CITIZENFOUR
tigrutigru at gmail.com
tigrutigru at gmail.com
Fri Oct 24 16:56:05 PDT 2014
Russian gov is not nice. Though it's kind of lucky that it has to do rather nice things to piss US gov off.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 25 Oct 2014, at 01:27, cypherpunks-request at cpunks.org wrote:
>
> Send cypherpunks mailing list submissions to
> cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cypherpunks-request at cpunks.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cypherpunks-owner at cpunks.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cypherpunks digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. CITIZENFOUR (Rich Jones)
> 2. Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state] (Juan)
> 3. Re: CITIZENFOUR (John Young)
> 4. Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state] (Juan)
> 5. Re: CITIZENFOUR (Colin Mahns)
> 6. Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state]
> (Cathal Garvey)
> 7. Re: CITIZENFOUR (Michael C. Toren)
> 8. Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state] (Juan)
> 9. Re: CITIZENFOUR (odinn)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 11:58:22 -0700
> From: Rich Jones <rich at openwatch.net>
> To: "cypherpunks at cpunks.org" <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>
> Subject: CITIZENFOUR
> Message-ID:
> <CADJYzxL0-5oq9vmFe45YUbF_cYcBkUsxm+kdSNi0c6FvPBU6Ww at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Saw this last night - an obvious must-watch for all CPunks. I think it was
> probably the most important documentary film of all time. As Roger Ebert
> said, "it’s as if Daniel Ellsberg had a friend with a movie camera who
> filmed his disclosure of the Pentagon Papers every step of the way. Or if
> the Watergate burglars had taken along a filmmaker who shot their crimes
> and the cover-up that followed. Except that the issues “Citizenfour” deals
> with are, arguably, a thousand times more potent than Vietnam or
> Watergate." Truly, this is the Snowden story we have been waiting for since
> 2013.
>
> The main revelation of the film, however, is what an incredible boob Glenn
> Greenwald is. I had some idea of this after seeing him give an extremely
> disappointing talk earlier this year, but I don't think I quite understood
> how useless this guy really is. He's constantly asking the wrong questions,
> displays a technical ineptness (to the point of deliberate ignorance) that
> obviously hampers the journalism, and at very step shows a very clear
> desire to keep the document cache to himself for careerist purposes. At one
> point Ewen MacAskill brings up the idea of there being a Wikileaks-esque
> document explorer, and Ed says that this would be the best outcome for the
> documents, and Greenwald quickly dismisses the idea to talk about his
> publishing schedule. I still have immense respect for him, but I found it
> very frustrating and quite cringey to watch him treat the whole event in
> news-cycle terms, while everybody around him is obviously thinking in
> historical context. For instance, there is a moment when they are prepping
> for Ed's first on-camera interview and he asks the reporters how much
> background he should give about himself, and they give different answers.
> Poitras asks for as much detail as possible, and Greenwald basically says
> that isn't important, just be short so we get a good soundbite.
>
> More importantly, I think the film also misses an opportunity to talk about
> *power*. This is something Edward himself has addressed, but it isn't
> really covered in Greenwald's reporting or books, and the only time it's
> mentioned in the film is when Jacob Appelbaum, while speaking before a
> European council of some sort, quite astutely comments that surveillance
> and control are one and the same. I think the film should probably have
> spent another hour or so investigating, naming and confronting those who
> profit from that control. Other than a few choice C-SPAN snippets, the
> enemy is completely faceless, which plays well for the pervading sense
> paranoia which envelops the film, but also leaves many questions unasked.
> Perhaps that's left as an exercise for the viewer, but I think the general
> take-away message from both the reporting and to a slightly lesser extent
> the film is that any "solution" will be token reform of policy and not
> dismantlement of power structures.
>
> Also, very nice of the Russian government to let Ed have his girlfriend
> back. I didn't know that had happened, and it gives a rather unexpected
> happy ending to a film which otherwise made me want to cry desperately.
>
> Anyway, I'd be very interested to hear what you lot thought of it. (JY, you
> should throw a torrent up ASAP! I'm sure people will be screenshotting and
> analyzing all of the new document shots the film contains.)
>
> R
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20141024/47d4dd8d/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 16:32:52 -0300
> From: Juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com>
> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state]
> Message-ID: <544aa919.245d8c0a.b637.0c71 at mx.google.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 10:06:54 +0200
> "Łukasz \"Cyber Killer\" Korpalski" <cyberkiller8 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> W dniu 24.10.2014 o 09:47, Juan pisze:
>>>
>>> lol - what a stupid piece of shit you are
>>
>> I would like to have the moderator of this maillist look at the above
>> comment and take appropriate action. Thx.
>
>
> LMAO!!! - stupid scumbag threatens violence and then wants
> censorship when he's treated like the scumbag he is? LMAO,
> again.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 15:32:52 -0400
> From: John Young <jya at pipeline.com>
> To: <miserlou at gmail.com>, <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>
> Subject: Re: CITIZENFOUR
> Message-ID: <E1Xhkaq-00035l-2X at elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> Screenshots most welcome. cryptome[at]earthlink.net or pointers.
>
> Greenwald's mercenary greed is why only 97% of Snowden docs
> have been released. His and cohorts criminal behavior puts citizens
> in harms way to protect the natsec apparatus including natsec media.
>
>
> At 02:58 PM 10/24/2014, you wrote:
>> Saw this last night - an obvious must-watch for
>> all CPunks. I think it was probably the most
>> important documentary film of all time. As Roger
>> Ebert said, "itâs as if Daniel Ellsberg had a
>> friend with a movie camera who filmed his
>> disclosure of the Pentagon Papers every step of
>> the way. Or if the Watergate burglars had taken
>> along a filmmaker who shot their crimes and the
>> cover-up that followed. Except that the issues
>> âCitizenfourâ deals with are, arguably, a
>> thousand times more potent than Vietnam or
>> Watergate." Truly, this is the Snowden story we
>> have been waiting for since 2013.
>>
>> The main revelation of the film, however, is
>> what an incredible boob Glenn Greenwald is. I
>> had some idea of this after seeing him give an
>> extremely disappointing talk earlier this year,
>> but I don't think I quite understood how useless
>> this guy really is. He's constantly asking the
>> wrong questions, displays a technical ineptness
>> (to the point of deliberate ignorance) that
>> obviously hampers the journalism, and at very
>> step shows a very clear desire to keep the
>> document cache to himself for careerist
>> purposes. At one point Ewen MacAskill brings up
>> the idea of there being a Wikileaks-esque
>> document explorer, and Ed says that this would
>> be the best outcome for the documents, and
>> Greenwald quickly dismisses the idea to talk
>> about his publishing schedule. I still have
>> immense respect for him, but I found it very
>> frustrating and quite cringey to watch him treat
>> the whole event in news-cycle terms, while
>> everybody around him is obviously thinking in
>> historical context. For instance, there is a
>> moment when they are prepping for Ed's first
>> on-camera interview and he asks the reporters
>> how much background he should give about
>> himself, and they give different answers.
>> Poitras asks for as much detail as possible, and
>> Greenwald basically says that isn't important,
>> just be short so we get a good soundbite.
>>
>> More importantly, I think the film also misses
>> an opportunity to talk about power. This is
>> something Edward himself has addressed, but it
>> isn't really covered in Greenwald's reporting or
>> books, and the only time it's mentioned in the
>> film is when Jacob Appelbaum, while speaking
>> before a European council of some sort, quite
>> astutely comments that surveillance and control
>> are one and the same. I think the film should
>> probably have spent another hour or so
>> investigating, naming and confronting those who
>> profit from that control. Other than a few
>> choice C-SPAN snippets, the enemy is completely
>> faceless, which plays well for the pervading
>> sense paranoia which envelops the film, but also
>> leaves many questions unasked. Perhaps that's
>> left as an exercise for the viewer, but I think
>> the general take-away message from both the
>> reporting and to a slightly lesser extent the
>> film is that any "solution" will be token reform
>> of policy and not dismantlement of power structures.
>>
>> Also, very nice of the Russian government to let
>> Ed have his girlfriend back. I didn't know that
>> had happened, and it gives a rather unexpected
>> happy ending to a film which otherwise made me want to cry desperately.
>>
>> Anyway, I'd be very interested to hear what you
>> lot thought of it. (JY, you should throw a
>> torrent up ASAP! I'm sure people will be
>> screenshotting and analyzing all of the new document shots the film contains.)
>>
>> R
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20141024/b18bbd1f/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 16:38:05 -0300
> From: Juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com>
> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state]
> Message-ID: <544aaa51.8800e00a.3527.082d at mx.google.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
>
>
> isn't this cute
>
> http://ultraculture.org/blog/2014/10/24/climate-change-now-military-threat-says-pentagon/
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 20:36:44 +0000
> From: Colin Mahns <colinmahns at riseup.net>
> To: "cypherpunks at cpunks.org" <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>
> Subject: Re: CITIZENFOUR
> Message-ID: <52E3F5CF-898F-4FDC-B6DB-005D950452ED at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Should've warned about spoilers ;)
>
> Interesting to read your critiques of it Rich, looking forward to rereading your email after seeing the film.
>
> Colin
>
>> On October 24, 2014 2:58:22 PM EDT, Rich Jones <rich at openwatch.net> wrote:
>> Saw this last night - an obvious must-watch for all CPunks. I think it
>> was
>> probably the most important documentary film of all time. As Roger
>> Ebert
>> said, "it’s as if Daniel Ellsberg had a friend with a movie camera who
>> filmed his disclosure of the Pentagon Papers every step of the way. Or
>> if
>> the Watergate burglars had taken along a filmmaker who shot their
>> crimes
>> and the cover-up that followed. Except that the issues “Citizenfour”
>> deals
>> with are, arguably, a thousand times more potent than Vietnam or
>> Watergate." Truly, this is the Snowden story we have been waiting for
>> since
>> 2013.
>>
>> The main revelation of the film, however, is what an incredible boob
>> Glenn
>> Greenwald is. I had some idea of this after seeing him give an
>> extremely
>> disappointing talk earlier this year, but I don't think I quite
>> understood
>> how useless this guy really is. He's constantly asking the wrong
>> questions,
>> displays a technical ineptness (to the point of deliberate ignorance)
>> that
>> obviously hampers the journalism, and at very step shows a very clear
>> desire to keep the document cache to himself for careerist purposes. At
>> one
>> point Ewen MacAskill brings up the idea of there being a
>> Wikileaks-esque
>> document explorer, and Ed says that this would be the best outcome for
>> the
>> documents, and Greenwald quickly dismisses the idea to talk about his
>> publishing schedule. I still have immense respect for him, but I found
>> it
>> very frustrating and quite cringey to watch him treat the whole event
>> in
>> news-cycle terms, while everybody around him is obviously thinking in
>> historical context. For instance, there is a moment when they are
>> prepping
>> for Ed's first on-camera interview and he asks the reporters how much
>> background he should give about himself, and they give different
>> answers.
>> Poitras asks for as much detail as possible, and Greenwald basically
>> says
>> that isn't important, just be short so we get a good soundbite.
>>
>> More importantly, I think the film also misses an opportunity to talk
>> about
>> *power*. This is something Edward himself has addressed, but it isn't
>> really covered in Greenwald's reporting or books, and the only time
>> it's
>> mentioned in the film is when Jacob Appelbaum, while speaking before a
>> European council of some sort, quite astutely comments that
>> surveillance
>> and control are one and the same. I think the film should probably have
>> spent another hour or so investigating, naming and confronting those
>> who
>> profit from that control. Other than a few choice C-SPAN snippets, the
>> enemy is completely faceless, which plays well for the pervading sense
>> paranoia which envelops the film, but also leaves many questions
>> unasked.
>> Perhaps that's left as an exercise for the viewer, but I think the
>> general
>> take-away message from both the reporting and to a slightly lesser
>> extent
>> the film is that any "solution" will be token reform of policy and not
>> dismantlement of power structures.
>>
>> Also, very nice of the Russian government to let Ed have his girlfriend
>> back. I didn't know that had happened, and it gives a rather unexpected
>> happy ending to a film which otherwise made me want to cry desperately.
>>
>> Anyway, I'd be very interested to hear what you lot thought of it. (JY,
>> you
>> should throw a torrent up ASAP! I'm sure people will be screenshotting
>> and
>> analyzing all of the new document shots the film contains.)
>>
>> R
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20141024/c8127b8b/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 22:20:45 +0100
> From: Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey at cathalgarvey.me>
> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state]
> Message-ID: <544AC2AD.9060308 at cathalgarvey.me>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> The German military had a report years ago that found the same
> conclusion about peak oil. Militaries are often asked to take long-view
> stances on things like resources and geopolitics, and
> climate/resource-depletion are the sorts of things that turn up.
>
> Not, that is, that I am a fan of militaries offering policy suggestions. :)
>
>> On 24/10/14 20:38, Juan wrote:
>>
>>
>> isn't this cute
>>
>> http://ultraculture.org/blog/2014/10/24/climate-change-now-military-threat-says-pentagon/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:49:00 -0700
> From: "Michael C. Toren" <mct at toren.net>
> To: miserlou at gmail.com
> Cc: "cypherpunks at cpunks.org" <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>
> Subject: Re: CITIZENFOUR
> Message-ID: <20141024214900.GA16357 at netisland.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:58:22AM -0700, Rich Jones wrote:
>> At one point Ewen MacAskill brings up the idea of there being a
>> Wikileaks-esque document explorer, and Ed says that this would be the
>> best outcome for the documents, and Greenwald quickly dismisses the idea
>> to talk about his publishing schedule.
>
> I wasn't watching the scene with the intention of being able to recall it
> fully afterwards, but I remember it rather differently. I recall Ed saying
> releasing all of the documents Wikileaks-style would an ideal outcome, but
> because it included information that should be legitimately redacted, he
> instead wanted to filter the material through journalists who would make
> that judgement call. Also, Greenwald said he was under a deadline, and I
> think you'll agree it was in everyone's best interests to start to get the
> information out as quickly as possible.
>
> But, I could be misremembering.
>
> -mct
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 19:20:22 -0300
> From: Juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com>
> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: Of Sealand, corp, and country [was: nation-state]
> Message-ID: <544ad05c.e11b8c0a.532b.2dd7 at mx.google.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 22:20:45 +0100
> Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey at cathalgarvey.me> wrote:
>
>> The German military had a report years ago that found the same
>> conclusion about peak oil. Militaries are often asked to take
>> long-view stances on things like resources and geopolitics, and
>> climate/resource-depletion are the sorts of things that turn up.
>
> I guess organizations like the US military are asked by its
> corporate accomplices to do particular things, but there are
> other things that they would do on their own anyway, without
> being asked. Like looking for excuses to extend their global
> criminal operations.
>
> As a side note of sorts, the german military is in a sense the
> same military that got millions of its own people killed,
> killed millions of people abroad, tried to conquer europe
> twice...and failed.
>
>
>> Not, that is, that I am a fan of militaries offering policy
>> suggestions. :)
>
> What could possibly go wrong with that? =P
>
>
>>
>>> On 24/10/14 20:38, Juan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> isn't this cute
>>>
>>> http://ultraculture.org/blog/2014/10/24/climate-change-now-military-threat-says-pentagon/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 23:27:00 +0000
> From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla at riseup.net>
> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> Subject: Re: CITIZENFOUR
> Message-ID: <544AE044.3060006 at riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Hello,
>
> John, for some reason your name reminds me of someone who I think was
> the ninth person to walk on the moon? Same John Young? (long shot I
> know) Just kidding though - you are the founder of Cryptome, right?
>
> Anyway, It's not my intent here to ruffle any feathers (on this
> thread), but I did want to suggest (and I'm sure someone has already
> thought of this) that people be able to search for their names or IDs
> in (searchable) databases of leaked info.
>
> I think this came up in a thread on twitter some while back actually...
> https://twitter.com/AnonyOdinn/status/344585372216487937
>
> (That twitter thread was from a discussion in mid-2013[!] which
> referenced MainCore and also (different than MainCore) a 'list of
> targets' that Greenwald had mentioned, but regardless of if it's
> MainCore or Greenwald's 'list of targets' or other such thing, I think
> searchability is really important, which of course implies that really
> all the data should be made available in some kind of format to allow
> keyword searches.)
>
> - -Odinn
>
>
> John Young wrote:
>> Thanks for the comments.
>>
>> Screenshots most welcome. cryptome[at]earthlink.net or pointers.
>>
>> Greenwald's mercenary greed is why only 97% of Snowden docs have
>> been released. His and cohorts criminal behavior puts citizens in
>> harms way to protect the natsec apparatus including natsec media.
>>
>>
>> At 02:58 PM 10/24/2014, you wrote:
>>> Saw this last night - an obvious must-watch for all CPunks. I
>>> think it was probably the most important documentary film of all
>>> time. As Roger Ebert said, "it’s as if Daniel Ellsberg had a
>>> friend with a movie camera who filmed his disclosure of the
>>> Pentagon Papers every step of the way. Or if the Watergate
>>> burglars had taken along a filmmaker who shot their crimes and
>>> the cover-up that followed. Except that the issues
>>> “Citizenfour� deals with are, arguably, a thousand times more
>>> potent than Vietnam or Watergate." Truly, this is the Snowden
>>> story we have been waiting for since 2013.
>>>
>>> The main revelation of the film, however, is what an incredible
>>> boob Glenn Greenwald is. I had some idea of this after seeing him
>>> give an extremely disappointing talk earlier this year, but I
>>> don't think I quite understood how useless this guy really is.
>>> He's constantly asking the wrong questions, displays a technical
>>> ineptness (to the point of deliberate ignorance) that obviously
>>> hampers the journalism, and at very step shows a very clear
>>> desire to keep the document cache to himself for careerist
>>> purposes. At one point Ewen MacAskill brings up the idea of there
>>> being a Wikileaks-esque document explorer, and Ed says that this
>>> would be the best outcome for the documents, and Greenwald
>>> quickly dismisses the idea to talk about his publishing schedule.
>>> I still have immense respect for him, but I found it very
>>> frustrating and quite cringey to watch him treat the whole event
>>> in news-cycle terms, while everybody around him is obviously
>>> thinking in historical context. For instance, there is a moment
>>> when they are prepping for Ed's first on-camera interview and he
>>> asks the reporters how much background he should give about
>>> himself, and they give different answers. Poitras asks for as
>>> much detail as possible, and Greenwald basically says that isn't
>>> important, just be short so we get a good soundbite.
>>>
>>> More importantly, I think the film also misses an opportunity to
>>> talk about power. This is something Edward himself has addressed,
>>> but it isn't really covered in Greenwald's reporting or books,
>>> and the only time it's mentioned in the film is when Jacob
>>> Appelbaum, while speaking before a European council of some sort,
>>> quite astutely comments that surveillance and control are one and
>>> the same. I think the film should probably have spent another
>>> hour or so investigating, naming and confronting those who profit
>>> from that control. Other than a few choice C-SPAN snippets, the
>>> enemy is completely faceless, which plays well for the pervading
>>> sense paranoia which envelops the film, but also leaves many
>>> questions unasked. Perhaps that's left as an exercise for the
>>> viewer, but I think the general take-away message from both the
>>> reporting and to a slightly lesser extent the film is that any
>>> "solution" will be token reform of policy and not dismantlement
>>> of power structures.
>>>
>>> Also, very nice of the Russian government to let Ed have his
>>> girlfriend back. I didn't know that had happened, and it gives a
>>> rather unexpected happy ending to a film which otherwise made me
>>> want to cry desperately.
>>>
>>> Anyway, I'd be very interested to hear what you lot thought of
>>> it. (JY, you should throw a torrent up ASAP! I'm sure people will
>>> be screenshotting and analyzing all of the new document shots the
>>> film contains.)
>>>
>>> R
>
> - --
> http://abis.io ~
> "a protocol concept to enable decentralization
> and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
> https://keybase.io/odinn
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUSuBDAAoJEGxwq/inSG8C+CQIAImR/hNx/DOc+ijBL0TvHNnO
> FgZ5/N3ZU7+kttHBnMTfRCTo2CQFqQLsHenynt+adKjDPiHND2cFdQ1ecBWfUvO3
> H0T73M3SC8Ay4e5Y3ygNk471v2eOEBDgyxFzUbkEXb67kWl6ht6RE6qpe0egiS4s
> bpGHT+DwkEkEaXoy3okFnKotBf9xZdTzRJkIDSO5O/i2ZxWKc7fyy0JsFY9ZVKrO
> J29Qv3rWfQ1L2rpOxRYsd23euE/GZTLKhRazxsPzSL04F81uXNFtvg/8WJs9sxN0
> LeJImrkm2UA0hganO/CxAnBJXUJN6gwQLrfdCitUK6wNduZPJXq2KGNioZF4hKI=
> =4nJ+
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> cypherpunks mailing list
> cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of cypherpunks Digest, Vol 16, Issue 30
> *******************************************
More information about the cypherpunks
mailing list