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

[luke viia]

 

 

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.

 

 

yup, and in that respect, it's pretty similar to the way people might change their behavior when they become aware that all their google searches, text messages, wall postings etc are being logged by the authorities.

[luke viia]

*Google (1) is viewing the thread*

 

 

[YO303]

 

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.

 

 

ah, that makes more sense, idiot me.

 

Is that something new? i thought we all knew it all along, i was under the impression that they have been doing this for a long time.

 

Okay now my question is what will people do about this. Are there any plans or protests or anything, posting on the internet about it will not solve anything.

 

I mean we have seen this before have we, people will get outraged for a couple of weeks then they'll forget about it with nothing done and nothing accomplished. If you are going to give me shit for being apathetic about the whole thing at least do something, its great to be aware and all but if you are going to act outraged do something more than complain for two weeks. (not directed at anyone is this thread, just the public in general)

[eugene]

 

 

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.

yup, and in that respect, it's pretty similar to the way people might change their behavior when they become aware that all their google searches, text messages, wall postings etc are being logged by the authorities.

well i'm pretty sure people are already quite aware that their private gmail messages are stored and logged by google, so is government somehow worse than a corporation you have absolutely no control over ?

regarding behavior change, as i said, i believe it's a matter of building up trust, it's a longterm thing. when people are made sure that the info they expose is not used against in any way they'll gradually stop caring. that's my theory on a subject i know nothing about..

[luke viia]

Yes, the government is worse. The government doesn't have to ask google for my info anymore, they demand it. That's what the video with Greenwald in the OP is about. Google can't put me in jail, the government - who now has access to everything I say via google - can. Normally when you give data to a company, there is some sort of privacy clause, saying what can and cannot be shared between the company you've given data to and third parties. That's been bypassed, apparently. It's alarming.

 

Regarding your second point - if people were indeed able to trust that the government wouldn't use their data to get them in trouble, then yeah, they'd probably not act much different whether monitored or not. But that's not the case. The Cameron D'Ambrosio facebook shenanigans over the past few weeks should be a good example of the sort of trust the government is building by using social network data.

[luke viia]

 

 

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.

 

 

ah, that makes more sense, idiot me.

 

Is that something new? i thought we all knew it all along, i was under the impression that they have been doing this for a long time.

 

Okay now my question is what will people do about this. Are there any plans or protests or anything, posting on the internet about it will not solve anything.

 

I mean we have seen this before have we, people will get outraged for a couple of weeks then they'll forget about it with nothing done and nothing accomplished. If you are going to give me shit for being apathetic about the whole thing at least do something, its great to be aware and all but if you are going to act outraged do something more than complain for two weeks. (not directed at anyone is this thread, just the public in general)

 

 

Front page of the EFF site offers a course of action: https://www.eff.org/

 

And posting online about online privacy DOES help the issue gain traction. That's exactly how SOPA and PIPA were squashed earlier this year.

[Silent Member]

So yeah, at some point in time everyone who ever gently graced an illegal torrent is going to jail/work camp for monsanto. It's a slippery slope I tell ya.

[eugene]

Yes, the government is worse. The government doesn't have to ask google for my info anymore, they demand it. That's what the video with Greenwald in the OP is about. Google can't put me in jail, the government - who now has access to everything I say via google - can. Normally when you give data to a company, there is some sort of privacy clause, saying what can and cannot be shared between the company you've given data to and third parties. That's been bypassed, apparently. It's alarming.

 

Regarding your second point - if people were indeed able to trust that the government wouldn't use their data to get them in trouble, then yeah, they'd probably not act much different whether monitored or not. But that's not the case. The Cameron D'Ambrosio facebook shenanigans over the past few weeks should be a good example of the sort of trust the government is building by using social network data.

that's not the issue i had in my mind, it's obvious that this move by the NSA is lame. im talking about something more hypothetical - the comparison of google and the government having your data. sure, google doesn't have an army and police but it still has the possibility to use your data in any way it wants, just use your imagination. the law, while different in ways it applies to corps and the gvnt plays the same role. i guess it's the dormant gvnmt fearing libertarian that wakes in every american when those issues rise up.

[luke viia]

It does strike me as odd that more people aren't equally concerned about their private information being plastered all over other social media sites as well. Not sure why you're trying to guide me into a conversation about who's worse: the government or google, though. Got my complaints about both.

 

 

 

 

Just as a last point before I fuck off for a while: if google has my google search data, they can do useful things with it, like refine searches and point me to new sources of information. The government can do... what again?

[eugene]

It does strike me as odd that more people aren't equally concerned about their private information being plastered all over other social media sites as well. Not sure why you're trying to guide me into a conversation about who's worse: the government or google, though. Got my complaints about both.

it's just an interesting observation i think. people have been giving up their information to various corporations who may exploit it for money since the existence of internet and were generally cool with that, but when it gets to the government its a "PRIVACY HOLOCAUST", "DEATH TO OBAMA" and such.

[Guest Atom Dowry Firth]

 

It does strike me as odd that more people aren't equally concerned about their private information being plastered all over other social media sites as well. Not sure why you're trying to guide me into a conversation about who's worse: the government or google, though. Got my complaints about both.

it's just an interesting observation i think. people have been giving up their information to various corporations who may exploit it for money since the existence of internet and were generally cool with that, but when it gets to the government its a "PRIVACY HOLOCAUST", "DEATH TO OBAMA" and such.

 

 

There's a big difference between willingly opting in to something you know the consequences of and having your privacy invaded while not knowing the consequences, without even having been consulted first.

[eugene]

i get the "invasion" part of course but in which case do you know the consequences exactly ? at least with the government you have some ability to change the management.

[YO303]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/08/us-usa-security-records-idUSBRE9560VA20130608 lol

 

This line from the article really got me ""We're going to have to make some choices as a society. ... There are trade-offs involved.", he says that like people had a choice, like the people voted on it (ironically people voted for him while he ran on the platform that he wont expand the patriot ect,etc)

 

As much as i seem apathetic towards the whole think i do find this kind of surveillance unnecessary, of course im not an expert on the field so i dont know.

[Guest RadarJammer]

the government probably doesn't care if you are a tea party extremist with an addiction to dungeon porn and browses the internet behind 30 layers of encryption and makes fireworks in your basement. what the government does care about is finding out how far they can push surveillance on us before it results in a riot,

 

i'm certain the government realizes that we are on the verge of some really significant technology breakthroughs in lie detection and brain scanning so they are acclimatizing us

 

by the time they can collect our brain patterns from the distance between a stop light and a cross walk then they will do it and it will be on reddits front page for a week then people will get used to it, like always.

[MisterE]

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.

you really don't have much imagination or are just being too lazy to exercise it, if you can't think of any possible ways this could be used to fuck with anyone, not just meaningful people. there are also indirect ways it could affect you. for example-

what if you decided to run for some political office, and the people in power are worried about you because you seem too honest? so then they go look up your records and dig to find stuff to use against you. now, they are saying that it's only records of who calls who and how long they talked but i've seen a few things that indicate that the actual content of calls may be getting recorded, along with the content of emails and texts etc. and if that's not happening now it will. so lets say in the future you decided to run for office of some kind, and 'they' would have maybe 10yrs of phone recordings/texts/emails to sift through, using search algorithms to find something, anything to use against you. they wouldn't even have to reveal what they found, which would out them for having this system, but they could use that info to go look for something else that they could use against you without revealing their full hand.

 

so you say 'but i don't want to ever run for office'. ok, but consider that any potentially honest people who may try to represent you, could have this system used to keep them out of what has become almost completely just a 'racket'. the gov would naturally end up with fewer and fewer honest or even half-way honest people, become more totally corrupt than it already is, and that WOULD effect you. your life would actually become much shittier. there would be tangible changes in your life that you would bitch about and resent, as a result of the brick wall that the powerful corrupt politicians would be able to build around washington, with this technology, to keep out anyone with an idea to weed out corruption.

 

this is just one of probably an infinite number of ways that this could result in your life becoming much shittier. all it takes is a little creativity to think of more.

[LimpyLoo]

It's a good thing I'm behind 6 proxies.

[MisterE]

 

It does strike me as odd that more people aren't equally concerned about their private information being plastered all over other social media sites as well. Not sure why you're trying to guide me into a conversation about who's worse: the government or google, though. Got my complaints about both.

it's just an interesting observation i think. people have been giving up their information to various corporations who may exploit it for money since the existence of internet and were generally cool with that, but when it gets to the government its a "PRIVACY HOLOCAUST", "DEATH TO OBAMA" and such.

 

it shouldn't be hard to understand the difference between being ok with a corp using your online habits (and afaik this doesn't include the actual contents of any kind of private communications) to advertise stuff to you, in accordance with a notification of it which you agree to when you use their service, and that same corp giving over your private info to the government who may do any number of bad things with it, depending on who is in charge at any given time. it really, really should not be difficult to understand.

[awepittance]

Deer, on 08 Jun 2013 - 2:37 PM, said:

 

 

 

I mean we have seen this before have we, people will get outraged for a couple of weeks then they'll forget about it with nothing done and nothing accomplished. If you are going to give me shit for being apathetic about the whole thing at least do something, its great to be aware and all but if you are going to act outraged do something more than complain for two weeks. (not directed at anyone is this thread, just the public in general)

i don't understand, so people are only allowed to get upset and talk about it if they 'get outraged' for more than a couple of weeks?

 

i think it is of the upmost importance for the free spirit of humanity to not feel as if their every movie is being logged or surveiled. This effects creativity, human expression, political activism, exposing corruption in corporate or government structures. Glenn Greenwald did a fantastic talk recently relating all this back to how feeling like you have privacy is integral to human creativity in general. Without it we have less 'safety' to be creative. I think that is very much true and I wish more people would acknowledge it.

 

one of the biggest problems I see is that under Bush all the same people who think privacy erosion is no big deal now, used to think it was under the bush administration. But now that a lot of shrill right wingers who drown out real criticism are saying Obama is a communist dictator, people on the left (who hated Bush) knee jerk in the other direction and instead of properly opposing what they once opposed, they instead accept it and defend it because he's a 'thoughtful man' who 'inherited a mess'. I think it's time for people to accept the blatant fact that Obama is simply carrying out the same trajectory sped up by Bush.

 

just think about it this way, the government relies on corporate funds.

Privacy erosion is a valuable commodity to these corporations. The more transparent we are as a society and as individuals the easier it will be for companies ot make money off of us by studying our habits behaviors and personal preferences. We are in an era that makes the Neilsen rating and surveys look like a joke. They don't need to do that anymore when we have no privacy left. We will be ripe for the picking.

 

edit: The fact that when Google implemented 'algorithmic' personal e-mail scanning, and barely anyone complained is when we basically totally surrounded to what's to come. If people are generally ok with an algorithm spying on their e-mails, how long is it going to take them to be ok with a live person doing it? Probably not very long.

 

[awepittance]

 

There's a big difference between willingly opting in to something you know the consequences of and having your privacy invaded while not knowing the consequences, without even having been consulted first.

 

there is a big difference, but the two are intersecting right now. Technology has made having true privacy more difficult but you can choose to opt-out if you really wanted to. But because of this technology and acceptance of things like facebook and google e-mail scanning, it makes government spying not seem like that much of a big deal to people. They're already given up a significant amount of their privacy for entertainment and convenience, and if they aren't a political activist, a 'radical' a 'terrorist' or a journalist they think it doesn't effect them. They would be wrong though because having a lack of privacy effects everyone on a deeper psychological level.

[coax]

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

 

Sadly, whenever I have brought privacy and government surveillance up with people I know, the general consensus is that they don't care. In fact it's a bit of a stonewall to convince anyone that government spying is bad. They would rather be protected from criminals and get criminals caught, than have privacy. It's like there isn't really enough surveillance. Just record EVERYTHING and it'll be a lot better. If I try to bring up possible abuses of power, it turns into a heated argument and such. I don't know, maybe privacy really is gone. I didn't think it was, but imagine the Xbox One and smartphones and Google Glass everywhere, it is a potential source for government to tap into. No reason to believe otherwise.

[awepittance]

the only 'reason' to believe otherwise seems to be 'why would the government want to spy on me, my life is boring' etc.

One of the interesting dilemmas about that point of view, is it essentially means that as long as you lead a boring an uneventful life the government will stay off your back. Is that really a good way to live life? I don't think it is. I think even just keeping the door open that at some point you *may* want to fight back against the government in some sort of ideological or activist fashion is a good thing that can empower you. If you give up and just say fuck it, i'm boring I have nothing to hide, it seems like you're just setting up a path in front of you playing right into the government's hand. It's also worth noting that journalists and whistleblowers will now be more scared to release information that could be of public value for everybody. Being an activist and journalist puts you directly in the crosshairs for privacy intrusion, but they won't be the only ones effected. If one of them was going to release a document talking about how a particular product is toxic, they might think twice out of fear they are being watched, and you as a person who's 'not doing anything the government is interested in' might suffer by using that product without knowing it's toxic. that's just one example of how this privacy erosion effects us all, and not just on a psychological level.

basically what i'm against is the idea of self censorship as a way to go through life, this is what privacy erosion will lead to even more so than it exists now.

[LimpyLoo]

I agree 100%, JE.

[coax]

Yep and the problems might not arise right this moment. It may happen in 2020, or 2030, with many new people in the government, after a big conflict or something, and then they have all these tools readily available. It may slowly creep up on everyone, like it feels like it's doing now. How do we know what is decided to be "terrorism" and not in the future? Let's just be boring people and say and think exactly what we're being told all the time to be safe ;/ I WANT to think unconventially. I want to on purpose embrace anarcho-capitalism, libertarian socialism, hell even the overthrow of the government. Whatever has something worth thinking about. Hard moral problems, etc. Censorship, political correctness and all this merely pacifies the population and stigmatizes. Meh. It's already difficult to bring up topics like anarchism, and it's not even that crazy or whatever you want to call it. It's simply common sense and should be vetted always, especially in a growing government society

[YO303]

the only 'reason' to believe otherwise seems to be 'why would the government want to spy on me, my life is boring' etc.

 

One of the interesting dilemmas about that point of view, is it essentially means that as long as you lead a boring an uneventful life the government will stay off your back. Is that really a good way to live life? I don't think it is. I think even just keeping the door open that at some point you *may* want to fight back against the government in some sort of ideological or activist fashion is a good thing that can empower you. If you give up and just say fuck it, i'm boring I have nothing to hide, it seems like you're just setting up a path in front of you playing right into the government's hand. It's also worth noting that journalists and whistleblowers will now be more scared to release information that could be of public value for everybody. Being an activist and journalist puts you directly in the crosshairs for privacy intrusion, but they won't be the only ones effected. If one of them was going to release a document talking about how a particular product is toxic, they might think twice out of fear they are being watched, and you as a person who's 'not doing anything the government is interested in' might suffer by using that product without knowing it's toxic. that's just one example of how this privacy erosion effects us all, and not just on a psychological level.

basically what i'm against is the idea of self censorship as a way to go through life, this is what privacy erosion will lead to even more so than it exists now.

 

Its not that my life is boring or that i am self censoring myself just not to get under the government's surveillance, im not a political activist and probably never will, i dont see myself doing anything that would make the government see me as a treat.

 

The only thing that makes me angry from a personal point of view is that journalism and some art suffer from this type of stuff.

[awepittance]

i'm glad you can acknowledge what you said at the end, because part of my point is that if journalists are effected, so are you. Journalists, at least good ones deliver information for the public good, and if more of them are afraid to report on certain things out of fear of being watched or jailed your life might suffer in perhaps a very small but possibly large way.
so even if you completely strip away the theory that surveillance on a mass scale effects everyone's day to day behavior, you are still left with the very real idea that less vital information for the public good will be released out of fear.  Things like the Erin Brockavich story will become more of a thing of the past or a golden era of investigative journalism.

there is a whole other side to it too though, people who are naturally passionate and rebellious might see this enroaching privacy erosion as a wakeup call to motivate them to fight even harder. I hope we start seeing more vocal people in this department because with someone like Obama being the face of it, most of the people who would normally be vocal have totally remained silent or even worse... defended his horrible Bush-legacy presidency for the last 5 years.

people like Turley and Greenwald, are probably the most prominent individual voices in this movement. Organizations like the ACLU and EFF still get a lot of press, but not enough. We need at least 10x as many organizations and people speaking out about this subject. Once we get to that point it could create a tipping effect where we might actually gain some real ground. It doesn't take that many people to create a political ground swell, just enough dedicated and passionate ones.