Why Did Snowden Pick SXSW for First Video Talk?

Your next video will start in

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments


March 10 (Bloomberg) -- Edward Snowden, who leaked classified documents revealing the surveillance activities of the National Security Agency, said technology companies need to take a leadership role in improving encryption tools. American Civil Liberties Union Principal Technologist Christopher Sighoian speaks on Bloomberg Television's “Bloomberg West.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Snowden's motivations thing to the worst -- thanks to the work onstage?

They really wanted to spark a debate and he has been successful in the past months to make sure the debate has taken place by bringing the public into and making sure the public knew what the government has been doing.

The reason that sxsw, his first opportunity to speak live to the world, technology brought us into a surveillance state.

Technology is the only thing, so this is a chance for him to speak with a technical audience so people can build the apps and services we all depend on.

Now is the time to depend on our customer information.

Qwest watching the video, i noticed the quality was not great.

He was frozen on screen.

That is because he apparently sent the video through mold will different proxies.

Qwest that is correct.

Edward snowden and took some steps to protect his information about where he is.

There is not an easy way to have a high-quality video feed and also have it secure and private at the same time.

It is not lost on the chat was happening over goodwill.

You guys use google hangouts.

We talk about putting the responsibility back on developers to make the product from the start.

The irony from -- that we were using the google service was not lost on us.

We did an evaluation of the widely available videoconferencing services.

We found what the services that have been designed to be as is -- as secure as possible were not easy to use and did not work over seven proxies.

We ultimately decided google'service would be the most reliable for us.

That meant we were using a google service.

We were having a conversation with 50,000 people.

It did not need to be private.

We did want to ensure as the location remained private sue other actors, there is a conflict between services that are secure and services easy to use.

Unfortunately, regular people have to pick one or the other.

Class i thought it was notable snowden was not just addressing technologist, but addressing business people, people starting and investors will were deciding what kinds of companies to invest in.

What did he have to say or what did he know -- you know about his views in the roles of business?

I think there is a big opportunity in the market right now for companies who want to compete with google and facebook i focusing on privacy and security.

I think there are many people willing to pay five or $10 a month for a secure e-mail product for secure social networking and the fact is, the mass-market services like google and facebook and skype are not designed to be private and secure.

People pay for telephone service and fedex.

I think people are ready to start paying for communication services and the market is therefore whoever wants to see it and run with it.

Obviously, you and snowden are much more advanced than average consumers in terms of how you used the internet and how you used mobile phones.

What can average consumers do?

What browsers and apps should we use and what should we not use?

The rule of thumb for people at home really should be, how much am i paying for the services i'm using?

If the web browser you get is free and the mobile operating you're getting is free, think about how the companies who make them are paying their developers.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

If consumers want services that will put their privacy first and secure their information, they will have to start paying for them otherwise, the companies will monetize their data and collect their information and hold on for as long as they can.

Qwest does that mean we should not use google?

We should not use facebook?

Because the services are free?

Google is not a charity.

Facebook is not a charity.

They have a lot of developers to feed.

Those salaries are free.

You have to question, why is google giving you the service and wise facebook giving you this service?

They want to collect your information.

If you want secure e-mail, it will not come from google as long as you're getting it for free.

That is -- that does not mean they could not start charging for their services and then make them secure, but that is not a step they have taken.

For now, these free services do put data at risk.

If i should not use google chrome, what browser should i use?

The firefox browser is at least a browser aiming to be as privacy preserving as possible.

The relationship is one where they give apple money and they give them devices.

Google is really an information company and the fuel powering google''s entire ecosystem is the collection of data.

It is not an accident the chrome browser is not very privacy preserving by default.

They are an advertising company.

It suits their interests.

Thank you so much.

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.


BTV Channel Finder


ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change