Snowden's book really speaks to me on so many levels. As a hacker, as a boy growing up in the new age of the Internet. As a person who experienced 9/11 and never aligned with the direction it took the USA. As a person who questions my identity and the messages I get about identity on a daily basis.<p>He will be remembered for a long time because of the actions he took, but if he had not done anything else, his book would be remembered on its own as a discourse on what being human means in these times. But, it will never be viewed on its own, and that is a tragedy.<p>Pardon Snowden.
There is a real lesson here about just how cavalier the American government - and to some degree the public - is about civil liberties, but that isn't the biggest problem.<p>The problem here isn't even so much the government is being shady - that has happened before, it will happen again. I can understand people not feeling threatened by constant snooping even though I disagree.<p>To me the real problem is how effectively the government has kept this subject from creeping into the public debate. The scary part is the secret laws and precedents that elected officials aren't allowed to even tell their constituents about. Government officials are not reliable; this is far to much unaccountable power even if people involved were allowed to discuss what is happening.<p>Why aren't the not-technically-interesting parts of this wiretapping program legal for government agencies to talk about? If they need to be hidden, why not go straight to the logical conclusion and classify a bunch of other laws?<p>Democracies can't handle this level of secrecy. The whole thing is going to fall apart one way or another - the path America is going down isn't stable at all; something is going to have to change radically. Either the intelligence agencies will gain supremacy over the government, the government itself will go rogue or the secrecy will have to end.<p><i>EDIT</i> I'm going to bed before I see the whole video, but around 1:46:00 - the bit with J. Clapper. Case in point that the whole system of checks and balances can't work.<p><i>EDIT2</i> And around 2:10:00. Barbaric stuff; it is like centuries of accumulated Common Law and parliamentary legal tradition never happened. People need to be able to occasionally talk about this stuff in formal setting.
Snowden is really clever with these interviews. Right away in the interview he establishes his concerns about the government, then briefly mentions the government smear campaign against him without hanging on the point too much. He calmly explains himself in an articulate way, establishing himself as perfectly sane. Then he reaches out to connect and empathize with his interviewer:<p>> When I hear you just speak, I go "actually this is a thoughtful guy."<p>When he validates Joe, he validates Joe's audience, and it becomes Snowden's audience. He did this with Trevor Noah too; I think he's intentional about it while very cleverly appearing not to be. It's a good thing Snowden is the one who blew that whistle, and not somebody less calculating.
The success of Joe Rogan is fascinating and encouraging.<p>For a long time there was a view that attention spans were diminishing. Facebook and Tik Tok reduced content to the smallest possible dosage.<p>But look at this. This is one of the world's most popular podcasts and it's nearly three hours long. You see it too in TV: what is a Netflix series but a 13 hour movie?<p>I see a definite trend towards long form content right now, which I think is quite positive.
His podcasts are infinitely better than any amount of talking-head punditry available on the major news networks. I've not run across one yet that wasn't well-reasoned, patient, and interesting - even if I didn't agree with conclusions being made or the thought processes expressing them.
This is the first time, and maybe it's just because of the length of the interview; that I've noticed Snowden's being slightly untethered from sensibility. The first 10 minutes in particular was a little worrisome.<p>I imagine that being stuck in Russia, with the pressure he's under has contributed to this. I do wonder how much of this personality bubble was in place when he made the decisions he did.<p>Nevertheless, I do have a love hate relationship with what he did.
I have to be honest here, I was very disappointed with this episode. It's basically a very long monologue and feels like a marketing gig for his book and not like a podcast with Edward Snowden. For someone who's familiar with Snowden and his story, this had very little informational value.<p>I would've wished they talked about a bit more about other topics to see what Snowden and his opinions are like outside of the general theme of mass surveillance. At the 2 hour mark, Joe tries to switch and asks about his current day-to-day life. But they switch back to the main theme after about 10 minutes.
Let's not forget Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange who are currently unable to give interviews because of what the United States is doing to them.
TLDW;<p>Edward Snowden: How Your Cell Phone Spies on You:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFns39RXPrU" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFns39RXPrU</a><p>Edward Snowden on America and Russia’s Diplomatic Woes:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k19Ipq0TV8Y" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k19Ipq0TV8Y</a>
Snowden inspired me to immerse myself in learning more about modern information technology.<p>He caused me to question what it means to be a patriot.<p>He drove me to learn about the importance of open-source encryption software for storing (VeraCrypt) and transporting data through networks (VPN).<p>Knowledge is your power over your government.
This seems like the perfect post to showcase a little weekend project of mine.<p>I kind of wanted to checkout Joes podcasts on the go, but I don’t want to listen to the whole 2 or 3 hours. Instead, a list of topics with timestamps would be much better. So I hacked together a little feed and a player doing just that.<p>This episode is also already live:<p><a href="https://joeroganplayer.com/episodes/1368" rel="nofollow">https://joeroganplayer.com/episodes/1368</a><p>Granted, it’s all done manually at the moment, but I share the work with friends also interested in this.
I love the long form discussion. I feel I can actually here someones thoughts and perspectives rather than short meaningless soundbites. The lack of guests shouting over each other is great as well. He has also exposed me to some wonderful thinkers like Sean Carrol who I otherwise would not have come across.
Snowden mentioned something about Android and iOS refusing to implement his idea about cutting network access to specific apps. He said they claim it's a security risk. What is the security risk and where can I see the discussion about this feature?
Yung Haimie killing it this week,<p>Just finished listening to richard dawkins earlier this week<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bN4spt3744" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bN4spt3744</a>
Joe Rogan's booking and showrunning team(s) needs a lot more credit where it's due.<p>The politically and professionally diverse guests they are able to get, no doubt with the assistance of Joe himself, is absolutely incredible. You rarely see a show where you can have an extreme right wing radio host be a guest, only to have a slew of high profile left wing candidates on months later, with zero fucks given in making sure it's family-friendly.
I can't help but feel Snowden comes off as a frustrated naive insider spilling details out of disappointment. Lacking perspective here. Most of his points are basically peter's principle, hierarchy failure, internal competition, all traits that made the response to national threats inappropriate before and after 9/11.<p>I really don't think that his actions were clearly thought out and he won't get a pass any time soon.
Just a friendly reminder : <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/us/politics/edward-snowden-at-nsa-sexually-explicit-photos-often-shared.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/us/politics/edward-snowde...</a><p>Theses guys just shared naked pics of peoples ...<p>This kind of power corrupt ...
It's not strange many interesting people want to visit Joe Rogan podcast.<p>First, he is willing to give a voice to many who won't be able to tell their stories on mass media.<p>Who other will let speak people like James Damore? What major broadcaster is willing to interview Jordan Peterson without protraiting him as a villain?<p>He respects his guest, when in disagrement. His interview to Jack Dorsey (not much of his liking, I presume), was criticised for not being aggresive enough.<p>The interviewed is not afraid of a headline out of context.<p>Given the current political climate, I'm not suprised a MMA guy is capable of doing what most journalists don't.
If I watch anymore JRE at all it's going to be in a "private" tab. Not that Youtube recommendations/suggestions are good anyway, but watching JRE absolutely destroys them<p>Though, as much airtime as Rogan has given to conspiracy theories- I guess it makes sense that it turns my recommendations into absolute nonsense
Snowden: But I didn't come forward to be safe. If I wanted to be safe, I'd still be sitting in Hawaii, making a hell of a lot money, to spy on you.
We live in a time where the president of the United States himself questions any law that inconveniences him personally, same goes for any oversight, and he retains a great deal of support from the population and his own party.<p>I wonder how / if it is possible to convince the public that laws and oversight are necessary for good government.
The whistleblower protections that Snowden did not bother to use are the same ones currently providing the spark for the impeachment proceedings in the US House of Representatives.<p>Really wish he had gone that route instead of the one he chose - and we'll never know for sure how pure his intentions were/are because of it.