Privacy: For/Against

[Sammael Bard]

Fun that you should think I'm not calm, when you're the one who can't write his own stories.

Do I look fucking agitated about this topic?

I'm just asking for perspective and you're trying to stir shit up.

 

[sr71plt]

Do I look fucking agitated about this topic?

I'm just asking for perspective and you're trying to stir shit up.

When you're snide (which you were) that's the response you get. Off now to do my own writing.

 

[NicoleZ]

Fun that you should think I'm not calm, when you're the one who can't write his own stories.

Barking up the wrong tree again, ya old mutt? You never were in marketing were you?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Not all that many, I don't think. And it's also a lot harder to go off the grid than TV tries to make you think it is. The other side to this is that it's damn hard to separate out folks who are on the grid--certainly a lot harder than TV tries to make you think it is. Most of those worried to death that the government is watching them are of no interest whatsoever to the government and running across them in searches is just useless flak that has to be separated off.

Right.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

It's more the mobilization of extraction and analysis ability that's dangerous. NSA may have become better at that over the last twenty years, but when I was in the business and tried to get useful, targeted information from them, they never could find it in all that they were collecting. That's made me feel pretty safe personally.

MAY have gotten better? XKeyScore. The break of older forms of SSL. The continued attempts to break new encryption and the known efforts to modify the hardware of people to better collect data on them. Deals done with Microsoft and every internet carrier. Twenty years ago the world was not especially online. But who over the age of 16 doesn't have a cell phone now?

It's already been stated, but to the OPs question, information is like uranium. It's useful. You can do things with it. You can gather a lot of it safely if protocols are managed. But if ownership changes it can suddenly be a huge and even deadly threat. (Which, US boys and girls, is way it matters who you elect to office, so if a few more of you could be bothered to vote...)

 

[jsmiam]

On topic, one retort is how easy it is for lone wolf employees acting outside the rules to do personal snooping for nefarious purposes.

You could also make the snoop even more evil.. Make them a Google or Facebook analytics employee. I leave Microsoft off, because although they clearly would be just as evil if they knew how, they're just not as competent as Google and Facebook at spying. (PREEMPTIVE EDIT...as in, how they handled windows 10 for example.. They spy like crazy, but are so clumsy and bad at it, everbody knows. When Facebook and google spy, people practically thank them.. they are better at it than Microsoft)

 

[NicoleZ]

You could also make the snoop even more evil.. Make them a Google or Facebook analytics employee... ...When Facebook and google spy, people practically thank them.. they are better at it than Microsoft)

A friend of mine who once was employed as an acoustics specialist on the SOSUS project tells me that every time you turn on your PC, Google takes a webcam pic of whoever is in front of the screen. That is, if you have a webcam and use Google software applications. Google truly do have your number it seems.

On the other hand, can you imagine the retinal damage this causes the poor Google analysts who have to wade through all the mug shots!

 

[sr71plt]

It's already been stated, but to the OPs question, information is like uranium.

Pure information is just data; it doesn't become uranium until isolated and properly assessed--and then found to be useful. Simple information is just a pile of possibility.

I'll admit to having a cell phone--but not a smart phone--but I've never received a call on it and only keep it in case I need to call AAA when on the road. Otherwise, it's off and . . . well . . . somewhere, I'm sure.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Pure information is just data; it doesn't become uranium until isolated and properly assessed--and then found to be useful. Simple information is just a pile of possibility.

I'll admit to having a cell phone--but not a smart phone--but I've never received a call on it and only keep it in case I need to call AAA when on the road. Otherwise, it's off and . . . well . . . somewhere, I'm sure.

I make a distinction between data and information. Data's a pile of numbers. When you comb it and extract useful stuff, that's information.

It's not hard for people of a certain age to live largely off grid. But if you want to punish an 18 year old female, take away her smart phone for a week. Disconnected = unthinkable. There will be screams.

Constant social immersion - I see how often people under 25 text - is as addictive as crack, especially when it becomes the primary flirting and mate selection mechanism. Apple will be rich as long as guys can send dick pics and girls can type "*smile* maybe...."

The NSA is thought to harvest Skype - apparently the encryption it uses is utterly meaningless. It has occurred to me that among the data the NSA has gathered is what may amount to the world's largest and largely accidental collection of very amateur porn, some of it underage by fiat. I would not be surprised if they have developed specific filters just to get rid of it. Or if someone quietly kept a best-of collection.

 

[NicoleZ]

I make a distinction between data and information. Data's a pile of numbers. When you comb it and extract useful stuff, that's information.

That's absolutely correct HITD. Intelligence is the collection/gathering of data, collation/sifting of the information contained in that data as to capabilities and potential/possible intentions revealed (this is also somewhat confusingly referred to as "intelligence"). What the political masters do with the intelligence gleaned is an entirely different matter, usually decided by political expediency and wishful thinking...

 

[Bramblethorn]

The NSA is thought to harvest Skype - apparently the encryption it uses is utterly meaningless. It has occurred to me that among the data the NSA has gathered is what may amount to the world's largest and largely accidental collection of very amateur porn, some of it underage by fiat. I would not be surprised if they have developed specific filters just to get rid of it. Or if someone quietly kept a best-of collection.

Yep, NSA (and counterparts such as GCHQ) collect a lot of porn. Filtering it out isn't an option because porn videos are a GREAT place to hide steganographic messages.

The NSA is also interested in porn as a way to discredit some of those who view it, and according to Snowden there's a fair bit of abuse with staff using intercepted nudes etc. for their own fun.

 

[Bramblethorn]

A friend of mine who once was employed as an acoustics specialist on the SOSUS project tells me that every time you turn on your PC, Google takes a webcam pic of whoever is in front of the screen. That is, if you have a webcam and use Google software applications. Google truly do have your number it seems.

I don't know about that particular story, but webcams certainly can be abused. Fortunately there's an easy fix for that; I have a bit of cardboard that sits over my webcam when I'm not using it.

Microphones are another matter.

 

[Hypoxia]

About the time AC Clarke invented the idea of geosynchronous satellites, he wrote a story about such, with a nefarious power (China IIRC) orbiting sats that beamed pr0n down onto the capitalist pigs to distract and demoralize we weak Westerners. A fun attack on 3-letter agencies might be to deluge them with XXXXX-hard pr0n from many sources. Which are just plain sex and which are stego? The machines can't be sure and the humans get distracted. All the intel is fucked, literally. So the con argument becomes: You're all pervs and wankers!

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Yep, NSA (and counterparts such as GCHQ) collect a lot of porn. Filtering it out isn't an option because porn videos are a GREAT place to hide steganographic messages. The NSA is also interested in porn as a way to discredit some of those who view it

Yeah, but that article contains a fair amount of bullshit, by mixing concepts. Yes, I'm sure the NSA has the original one of everything - pictures, video, audio, all the places stenography works. But there's no reason to look at it. When some criminal shares a video, the NSA would have computers compare it to videos on file. Steno would show up as small deviations from the original; humans wouldn't even see them, but algorithms sure do. No humans involved in that loop.

Checking out what terrorists get off on, sure, that requires human analysis, and yeah I bet a lot of that gets sick and sordid. I don't mind my tax dollars going to that - I don't think many are getting off to that crap.

and according to Snowden there's a fair bit of abuse with staff using intercepted nudes etc. for their own fun.

Yeah, human nature in action. Guys have porn collections. When you have access to hot new stuff every day - and can write algorithms to hunt out the fleshy pics - there's no way you don't end up with amazing amounts of the hottest ever. I wonder if they are stuck keeping it on classified systems, or break lots of laws by downloading it to home collections. No, I don't even want to know. The rare times I have to deal with restricted data, I need toothpicks to keep my eyelids open. There's no way I want to know how much fun other people get to have at work.

 

[Sammael Bard]

Pssst: It'll be great if you people stick to the non-political aspect of this privacy debate. It's always a mess.

Although I've received my answers, I'm still waiting to see if someone can put forth any fresh perspective. I don't want to see this thread split, moved or closed.



Thanks