Weigh In: Individual privacy and freedom versus collective *safety and security*

[misteraven]

Well, my peoples been a minute since I've done a "weigh In" thread. The last ones on Social Media cheapening personal relationships and killing conversation has done incredibly well (go check it out and chime in, if you havent already). The one on political correctness versus teenage / young adult violence hasn't been as popular a topic, but hoping you guys still jump in on that discussion. Also remember to search "Weigh In" as there will likely be many more if you're reading this long after the fact.

 

Current topic: Individual privacy and freedom versus collective *safety and security*.

 

Inspired by a DM conversation with a friend from London (yes, it sucked trying to tap out decent replies on the fake mobile keyboard and being limited by the charter count for each individual response. Also lost a message or two when I hit send and it just disappeared instead of sending). In any case, I had responded to an IG story he posted that was a repost of someone else being critical of tax breaks for the 1% and how they should be paying more taxes and carrying the lions share of the weight in supporting a livable wage and health care and other social programs since they wouldn't be in a privileged position without the hard work of the labor force.

 

Now to take a step back and add some context, which helps define my position in the actual topic here (though this also deserves to be a weigh in thread so maybe we'll loop back to the specific topic of taxes)... I believe tax is theft, plain and simple. If you pay 25% taxes on your income, you are a slave from January 1 through to March 31st. Literally every penny you make, will be taken from you through the threat of incarceration and enforced from the end of a gun. That money will then go into the void where if you take the time to review the National Budget (in the USA at least), most will be going to wage wars and further build up our arsenal of tools for mass destruction. The next largest line item is to pay for medicare and social security, a ponzi scheme in every sense of the definition in that the government long ago spent the money of the people that paid into that retirement program and is now paying them back with new money being taxed (stolen) from people working today.

 

The basic services that come to mind the moment you suggest we should do away with all taxes... Stuff like roads and bridges, National Parks, environmental spending, etc can be found all lumped into that little sliver in the pie chart at the bottom of the line items that make up the National Budget. So while you're slaving a way a minimum of 3 months out of every year (often times significantly longer), your money is going to further consolidate the power of the politically elite, pay their ridiculous salaries and their preferential health care (that differs completely from the crap we're forced into - yet another topic - and basically do all the foul shit most of us are against like invading sovereign countries and bombing their infrastructure to dust before rebuilding it all back up again... And providing shit care to our senior citizens because they were convinced they needed to give up a huge portion of their income over a lifetime so that the government could look after them in their old age, rather than consider the government can't even deliver mail or issue drivers licenses with any type of proficiency so literally putting your retirement and health in their hands might not be a wise idea (also a topic for another day).

 

Anyhow, looping back... Considering the above especially, but in general we likely can all agree that the government is hugely powerful and that power is maintained by way of our tax money. That if we implemented duties and tariffs solely by those that are consuming that item, that we could very easily cover the costs of infrastructure and basic social systems like the fire department and law enforcement. Believe it or now, in the history of the USA, even now in 2018, this country went without income tax for longer than it has been maintained with it. That all the way into the 1900s, we actually managed to get through some of our largest advances as a country and prosper to become one of the most significant countries on the planet, without a government funded through the hefty income tax revenue it demands today. Again, straying and definitely need to make this its own topic, but feel free to explore it further.

 

Government power is in direct correlation to the loss of individual freedom and a huge recent example is the Real ID program being implemented, right now as we speak. Basically the Federal Government wants more direct, granular access to data on each individual. By appropriating the state drivers license system and consolidating it into a centralized federal database, they can lay the groundwork to mass data collection since drivers licenses are used for a whole hell of a lot more than driving a car. With technological advances and a more standards compliant format, its easy to go from flashing some ID, to instead scanning an ID that then updates your profile in the system. Scary 1984 type shit for sure.

 

The narrative being sold is that time tested and true boogie man narrative of terrorism and the governments valiant efforts to track it down and stomp it back into the furthest reaches so that you and your loved ones stay safe.

 

Never mind that your chance of being hit by lightening or attacked by a shark are greater than dying in a terrorist type event. Or that somehow hacking or falsifying the state drivers license system, literally has not played any type of role in a single event, ever. Or that anyone can still falsify the paperwork needed to get a Real ID or bypass it altogether with a falsified international passport, etcetera, etcetera.

 

Some states, including my newly adopted home of Montana, essentially told the Federal Government to shove their Real ID program and to go fuck themselves. Literally our governor, with the unanimous support from both sides of the aisle in our state legislature, said it was a not needed, expensive and a gross violation of individual privacy and complete over step of Federal power.

 

In response, the Federal government bullied the non-cooperative states, including Montana by threatening to pull funding for specific critical programs (yes the ones, being funded by the money they previously stole from the very same people) and more significantly (IMO), said that Montana state drivers licenses would no longer qualify as valid personal identification in any Federal building. That means, you can't use a Montana drivers license at the post office or at the airport to buy a ticket or board a plane. Further to that, it would no longer fall under the umbrella of national reciprocity so that driving in other states, would require new legislation between each and every state to revalidate the privilege to drive their roads with a drivers license no longer recognized at the national level. Yeah, I'm fucking serious... Look it up if you don't believe me.

 

Since then, and actually evolving this week, is that this particular state got somewhat bullied into semi compliance. Unlike most states that just went and embraced this fucked up cluster fuck of a situation, the state of Montana is voting to make Real ID participatory for citizens of the state, in exchange for not getting funding cut and for the people that aren't willing to deal with the hardships that'll follow giving Washington DC a giant middle finger. The Feds have extended the compliance deadline in exchange for *tangible progress* and the state is allowing people the option of paying $35 to trade in their Montana State Drivers License for a Real ID version of it so that they can get back to showing ID when they need to pick up their mail or board a flight that leaves the state of Montana. So at least for now, people here (and in a couple other states that are also fighting back) can choose to not get down with that program.

 

So... I'm guessing his will be news to a lot of you. I'm guessing those that might have heard mention, probably haven't followed it closely and realize the extent of what's happening, let alone the implications of this truly fucked up situation. While most of us are reposting Trump memes, marching against the 1% and arguing over who gets to use what bathroom or whatever the current narrative and hot button topic the mainstream media is spinning up, and feel like we're politically engaged, we're taking another huge step in that grand plan they have. George Orwell was far too conservative in his warnings about big brother.

 

Feel free to research all I've said. Here's a recent news report specific to where I live, but if you dig around, you'll find a ton of shit. Open your eyes, read between the lines, question everything and most important of all, start using that blob of grey matter between your ears.

 

http://flatheadbeacon.com/2018/01/09/montana-prepares-start-issuing-real-ids/

 

I now open this up to discussion.

[Mercer]

There's no hope of ever fixing government, and by that I mean any government, Federal, State, or Local. Power corrupts, and giving an organization a monopoly on violence means they have absolute power.

 

[Hua Guofang]

Shit, I know I’m going to expend way too much time power-posting in this thread.,.,

[misteraven]

Going to bump this with some big recent changes that speaks directly to this topic...

 

Big Brother Britain: Extraordinary moment police FINE pedestrian £90 for disorderly behaviour after he tries to cover his face from facial recognition camera on the streets of London

Link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7036141/Police-fine-pedestrian-90-facial-recognition-camera-row.html

 

San Francisco Is Right: Facial Recognition Must Be Put On Hold

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/opinion/columnists/facial-recognition-ban-privacy.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

[glorydays]

It's like we're paying to be oppressed

[misteraven]

7 hours ago, glorydays said:

It's like we're paying to be oppressed

You just summarized the entire tax system.

 

 

[Hayabusa]

Just curious but what do you guys fear would happen when the government collects all your information? What are the concerns?

 

sometimes I have a hard time believing that “the government” would target Joe in Wisconsin because they don’t like him. It just seems like an inefficient way to go after a person considering you would need to literally wade through millions of pieces of info to target someone?  Not trying to troll or be a dick but just curious what the real world concerns are? 

[misteraven]

Not even a need to speculate... Plenty of historical precedent on what happens to governments that consolidate too much power.

 

Side note: Why isn’t @Mercerup in this thread?

[Hayabusa]

53 minutes ago, misteraven said:

Not even a need to speculate... Plenty of historical precedent on what happens to governments that consolidate too much power.

 

Side note: Why isn’t @Mercerup in this thread?

Sure.

 

but i mean today. You as a concerned person about this issue, what do you forsee as a possibility with this government collection of information about citizens? Whats the government “end game” if you will?

 

disclaimer: im in Canada eh so far removed from our brothers to the south...

[Mercer]

6 hours ago, misteraven said:

Not even a need to speculate... Plenty of historical precedent on what happens to governments that consolidate too much power.

 

Side note: Why isn’t @Mercerup in this thread?

Quote

Now to take a step back and add some context, which helps define my position in the actual topic here (though this also deserves to be a weigh in thread so maybe we'll loop back to the specific topic of taxes)... I believe tax is theft, plain and simple. If you pay 25% taxes on your income, you are a slave from January 1 through to March 31st. Literally every penny you make, will be taken from you through the threat of incarceration and enforced from the end of a gun. That money will then go into the void where if you take the time to review the National Budget (in the USA at least), most will be going to wage wars and further build up our arsenal of tools for mass destruction. The next largest line item is to pay for medicare and social security, a ponzi scheme in every sense of the definition in that the government long ago spent the money of the people that paid into that retirement program and is now paying them back with new money being taxed (stolen) from people working today.

This was enough truth, and never felt the need to elaborate in here.

 

Extortion by threat of violence aside, if you look into the governments finances, they're much more irresponsible with spending than any of us are. Taxes are nowhere near high enough to cover what the US Government really spends if you calculate in the nation debt in the trillions we're stealing from future generations, and the infinite amount of unbacked money they magically print from thin air. They're basically devaluing what the citizens currently hold, stealing from your retirement fund, and driving prices endlessly upward. Venezuela isn't a freak occurrence,  that's just the inevitable fate of every fiat currency that's ever run it's full course.

[Mercer]

On 5/16/2019 at 1:18 PM, glorydays said:

It's like we're paying to be oppressed

This needs to be put on a shirt

[Mercer]

5 hours ago, Hayabusa said:

Sure.

 

but i mean today. You as a concerned person about this issue, what do you forsee as a possibility with this government collection of information about citizens? Whats the government “end game” if you will?

 

disclaimer: im in Canada eh so far removed from our brothers to the south...

Government used to be a bare bones way to avoid the tragedy of the commons, and organize a national defense and infrastructure. Today, it's a tool for people to enforce their vision for society onto everyone else. The way technology is going, someone will be able to look you up, process everything you've ever posted and build a psychological profile. That's good news for advertisers, and even better news for people who want to infringe on your freedom to facilitate their will. While Canada's government "isn't so bad" now depending on your perspective, and the amount of effort it currently takes to process all your data, give you a social rank, lock in in a cage, or worse isn't really worth it for now, things always change. There's no telling what can be done with all your data now, and especially in the future.

[Mercer]

On 5/16/2019 at 11:45 AM, misteraven said:

Going to bump this with some big recent changes that speaks directly to this topic...

 

Big Brother Britain: Extraordinary moment police FINE pedestrian £90 for disorderly behaviour after he tries to cover his face from facial recognition camera on the streets of London

Link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7036141/Police-fine-pedestrian-90-facial-recognition-camera-row.html

 

San Francisco Is Right: Facial Recognition Must Be Put On Hold

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/opinion/columnists/facial-recognition-ban-privacy.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

Amazing, conduct yourself in a disorderly manner by ganging around and detaining a citizen who's committed no crime, to charge THEM with disorderly conduct.

[Hua Guofang]

On 5/17/2019 at 1:45 AM, misteraven said:

Going to bump this with some big recent changes that speaks directly to this topic...

 

Big Brother Britain: Extraordinary moment police FINE pedestrian £90 for disorderly behaviour after he tries to cover his face from facial recognition camera on the streets of London

Link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7036141/Police-fine-pedestrian-90-facial-recognition-camera-row.html

 

San Francisco Is Right: Facial Recognition Must Be Put On Hold

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/opinion/columnists/facial-recognition-ban-privacy.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

I can assure you that there are a fuck-tonne of people inside the national security community who are alarmed and working hard to constrain the way government collects data, like what we saw in the UK this week. I took that issue to my colleagues who work in that area (policy and legal folk) and they were shocked and frightened by what they saw.

 

There's a pretty strong swell of people within the legal and policy profession that refuse to accept that legislation is the answer (for most things) but in particular the way data is collected and personal privacy. There's a big push to stop companies from collecting as much as they do and for govts to pull back on its natural urges to dominate in terms of information collection and hoarding. One main proponent here in Australia for govt pulling back on legislation and control is Lesley Seebeck (she was CISO at the Aust Bureau of Meteorology when they were hacked by the MSS a couple of years back, as a back door into the DoD), she has a lot of interesting things to say in this area. 

 

The social credit system in China has been a big wake up slap in the face for govts in the west, along with intelligence and policing communities. The idea was that the digital revolution would provide for greater knowledge and autonomy in society and we would take leaps and bounds in terms of civics, informed choice, etc. However, it's been the opposite. Technology has allowed authoritarian govts to massively increase their control and decrease transparency and it has created some unwelcome surges of an authoritarian nature in otherwise fairly relaxed govts.

 

People in the national security communities, the academy and different policy making areas are uncomfortable to alarmed because of the way tech - in terms of sensors, data collection and analysis and the uses of that data - is impacting our societies. The dislike of the new world is not something that exists only within those who distrust govt, it's also within govt.

Edited May 18, 2019 by Hua Guofang

[Hua Guofang]

Some folk I know discussing these exact issues

 

Tech, LAw and the day cyber went kinetic - https://simplecast.com/s/7dc05e0d

 

Data, cyber and the social contract - https://simplecast.com/s/85727718

 

 

[misteraven]

Doorbell-camera firm Ring has partnered with 400 police forces, extending surveillance concerns

The doorbell-camera company Ring has forged video-sharing partnerships with more than 400 police forces across the United States, granting them potential access to homeowners’ camera footage and a powerful role in what the company calls the nation’s “new neighborhood watch.”

 

Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/08/28/doorbell-camera-firm-ring-has-partnered-with-police-forces-extending-surveillance-reach/

 

 

[misteraven]

[misteraven]

Link: https://thehustle.co/10102019-ring-Amazon-surveillance-privacy/

 

As Ring’s surveillance partnerships come into focus, civil rights groups speak up

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Back in August, The Washington Post reported that more than 400 US agencies have inked video-sharing partnerships with Amazon’s Ring camera unit, which allows police potential access to footage from millions of internet-connected Ring cameras nationwide. 

Amazon and Ring — a company that hails its Neighbors app as “The New Neighborhood Watch” — see the rapid growth as a notch to be celebrated. But critics aren’t dancing (unless you consider flipping a lid a dance move).

On Tuesday, more than 30 civil rights and privacy groups endorsed an open letter calling on US cities to end their partnerships with Ring. Among other things, they cited a lack of transparency around the company’s marketing tactics and concerns involving consumer privacy.

Here are some of the issues the letter highlights: 

• Cops are coached on how to get surveillance footage without a warrant.
• Officials in partnered law enforcement agencies are instructed to promote the adoption of Ring and its connected app, Neighbors, which serves as a map interface for Ring cameras.
• Reports reveal statements put out by local governments were written, or approved, by Ring. 
• Some districts paid Amazon up to $100k to lower costs of Ring cameras for residents.

The letter argues that the partnerships are bereft of “oversight or accountability,” and calls for future deals to involve communities and elected official approval when deciding on the use of new public surveillance technology.

 

 

[misteraven]

Amazon Is Coaching Cops on How to Obtain Surveillance Footage Without a Warrant

Ring, Amazon’s home surveillance company, is teaching police how to convince residents to share camera footage with them.

 

Link: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/43kga3/amazon-is-coaching-cops-on-how-to-obtain-surveillance-footage-without-a-warrant

[misteraven]

Cops Are Offering Ring Doorbell Cameras in Exchange for Info

Amazon-owned Ring has cozied up to law enforcement, and critics say it's using police departments to help market its surveillance cameras.

 

Link: https://www.wired.com/story/cops-offering-ring-doorbell-cameras-for-information/

[misteraven]

Obama Administration Set to Expand Sharing of Data That N.S.A. Intercepts

The Obama administration is on the verge of permitting the National Security Agency to share more of the private communications it intercepts with other American intelligence agencies without first applying any privacy protections to them, according to officials familiar with the deliberations.

 

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/us/politics/obama-administration-set-to-expand-sharing-of-data-that-nsa-intercepts.html

[misteraven]

N.S.A. Triples Collection of Data From U.S. Phone Companies

The National Security Agency vacuumed up more than 534 million records of phone calls and text messages from American telecommunications providers like AT&T and Verizon last year — more than three times what it collected in 2016, a new report revealed on Friday.

*Report attached below.

 

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/politics/nsa-surveillance-2017-annual-report.html

2018-ASTR----CY2017----FINAL-for-Release-5.4.18.pdf

[Schnitzel]

This is getting so worrying.

 

 I haven't read all the way through this thread because . a lot of the time I freely admit I don't understand well enough to comment.

 

I hate the way  that the discussion is sort of framed now  that a desire for privacy, discomfort at constant surveillance starts to mark you out as undesirable.

 

I'm not doing anything wrong but I don't want you watching me not do it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by Schnitzel

[Schnitzel]

I've wondered if you could do stuff to cloud their view of your life  ( turn  flight mode on  your phone when you don't need it etc. switch phones with wifey on days times to cloud things) not to ensure total privacy but at least reduce the efficiency of the amount of data they have. but trying to explain that to people instantly puts you in a box marked weird.

 

All this shit seemed so nice so new so fun back in 2000 or even pre 2010 ( or whenever smartphones came out) now just seems a little tiresome if not outright distressing.

 

 

Amazon has not been transparent about plans to integrate facial recognition into Ring cameras. Amazon Ring has denied any connection between their technology and facial recognition software, but according to the Washington Post, Ring filed two patents in November 2018 “that describe technology with the ability to identify “suspicious people” and create a “database of suspicious persons.” Ring’s terms of service allow the company to “access and use your User Recordings” for “developing new Products and Services,” which covers facial recognition. 

 

 how far too far down this road have we gone that amazon gets to set the terms of what make somebody suspicious or undesirable....

 

[misteraven]

Putting it in airplane mode or even powering off isn’t enough. If you search, you’ll see they have had the ability to remote activate smart phones, as well as remote activate and broadcast sound and video for many years. They can even do it without the phone appearing to be active or in any way logging the remote activity in the logs or on your bill. 
 

you literally have to power down and remove the battery and even then I’m not sure you can trust it. Also, I have friends that work at Apple. Meeting areas all have places where you’re required to leave your phone. They do not allow them in high level meetings. On the surface you can say it’s so you don’t record activity but reality is that they’re aware of how smartphones can be exploited. 
 

Heres a link to an article discussing a class action lawsuit against Bose that used their wireless headphones to passively listen and build profile data on users that was then being sold off. 
 

Link: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bose-lawsuit-idUSKBN17L2BT

[Schnitzel]

Far out  this is actually really depressing.

 

If you have to remove the battery apple has you cornered......