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.

  • 58008@lemmy.worldEnglish
    301·
    16 days ago

    I think what he did was heroic. I don’t know for sure that his motives were pure, like I can’t see into his soul, or know what his relationship with Russia was before doing it, but all in all I think what he revealed had to be revealed. The NSA were untethered by any sort of oversight or accountability to the public, and they proved beyond any doubt just how completely and totally an agency loses it’s fucking mind when no one’s watching. I doubt anything changed in that regard - they’ve probably just strafed into a different shadowy part of the landscape and are continuing with new/improved tools - but it at least taught us all that, yes, the government really is both capable and motivated to spy on every bowel movement and armpit sniff you perform, whether or not you’re a suspect in a crime. The mere affirmation that this sort of thing really goes on is worth having.

    • bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      311·
      16 days ago

      FWIW, his passport was revoked while on a layover in Russia from Hong Kong to Cuba for an intended final destination of Ecuador. This is what caused him to seek asylum in Russia because that was his only option. His involvement with wikileaks during this time is suspicious knowing what we know now, but it seems to me he either got stuck in Russia because of the US or because of Wikileaks, and he didn’t knowingly have a relationship with Russia before getting stuck there.

        • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
          41·
          15 days ago

          That they were/are pretty pro Russia and have uncritically disseminated Russian agitprop intended to destabilize the US.

          • tar@lemmy.zip
            2·
            15 days ago

            i don’t think it’s true that they’re pro-russia, and if the agitprop was true, i don’t see the problem with disseminating it.

            • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
              2·
              15 days ago

              As long as context is clearly explained and sources named I don’t disagree. But they’ve been less than reliable about that in the past. If you repeat propaganda (even if it’s more or less true) without explaining that it’s propaganda by providing relevant context then you are a propagandist.