty annoying.

aw3c24• 12 years ago

This feels like the typical Kimble self-advertising event. Disgusting.

sschueller3• 12 years ago

He is actually at this very moment advertising his Mega service :)

progx• 12 years ago

Nooo, really ? ;-)

Fuxy• 12 years ago

Hey sleazy or not this gets a lot of attention to a important issue which we desperately need.

caractacus3• 12 years ago

I am surprised that Greenwald and Snowden are choosing to reveal all this at an event that seems to have been orchestrated by Dotcom and prefaced by his typical self-publicising exaggerated rhetoric.

ElCapitanMarkla• 12 years ago

Ugh they should have stopped after Greenwald, Snowden and Assange. Until the lawyer started painting his poor Kim Dot Com picture it was good.

aluhut• 12 years ago

And so sad that so few seem to remember how he became big.

I wouldn't entrust him my shoe size.

Nanzikambe• 12 years ago

Regardless of my distate for KDC, I have to say: I disagree.

Given the allegations * regarding the illegal involvement of state security apparatus in his case, I can totally see that this event represented an ideal platform for everyone participating.

Though KDC did use the event to plug products & services, that wasn't the focus of the event. In his shoes, I think you'd have to concede that he'd have been an idiot not to do so.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom#Political_fallout_f...

martiuk• 12 years ago

KDC is pretty much the anti-hero in this whole saga. While I don't really respect him as a person, I also don't believe it was fair/correct for what happened to him and I'm glad he's helping the cause against dragnet/mass surveillance.

mrmondo6• 12 years ago

As a New Zealander, I have not felt more disgusted by a Prime Minister since Muldoon. This isn't news to those of us in the tech sector with experience in NZ - but it's amazing for international hero's such as Glenn Greenwald, Edward Snowden and Assange speak out so publicly about the grease-bag that is John Key and his party. Apologies for the loaded wording, I feel very passionately about the freedom of New Zealand.

bitserf• 12 years ago

Fellow NZ citizen. Could not agree more. I hope we will have more engagement of the citizenry this election.

mrmondo6• 12 years ago

As will I - I'm not for or against any party other than knowing that National has always failed NZ due to corruption and dirty politics, here's the link for international voting information: http://www.elections.org.nz/events/2014-general-election/vot...

vorg• 12 years ago

It would also be good to have more engagement of non-citizen New Zealanders this election also!

For non-Kiwis... New Zealand is one of the very few countries in the world where non-citizens are allowed to vote in national elections. Permanent residents who have lived in NZ for only 1 year can register to vote, though they don't have to. They're not allowed to become citizens until they've lived in NZ for 5 years however. This is in stark contrast to nearby Australia where only citizens vote, just like in most other countries, but their unusual electoral situation is that its citizens must vote (or be fined).

mrmondo6• 12 years ago

Another link to a live stream that's very reliable: http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Decision14/Video/LIVESTREAMKimDot...

majani• 12 years ago

That fake Obama just below the video is a real blow for credibility

IkmoIkmo• 12 years ago

Hah I was wondering about that

etiam3• 12 years ago

Did anyone else have the issue of the flash plugin reloading once?

tsileo• 12 years ago

Me too, a few seconds after playing, it reloaded itself.

etiam3• 12 years ago

Thanks for the information.

This is uncomfortably close to the way I imagine a glitch from something like a FOXACID exploit might look, and youtube is a known exploitable service. Maybe I need to get someone more skilled than myself have a close look at this machine.

Knowledgeable people here, would you please comment if there's reason to rule out concerns about this.

mrmondo6• 12 years ago

Here's the full stream recorded and uploaded to YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbps1EwAW-0

q_no• 12 years ago

Too bad, the Youtube video does not play in Germany due to copyright issues. This is a farce

junto5• 12 years ago

While I find Dotcom to be a epitome of a shill, I doubt Greenwald or Snowden would back this particular claim if they truly believed it was false.

Both Snowden and Greenwald have choosen to honour the truth above their own safety and security. Both of them are also acutely aware of the fact that standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Dotcom reflects poorly on their own integrity.

Maybe the USG leaked this email as a 'false flag' in order to make Greenwald look a fool when it gets proved as false, or it is true, and Greenwald and Snowden are right to back Dotcom in this particular argument, whether or not he is a crook or not.

A US movie company doing back-room deals (on behalf of the USG) with NZ politicians, in order to get someone extradited for alleged copyright infringement is just downright dirty and a waste of public money. It is corrupt corporatism at it's finest.

If it is true, I hope the shit hits the fan. However, as many others have pointed out. The fact that a politician is dirty is not an automatic guarantee that the voting public won't vote for him.

caractacus3• 12 years ago

A main question for me is how dotcom got hold of his email. There is no mention that it came from Snowden's leaks or similar, though it appears that this is what Dotcom is wanted everyone to believe: host an event highlighting mass surveilliance of NZ citizens, publicise an email hours beforehand, hope everyone conflates the issues and thinks that the legitimacy that Greenwald and Snowden lend to the surveillance event is passed onto the email.

Personally, I doubt the CEO of a major company like WB would send an email outlining this kind of agreement, especially when he says that Key told him 'in private' that such and such would happen. I'm not saying it didn't happen but would the CEO of a major movie studio be careless enough to put this in the clear in an email? Half the employees of a place like WB are lawyers...

junto5• 12 years ago

While that is true, do you imagine that Greewald and Snowden are stupid enough not to validate their sources? They own integrity is on the line here, and Greenwald in particular is trading on that integrity, and the entire Firstlook.org integrity is riding with him.

Either the USD has sold him a complete dummy and Firstlook is dead in the water, or the claim is true.

jacquesm23• 12 years ago

The first rule of email: if you do something incriminating, don't use email. Oliver North and many many others after him have shown that people are simply stupid.

From small time crooks to big time politicians and a whole spectrum of stupid people in between the 'incriminating email' seems to be a staple element in the arsenal of prosecutions the world over. I don't see why CEO's of major corporations should be exempt. See recent revelations regarding collusion by big companies to depress engineers salaries.

tomp3• 12 years ago

While I find Dotcom to be a epitome of a shill, I doubt Greenwald or Snowden would back this particular claim if they truly believed it was false.

Can I just ask you, what's the claim? I cannot watch the video at this time (I'm at work)...

tim333• 12 years ago

I think this stuff:

- The Kim Dotcom "big reveal" is out - and has almost immediately been dismissed as a fake.

- The "reveal" is an email which purports to show Prime Minister John Key involved in a plan to get the internet entrepreneur into New Zealand so he could be extradited to the United States.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objecti...

davidgerard• 12 years ago

"shill"? That implies he's working for anyone but himself. "Colourful racing identity" is the usual Australian euphemism, I'm sure there's a New Zealand equivalent.

Really, the amazing thing the US did with MegaUpload was to make Kim Dotcom look like a hero by comparison ...

Keyframe• 12 years ago

Is this a way to discredit Assange?

mrmondo6• 12 years ago

How did Snowden not make the title of this post?!

codeulike2• 12 years ago

Surprise guest.

4mnt• 12 years ago

Snowden was not introduced until after OP posted this link

makaveli8• 12 years ago

I didn't realise I had so many right wing friends on facebook (Read: Not real friends). All they can come up with in response is "omg Kim Dotcom is fat lol"

mrmondo6• 12 years ago

Post from Glenn Grennwald and Ryan Gallagher on FirstLook: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/15/new-zealand-gc...

nickdotmulder• 12 years ago

It doesn't seem like New Zealanders are taking this very seriously, even mocking:

http://tvnz.co.nz/seven-sharp/kim-dotcom-s-bombshell-revelat...

Intermernet2• 12 years ago

I hope they take it a bit more seriously once they've watched a bit longer.

I've found that the New Zealander response to many things is one of apparent mocking, and this is sometimes a good thing. The NZ public don't treat much as sacred, and this sometimes looks like dismissal. I'd take comfort in the fact that the current political leaders in NZ are commonly treated to as much, or more, derision than is being shown here towards Dotcom, Assange, Snowden, Greenwald etc.

The NZ populous are generally pretty smart. Let's hope that they take these revelations and act intelligently on them.

EdwardDiego• 12 years ago

Bear in mind that Mike Hosking, one of the hosts of Seven Sharp, is a major backer of current Prime Minister John Key.

ak39• 12 years ago

Were all the slides blacked out while GG presented? Or is this done at YouTube level? (cf. > 51 minutes in)

Arcantium• 12 years ago

they were blacked out. He only showed the stuff relevant to what he was presenting.

raldi• 12 years ago

Please don't use all-caps in your submission titles.

tete• 12 years ago

It's interesting despite being a Kim Dotcom event, despite his comments and ads. The others don't seem too happy about that either.

balabaster2• 12 years ago

It's interesting how many people have grown so desensitized to the content being presented that they're back to slinging mud about the credibility of the persons delivering the content. I'd say regardless of what you may think of Assange, Dot Com and Snowden personally, the presentation was excellent and raised an extremely valid critique of the state of Western surveillance. Perhaps we all need to stay on point.

igl• 12 years ago

8 hours and 262 points later this moved past page 2 on HN already? Behind the stupid motorcycle helmet? eh?

beedogs2• 12 years ago

I'm guessing it was moved by the admins. For some reason.

beedogs2• 12 years ago

It's weird how this story seems to have disappeared from the front page of HN, despite sitting at 265 points currently and being only 10 hours old.

It was there a few hours ago. Makes one wonder...

singularity2001• 12 years ago

Yep, seems like Playboy interviews are more important today ( less points, less comments, more hours ... how does the HN algorithm work?) ...

Reopened for our timezone, with better link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8320292 (is that ok?)

LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

Related Stories