Not sure why I was downvoted here. Maybe this was interpreted as snark. I assure you that it was not. I am genuinely concerned that reading about snowden and NSA issues "flags" me and puts me on a list. I Don't feel like I've anything to hide, but it seems that the NSA wants this to go away. Maybe I'm paranoid.
We know the NSA and GHCQ really do get involved in forums like this to push their propaganda. I would have thought that was a seriously paranoid conspiracy theory a year ago but it isn't is it?
If they were sending people off to concentration camps, I'd be cautious. As it is, I'd be proud to be on some NSA list. Come on, let's do it, NSA. What exactly are you going to with me on such a list, browse my porn?
I can see where you are coming from with that sentiment, kind of "they can't arrest everyone". I guess what scares me is if things do escalate to a tipping point life could really suck for the group that gets targeted. I even generally think that the NSA is mostly filled with good people that want to do public good. As big as snowden and the evesdropping story got, I still think that most of the mainstream public thinks snowden did something WRONG akin to espionage. Its one of those things that when reported on your average news channel is easy to dismiss as just some rogue bad actor with an ax to grind. The more I think on this the more I am blown away at what he did. This guy DID put a target on his back. He exiled himself from his life over this. I wouldnt be surprised if he was on a hit list. I think of having to be in his shoes, and dont think I would have that same courage.
Sure, but my point is that we're nowhere near Snowden. I wouldn't want to be him, but to be the guy who gets put on some list with a million other people for reading and discussing an article that's critical of the NSA? Bring it on.
That "rule" is ludicrous anyway. Even if one were to assume that an average separation of 6-7 is really the case even today, the separation to "important people" is likely to be far lower, if one assumes that "important people" on average have more social connections, because most of us on average will have fewer connections than our connections, who again are on average connected to people with more connections than themselves.
For my part, for example, I have met various relatively low level Norwegian politicians and trade union people that have huge networks. These low level politicians, for example have met people with vastly more influence, such as Castro (communist politician who moved to Cuba; these days he's converted to Islam, become a social democrat, and runs a shipping company in Norway..), Mao (trade union guy who has a picture of himself with Obama from some meet and greet in the 60's), Obama (hand shakes during some visit), the new secretary general of NATO (he's ex-Norwegian prime minister for the labour party - every member of parliament in recent years and most Labour party members have met him, so most Norwegians will only have one step between them and him), the Dalai Lama (large numbers of Norwegian politicians have met him), just to mention some random names, though most of them will have done little more than shake hands.
Extend it one level, and the people I know will have worked closely with people who have worked closely with the people mentioned.
Most people will be able to find paths to someone that the NSA could use to justify surveillance if they want to in 3 degrees or less. Of course, in most cases these people will not have discussed anything that would give the NSA a legitimate reason for interest.
So the 3-degrees thing basically amounts to saying they can conduct surveillance of everyone they bloody well please, as long as they can be bothered to identify a suitable connection.
