The NSA's Next Move: Silencing University Professors?

On 9 September, Johns Hopkins University asked one of its professors to take down a blog post on the NSA.

A professor in the computer science department at Johns Hopkins University had written a post on his blog, hosted on the university's servers, focused on his area of expertise, which is cryptography. The post was highly critical of the government, specifically the National Security Agency, whose reckless behavior in attacking online security astonished him.

Professor Matthew Green wrote:
I was totally unprepared for today's bombshell revelations describing the NSA's efforts to defeat encryption. Not only does the worst possible hypothetical I discussed appear to be true, but it's true on a scale I couldn't even imagine.

The NSA's Next Move: Silencing University Professors?

At first I was appalled and greatly concerned.

But after some reflection I wondered if this could be a [I]good thing:

With all the "Correct Thinking" and campus censorship rampant today, perhaps Universities and professors might have second thoughts about political correctness when they realize that Big Brother is looking over their shoulders, listening to their calls and lectures, and analyzing their posts and messages!

The researcher had posted a blog critical of the NSA's anti-encryption efforts and the pervasive invasion of privacy it would support, if unchecked. But isn't this much like what liberal and progressive institutions do when they punish or shut down thoughts they disagree with; when they refuse to allow alternate or (currently) unpopular opinions onto the campus or into the classrooms?

Professor Green was told by his dean, and by another department with large government contracts, that he could not keep his thoughts on the campus servers.

Maybe a taste of their own medicine or the loss of a few million$$ grants would make them think twice about the value of censorship on what used to be free-thinking places of discussion and exploration.

I'm still not certain I agree with the university's actions or the NSA pressure, but the blog speaks for itself about the loss of truth and privacy.

Professor Green's blog is still available elsewhere.

And there many others supportive of his position vis-à-vis the dean and school

Check the links and see if you think Big Brother has gone to far, or if liberal schools need to think twice about their own censorship on campus.

jdub297


Check the links and see if you think Big Brother has gone to far, or if liberal schools need to think twice about their own censorship on campus.

edit on 13-9-2013 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)

Or?

Did you say or?

AND is what you mean.

Here's the trick. No one wants to hear what they don't want to hear. Everyone tries to censor things, whether you realize or not. This is grouping together with like minded people.

By the way this will only make them more prone to censorship knowing the government is watching. Can't have anyone on Campus putting government grants at risk now can they?

reply to post by Dustytoad

Can't have anyone on Campus putting government grants at risk now can they?

Having a bit of moral courage and taking principled stands might better suit those in control of schools than sycophancy and dependence.

Not wanting to hear is quite different from not allowing to speak.

There are many things most people do not want to hear, but colleges and universities have taken the position on many issues that dissent or alternative opinions will not be allowed on campus or in classrooms.

And "or" means or.

There's little that U. S. Americans seem willing or able to do about government intrusions into privacy today; but, college and university deans and regents theoretically have the freedom to alter their behavior and standards to reflect those they expect from their funders and governments.


If they don't want to be censored, perhaps they could be more reluctant to censor student thought and speech?

reply to post by jdub297


Here! Here!

Personally I have been rather distraught at the lack of concern and seeming acceptance as to continuing revelations about the NSA's gross overreach on ATS. I expect it out in the world but if folks here don't care...is there any hope?

A university who censors is indeed (as another poster said) trying to keep their money and teaching the students to be in lock step with the government (group think) or be censored.

If there is not outrage about this, how many others colleges will follow and what will happen to independent minded thinkers who could have the power to shape our future?

jdub297


And "or" means or.

If they don't want to be censored, perhaps they could be more reluctant to censor student thought and speech?

edit on 13-9-2013 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)

I agree, so you are saying you meant or, which then means you favor NSA spying.

And would mean that you don't like either.

Your purpose here has nothing to do with the NSA. I see that now. I find it Ironic you can't defend the guy for having a conservative view on internet spying, is all.

Dustytoad

jdub297


Check the links and see if you think Big Brother has gone to far, or if liberal schools need to think twice about their own censorship on campus.

edit on 13-9-2013 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)

Or?

Did you say or?

AND is what you mean.

Here's the trick. No one wants to hear what they don't want to hear. Everyone tries to censor things, whether you realize or not. This is grouping together with like minded people.

By the way this will only make them more prone to censorship knowing the government is watching. Can't have anyone on Campus putting government grants at risk now can they?

Too lazy, sorry, to search for the link right now...but it may not be a matter just of censorship, but of continuing to live, if you are a scientist or a professor, especially engaged in certain research.

Dead scientists, thread, anyone? I'm sure someone can link those pertinent threads, for there have been quite a few.

Having said that, I'm not sure there if we're dealing with the NSA or military industrial complex, or something not named, heretofore, and therefore, no one has name for it. You either go along, though, with the paradigm in progess, or you pay, perhaps with your life.

Censorship is little things, comparatively. And what is you speak up, blow the whistle, lose your job, and everything else and all that happens is revisionist history, erasing your sacrifice, after all?

Just some things to think about per the OP. Good questions, all, though, whether it's something we can fight for truth over or not, we should keep trying to shed light on what happens if you try to, even if we can't illuminate the truth, itself.

reply to post by Dustytoad

... so you are saying you meant or, which then means you favor NSA spying.

No, it doesn't. I was offering two alternative propositions out of a possible universe of them.

Both phrases can be true at the same time, they are not mutually exclusive:
The NSA has gone too far.
Universities should not censor student thought.
See how easy that is?

And would mean that you don't like either.

No, it means you can't think for yourself or state your own conclusions about either possible proposition.

I find it Ironic you can't defend the guy for having a conservative view on internet spying, ... .

I don't need to defend him; his blog speaks for itself, and the articles I linked-to defend him very well.

But you've posted twice now, and still can't formulate your own independent opinion of the dichotomy presented, can you?

reply to post by tetra50


The only problem with you examination is that Professor Green's blog is still up, just not on Johns Hopkins' server anymore.

He still lives and works.

And his gets seen every time someone isn't too lazy to hit the link.