cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/48428963
I personally do, he actually risked his life to release information about the government spying on people. And there are for sure more advanced ways now. Even your phone is listening.
He's a hero solely for trying to save Atari Teenage Riot.
It's sad that only 10% of the data he leaked ever made it to the public. From what I've read, the unreleased stuff has been lost. I could be wrong and don't have a source handy for that.
I'd let him hide out in my apartment.
He gave people information that they otherwise wouldn't have, regarding the surveillance state at the time. Definitely good for the common person, bad for the government.
I do wish there was more done about it. It seems like not enough happened and now things are even worse with the thousands of internet trackers, Google, Meta, Flock, etc... We needed some kind of privacy protections but we didn't get enough and now we're here, on platforms like Lemmy, avoiding the all-knowing algorithm as much as possible.
How did we go from "Ahh! The government can listen to our phonecalls and read our emails!" to "Sure Big Tech, train your AI on my personal photos, location, usage habits, and manipulate my internet experience for profit! Please do!!!"
I don't really believe in the concept of 'heroes' as in unquestionably good people who are to be emulated, but there are people of commendable moral principles, actions, and character that are worth noting.
His actions were unquestionably noble and effective in revealing the depth of surveillance of statesian citizens by a government many of them trusted, but mistakes in how that data was passed to journalists are also worth noting so such actions aren't self-sacrificing. He'd be more useful continuing to expose how that continues and has gotten worse, and simultaneously deserves a more comfortable life for his efforts. But he was also young and from my interpretation of my reading seemed to almost accidentally find himself at BAH. If someone more experienced and guided by good handlers were involved, his results could have been multiplied, and his efforts better rewarded.
I think he had as much impact as anyone in his position could possibly have, if not way above average for a whistleblower.
The problem is that the public quickly turned on him, in no small part due to the PR strategy of those who DO have the power to change this. And most of the public shrugged and said what are we gonna do?
His contribution was proof that suspected domestic spying under the guise of homeland security was being widely misused. Which is a violation of YOUR constitutional rights. Of course anyone paying attention suspected it before, but he brought receipts. Many people think he should be in jail or worse because of this.
Unless he's lying, and I don't think he has been shown to lie, he did attempt to use proper channels. The media has historically been called the 4th branch of government for a reason - and ultimately that's where he turned.
The man effectively lost much of his freedom and the people he did it for were unable to take it any further.
We are learning as a species that public relations (messaging, propaganda, whatever) is effective, and when the ownership class can put trillions into controlling the masses, it works.
I'd like to think there's a counter for it, but the worker class seems to be willing to suffer a lot of misery so long as someone else is suffering more than they are.
I had a professor in a cyber security class go off about how you're a traitor to the United States if you thing well of him. I remember rolling my eyes and wondering why she was drinking so much cool aid.
He did the right thing, but the concept of heros is not a good or useful one, especially when it comes to political actors.
My thoughts exactly.
Yes
I'm still confused. All I took away from it is that it's illegal to point out someone is committing crimes. A full mask off moment that will echo through history.
If he isn't a hero to you, I question you as a person.
He's a hero and Aaron was a martyr.
He's unquestionably a hero.
What a loaded question. Hero is such a poorly defined yet super high bar. Firefighters who die rescuing children don't even typically want to be called a hero. This just sets up people to say no and muddy the water.
Did he stand up for democracy and transparency and rule of law? Yes. Did he suffer for his actions from powerful people more concerns for the political harm caused by the exposure of illegal actions? Yes.
Did he do everything right? No, he's human, and wasnt asking to be lionized or elected anything. He wanted people to look at the materials and demand change from governments. He didn't get what he wanted, and ended up stuck in Russia, where people can dismiss him as just a traitor, so no, he didn't do everything right. He could have also thrown himself on the mercy of the American justice system, no matter how doomed that would be. But he's human, so I don't expect suicide.
Scary thing is he didnt really accomplish much with his sacrifies. NSA is much scarier today and things just goes on.
I don't think so, while the impact wasn't as great as he and other people wished, it nonetheless had a big impact, many people started to care, just because of what he exposed.
If it weren't for him the majority would've been still thinking gov spying on citizens is a conspiracy theory hhhhh
Of course. If you risk your life and freedom for the greater good on your own account you sure are a hero.
Yup, a hero. Sacrificed himself for a greater good.
I don't necessarily think hero is the right word, but his actions are commendable, even if they largely had little effect.
I think he did the right thing even though it meant sacrificing his freedom. People are more aware of government surveillance around the world, even if it's only increased in other ways. We can try to fight it in the open, now.
A good person and a decent human being? Yes.
Heroes are shit.
Yes
The alternative hero of that situation is the US government so ...
That's a very weird binary view. Do you think every situation involves one hero and one villain? I'd say many situations involve no heroes at all.
This is exactly why the original question is so loaded to be disengenuois.
Answering yes sounds foolish, while a complex answer sounds like waffling or even excusing, and will be generally ignored. Only the person who answers clearly with a "no" sounds reasonable.
Please explain the nuance to me here. It's really lost on me tbh
Hero. No. The right thing. Yes.
Well, then... "I can be your hero, baby!"
@Anonymous_Leaker yes.
I dislike that he pursued asylum in Russia and I think that doing so potentially damages his credibility and motives. But what he did was important nonetheless.
Let's be honest, virtually every other country would have extradited him.
North Korea or China might've been other options, but hardly better ones. Norway maybe, but they had shown to also cave to American pressure by prosecuting the founders of pirate bay.
No great options, really.
Yeah. Probably had to worry about illegal snatch and grabs too. It's just ironic that he had to turn to autocrats who use much of the same tactics he warned about.
Of course our views on Russia in 2013 were quite different to what they are now, but we always kind of knew they were a mafia state with varying levels of dedication to "playing along" on the world stage.
They've gone the weasel-route by releasing piece-by-piece to not cause drama and censoring names to not endanger them. In the end, this did more damage than good, getting people used to the scandals and feeling helpless. I wonder if that wasn't on purpose?
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
