Obama Admin. admits to surveillance methods: Beating a Dead Horse Pt. 74

Hopefully everyone has heard soundbites or saw the speeches on TV.

Glenn Greenwald received a lot of potentially damning documents from an insider source at the NSA, saying that most major internet companies have or were ordered to hand over account and personal information including emails and their attachments, pictures, what companies they work for, etc. under Operation Prism beginning in 2007. Apparently Greenwald has copies of the NSA requests for Google and others to hand over and mine this information on a continual basis.

Also doing the same with any Verizon phone customers.

The official response from the gov't is that this was a "modest breach of privacy", and that unless individuals were suspects in a terror plot or case, that their information would not be delved into.

Occupy Wall Street participants also allegedly had their phones data mined:

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/06/security_expert_all_occupiers_phones_were_logged/

so, what's everyone think? let's start up the ol' shitstorm.

another proof that obamba is indeed leading america to socialism devoid of privacy, individualism and private property where government and the people is one.

Nothing new, it sucks but i dont care because my life is not worthy of surveillance.

The thought of people spying on you its kind of creepy but lets face it most of us are not being spied on.

  On 6/8/2013 at 7:15 PM, Deer said:

Nothing new, it sucks but i dont care because my life is not worthy of surveillance.

 

The thought of people spying on you its kind of creepy but lets face it most of us are not being spied on.

Exactly my thoughts.

Ze Germans were very happy with the Dutch registering belief. If regime's ever change in something more fascist, multiple humans will be fucked based on whatever criteria they can google.

https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2013/06/06/un-report-warns-of-surveillance-techs-human-rights-threats

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57587005-38/justice-department-tries-to-force-google-to-hand-over-user-data/

These are pretty serious issues, but I find that most people I try to talk "privacy" with online just don't get it (or don't care) yet. They are largely in the boat that Deer and Stephen are in - believing that they're so inconsequential that no one would spy on them, so why should they care about this? Nothing they can do anyway, etc etc. I don't much care for that outlook - it seems very complacent and self-interested, though probably unintentionally so - but I do understand the frustration regarding the lack of ways to influence new policies. People's response to privacy concerns is usually "well get off the internet if it bothers you, nyahh!" and that is, of course, not a solution to the problem. If anybody's interested, I highly recommend Access Now as a good source for keeping up with these issues in the news.

problem is just the mere suggestion or hint that we *could be* spied on regardless of criminal acts, leaves a chilling effect that alters the way we act and behave on a subconscious level. Even if you don't think anything you do is worthy of spying or something to the effect of 'if im not doing anything wrong i dont have anything to hide' i believe that deep down on some level you are modulating your behavior online and in the public sphere as a result of surveillance.

if you want to do this test for yourself, next time you're at a bar or dinner with friends put a tape recorder down on the table, start it and say 'im not going to listen to this, so just carry on as normal' and chances are they wont carry on as normal

  On 6/8/2013 at 8:42 PM, luke viia said:

https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2013/06/06/un-report-warns-of-surveillance-techs-human-rights-threats

 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57587005-38/justice-department-tries-to-force-google-to-hand-over-user-data/

 

These are pretty serious issues, but I find that most people I try to talk "privacy" with online just don't get it (or don't care) yet. They are largely in the boat that Deer and Stephen are in - believing that they're so inconsequential that no one would spy on them, so why should they care about this? Nothing they can do anyway, etc etc. I don't much care for that outlook - it seems very complacent and self-interested, though probably unintentionally so - but I do understand the frustration regarding the lack of ways to influence new policies. People's response to privacy concerns is usually "well get off the internet if it bothers you, nyahh!" and that is, of course, not a solution to the problem. If anybody's interested, I highly recommend Access Now as a good source for keeping up with these issues in the news.

100% agree.

and sadly the only way to be truly 'private' now is coming at an intersection with hacker culture/cyber terrorism. PEople who use tor or privacy methods to be anonymous online will now be targeted and extra scrutinized because they are 'most likely' to be hackers or 'cyber terrorists'. IT's really crazy how if you think about it, Stuxnet is really what started most of this talk about *Actual* harmful cyberterrorism, we played dumb for years but after America and Israel admitted working in tandem to create Stuxnet, nobody gives a shit but still the American propaganda for cyber terrorism is still taken seriously.

I highly recommend that Stephen and Deer watch this talk by John Turley. He makes a good case for the idea that surrendering your privacy and not having respect for your own privacy actually goes against human nature

5 parts, here is part 1

far more interesting than 95% of the Ted talks people pass around. you won't see this at a Ted Talk though, because somehow its become controversial to stand up for privacy and actually claim that one can fight against the 'inevitable'

edit: re: Luke, think about how many people were not cognoscente of the world or privacy rights pre Patriot act and 9/11. How can you convince people this young and who didn't have awareness of privacy before it started eroding away so quickly that it's important? I've found that the younger you are the less you seem concerned about privacy.

edit2: "most of us are not being spied on" is a blatantly self centered viewpoint. Try being a journalist or activist and comfortably hold that point of view.

  On 6/8/2013 at 7:15 PM, Deer said:

Nothing new, it sucks but i dont care because my life is not worthy of surveillance.

 

The thought of people spying on you its kind of creepy but lets face it most of us are not being spied on.

I don't believe this. It seems to me that we are all being spied on but it's only a few who have now been actively persued. one does not need a life full of meaning to be prosecuted or attacked, If you do something wrong and the circumstances are right you are going to get shit.

  On 6/8/2013 at 9:51 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

problem is just the mere suggestion or hint that we *could be* spied on regardless of criminal acts, leaves a chilling effect that alters the way we act and behave on a subconscious level. Even if you don't think anything you do is worthy of spying or something to the effect of 'if im not doing anything wrong i dont have anything to hide' i believe that deep down on some level you are modulating your behavior online and in the public sphere as a result of surveillance.

 

if you want to do this test for yourself, next time you're at a bar or dinner with friends put a tape recorder down on the table, start it and say 'im not going to listen to this, so just carry on as normal' and chances are they wont carry on as normal

you keep pushing this simplistic hypothesis every time the issue is mentioned.

regarding your example, i presume that maybe the first time they will be suspicious and act funny (if they initially don't trust you) but in subsequent times as more and more proof accumulates they you're indeed doing nothing with the recordings they'll gradually stop caring.

the internalized idea that chances are that some NSA worker is gonna spy your internets are close to zero similarly nullifies this effect you're talking about. also, people don't give a fuck.

  On 6/8/2013 at 7:09 PM, eugene said:

another proof that obamba is indeed leading america to socialism devoid of privacy, individualism and private property where government and the people is one.

Oh c'mon don't do this "socialism" con again. It's way closer to a fascist state. And may I remind you of the McCarthy era, which was completely anti-socialist but so fascist to an extend where it became identical to the system the USA had been fighting just 10 years ago in Europe. Had McCarthy had the technological means of today he would have made the US a perfect 1984 scenery.

i think if they really wan't to put us all under constant serveilance they should first invoke a temporary martial law and bring in the troops and totally decimate all american street gangs and mafia and corrupt cops and THEN start the serveilance and say its to make sure none of that shit happens again. if they did that i might be tempted to just accept it.

  On 6/8/2013 at 10:11 PM, Bertolt Brechtakt said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 7:09 PM, eugene said:

another proof that obamba is indeed leading america to socialism devoid of privacy, individualism and private property where government and the people is one.

Oh c'mon don't do this "socialism" con again. It's way closer to a fascist state. And may I remind you of the McCarthy era, which was completely anti-socialist but so fascist to an extend where it became identical to the system the USA had been fighting just 10 years ago in Europe. Had McCarthy had the technological means of today he would have made the US a perfect 1984 scenery.

 

i think he was being sarcastic.

  On 6/8/2013 at 10:22 PM, SR4 said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 10:11 PM, Bertolt Brechtakt said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 7:09 PM, eugene said:

another proof that obamba is indeed leading america to socialism devoid of privacy, individualism and private property where government and the people is one.

Oh c'mon don't do this "socialism" con again. It's way closer to a fascist state. And may I remind you of the McCarthy era, which was completely anti-socialist but so fascist to an extend where it became identical to the system the USA had been fighting just 10 years ago in Europe. Had McCarthy had the technological means of today he would have made the US a perfect 1984 scenery.

 

 

 

i think he was being sarcastic.

 

I hope so :)

limpyloo, well, go fuck yourself and also stop posting.

essiness, luke, JE, i get and sympathize with all of your points but i feel like this spying is reserve for certain individuals and not for everyone. I do think they have the capabilities to spy on everyone but why? just for he lulz? why spy on people who pretty much go to work, come home watch some TV and go to bed just to do it all over again the next day, it seems like a waste of time/resources.

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:00 PM, essines said:

limpyloo, well, go fuck yourself and also stop posting.

chillax brah I was just joshin ya

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:08 PM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:00 PM, essines said:

limpyloo, well, go fuck yourself and also stop posting.

 

chillax brah I was just joshin ya

 

no, you weren't.

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:08 PM, Deer said:

essiness, luke, JE, i get and sympathize with all of your points but i feel like this spying is reserve for certain individuals and not for everyone. I do think they have the capabilities to spy on everyone but why? just for he lulz? why spy on people who pretty much go to work, come home watch some TV and go to bed just to do it all over again the next day, it seems like a waste of time/resources.

That's just like, your feeling, man. :P

  On 6/8/2013 at 10:05 PM, eugene said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 9:51 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

problem is just the mere suggestion or hint that we *could be* spied on regardless of criminal acts, leaves a chilling effect that alters the way we act and behave on a subconscious level. Even if you don't think anything you do is worthy of spying or something to the effect of 'if im not doing anything wrong i dont have anything to hide' i believe that deep down on some level you are modulating your behavior online and in the public sphere as a result of surveillance.

 

if you want to do this test for yourself, next time you're at a bar or dinner with friends put a tape recorder down on the table, start it and say 'im not going to listen to this, so just carry on as normal' and chances are they wont carry on as normal

 

regarding your example, i presume that maybe the first time they will be suspicious and act funny (if they initially don't trust you) but in subsequent times as more and more proof accumulates they you're indeed doing nothing with the recordings they'll gradually stop caring.

people definitely act different when you have a habit of recording them. I used to do this to my friends in bars. It was pretty wild how different the tone of conversations would end up Even parties got quieter when I'd have the recorder out. I never used the recordings against anyone, just for sampling, so none of my friends had any direct evidence that the recordings would hurt them. It seemed to me that their behavior remained changed for months after I stopped recording them, though I never came out and said "OK! I'm done recording things now!" -- just didn't get the portable mic out any more.

It's a pretty good comparison imo!

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:14 PM, essines said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:08 PM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:00 PM, essines said:

limpyloo, well, go fuck yourself and also stop posting.

 

chillax brah I was just joshin ya

 

no, you weren't.

 

You need to chill out.

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:08 PM, Deer said:

essiness, luke, JE, i get and sympathize with all of your points but i feel like this spying is reserve for certain individuals and not for everyone. I do think they have the capabilities to spy on everyone but why? just for he lulz? why spy on people who pretty much go to work, come home watch some TV and go to bed just to do it all over again the next day, it seems like a waste of time/resources.

don't think that they're actively spying on "normal" people, just collecting a lot of data for future use in case someone goes bad. there's even no need for spying really with the amount of data that can be derived from our internet use.

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:20 PM, eugene said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:08 PM, Deer said:

essiness, luke, JE, i get and sympathize with all of your points but i feel like this spying is reserve for certain individuals and not for everyone. I do think they have the capabilities to spy on everyone but why? just for he lulz? why spy on people who pretty much go to work, come home watch some TV and go to bed just to do it all over again the next day, it seems like a waste of time/resources.

don't think that they're actively spying on "normal" people, just collecting a lot of data for future use in case someone goes bad. there's even no need for spying really with the amount of data that can be derived from our internet use.

 

Yeah, it's record keeping, not spying in the sense of collecting secrete photos of Deer kissing his mistress/llama under the stadium bleachers.

Though I have a feeling the NSA would disagree w/ Eugene's second statement there. Somebody apparently thinks it is very much necessary to be collecting data secretly.

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:17 PM, luke viia said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 11:08 PM, Deer said:

essiness, luke, JE, i get and sympathize with all of your points but i feel like this spying is reserve for certain individuals and not for everyone. I do think they have the capabilities to spy on everyone but why? just for he lulz? why spy on people who pretty much go to work, come home watch some TV and go to bed just to do it all over again the next day, it seems like a waste of time/resources.

 

That's just like, your feeling, man. :P

 

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 10:05 PM, eugene said:

 

  On 6/8/2013 at 9:51 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

problem is just the mere suggestion or hint that we *could be* spied on regardless of criminal acts, leaves a chilling effect that alters the way we act and behave on a subconscious level. Even if you don't think anything you do is worthy of spying or something to the effect of 'if im not doing anything wrong i dont have anything to hide' i believe that deep down on some level you are modulating your behavior online and in the public sphere as a result of surveillance.

 

if you want to do this test for yourself, next time you're at a bar or dinner with friends put a tape recorder down on the table, start it and say 'im not going to listen to this, so just carry on as normal' and chances are they wont carry on as normal

 

regarding your example, i presume that maybe the first time they will be suspicious and act funny (if they initially don't trust you) but in subsequent times as more and more proof accumulates they you're indeed doing nothing with the recordings they'll gradually stop caring.

 

people definitely act different when you have a habit of recording them. I used to do this to my friends in bars. It was pretty wild how different the tone of conversations would end up Even parties got quieter when I'd have the recorder out. I never used the recordings against anyone, just for sampling, so none of my friends had any direct evidence that the recordings would hurt them. It seemed to me that their behavior remained changed for months after I stopped recording them, though I never came out and said "OK! I'm done recording things now!" -- just didn't get the portable mic out any more.

 

It's a pretty good comparison imo!

 

there's no question that people would act differently when put up with the fact they're being recorded, but i believe it's matter of trust and habit, im not sure that in your example they were 100% sure that the recordings wouldn't embarass them somehow.