Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Isn't it more banal and just people using budgets and extending their influence within the community that decides the funding? Bad metrics create weird outcomes, etc.

Pick any government agency at random. You'll find weird spending, baffling ideas, inefficiencies, power struggles with other agencies, etc. That agency will try to define their role in a way that maximises the money they need to do that job and that claims authority for that particular area.

I imagine the NSA feels fine about what they do. They probably have a bunch of techniques that they've rejected as being too intrusive or too constitution-violating. Something about "Overton Window" fits here - you hear about Guantanomo and you think "Hey, we're not torturing people like they do there, so we're better".

Add weak oversight, and a favourable exploitable atmosphere about a bogeyman ("THE COMMUNISTS!" "TERRORISTS!" "DRUGS!") and it's easy to see how an agency ends up going too far.

Going too far if you regulate children's play areas or the size of holes in fishnets doesn't mean much. Obviously, going too far when you're NSA ends up with a really bad situation.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: