Author Topic: Privacy and anonymity  (Read 12438 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MoraWintersoul

  • Gloom Cookie
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5293
  • Gender: Female
  • Transadriatic progressive buddy of Wasteland
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #70 on: October 12, 2013, 11:32:33 AM »
Women can't breast-feed in public.
At least 45 of the 50 states plus DC and the US Virgin Islands have laws specifically allowing breastfeeding in any public or private location.

I don't know if it's because of legality.  It may be legal but that doesn't mean that people won't get offended, thinking it's lewd behavior.
One shouldn't change their behavior because of people that are stupid. Lewd would be breastfeeding the kid with her breast(s) in full view.
Yes, because female boobs are sexualized so much that you can't expose them to use them for their primary purpose without someone getting offended because OMG HER NIPPIES ARE SHOWING

The only time I am glad about living in a "backward" country is when I read stuff like this: I don't think anyone in our government is able nor particularly interested in spying on citizens for online data (since they're already riding on our backs in every other possible way), and it's not like Google can get something out of my data. What's advertising, even invasive, good for if the person doesn't have any purchasing power whatsoever? :lol

Quote
Don't try to BS Milena about Kevin Moore facts, she will obscure quote you in the face.
You consistently make so much sense, and express yourself so eloquently, that I've decided you're basically a female version of robwebster.

Offline slycordinator

  • Posts: 1303
  • Gender: Male
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #71 on: October 12, 2013, 03:56:58 PM »
Women can't breast-feed in public.
At least 45 of the 50 states plus DC and the US Virgin Islands have laws specifically allowing breastfeeding in any public or private location.

I don't know if it's because of legality.  It may be legal but that doesn't mean that people won't get offended, thinking it's lewd behavior.
One shouldn't change their behavior because of people that are stupid. Lewd would be breastfeeding the kid with her breast(s) in full view.
Yes, because female boobs are sexualized so much that you can't expose them to use them for their primary purpose without someone getting offended because OMG HER NIPPIES ARE SHOWING
It's like I'd understand someone asking the woman to cover up if she exposed both breasts while only breastfeeding from one of them. But women who breastfeed are simply not doing this. They aren't flashing people then using the breastfeeding baby as an excuse.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #72 on: October 25, 2013, 09:46:07 AM »
It would appear that when he's not lying to Congress and making asinine statements to the media Michael Hayden is a pretty nice guy (and he takes a pretty good picture).

Quote from: techdirt
Tables Turned On Former NSA Boss Michael Hayden, As 'Off-The-Record' Call Is Live Tweeted By Train Passenger
from the no-expectation-of-privacy-on-a-train dept
Michael Hayden, former NSA and CIA boss, who famously argued that the only people complaining about NSA surveillance were internet shut-ins who couldn't get laid, apparently never learned that when you're in a public place, someone might overhear your phone calls. Entrepreneur and former MoveOn.org director Tom Matzzie just so happened to be on the Acela express train from DC to NY when he (1) spotted Hayden sitting behind him and (2) started overhearing a series of "off the record" phone calls with press about the story of the week: the revelations of the NSA spying on foreign leaders. Matzzie did what any self-respecting American would do: live-tweet the calls. During the calls Hayden apparently slammed the Obama administration, while insisting he only be quoted as a "former senior administration official."

I'm sure Hayden will be happy about this. After all, as I'm sure he'd be the first to argue, he had no expectation of privacy in such a situation, right? In the end, it appears someone in his office spotted the tweets, and alerted Hayden who ended up taking a photo with Matzzie and having a short conversation with him.

A bunch of the tweets are below:

    Former NSA spy boss Michael Hayden on Acela behind me blabbing "on background as a former senior admin official" Sounds defensive.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    Hayden talking about a famous blackberry now.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    Hayden was bragging about rendition and black sites a minute ago.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    Michael Hayden on Acela giving reporters disparaging quotes about admin. "Remember, just refer as former senior admin" #exNSAneedsadayjob
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    On Acela: Michael Hayden was talking to Massimo Calabresi at TIME I am pretty sure. Does he tweet?
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    On Acela listening to former NSA spy boss Michael Hayden give "off record" interviews. I feel like I'm in the NSA. Except I'm in public.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    On Acela: phone ringing. I think the jig is up. Maybe somebody is telling him I'm here. Do I hide?
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    New call. I am totally busted I think.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    I think I'm safe. Just passed Philly. No rendition yet. Do I have the balls to ask him for a photo? #haydenacela
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    On Acela: Hayden's comments to press were clearly about NSA spying on foreign allies. #haydenacela
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    Win pic.twitter.com/tsJHqjv1LM
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013





    I just had a very nice conversation with Michael Hayden. He was a gentleman and we disagree.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    On the pic. His office called him and then he graciously offered me an interview. We talked around the 4th amendment and foreign spying.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    I have to say. I'm actually a little afraid. The intelligence world is kind of dark and scary.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    Hayden just left train in Newark. He touched my back...again. I think a stop short actually.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013



    Getting off train soon. Somebody email my wife and explain all this.
    — Tom Matzzie (@tommatzzie) October 24, 2013

For all the talk from the NSA folks how revealing how we collect phone information will lead terrorists to use other means... the fact that an ex-NSA boss would give such calls in a public place like this makes it pretty clear that even if you know if others eavesdrop on you, and you're supposedly an "expert" on this stuff, sometimes people just take a chance anyway. And sometimes it doesn't work so well.

Of course, Hayden's response to all of this is to blame "liberal activists" for this "bullshit" story, while insisting that Matzzie's statements about what the calls were about were "terribly wrong." As if anyone's going to believe that.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #73 on: October 28, 2013, 10:07:38 PM »
Quote
That program, whose targets included the communications of U.S. allies such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, began in 2002, according to administration officials. Obama never knew that the program targeted American allies, officials said, adding that he was aware of collection efforts aimed at leaders of “adversarial countries.”

So all this time our asshole president has defended spying on US citizens by saying over and over again that he's aware of everything that's going on, and therefore is aware of all of the safeguards and legal protections in place. "Trust us!  ;D" Of course now that the Germans and the Spanish are pissed off about it, people who seem to matter a helluva lot more than we lowly citizens do, "hey, it was news to me." One way or another, this is a man who's stunningly full of shit.

Also, I'd bet good money that by this time tomorrow a senior Bush administration person is on FOX saying "whoa, we never started this," or "we provided that guy a 12 page dossier titled 'how we spy on foreign heads of state (and yes, that includes our allies).'" For all of their experience at being full of it, they're not good enough at it to actually figure out what they can or can't get away with.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #74 on: October 29, 2013, 05:08:06 PM »
I just don't get how you can immediately and forcefully draw the conclusion that he is full of shit. You have no idea what kind of information Obama is being given, and without that knowledge, it's impossible for you to make a statement that he's lying. The President is the head of a gigantic organization that is in charge of a wide variety of things and whose job title is more than just running said organization. It's a little ridiculous to think or imagine that one man, any one man, can actually perform the duties we expect out of a President. In that vein, it's completely plausible taht Obama thought he was aware of what was going on, but was left out in the dark on issues. I see no reason to assume that any one agency within the Executive Branch is always being a fair player, always reporting accurate information, and that the heads of said departments don't wield actual power.

I still see systemic failure, or at least the possibility of systemic failure.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #75 on: October 29, 2013, 05:55:22 PM »
I see systemic failure as well, but he's the one up there defending it still. Defending it largely on the basis of how knowledgeable he is in the whole operation. Remember, this is a man who blasted everything he's doing when he was a senator, and now his explanation for flip-flopping is that he has a thorough understanding of it all. Except when it upsets somebody that matters, that is.  I've no doubt that there are plenty of aspects of our intelligence program that he's not privy to, but stop defending it so vehemently if you don't fully understand it, FFS.

And even if it is a systemic failure, one of the things I constantly blasted Dumbass for was failing to accept responsibility for the people who fuck up beneath you. "The buck stops here" seems to have completely disappeared around 2000 or so. The result is that we're seeing the exact same lack of accountability out of Obama. 

And then there's this:
NSA Officials Livid That White House Is Pretending It Didn't Know About Spying On Foreign Leaders   :rollin

I really expected it to be the Bush administration that called him out on it, but this might be better. And it just goes to show that, like I said, these people just aren't very good liars.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #76 on: October 29, 2013, 07:00:52 PM »
So we're supposed to trust the people who literally spy on us, the NSA, over the leaders who are supposed to oversee that? I see no reason why I should trust the NSA more. That article also doesn't actually say Obama is lying, it even gives us a place to look for where communication could have broken down.

I'm also not vehemently defending it. The only thing I'm disagreeing with you on, the only thing, is where and how to cast blame.

Offline slycordinator

  • Posts: 1303
  • Gender: Male
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #77 on: October 29, 2013, 08:03:16 PM »
I just don't get how you can immediately and forcefully draw the conclusion that he is full of shit. You have no idea what kind of information Obama is being given, and without that knowledge, it's impossible for you to make a statement that he's lying.
1) I don't see where he stated that Obama lied. He concluded that the guy is full of shit because he stated emphatically something that is now known to be absolutely false. That conclusion isn't a statement that the guy lied, just that he didn't tell the truth (because lying requires you to make knowingly false statements).
2) The fact that he made statements that are now known to be grossly inaccurate, isn't it arguable that he doesn't know what's going on and is therefore incompetent?

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #78 on: October 29, 2013, 09:18:45 PM »
I just don't get how you can immediately and forcefully draw the conclusion that he is full of shit. You have no idea what kind of information Obama is being given, and without that knowledge, it's impossible for you to make a statement that he's lying.
1) I don't see where he stated that Obama lied. He concluded that the guy is full of shit because he stated emphatically something that is now known to be absolutely false. That conclusion isn't a statement that the guy lied, just that he didn't tell the truth (because lying requires you to make knowingly false statements).
2) The fact that he made statements that are now known to be grossly inaccurate, isn't it arguable that he doesn't know what's going on and is therefore incompetent?

1) I guess I just relate being full of shit with lying, especially in the context. No matter how I read what Barto said, he would have to be calling Obama a liar.

2) That's entirely possible, I have no problems with such a route, but that would be a different complaint. My only counterpoint would be that it's also arguable there are just massive problems with the system we have in place, and that any body, no matter who they are, is going to be an 'incompotent President.' They'll just be some who get lucky / fortunate while they're in office, and others who get a raw deal.


Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #79 on: October 29, 2013, 09:22:47 PM »
So we're supposed to trust the people who literally spy on us, the NSA, over the leaders who are supposed to oversee that? I see no reason why I should trust the NSA more. That article also doesn't actually say Obama is lying, it even gives us a place to look for where communication could have broken down.

I'm also not vehemently defending it. The only thing I'm disagreeing with you on, the only thing, is where and how to cast blame.
First off, the you in the vehemently defending remark was directed at Obama, not you. He shouldn't be defending it at all if he doesn't understand what's happening.

Secondly, don't you think that if the system is so fucked up that nobody knows anymore who's spying on what, that a president who didn't suck ass would be calling for answers, rather than defending it? Hell, even the people in the senate intelligence committee are fighting amongst themselves over who knows what, and the people outside of that committee have all given up citing the uselessness of the whole thing. Yet Obama stands firm that it's all just peachy.

edit:
2) That's entirely possible, I have no problems with such a route, but that would be a different complaint. My only counterpoint would be that it's also arguable there are just massive problems with the system we have in place, and that any body, no matter who they are, is going to be an 'incompotent President.' They'll just be some who get lucky / fortunate while they're in office, and others who get a raw deal.
Quite reasonable, however a president with some integrity would also call people out for screwing the system up so badly, rather than mounting a staunch and ongoing defense of their failure.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #80 on: October 29, 2013, 11:22:46 PM »
So we're supposed to trust the people who literally spy on us, the NSA, over the leaders who are supposed to oversee that? I see no reason why I should trust the NSA more. That article also doesn't actually say Obama is lying, it even gives us a place to look for where communication could have broken down.

I'm also not vehemently defending it. The only thing I'm disagreeing with you on, the only thing, is where and how to cast blame.
First off, the you in the vehemently defending remark was directed at Obama, not you. He shouldn't be defending it at all if he doesn't understand what's happening.

Ahh, well that really makes more sense... I was a little confused.

Quote
Secondly, don't you think that if the system is so fucked up that nobody knows anymore who's spying on what, that a president who didn't suck ass would be calling for answers, rather than defending it? Hell, even the people in the senate intelligence committee are fighting amongst themselves over who knows what, and the people outside of that committee have all given up citing the uselessness of the whole thing. Yet Obama stands firm that it's all just peachy.

As far as I can tell, the man has been calling for answers, and still is. I think you're completely underplaying the ways in which Obama is not defending the programs. All he's really doing, in his defense of the NSA, is saying an agency of that type is important to have. I couldn't find anything that was more than just a general support of the concept and their mission. Meanwhile, the same reports also mention that Obama cut some programs over the summer when he found out about them in a review, and is doing more review to see what needs to be cut and where.


Quote
edit:
2) That's entirely possible, I have no problems with such a route, but that would be a different complaint. My only counterpoint would be that it's also arguable there are just massive problems with the system we have in place, and that any body, no matter who they are, is going to be an 'incompotent President.' They'll just be some who get lucky / fortunate while they're in office, and others who get a raw deal.
Quite reasonable, however a president with some integrity would also call people out for screwing the system up so badly, rather than mounting a staunch and ongoing defense of their failure.

In my opinion, a President with some integrity would call for people out for screwing up a system, but only after he was fully aware of the situation so he knew whom he was calling out actually deserved it.

I just haven't seen this staunch defense of their failure. They've trumped out the same tired bullshit of "it keeps us safe," but that's not defending the systems failures.



Offline slycordinator

  • Posts: 1303
  • Gender: Male
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #81 on: October 30, 2013, 11:12:55 AM »
1) I guess I just relate being full of shit with lying, especially in the context. No matter how I read what Barto said, he would have to be calling Obama a liar.
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/full+of+shit
Quote
full of shit (rude)
completely wrong, false, or worthless full of crap You don't know what you're talking about - you're full of shit!

In short: It doesn't mean what you think it does.

Like the time I was backpacking with Boy Scouts and we mentioned how the moon is so bright out in the middle of nowhere. One kid immediately said that you can get your skin burned from rays that reflected off the moon and that they were called moonburns. I didn't get that he was trying to be deceitful; I think he believed that. It didn't stop me from telling him that he was full of shit, though, because he was.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #82 on: October 30, 2013, 01:24:27 PM »
I didn't say it means lying, I said I relate it with lying. Someone who is lying can be full of shit. Someone who is full of shit isn't necessarily lying. In the context of what Barto said, he was essentially calling him a liar, he wasn't just calling him wrong. And considering Barto didn't object to that interpretation, I really don't see why you are.

Someone who lies a lot, is also someone who says a lot of wrong things, which makes them someone who is full of shit. They're completely related terms.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #83 on: October 30, 2013, 01:51:00 PM »
Just to clarify, I was suggesting that either he was lying or he was incompetent and to short of integrity to own up to it.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #84 on: October 31, 2013, 05:21:10 PM »
Feinstein Releases Fake NSA Reform Bill, Actually Tries To Legalize Illegal NSA Bulk Data Collection

This is what I was concerned about, and while it won't be this bill, it'll be one that does the exact same thing. It'll be sold off as reforms for the abuses, but will actually legalize and codify exactly what they're already doing. Unfortunately, it'll be an easy sell. With all of the privacy related cases we've seen over the last decade, nobody ever actually tries to fix problems. They legalize them and insist that they made things better. Yeahhh Democracy!
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Lucien

  • composer
  • Posts: 4505
  • Gender: Male
    • my music
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #85 on: October 31, 2013, 06:00:30 PM »
Feinstein Releases Fake NSA Reform Bill, Actually Tries To Legalize Illegal NSA Bulk Data Collection

This is what I was concerned about, and while it won't be this bill, it'll be one that does the exact same thing. It'll be sold off as reforms for the abuses, but will actually legalize and codify exactly what they're already doing. Unfortunately, it'll be an easy sell. With all of the privacy related cases we've seen over the last decade, nobody ever actually tries to fix problems. They legalize them and insist that they made things better. Yeahhh Democracy!

Well, there's always Tor. Unless they ban them, which would suck. I think its strange why the government/NSA thinks they need to watch us. "b-b-b-but terrorists!" seems to be less of a good reason every day. I can only think they'd be looking for pedophiles or any illegal porn viewers, since that would make sense. But the government really hasn't told us that was the case. To us, from what we know, it just seems like they want to be creepers watching the porn we look at. However, with hundreds of millions of people to look through to find the offenders, it seems kind of pointless. The sheer amount of people would most likely keep you from being seen.

Then there are those new world order believers who think we are just spiraling down into a one-world government, and that this is just another sign. :umno:

There's nothing in this world but mist.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #86 on: October 31, 2013, 06:28:03 PM »
TOR is currently still solid, but they're making progress in attacking it and it seems to be a very high priority for them. I suspect the next evolution of privacy software will be a step up from TOR, and probably be quite solid for a while. However, as the OP suggests, I don't think they'll allow that to happen. The one thing that seems perfectly clear from all of these Snowden leaks and the government's responses to them is that our government overlords really fucking hate privacy. Scares the hell out of them, and from their perspective, only bad people require it. What we've seen several times is the government specifically going after people using anonymity protocols for no other reason than they're trying to remain hidden. That includes TOR users, and while they've had no success in identifying individual users, they can identify all TOR traffic and anybody they do happen to ID has a big giant bullseye on their computer.

As for the why, I don't think it's any huge conspiracy. Governments always want more power. The republicans always prided themselves on being the "law and order" party, and since the democrats are now the republicans, we have a "law and order" government on both sides of the aisle. A simple truism is that powerful people really hate any crime at all if they're not the ones committing it.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Lucien

  • composer
  • Posts: 4505
  • Gender: Male
    • my music
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #87 on: October 31, 2013, 06:33:50 PM »
Well, the government is annoying. It's sad, really.

That reminds me, I always associate the lyrics to Porcupine Tree's Deadwing as a requiem of privacy. I highly doubt that's the actual subject of them, but it just feels like it to me.

Offline slycordinator

  • Posts: 1303
  • Gender: Male
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #88 on: November 01, 2013, 01:50:03 PM »
While Barto already explained this,

In the context of what Barto said, he was essentially calling him a liar, he wasn't just calling him wrong.
Not true. He starts of detailing how the President is completely full of shit then in the next paragraph stating that he wouldn't be surprised if someone came along with evidence that the President was lying. There's a big difference between "it wouldn't surprise me if he was lying" and "he's a liar."

And considering Barto didn't object to that interpretation, I really don't see why you are.
He didn't need to raise the objection, because I already did it for him.

But whatever...

Offline Fiery Winds

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 2833
  • Gender: Male
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #89 on: November 23, 2013, 11:39:19 AM »
Latest leak reveals NSA has infected 50,000 networks around the world.

Quote
In the document, which lays out the agency's strategy from 2012 to 2016, the NSA complained that current U.S. laws don't allow the scope of surveillance that it would like to conduct.

Not too surprising, since a lot of this is foreign spying, but it's clear that the NSA wants access to every single piece of data around the world.
This thread has been burned.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #90 on: February 28, 2014, 08:31:52 AM »
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/02/27/uk-us-spies-hacked-webcams-millions-yahoo-users/

Quote
U.S. and British spy agencies intercepted and stored images from the webcams of millions of likely innocent Yahoo users, including “large quantities” of sexually explicit images, the Guardian reported Thursday -- a revelation the web giant described as “a whole new level of violation.”

A secret program called Optic Nerve appears intended to collate a digital mugbook of sorts, snapping screenshots every 5 minutes or so from user feeds. But the program targeted indiscriminately, regardless of whether the webcam owner was an intelligence target or not.

More than 1.8 million user accounts from around the world were accessed in one six-month period alone.

I guess it's OK, though. After all, they have prevented terrorists from attacking thanks to this.  ::) 

Besides which, it's all perfectly legal.  :lol
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline AngelBack

  • I'm officially a lard......
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 716
  • Gender: Male
  • Why you want beef with broccoli ?
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #91 on: February 28, 2014, 09:44:21 AM »
The over stepping of/on privacy rights has reached epic proportions and that is just the incidents we have found out about to date.  It would be silly to think there aren't even more invasive eavesdropping  programs underway that we have NOT heard of yet.

I am no conspiracy nut, but in one week my fifteen year old son searched for the recipe to make C4 and then let a friend show him a KKK site.  NO doubt my IP address is on somebody's watch list by now.  And when they see how often I am on DTF....oh boy, sorry guys, guilt by association!
Until you struggle through the dark, you'll never know that you're alive.

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 7294
  • Gender: Male
  • Do a nice one for grandma
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #92 on: February 28, 2014, 10:32:33 AM »
The over stepping of/on privacy rights has reached epic proportions and that is just the incidents we have found out about to date.  It would be silly to think there aren't even more invasive eavesdropping  programs underway that we have NOT heard of yet.

I am no conspiracy nut, but in one week my fifteen year old son searched for the recipe to make C4 and then let a friend show him a KKK site.  NO doubt my IP address is on somebody's watch list by now.  And when they see how often I am on DTF....oh boy, sorry guys, guilt by association!

Not to mention the blackmail on a lot of people.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

I Love You...Poppin Fresh

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #93 on: March 11, 2014, 08:03:47 PM »
Conflict Erupts in Public Rebuke on C.I.A. Inquiry

Christ, this thing between Feinstein and the CIA is turning into a real meltdown. Can't say that I'm disappointed at all, but I am pretty disgusted at all the parties involved. The great part of it is that it's covering so much ground pretty much everybody is being exposed. You've got the CIA destroying evidence of wrongdoing, and hiding evidence from the Senate investigating it. You've got the Senate obtaining internal, classified documents from the CIA via unknown means. There's the CIA spying on the Senate to find out how they got documents that called them liars and criminals. Now you've got Feinstein's sorry ass having the gall to whine because the CIA is spying on them, rather than just us lowly citizens. Now we've got both sides reporting each other to the DoJ, as if Holder's weak ass is going to do anything about it, when his department is probably in just as deep as everybody else. Just goes to show that when scumbags associate with other scumbags, you can always count on it becoming a clusterfuck of lies and power grabs.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline MinistryOfLostSouls

  • Posts: 92
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a vewy vewy nithe guy
    • A Happy Place: Inside the Film Work of Matthew Berdyck
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #94 on: March 12, 2014, 01:53:46 AM »
It may seem I talk about my film career a lot but up until I haven't really said anything about what I really do for a living.  I'm going to express what I do because it makes a very good point about the subject of privacy and government monitoring. 

Aside from making music videos, which is my hobby, I have been traveling the country exposing EPA Superfund toxic waste sites in residential neighborhoods and the associated illness clusters.  I work in the same field as a peer to Erin Brockovich, essentially.  My primary focus is Superfund sites that are managed by The Department of Defense, or defense contractors.  Basically, I show up, take on the DOD, The US EPA, state EPA, Mayors, and local newspapers for covering up toxic waste dumps in residential neighborhoods. 

Recently, in part, my efforts contributed to the resignation of Scott Nally, the director of The Ohio EPA, after he illegally denied bulk records requests and then was found to have taken bribes from the coal industry.  Right now my primary opponents to my work would be Lockheed Martin, Monsanto - for their chromium production, The US EPA Regions 5 & 9, The Defense Logistics Organization.  I'm doing work that is working to put state, local, and federal officials out of office. 

I'm working on exposing the fact that The DOD poisoned about 60,000,000 Americans with toxic waste while using The EPA to cover up their actions, all confirmed by public records.  I'm doing a feature length film about the subject matter narrated by Andrew Tiernan, the guy that plays Ephialtes in the 300 series and was Salzar in The Pianist, called Death Water. 

Now, all of that being said, I'm legit as fuck.  If you see me in your neighborhood with a camera all hell is about to break loose.  You should probably sell your house and count how many friends you have with brain tumors. I'm running around the country exposing defense contractors to billions in lawsuits.  Yet, do I worry about being monitored?  No.  Why?  Because I'm not doing anything wrong. 

If they are monitoring me it hasn't stopped me from doing a damn thing.  I have people around me who constantly try to make me feel like I am doing some covert operation or that my car is going to be mysteriously rammed into a pole at 4am and burst into flames, like the guy a couple of months ago in LA who was about to reveal secrets about the director of the CIA.  Is that going to happen?  No.  Mostly because I don't drive and also because I am not a paranoid freak. 

Now, if they are, in fact, monitoring people what are they monitoring them for?  They are looking for instances of possible domestic terrorism.  Let's say we have a bombing, and then Alex Jones screams, "False Flag" and then 15 million of his followers all get on Facebook screaming about revolution.  Gee, who do you think they are going to start monitoring?  Julllian Assange said, "Facebook is a CIA spying machine." I, for one, support monitoring in the capacity of protecting ourselves inside our own boundaries from another Timothy McVeigh, or Ted Kazinski.  If there are NSA people monitoring me I hope they are, at least, entertained.



I remember trying to explain this to a group of Alex Jones followers, trying to explain that when you scream on the internet about overthrowing the government that you could potentially be exposing yourself to surveillance from the NSA.  They got angry at me, said I was "COINTEL PRO" and that I was working for the CIA to disrupt their "important work towards revolution."  That's cute.  Dear CIA, PAY me.

« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 02:12:15 AM by MinistryOfLostSouls »

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #95 on: March 12, 2014, 08:23:59 AM »
So in other words, the government is poisoning neighborhoods and then lying about it, but they're certainly trustworthy enough to only spy on terrorists rather than, say, people who might be subversive but non-violent? People who might disagree politically? Dopers? Bitcoin hoarders? Truth is we're seeing more and more reports about the scope of the spying, and the pattern reflects what everybody has known all along which is that goal of any intelligence service is to have access to every single bit of information at any time. Given what you're up to that should concern you.

To paraphrase a old doper adage, it's not paranoia if they really are up to no good.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline MinistryOfLostSouls

  • Posts: 92
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a vewy vewy nithe guy
    • A Happy Place: Inside the Film Work of Matthew Berdyck
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #96 on: March 12, 2014, 10:51:01 AM »
So in other words, the government is poisoning neighborhoods and then lying about it, but they're certainly trustworthy enough to only spy on terrorists rather than, say, people who might be subversive but non-violent? People who might disagree politically? Dopers? Bitcoin hoarders? Truth is we're seeing more and more reports about the scope of the spying, and the pattern reflects what everybody has known all along which is that goal of any intelligence service is to have access to every single bit of information at any time. Given what you're up to that should concern you.

To paraphrase a old doper adage, it's not paranoia if they really are up to no good.

They're not actually "lying" about the toxic waste.  That's the problem. There are 1,300 of these sites all across the country.  In each case the EPA came in and cleaned everything up but their public education campaigns were  very limited, i.e. Akron, Ohio 1000 effected residents only 300 mailers sent out, San Fernando Valley 800,000 effected water customers only 1,800 mailers.  Do this over a period of 33 years at 1,300 sites and eventually, like saving pocket change for a year, the numbers add up over time.  It was a valiant effort, but it wasn't valiant enough. 

And yes, if you are "subversive" but non-violent you are exposing yourself to potential monitoring.  Evidence of that monitoring, outside of Snowden revelations, exists if you take the time to look for them.  The ACLU just filed massive lawsuit over Fusion Centers violating people's privacy https://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/fusion-centers.  Even then, the Fusion Center program enter has turned up very little useful information. 

You say I should be concerned that they are monitoring me.  Why?  Who gives a fuck if they are monitoring me.  How does it effect my life if they assign attention to me?  I mean, if they did bother to waste resources on me what would they find out?  Subject drinks too much caffeine?  Then, once they've collected all this data about me what are they going to do with it?  I'm not doing anything wrong or breaking any laws.



 



 

Offline ReaPsTA

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9401
  • Gender: Male
  • Lost within a world I chose to hide
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #97 on: March 12, 2014, 12:13:03 PM »
At some point, it's a simple upside/downside comparison:

Downside

 - The government has tried to alter and shape political speech for its benefit before, such as smearing Martin Luther King Jr.  In this case, they're obviously trying to gather personal data on potential opponents to use against them.  Let's say you're a Congressperson who wants to oppose the NSA, but you watch really weird porn.  Do you want that getting out?

 - This is also an economic issue.  Let's say you're an oil company that wants to better encrypt your internal networks.  It's be a shame if classified economic information "leaked", wouldn't it?

 - Drug cases are being prosecuted with secret evidence acquired by the NSA.

 - Attorney-client confidentiality over electronic communications is basically dead.

 - Confidentiality of medical information is very probably dead.

Upside

 - Maybe, possibly, some day catching a terrorist.
We must learn to rise above the past
Before we can at last
Begin again

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #98 on: March 12, 2014, 12:17:42 PM »
Hopefully a terrorist you didn't create yourself.  :lol
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline ReaPsTA

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9401
  • Gender: Male
  • Lost within a world I chose to hide
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #99 on: March 12, 2014, 12:25:32 PM »
What are you talking about?  When Pakistani people watch their family members get horribly murdered by drones, they thank Allah that America is protecting them from terrorists.  The constant anxiety they feel isn't because the drones are terrorizing them.  It's because they know that, somewhere among them, someone is maybe possibly plotting an attack against America.  And all they want is for America to be safe.
We must learn to rise above the past
Before we can at last
Begin again

Offline JayOctavarium

  • I used to be a whorejerk
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7828
  • Gender: Male
  • But then I took a Hef to the knee...
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #100 on: March 12, 2014, 12:29:57 PM »
MinistryOfLostSouls...


Aren't the Halico site in Oxnard and the Santa Suzanna Jet Propulsion Lab in Simi Valley both Superfund sites? Or am I thinking of something else.





Subject drinks too much caffeine?


This made me :lol





--


sorry to get off topic      -sinks back into the hedge-
I just don't understand what they were trying to achieve with any part of the song, either individually or as a whole. You know what? It's the Platypus of Dream Theater songs. That bill doesn't go with that tail, or that strange little furry body, or those webbed feet, and oh god why does it have venomous spurs!? And then you find out it lays eggs too. The difference is that the Platypus is somehow functional despite being a crazy mishmash or leftover animal pieces

-BlobVanDam on "Scarred"

Offline ReaPsTA

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9401
  • Gender: Male
  • Lost within a world I chose to hide
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #101 on: March 12, 2014, 12:36:59 PM »
Personal thing - I have a friend who's in Morocco right now.  I know the NSA is collecting what we send and probably scanning it.  I'm very very careful about what I type because I don't want them coming to my house or putting a piece of Malware on my computer to track me further.
We must learn to rise above the past
Before we can at last
Begin again

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #102 on: March 12, 2014, 01:26:38 PM »
Personal thing - I have a friend who's in Morocco right now.  I know the NSA is collecting what we send and probably scanning it.  I'm very very careful about what I type because I don't want them coming to my house or putting a piece of Malware on my computer to track me further.
Certainly reasonable. What troubles me is that if they think you're going to any lengths at all to be secretive that will only escalate the matter. Anybody who uses encryption, for example, is already a suspect because nobody without something to hide would do such a thing. The continuation of that is that some NSA asshat might well decide that your chats are too benign to be normal and decide that in an of itself warrants further investigation. Ironically, you might be better off signing every email with:

Flight school bomb pressure cooker jihad first responders FEMA hospital gas influenza mujaheddin resistant


And God dammit, somebody stole my idea. NSA keyword Haiku generator I actually proposed a haiku/poetry contest a few months ago.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline ReaPsTA

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9401
  • Gender: Male
  • Lost within a world I chose to hide
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #103 on: March 12, 2014, 01:29:38 PM »
It's not all bad, things evolve.  Eventually, enough garbage "key words" will be out there that they won't be worth spying on anymore.
We must learn to rise above the past
Before we can at last
Begin again

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18109
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Privacy and anonymity
« Reply #104 on: March 12, 2014, 01:37:32 PM »
They already aren't. Hell, there are already tons of people using a Mozilla plugin that automatically attaches random PRISM keywords to every email. The bad guys are the ones who choose their words wisely like you and your Moroccan friend. People who plaster their messages with bomb references are just troublemakers.

Sadly, I'm not sure a government as ineffective as ours would catch on to such a distinction. Fuck, look at TSA.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson