No doubt identify theft occurs, and no doubt some have been harmed by some malicious disclosure of their medical information. No doubt technology has been and can be used for nefarious reasons. But fear of all those things is, IMNVHO, greatly exaggerated along with and in the same way everything has become fear-driven especially since 9/11/2001. The fear-mongering industry is thriving and being successful probably beyond any expectation. You absolutely can't get through any local news show without them saying - at least once - "we'll tell you how to protect your family." Articles now no longer tell you "how your kid can have fun at summer camp," but instead tell you "things to beware of if you send your kid to camp." Want to know the most popular toys to buy for Christmas? Nope, but you can find easily the "most dangerous." "Worst Foods to Eat", "Most Dangerous Airlines," "Cities to Avoid" yada. I think it's likely that fear will overtake old age, cancer and heart disease as the leading cause of death.
Well put.
It's in our nature to want to avoid things that harmful to us. Now that everything is a Google search away, we can search our fears and find endless articles and anectdotes to prove the conclusion we've already reached in our minds. A person is more likely to complain about a negative experience than boast about positive one, so our findings become skewed.
Yeah, I wondered what the total was he saw. And he did undoubtedly miss some - maybe a lot, since he was generally just being a bit observant while on his normal way to work. One wonders if it would be helpful to try to get the word out to potential evil-doers that it's really hard to avoid detection.
Yeah, I wondered what the total was he saw. And he did undoubtedly miss some - maybe a lot, since he was generally just being a bit observant while on his normal way to work. One wonders if it would be helpful to try to get the word out to potential evil-doers that it's really hard to avoid detection.
Non-evil lawbreakers (drugs, prostitution, gambling, etc.) and dissidents, too.
I don't know this but I suspect those little laser pointers that blind plane pilots can also blind surveillance cameras, especially those dinky ones in doorbells. I do know that just closing your eyes so that you yourself cannot see the camera does not mean the camera cannot see you. ok
I don't know this but I suspect those little laser pointers that blind plane pilots can also blind surveillance cameras, especially those dinky ones in doorbells. I do know that just closing your eyes so that you yourself cannot see the camera does not mean the camera cannot see you. ok
“Critics say that this designation conveniently obscures the fact that black supremacist violence, unlike white supremacist violence, does not actually exist.”
"The Consumer Online Privacy Rights Act is a very important step toward comprehensive consumer privacy protections. COPRA will protect us from corporations that value profit over our privacy. Support COPRA now."
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court found that the FBI may have violated the rights of potentially millions of Americans — including its own agents and informants — by improperly searching through information obtained by the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance program.
U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg, who serves in the District of Columbia and the FISA court, made his sweeping and condemnatory assessment in October 2018 in a 138-page ruling, which was declassified by the U.S. government this week.
To longtime critics of the government’s mass surveillance program, the FBI’s abuses are confirmation that federal law enforcement agents are combing through the communications of Americans without warrants, in violation of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
“These opinions reveal devastating problems with the FBI’s backdoor searches, which often resembled fishing expeditions through Americans’ personal emails and online messages,” said Patrick Toomey, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project. “But the court did not go nearly far enough to fix those abuses. The Constitution requires FBI agents to get a warrant before they go combing through our sensitive communications.”
The ruling concerns the FBI’s ability to access communications obtained through the NSA’s mass surveillance program, the existence of which was revealed in documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden. Critics of Snowden’s decision to leak classified NSA documents noted at the time that safeguards existed to prevent Americans’ communications from being searched improperly. The declassified FISA court ruling, however, shows that few safeguards existed at all....
Edward Snowden proved correct and patriotic, again.
On a daily basis I laugh my ass off about how people buy refrigerators and televisions and heat pumps and other things that they mindlessly take home and plug into the internet and how they consider themselves to be savvy and tech bright. One day probably not too far in the future, those folks that bought all that shit will wish they'd bought generators and gasoline instead. At least this is what my friend the Iranian general tells me.
Day by day, Amazon is extending its reach into everyday people’s lives through new technologies marketed as helpful and harmless. That cannot be farther from the truth. We are on the brink of a mass surveillance crisis and Amazon is ushering in this dangerous new era via Ring.
Ring, owned by Amazon, is a doorbell camera that allows users to monitor activity happening outside of the home and, many times, inside as well. Amazon not only has access to this footage, they own the content in perpetuity. But it gets worse-- Amazon makes insidious deals with local law enforcement agencies, rapidly targeting cities and writing marketing scripts for police officers to convince residents to buy Ring, often at a discounted rate or even for free.
Innovative technologies should not be used to increase policing at the expense of our privacy and freedom. Sign the petition to tell your mayor to put an end to shady partnerships between law enforcement and Ring.
Petition to Congress:
We need to curb Trump’s ability to spy on Americans without a warrant. That’s why you must vote YES for the bipartisan and bicameral Safeguarding Americans’ Private Records Act. This bill would put an end to the controversial Call Detail Records program in Section 215 of the Patriot Act, prohibit location tracking, and provide more transparency and oversight.
Day by day, Amazon is extending its reach into everyday people’s lives through new technologies marketed as helpful and harmless. That cannot be farther from the truth. We are on the brink of a mass surveillance crisis and Amazon is ushering in this dangerous new era via Ring.
Ring, owned by Amazon, is a doorbell camera that allows users to monitor activity happening outside of the home and, many times, inside as well. Amazon not only has access to this footage, they own the content in perpetuity. But it gets worse-- Amazon makes insidious deals with local law enforcement agencies, rapidly targeting cities and writing marketing scripts for police officers to convince residents to buy Ring, often at a discounted rate or even for free.
Innovative technologies should not be used to increase policing at the expense of our privacy and freedom. Sign the petition to tell your mayor to put an end to shady partnerships between law enforcement and Ring.
Petition to Congress:
We need to curb Trump’s ability to spy on Americans without a warrant. That’s why you must vote YES for the bipartisan and bicameral Safeguarding Americans’ Private Records Act. This bill would put an end to the controversial Call Detail Records program in Section 215 of the Patriot Act, prohibit location tracking, and provide more transparency and oversight.
Ah, yes, one more gizmo I will never have. If one wants to video their front porch one can install a CCTV camera out of reach and hook it to a DVR and record hours and days of porch video. A guy I used to buy medicine from in Asheville had this type of setup except he didn't record; just had a small monitor he could see the porch on. No one can spy on you if you have a stand alone system. Besides, we are all stand alone systems in our very existence. It's how things are meant to be.
Ah, yes, one more gizmo I will never have. If one wants to video their front porch one can install a CCTV camera out of reach and hook it to a DVR and record hours and days of porch video. A guy I used to buy medicine from in Asheville had this type of setup except he didn't record; just had a small monitor he could see the porch on. No one can spy on you if you have a stand alone system. Besides, we are all stand alone systems in our very existence. It's how things are meant to be.
People like watching their door and nanny cams on their phones, but they may be the ones being watched.
Ah, yes, one more gizmo I will never have. If one wants to video their front porch one can install a CCTV camera out of reach and hook it to a DVR and record hours and days of porch video. A guy I used to buy medicine from in Asheville had this type of setup except he didn't record; just had a small monitor he could see the porch on. No one can spy on you if you have a stand alone system. Besides, we are all stand alone systems in our very existence. It's how things are meant to be.
People like watching their door and nanny cams on their phones, but they may be the ones being watched.
Too bad for them. I described how to avoid this......a CCTV system cannot be hacked unless you physically splice into the cable hooked to the camera. It can't be done long distance or through the internet. Besides, these modern computer wizards are likely not very accomplished at doing things with their hands other than typing on keyboards.
People like watching their door and nanny cams on their phones, but they may be the ones being watched.
Possible, but not likely for most people. And, if you don't use the cams directed toward anything other than toward your outside door area, porch and yard, it would be pretty dull and mostly worthless watching. I suppose it could serve as an additional way for a potential thief to know the pattern of your comings and goings, or see which kid sneaks into the house late, or other incidentals of your life, but not a lot very personal or useful for nefariousness. Conversely, if all you have is cams with a monitor inside the house, you don't have squat any time you're not home. You'd be better off with a dog. Or maybe even one of the motion-detecting dog barkers.
Life is less stressful if you just expect to be on camera whenever you're in public, and that everything you say or post could possibly be public. Not that different from being a kid in a neighbourhood or smallish town back in the day where somebody would see whatever you did and tell your mum.
Life is less stressful if you just expect to be on camera whenever you're in public, and that everything you say or post could possibly be public. Not that different from being a kid in a neighbourhood or smallish town back in the day where somebody would see whatever you did and tell your mum.
Indeed.
Ethically, there's no difference between a policeman standing on a corner looking at people, and a face recognition system telling police who was at a given location.
