Video: The Vietnam War: Reasons for Failure - Why the U.S. LostHow we take back the internet - Edward Snowden 2022, Rujan AmeriÄka tvrtka za internetsku posredovanje Scottrade izjavila je u petak da je obavijestila oko 4, 6 milijuna kupaca o provali u svoju bazu podataka koji je mogao procuriti u privatne podatke.
วิŕ¸ŕ¸ľŕšŕ¸ŕšŕšŕ¸ No internet Access [สาŕšŕ¸Ťŕ¸ŕ¸¸ŕšŕ¸ŕ¸´ŕ¸ŕ¸ŕ¸˛ŕ¸IPŕ¸ŕ¸ŕ¸ŕ¸ąŕ¸] ŕšŕ¸ŕšŕšŕ¸ŕš10000000% | ŕ¸ŕ¸§ŕ¸˛ŕ¸Ąŕ¸Łŕ¸šŕšŕ¸ŕ¸ąŕšŕ¸§ŕšŕ¸ŕšŕ¸ŕ¸ľŕšŕ¸˘ŕ¸§ŕ¸ŕ¸ąŕ¸ŕ¸ŕ¸˛ŕ¸Łŕ¸Ľŕ¸ŕ¸ŕ¸¸ŕ¸ - Marketingtangtruong.com How we take back the internet | Edward Snowden | ŕšŕ¸Łŕ¸ľŕ¸˘ŕ¸ŕ¸Łŕ¸šŕšŕ¸ŕ¸˛ŕ¸Ł
How we take back the internet | Edward Snowden Video: How we take back the internet | Edward Snowden
đĄ Votre comportement financier avec vos cartes de crĂŠdit apparaĂŽt sur votre rapport de crĂŠdit. Si vous facturez plus que votre limite de dĂŠpenses disponible, vous devrez non seulement faire face Ă des frais supplĂŠmentaires de votre fournisseur de carte de crĂŠdit, mais aussi Ă votre cote de crĂŠdit. Cela peut affecter nĂŠgativement vos chances d'obtenir une approbation hypothĂŠcaire.
17 Picture Quotes. 544 Written Quotes. The Internet is awesome because it'sthere. Votes: 5. Steven Page. The Internet is becoming the town square for the global village of tomorrow. Votes: 5. Bill Gates. We are all now connected by the Internet, like neurons in a giant brain.
MLYNk. Edward Snowden has warned that surveillance technology is so much more advanced and intrusive today it makes that used by US and British intelligence agencies he revealed in 2013 look like childâs an interview on the 10th anniversary of his revelations about the scale of surveillance â some of it illegal â by the US National Security Agency and its British counterpart, GCHQ, he said he had no regrets about what he had done and cited positive he is depressed about inroads into privacy both in the physical and digital world. âTechnology has grown to be enormously influential,â Snowden said. âIf we think about what we saw in 2013 and the capabilities of governments today, 2013 seems like childâs play.âHe expressed concern not only about dangers posed by governments and Big Tech but commercially available video surveillance cameras, facial recognition, artificial intelligence and intrusive spyware such as Pegasus used against dissidents and back to 2013, he said âWe trusted the government not to screw us. But they did. We trusted the tech companies not to take advantage of us. But they did. That is going to happen again, because that is the nature of power.âSnowden has been in exile in Russia since 2013 after fleeing Hong Kong, where he handed over tens of thousands of top-secret documents to detractors denounce him for being in Russia, though it appears to be the only realistic option available to him other than jail in the US. Criticism has intensified since the invasion of Ukraine and his acquisition of Russian citizenship last year, two years after he despite his personal predicament, Snowden does not dwell on the past. âI have no regrets,â he has reduced his public profile over the last two years, giving fewer speeches, and retreating from press interviews and social media. This is partly because of family commitments he and his wife have two young he has remained in contact over the last decade with the three journalists who met him in Hong Kong, including this reporter. Friday marks exactly 10 years since Snowden revealed himself as the source of the views the widespread use of end-to-end encryption as one of the positive legacies of the leaks. The Big Tech companies had been embarrassed by revelations that they had been handing personal data over to the embarrassment turned to anger when further leaks revealed that, in spite of that cooperation, the NSA had been helping themselves to data from the Big Tech companies through backdoor vulnerabilities. In response, in spite of opposition from the agencies, companies rushed in end-to-end encryption years earlier than encryption âwas a pipe dream in 2013 when the story brokeâ, Snowden said. âAn enormous fraction of global internet traffic traveled electronically naked. Now, it is a rare sight.âBut Snowden is worried by technological advances that eat into privacy. âThe idea that after the revelations in 2013 there would be rainbows and unicorns the next day is not realistic. It is an ongoing process. And we will have to be working at it for the rest of our lives and our childrenâs lives and beyond.âThe intelligence agencies in the US and the UK acknowledge there was benefit from the debate on privacy that Snowden provoked but still argue this is outweighed by the damage they claim was done to their capabilities, including MI6 having to close down human-intelligence operations. Their other complaint is that the narrative in 2013 portrayed the NSA and GCHQ as the sole malign actors, ignoring what Russia and China were doing on the disputes such claims. He said no one at the time thought Russia and China were angels. As for damage, he said the agencies have never cited any evidence.âDisruption? Sure, that is plausible,â he said. âBut it is hard to claim damageâ if, despite 10 years of hysterics, the sky never fell in.â
We need to rethink the role the internet has in our lives and the laws that protect it, argues whistleblower Edward Snowden in this weekâs featured TED a former employee of the CIA, gained international attention when he disclosed thousands of classified documents revealing the operations of the US National Security Agency NSA to media outlets. The latest document he released suggested that the NSA monitored communications of delegates at the Copenhagen climate at TED2014 in Vancouver, Canada, via a telepresence robot, he said there were more âimportantâ documents to be released. Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the creator of the internet, later joined him on stage and described him as a âheroâ.Snowden called for a fundamental rethink of the role of the internet in our lives, concluding, âYour rights matter, because you never know when youâre going to need them.âTo watch this video on the TED website, click here.
Tags Appearing by telepresence robot, Edward Snowden speaks at TED2014 about surveillance and Internet freedom. The right to data privacy, he suggests, is not a partisan issue, but requires a fundamental rethink of the role of the internet in our lives - and the laws that protect it. "Your rights matter," he say, "because you never know when you're going to need them." Chris Anderson interviews, with special guest Tim Berners-Lee. ComentĂĄrios
TRANSCRIPT 012 Chris Anderson The rights of citizens, the future of the Internet. So I would like to welcome to the TED stage the man behind those revelations, Ed Snowden. Applause Ed is in a remote location somewhere in Russia controlling this bot from his laptop, so he can see what the bot can see. Ed, welcome to the TED stage. What can you see, as a matter of fact? 044 Edward Snowden Ha, I can see everyone. This is amazing. Laughter 052 CA Ed, some questions for you. Youâve been called many things in the last few months. Youâve been called a whistleblower, a traitor, a hero. What words would you describe yourself with? 108 ES You know, everybody who is involved with this debate has been struggling over me and my personality and how to describe me. But when I think about it, this isnât the question that we should be struggling with. Who I am really doesnât matter at all. If Iâm the worst person in the world, you can hate me and move on. What really matters here are the issues. What really matters here is the kind of government we want, the kind of Internet we want, the kind of relationship between people and societies. And thatâs what Iâm hoping the debate will move towards, and weâve seen that increasing over time. If I had to describe myself, I wouldnât use words like "hero." I wouldnât use "patriot," and I wouldnât use "traitor." Iâd say Iâm an American and Iâm a citizen, just like everyone else. 158 CA So just to give some context for those who donât know the whole story â Applause ââŹâ this time a year ago, you were stationed in Hawaii working as a consultant to the NSA. As a sysadmin, you had access to their systems, and you began revealing certain classified documents to some handpicked journalists leading the way to Juneâs revelations. Now, what propelled you to do this? ES You know, when I was sitting in Hawaii, and the years before, when I was working in the intelligence community, I saw a lot of things that had disturbed me. We do a lot of good things in the intelligence community, things that need to be done, and things that help everyone. But there are also things that go too far. There are things that shouldnât be done, and decisions that were being made in secret without the publicâs awareness, without the publicâs consent, and without even our representatives in government having knowledge of these programs. When I really came to struggle with these issues, I thought to myself, how can I do this in the most responsible way, that maximizes the public benefit while minimizing the risks? And out of all the solutions that I could come up with, out of going to Congress, when there were no laws, there were no legal protections for a private employee, a contractor in intelligence like myself, there was a risk that I would be buried along with the information and the public would never find out. But the First Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees us a free press for a reason, and thatâs to enable an adversarial press, to challenge the government, but also to work together with the government, to have a dialogue and debate about how we can inform the public about matters of vital importance without putting our national security at risk. And by working with journalists, by giving all of my information back to the American people, rather than trusting myself to make the decisions about publication, weâve had a robust debate with a deep investment by the government that I think has resulted in a benefit for everyone. And the risks that have been threatened, the risks that have been played up by the government have never materialized. Weâve never seen any evidence of even a single instance of specific harm, and because of that, Iâm comfortable with the decisions that I made. 445 CA So let me show the audience a couple of examples of what you revealed. If we could have a slide up, and Ed, I donât know whether you can see, the slides are here. This is a slide of the PRISM program, and maybe you could tell the audience what that was that was revealed. 502 ES The best way to understand PRISM, because thereâs been a little bit of controversy, is to first talk about what PRISM isnât. Much of the debate in the has been about metadata. Theyâve said itâs just metadata, itâs just metadata, and theyâre talking about a specific legal authority called Section 215 of the Patriot Act. That allows sort of a warrantless wiretapping, mass surveillance of the entire countryâs phone records, things like that â who youâre talking to, when youâre talking to them, where you traveled. These are all metadata events. PRISM is about content. Itâs a program through which the government could compel corporate America, it could deputize corporate America to do its dirty work for the NSA. And even though some of these companies did resist, even though some of them â I believe Yahoo was one of them ââŹâ challenged them in court, they all lost, because it was never tried by an open court. They were only tried by a secret court. And something that weâve seen, something about the PRISM program thatâs very concerning to me is, thereâs been a talking point in the government where theyâve said 15 federal judges have reviewed these programs and found them to be lawful, but what they donât tell you is those are secret judges in a secret court based on secret interpretations of law thatâs considered 34,000 warrant requests over 33 years, and in 33 years only rejected 11 government requests. These arenât the people that we want deciding what the role of corporate America in a free and open Internet should be. 647 CA Now, this slide that weâre showing here shows the dates in which different technology companies, Internet companies, are alleged to have joined the program, and where data collection began from them. Now, they have denied collaborating with the NSA. How was that data collected by the NSA? 709 ES Right. So the NSAâs own slides refer to it as direct access. What that means to an actual NSA analyst, someone like me who was working as an intelligence analyst targeting, Chinese cyber-hackers, things like that, in Hawaii, is the provenance of that data is directly from their servers. It doesnât mean that thereâs a group of company representatives sitting in a smoky room with the NSA palling around and making back-room deals about how theyâre going to give this stuff away. Now each company handles it different ways. Some are responsible. Some are somewhat less responsible. But the bottom line is, when we talk about how this information is given, itâs coming from the companies themselves. Itâs not stolen from the lines. But thereâs an important thing to remember here even though companies pushed back, even though companies demanded, hey, letâs do this through a warrant process, letâs do this where we actually have some sort of legal review, some sort of basis for handing over these usersâ data, we saw stories in the Washington Post last year that werenât as well reported as the PRISM story that said the NSA broke in to the data center communications between Google to itself and Yahoo to itself. So even these companies that are cooperating in at least a compelled but hopefully lawful manner with the NSA, the NSA isnât satisfied with that, and because of that, we need our companies to work very hard to guarantee that theyâre going to represent the interests of the user, and also advocate for the rights of the users. And I think over the last year, weâve seen the companies that are named on the PRISM slides take great strides to do that, and I encourage them to continue. 859 CA What more should they do? 901 ES The biggest thing that an Internet company in America can do today, right now, without consulting with lawyers, to protect the rights of users worldwide, is to enable SSL web encryption on every page you visit. The reason this matters is today, if you go to look at a copy of "1984" on the NSA can see a record of that, the Russian intelligence service can see a record of that, the Chinese service can see a record of that, the French service, the German service, the services of Andorra. They can all see it because itâs unencrypted. The worldâs library is but not only do they not support encryption by default, you cannot choose to use encryption when browsing through books. This is something that we need to change, not just for Amazon, I donât mean to single them out, but theyâre a great example. All companies need to move to an encrypted browsing habit by default for all users who havenât taken any action or picked any special methods on their own. Thatâll increase the privacy and the rights that people enjoy worldwide. 1012 CA Ed, come with me to this part of the stage. I want to show you the next slide here. Applause This is a program called Boundless Informant. What is that? 1022 ES So, Iâve got to give credit to the NSA for using appropriate names on this. This is one of my favorite NSA cryptonyms. Boundless Informant is a program that the NSA hid from Congress. The NSA was previously asked by Congress, was there any ability that they had to even give a rough ballpark estimate of the amount of American communications that were being intercepted. They said no. They said, we donât track those stats, and we canât track those stats. We canât tell you how many communications weâre intercepting around the world, because to tell you that would be to invade your privacy. Now, I really appreciate that sentiment from them, but the reality, when you look at this slide is, not only do they have the capability, the capability already exists. Itâs already in place. The NSA has its own internal data format that tracks both ends of a communication, and if it says, this communication came from America, they can tell Congress how many of those communications they have today, right now. And what Boundless Informant tells us is more communications are being intercepted in America about Americans than there are in Russia about Russians. Iâm not sure thatâs what an intelligence agency should be aiming for. 1143 CA Ed, there was a story broken in the Washington Post, again from your data. The headline says, "NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year." Tell us about that. 1154 ES We also heard in Congressional testimony last year, it was an amazing thing for someone like me who came from the NSA and whoâs seen the actual internal documents, knows whatâs in them, to see officials testifying under oath that there had been no abuses, that there had been no violations of the NSAâs rules, when we knew this story was coming. But whatâs especially interesting about this, about the fact that the NSA has violated their own rules, their own laws thousands of times in a single year, including one event by itself, one event out of those 2,776, that affected more than 3,000 people. In another event, they intercepted all the calls in Washington, by accident. Whatâs amazing about this, this report, that didnât get that much attention, is the fact that not only were there 2,776 abuses, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, had not seen this report until the Washington Post contacted her asking for comment on the report. And she then requested a copy from the NSA and received it, but had never seen this before that. What does that say about the state of oversight in American intelligence when the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee has no idea that the rules are being broken thousands of times every year? 1320 CA Ed, one response to this whole debate is this Why should we care about all this surveillance, honestly? I mean, look, if youâve done nothing wrong, youâve got nothing to worry about. Whatâs wrong with that point of view? ES Well, so the first thing is, youâre giving up your rights. Youâre saying hey, you know, I donât think Iâm going to need them, so Iâm just going to trust that, you know, letâs get rid of them, it doesnât really matter, these guys are going to do the right thing. Your rights matter because you never know when youâre going to need them. Beyond that, itâs a part of our cultural identity, not just in America, but in Western societies and in democratic societies around the world. People should be able to pick up the phone and to call their family, people should be able to send a text message to their loved ones, people should be able to buy a book online, they should be able to travel by train, they should be able to buy an airline ticket without wondering about how these events are going to look to an agent of the government, possibly not even your government years in the future, how theyâre going to be misinterpreted and what theyâre going to think your intentions were. We have a right to privacy. We require warrants to be based on probable cause or some kind of individualized suspicion because we recognize that trusting anybody, any government authority, with the entirety of human communications in secret and without oversight is simply too great a temptation to be ignored. 1455 CA Some people are furious at what youâve done. I heard a quote recently from Dick Cheney who said that Julian Assange was a flea bite, Edward Snowden is the lion that bit the head off the dog. He thinks youâve committed one of the worst acts of betrayal in American history. What would you say to people who think that? 1521 ES Dick Cheneyâs really something else. Laughter Applause Thank you. Laughter I think itâs amazing, because at the time Julian Assange was doing some of his greatest work, Dick Cheney was saying he was going to end governments worldwide, the skies were going to ignite and the seas were going to boil off, and now heâs saying itâs a flea bite. So we should be suspicious about the same sort of overblown claims of damage to national security from these kind of officials. But letâs assume that these people really believe this. I would argue that they have kind of a narrow conception of national security. The prerogatives of people like Dick Cheney do not keep the nation safe. The public interest is not always the same as the national interest. Going to war with people who are not our enemy in places that are not a threat doesnât make us safe, and that applies whether itâs in Iraq or on the Internet. The Internet is not the enemy. Our economy is not the enemy. American businesses, Chinese businesses, and any other company out there is a part of our society. Itâs a part of our interconnected world. There are ties of fraternity that bond us together, and if we destroy these bonds by undermining the standards, the security, the manner of behavior, that nations and citizens all around the world expect us to abide by. 1713 CA But itâs alleged that youâve stolen million documents. It seems only a few hundred of them have been shared with journalists so far. Are there more revelations to come? 1727 ES There are absolutely more revelations to come. I donât think thereâs any question that some of the most important reporting to be done is yet to come. 1741 CA Come here, because I want to ask you about this particular revelation. Come and take a look at this. I mean, this is a story which I think for a lot of the techies in this room is the single most shocking thing that they have heard in the last few months. Itâs about a program called "Bullrun." Can you explain what that is? 1801 ES So Bullrun, and this is again where weâve got to thank the NSA for their candor, this is a program named after a Civil War battle. The British counterpart is called Edgehill, which is a civil war battle. And the reason that I believe theyâre named this way is because they target our own infrastructure. Theyâre programs through which the NSA intentionally misleads corporate partners. They tell corporate partners that these are safe standards. They say hey, we need to work with you to secure your systems, but in reality, theyâre giving bad advice to these companies that makes them degrade the security of their services. Theyâre building in backdoors that not only the NSA can exploit, but anyone else who has time and money to research and find it can then use to let themselves in to the worldâs communications. And this is really dangerous, because if we lose a single standard, if we lose the trust of something like SSL, which was specifically targeted by the Bullrun program, we will live a less safe world overall. We wonât be able to access our banks and we wonât be able to access commerce without worrying about people monitoring those communications or subverting them for their own ends. 1927 CA And do those same decisions also potentially open America up to cyberattacks from other sources? 1938 ES Absolutely. One of the problems, one of the dangerous legacies that weâve seen in the post-9/11 era, is that the NSA has traditionally worn two hats. Theyâve been in charge of offensive operations, that is hacking, but theyâve also been in charge of defensive operations, and traditionally theyâve always prioritized defense over offense based on the principle that American secrets are simply worth more. If we hack a Chinese business and steal their secrets, if we hack a government office in Berlin and steal their secrets, that has less value to the American people than making sure that the Chinese canât get access to our secrets. So by reducing the security of our communications, theyâre not only putting the world at risk, theyâre putting America at risk in a fundamental way, because intellectual property is the basis, the foundation of our economy, and if we put that at risk through weak security, weâre going to be paying for it for years. 2040 CA But theyâve made a calculation that it was worth doing this as part of Americaâs defense against terrorism. Surely that makes it a price worth paying. 2050 ES Well, when you look at the results of these programs in stopping terrorism, you will see that thatâs unfounded, and you donât have to take my word for it, because weâve had the first open court, the first federal court thatâs reviewed this, outside the secrecy arrangement, called these programs Orwellian and likely unconstitutional. Congress, who has access to be briefed on these things, and now has the desire to be, has produced bills to reform it, and two independent White House panels who reviewed all of the classified evidence said these programs have never stopped a single terrorist attack that was imminent in the United States. So is it really terrorism that weâre stopping? Do these programs have any value at all? I say no, and all three branches of the American government say no as well. 2148 CA I mean, do you think thereâs a deeper motivation for them than the war against terrorism? 2153 ES Iâm sorry, I couldnât hear you, say again? 2155 CA Sorry. Do you think thereâs a deeper motivation for them other than the war against terrorism? 2201 ES Yeah. The bottom line is that terrorism has always been what we in the intelligence world would call a cover for action. Terrorism is something that provokes an emotional response that allows people to rationalize authorizing powers and programs that they wouldnât give otherwise. The Bullrun and Edgehill-type programs, the NSA asked for these authorities back in the 1990s. They asked the FBI to go to Congress and make the case. The FBI went to Congress and did make the case. But Congress and the American people said no. They said, itâs not worth the risk to our economy. They said itâs worth too much damage to our society to justify the gains. But what we saw is, in the post-9/11 era, they used secrecy and they used the justification of terrorism to start these programs in secret without asking Congress, without asking the American people, and itâs that kind of government behind closed doors that we need to guard ourselves against, because it makes us less safe, and it offers no value. 2303 CA Okay, come with me here for a sec, because Iâve got a more personal question for you. Speaking of terror, most people would find the situation youâre in right now in Russia pretty terrifying. You obviously heard what happened, what the treatment that Bradley Manning got, Chelsea Manning as now is, and there was a story in Buzzfeed saying that there are people in the intelligence community who want you dead. How are you coping with this? How are you coping with the fear? 2336 ES Itâs no mystery that there are governments out there that want to see me dead. Iâve made clear again and again and again that I go to sleep every morning thinking about what I can do for the American people. I donât want to harm my government. I want to help my government, but the fact that they are willing to completely ignore due process, theyâre willing to declare guilt without ever seeing a trial, these are things that we need to work against as a society, and say hey, this is not appropriate. We shouldnât be threatening dissidents. We shouldnât be criminalizing journalism. And whatever part I can do to see that end, Iâm happy to do despite the risks. 2432 CA So Iâd actually like to get some feedback from the audience here, because I know thereâs widely differing reactions to Edward Snowden. Suppose you had the following two choices, right? You could view what he did as fundamentally a reckless act that has endangered America or you could view it as fundamentally a heroic act that will work towards America and the worldâs long-term good? Those are the two choices Iâll give you. Iâm curious to see whoâs willing to vote with the first of those, that this was a reckless act? There are some hands going up. Some hands going up. Itâs hard to put your hand up when the man is standing right here, but I see them. 2515 ES I can see you. Laughter 2518 CA And who goes with the second choice, the fundamentally heroic act? 2522 Applause Cheers 2525 And I think itâs true to say that there are a lot of people who didnât show a hand and I think are still thinking this through, because it seems to me that the debate around you doesnât split along traditional political lines. Itâs not left or right, itâs not really about pro-government, libertarian, or not just that. Part of it is almost a generational issue. Youâre part of a generation that grew up with the Internet, and it seems as if you become offended at almost a visceral level when you see something done that you think will harm the Internet. Is there some truth to that? 2602 ES It is. I think itâs very true. This is not a left or right issue. Our basic freedoms, and when I say our, I donât just mean Americans, I mean people around the world, itâs not a partisan issue. These are things that all people believe, and itâs up to all of us to protect them, and to people who have seen and enjoyed a free and open Internet, itâs up to us to preserve that liberty for the next generation to enjoy, and if we donât change things, if we donât stand up to make the changes we need to do to keep the Internet safe, not just for us but for everyone, weâre going to lose that, and that would be a tremendous loss, not just for us, but for the world. 2649 CA Well, I have heard similar language recently from the founder of the world wide web, who I actually think is with us, Sir Tim Berners-Lee. Tim, actually, would you like to come up and say, do we have a microphone for Tim? 2702 Applause 2704 Tim, good to see you. Come up there. Which camp are you in, by the way, traitor, hero? I have a theory on this, but â 2717 Tim Berners-Lee Iâve given much longer answers to that question, but hero, if I have to make the choice between the two. 2726 CA And Ed, I think youâve read the proposal that Sir Tim has talked about about a new Magna Carta to take back the Internet. Is that something that makes sense? ES Absolutely. I mean, my generation, I grew up not just thinking about the Internet, but I grew up in the Internet, and although I never expected to have the chance to defend it in such a direct and practical manner and to embody it in this unusual, almost avatar manner, I think thereâs something poetic about the fact that one of the sons of the Internet has actually become close to the Internet as a result of their political expression. And I believe that a Magna Carta for the Internet is exactly what we need. We need to encode our values not just in writing but in the structure of the Internet, and itâs something that I hope, I invite everyone in the audience, not just here in Vancouver but around the world, to join and participate in. 2834 CA Do you have a question for Ed? 2836 TBL Well, two questions, a general question ââŹâ 2839 CA Ed, can you still hear us? 2841 ES Yes, I can hear you. CA Oh, heâs back. 2845 TBL The wiretap on your line got a little interfered with for a moment. Laughter 2850 ES Itâs a little bit of an NSA problem. 2852 TBL So, from the 25 years, stepping back and thinking, what would you think would be the best that we could achieve from all the discussions that we have about the web we want? 2908 ES When we think about in terms of how far we can go, I think thatâs a question thatâs really only limited by what weâre willing to put into it. I think the Internet that weâve enjoyed in the past has been exactly what we as not just a nation but as a people around the world need, and by cooperating, by engaging not just the technical parts of society, but as you said, the users, the people around the world who contribute through the Internet, through social media, who just check the weather, who rely on it every day as a part of their life, to champion that. Weâll get not just the Internet weâve had, but a better Internet, a better now, something that we can use to build a future thatâll be better not just than what we hoped for but anything that we could have imagined. 3006 CA Itâs 30 years ago that TED was founded, 1984. A lot of the conversation since then has been along the lines that actually George Orwell got it wrong. Itâs not Big Brother watching us. We, through the power of the web, and transparency, are now watching Big Brother. Your revelations kind of drove a stake through the heart of that rather optimistic view, but you still believe thereâs a way of doing something about that. And you do too. 3036 ES Right, so there is an argument to be made that the powers of Big Brother have increased enormously. There was a recent legal article at Yale that established something called the Bankston-Soltani Principle, which is that our expectation of privacy is violated when the capabilities of government surveillance have become cheaper by an order of magnitude, and each time that occurs, we need to revisit and rebalance our privacy rights. Now, that hasnât happened since the governmentâs surveillance powers have increased by several orders of magnitude, and thatâs why weâre in the problem that weâre in today, but there is still hope, because the power of individuals have also been increased by technology. I am living proof that an individual can go head to head against the most powerful adversaries and the most powerful intelligence agencies around the world and win, and I think thatâs something that we need to take hope from, and we need to build on to make it accessible not just to technical experts but to ordinary citizens around the world. Journalism is not a crime, communication is not a crime, and we should not be monitored in our everyday activities. 3158 CA Iâm not quite sure how you shake the hand of a bot, but I imagine itâs, this is the hand right here. TBL Thatâll come very soon. ES Nice to meet you, and I hope my beam looks as nice as my view of you guys does. 3212 CA Thank you, Tim. 3215 Applause 3220 I mean, The New York Times recently called for an amnesty for you. Would you welcome the chance to come back to America? 3229 ES Absolutely. Thereâs really no question, the principles that have been the foundation of this project have been the public interest and the principles that underly the journalistic establishment in the United States and around the world, and I think if the press is now saying, we support this, this is something that needed to happen, thatâs a powerful argument, but itâs not the final argument, and I think thatâs something that public should decide. But at the same time, the government has hinted that they want some kind of deal, that they want me to compromise the journalists with which Iâve been working, to come back, and I want to make it very clear that I did not do this to be safe. I did this to do what was right, and Iâm not going to stop my work in the public interest just to benefit myself. Applause 3335 CA In the meantime, courtesy of the Internet and this technology, youâre here, back in North America, not quite the Canada, in this form. Iâm curious, how does that feel? 3351 ES Canada is different than what I expected. Itâs a lot warmer. Laughter 3401 CA At TED, the mission is "ideas worth spreading." If you could encapsulate it in a single idea, what is your idea worth spreading right now at this moment? ES I would say the last year has been a reminder that democracy may die behind closed doors, but we as individuals are born behind those same closed doors, and we donât have to give up our privacy to have good government. We donât have to give up our liberty to have security. And I think by working together we can have both open government and private lives, and I look forward to working with everyone around the world to see that happen. 3446 Thank you very much. 3447 CA Ed, thank you.
All results 1 - 30 of 725 results Edward Snowden Here's how we take back the Internet Appearing by telepresence robot, Edward Snowden speaks at TED2014 about surveillance and Internet freedom. The right to data privacy, he suggests, is not a partisan issue, but requires a fundamental rethink of the role of the internet in our lives â and the laws that protect it. "Your rights matter," he says, "because you never know when you're ... Playlist Amazing reveals 10 talks Join us in looking back at some of the most awe-inspiring things ever seen on the TED stage. Curated by TED 10 talks Playlist The power of the individual voice 10 talks It only takes one voice to create change. Be inspired to take action through these talks by brave and passionate individuals. Curated by TED 10 talks Playlist The art of the interview 12 talks Glean interview skills and incredible insights from some of the greatest minds to sit down on the TED stage. Curated by TED 12 talks Playlist The most popular talks of 2014 20 talks From overcoming adversity to the latest in techâthese are the talks you binge-watched this year. Curated by TED 20 talks Rebecca MacKinnon Let's take back the Internet! In this powerful talk from TEDGlobal, Rebecca MacKinnon describes the expanding struggle for freedom and control in cyberspace, and asks How do we design the next phase of the Internet with accountability and freedom at its core, rather than control? She believes the internet is headed for a "Magna Carta" moment when citizens around the world d... Danny Hillis The Internet could crash. We need a Plan B The Internet connects billions of people and machines; it's the backbone of modern life. But tech pioneer Danny Hillis thinks the Internet just wasn't designed to grow this big - and he fears that one big cyber-attack or glitch could shut it down and take civilization with it. To head off a digital dark age, he sounds a clarion call to develop ... Hans Block and Moritz Riesewieck The price of a "clean" internet Millions of images and videos are uploaded to the internet each day, yet we rarely see shocking and disturbing content in our social media feeds. Who's keeping the internet "clean" for us? In this eye-opening talk, documentarians Hans Block and Moritz Riesewieck take us inside the shadowy world of online content moderators - the people contract... Andrew Marantz Inside the bizarre world of internet trolls and propagandists Journalist Andrew Marantz spent three years embedded in the world of internet trolls and social media propagandists, seeking out the people who are propelling fringe talking points into the heart of conversation online and trying to understand how they're making their ideas spread. Go down the rabbit hole of online propaganda and misinformation ... Vincent Moon TED Speaker Global wanderer Vincent Moon explores and documents vanishing traditions with his evocative ethnomusical films. Filmmaker Mikko Hypponen Fighting viruses, defending the net It's been 25 years since the first PC virus Brain A hit the net, and what was once an annoyance has become a sophisticated tool for crime and espionage. Computer security expert Mikko HyppĂśnen tells us how we can stop these new viruses from threatening the internet as we know it. Kayvon Tehranian How NFTs are building the internet of the future In this revelatory talk, technologist Kayvon Tehranian explores why NFTs - digital assets that represent a certificate of ownership on the internet - are a technological breakthrough. Learn how NFTs are putting power and economic control back into the hands of digital creators - and pushing forward the internet's next evolution. Stefana Broadbent How the Internet enables intimacy We worry that IM, texting, Facebook are spoiling human intimacy, but Stefana Broadbent's research shows how communication tech is capable of cultivating deeper relationships, bringing love across barriers like distance and workplace rules. Priscilla Chomba-Kinywa Why a free and fair internet is more vital than ever Without the internet, how would you have coped with the pandemic - from work and school, to maintaining your closest relationships? In the digital age, reliance on the internet is so common and seems ubiquitous, yet billions of people worldwide still go without it. Digital transformation strategist Priscilla Chomba-Kinywa advocates for collecti... Clay Shirky How the Internet will one day transform government The open-source world has learned to deal with a flood of new, oftentimes divergent, ideas using hosting services like GitHub - so why canât governments? In this rousing talk Clay Shirky shows how democracies can take a lesson from the Internet, to be not just transparent but also to draw on the knowledge of all their citizens. Naomi Shimada Tips for reclaiming your peace of mind online To post or not to post? The real question is How do you feel about it? Author Naomi Shimada reflects on the anxiety-inducing aspects of social media, sharing advice on how to step back from the shame, optics and echo chambers of the internet and untangle your self-worth from follower counts, likes and the unattainable perfectionism perpetuated ... Ashley Judd How online abuse of women has spiraled out of control Enough with online hate speech, sexual harassment and threats of violence against women and marginalized groups. It's time to take the global crisis of online abuse seriously. In this searching, powerful talk, Ashley Judd recounts her ongoing experience of being terrorized on social media for her unwavering activism and calls on citizens of the ... Jaron Lanier How we need to remake the internet In the early days of digital culture, Jaron Lanier helped craft a vision for the internet as public commons where humanity could share its knowledge - but even then, this vision was haunted by the dark side of how it could turn out with personal devices that control our lives, monitor our data and feed us stimuli. Sound familiar? In this vis... Siyanda Mohutsiwa How young Africans found a voice on Twitter What can a young woman with an idea, an Internet connection and a bit of creativity achieve? That's all Siyanda Mohutsiwa needed to unite young African voices in a new way. Hear how Mohutsiwa and other young people across the continent are using social media to overcome borders and circumstance, accessing something they have long had to violentl... Michael Patrick Lynch How to see past your own perspective and find truth The more we read and watch online, the harder it becomes to tell the difference between what's real and what's fake. It's as if we know more but understand less, says philosopher Michael Patrick Lynch. In this talk, he dares us to take active steps to burst our filter bubbles and participate in the common reality that actually underpins everything. Will Marshall The mission to create a searchable database of Earth's surface What if you could search the surface of the Earth the same way you search the internet? Will Marshall and his team at Planet use the world's largest fleet of satellites to image the entire Earth every day. Now they're moving on to a new project using AI to index all the objects on the planet over time - which could make ships, trees, houses an... Margaret Gould Stewart How the hyperlink changed everything The hyperlink is the LEGO block of the internet. Here's the bizarre history of how it came to be, as told by user experience master Margaret Gould Stewart. Jack Conte How artists can finally get paid in the digital age It's been a weird 100 years for artists and creators, says musician and entrepreneur Jack Conte. The traditional ways we've turned art into money like record sales have been broken by the internet, leaving musicians, writers and artists wondering how to make a living. With Patreon, Conte has created a way for artists on the internet to get pai... Wael Ghonim Let's design social media that drives real change Wael Ghonim helped touch off the Arab Spring in his home of Egypt ... by setting up a simple Facebook page. As he reveals, once the revolution spilled onto the streets, it turned from hopeful to messy, then ugly and heartbreaking. And social media followed suit. What was once a place for crowdsourcing, engaging and sharing became a polarized bat... SebastiĂĄn Bortnik The conversation we're not having about digital child abuse We need to talk to kids about the risks they face online, says information security expert SebastiĂĄn Bortnik. In this talk, Bortnik discusses the issue of "grooming" - the sexual predation of children by adults on the internet - and outlines the conversations we need to start having about technology to keep our kids safe. In Spanish with Engl... Markham Nolan How to separate fact and fiction online By the end of this talk, there will be 864 more hours of video on YouTube and million more photos on Facebook and Instagram. So how do we sort through the deluge? At the TEDSalon in London, Markham Nolan shares the investigative techniques he and his team use to verify information in real-time, to let you know if that Statue of Liberty image... Jeff Hawkins How brain science will change computing Treo creator Jeff Hawkins urges us to take a new look at the brain - to see it not as a fast processor, but as a memory system that stores and plays back experiences to help us predict, intelligently, what will happen next. Dan Gibson How to build synthetic DNA and send it across the internet Biologist Dan Gibson edits and programs DNA, just like coders program a computer. But his "code" creates life, giving scientists the power to convert digital information into biological material like proteins and vaccines. Now he's on to a new project "biological transportation," which holds the promise of beaming new medicines across the globe... Jonathan Harris The web as art At the EG conference in December 2007, artist Jonathan Harris discusses his latest projects, which involve collecting stories his own, strangers', and stories collected from the Internet, including his amazing "We Feel Fine." Stuart Duncan How I use Minecraft to help kids with autism The internet can be an ugly place, but you won't find bullies or trolls on Stuart Duncan's Minecraft server, AutCraft. Designed for children with autism and their families, AutCraft creates a safe online environment for play and self-expression for kids who sometimes behave a bit differently than their peers and who might be singled out elsewhe...
how we take back the internet edward snowden
