Book: No Place To Hide

Amy and I were going to have a bunch of friends over to our house today but we got rained out. So, I read Glenn Greenwald’s book No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State instead.

It was outstanding – 5 stars.

Let’s start with the punchline from Warren and Brandeis in their 1890 Harvard Law Review article The Right to Privacy where they assert that the right to privacy is primarily a “right to be left alone.”

Ponder that for a moment.

It’s a hot topic in my household since Amy did her thesis at Wellesley on the right to privacy. At the same time, I’ve been very open with my belief over the last decade that there is no more privacy, that the government tracks everything we do, and if you build your worldview around the notion that you have privacy, you are going to be disappointed. I guess I’ve been watching too much 24.

Now, this doesn’t mean I don’t think one should have a right to privacy. If I believed that, the philosophical arguments in our house would escalate dramatically. Rather, I gave up my own belief that I have privacy. And, I’ve felt for a long time that society is in a very unstable situation with regard to data, data privacy, and personal privacy. And I think this is going to get much, much worse as the machines further integrate themselves into everything we do.

So I view the problem of privacy at a meta-level. And as a result, I find books like Greenwald’s fascinating, powerful, and deeply insightful into the cause, effect, reaction, and second-order effect of humans trying to process what is going on, defend their position, and advance their perspective.

I thought Greenwald did a particularly good job of three things in this book:

  1. Painting a clear picture of Snowden, his character, and Greenwald’s experience interacting with him.
  2. Addressing the actions of the NSA that should cause outrage, or at least a deep, thoughtful conversation about what the appropriate boundaries for government surveillance in the United States.
  3. Demonstrating the tactics of the US government, especially through media which is sympathetic to the US government, in shifting the story from the main event (the NSA disclosures) to a continual campaign of discrediting the participants (Snowden and Greenwald).

It doesn’t matter which side of the issue you are on. If you feel like calling Snowden, and possible Greenwald, a traitor, you should read this book carefully. If you believe they are whistleblowers, or even heroes, you should read this book carefully. If you believe the government never lies, or always lies, you should read this book carefully. If you believe journalists aren’t caught up in the game, are objective, and have integrity, you should read this book carefully.

I’ve felt for a long time that it’s a real cop-out to call Snowden a traitor or just react to the surface of what is going on here. There are some really profound forces at work that will impact the United States, our notion of democracy, and privacy, for many years. And the second order effects, including how other nations view the United States and the other four of the Five Eyes or the implications on global companies headquartered in the United States, will impact us for many years.

And, as a bonus, there are lots of revealing PowerPoint charts in the book from the NSA documents which, in addition to driving Snowden and Greenwald’s points home, demonstrate that the US Government needs some courses in making PowerPoint slides nicer.

  • Interesting blog Brad!

    Directly related – you might like to check out

    Also this recent VentureBeat article – “Respect Network’s promise: own your digital future” here:

    They are having a major launch (and hackathon the day after) June 30, 2014 in SF at Exploratorium (I will send you an invite). If others reading this are interested, email me at

    Separately – you can reserve your personal cloud name now – so you have as this gains more steam:

  • Via email from an anonymous reader:

    Great review, and considerations.

    The problem is that the growth of the 5→9→14+ Eyes project is predicated on false-flag terror events, committed by those same Eyes. If one knows one’s true history, as opposed to that taught in schools and universities, worldwide, then one knows that such phony casus belli are used, unceasingly, to suck the masses, and much of what is considered the elite, into wars meant for their own destruction.

    With this in mind, is it right to even refer to government as such, particularly as it applies to ostensible, but clearly false, democracies? And the natural follow-on question — should such entities (I’d suggest entity is far closer to the mark, something so often lost on my fellow Americans who tend to be blinded by domestic news sources so as to miss that virtually everything happening within the boundaries of the U.S. is simultaneously occurring worldwide) be given the right to infringe upon our most intimate personal communications and day-to-day lives?

    Isn’t acceptance of this outrage rather akin to sanctioning it, even if silently?

    Writing this from Berlin, where the import of such considerations is felt quite acutely, in light of what took place here, on both sides of the Wall during the Cold War.


      Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.