dagblog - Comments for "I Don't Give a Damn About Privacy"

The Iranian government has

moat — Fri, 21 Jun 2013 23:44:17 +0000

In reply to I argue that new information

The Iranian government has certainly been working on getting some of that kind of control with their various hacking schemes during elections and protests.

The latest flavor is an "intelligent software" that will help "moderate" social media without banning it.

How nice of them.

Doh! Outed! Fine, I confess.

Michael Wolraich — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 03:06:37 +0000

In reply to Uuuummmm so ... because you

Doh! Outed! Fine, I confess. I'm a dirty, dirty sheep-gawker.

Very nice to see here, kgb. That civics captcha finally stopped the damn spammers. I've been meaning to blog about winning the spamwar at dagblog, but I haven't had a chance.

Uuuummmm so ... because you

Lazy KGB — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 23:28:05 +0000

In reply to I Don't Give a Damn About Privacy

Uuuummmm so ... because you don't care that everyone knows you like to look at naked sheep, that means everyone gets to know we like to look at naked sheep together?

Not cool dude.

(although, I do like the civics-quiz captcha)

Interesting historical note.

moat — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 01:30:09 +0000

In reply to "to induce in the inmate a

Interesting historical note. I did not realize the Castros did time there.

While they did not become ideal self regulating citizens during their stay, perhaps they learned some management techniques there.

Let me get this straight - if

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 03:36:25 +0000

In reply to The incompetence of the Feds

Let me get this straight -

if a new driver can't stay in his lane, the answer is to give him a bigger car that goes faster?

if the new driver is a state trooper who's supposed to protect us & enforce laws but still can't drive, the answer is to give him a tank?

As the story re: the nuns convicted of "felonies" for trespassing with spray paint shows, these cock-ups can mess with anyone.

Look at the guys they recruited to do "terrorism", basically giving them unworkable plans for nuclear or biochemical activities and busting them for thinking about them.

Update to my comment--there

erica20 — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 03:35:12 +0000

In reply to aa, I'm very interested in

Update to my comment--there are quite a few PRISMs, it seems. HSCB's is different from NSA's, which is different from another agency's.....

I am not sure about the not-social-engineering. Some of it is intimidation, which isn't good. (Destor Michael's point.)

I don't see anything implying

artappraiser — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 02:02:42 +0000

In reply to aa, I'm very interested in

I don't see anything implying a conspiracy, only a suggestion that some David Brooks types are part of the mix of people with access.

Flying through all of this discussion it constantly is hitting me that this is just the small town vs. big city thing allover again. The small town where everyone knows your business, you act according to the town majority/tribal norms, lest everyone shames you if you misbehave, with the consequence that life is safe and secure. One could call that social engineering, but I don't.

Ha. I think he made the right

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 00:21:35 +0000

In reply to You would have done a lovely

Ha. I think he made the right call with Greenwald.

Grass roots leaders will now

Resistance — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 00:17:50 +0000

In reply to aa, I'm very interested in

Grass roots leaders will now be placed 6 feet below the grass, unless they are approved by the real and only leaders?.... You only get a choice between two parties; Democrat or Republican; all others will be excluded, or destroyed. Those in power, fear the people....... Give them your guns... maybe that will help alleviate their fears? At least get your name on the National data base, so they will know who is armed?

aa, I'm very interested in

erica20 — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 23:41:28 +0000

In reply to She was much more than that,

aa, I'm very interested in what Snowden told LP in the Salon article.

Do you think he meant something specific when he said selected?

http://www.dtic.mil/biosys/files/HSCB-news-fall-2010.pdf

See page 4, the "hybrid model" and selected data.

What I think is odd and a little chilling, is that the rhetoric of all characters in a given situation is analyzed and is part of the prediction scenario, not just words of those who are suspected or expected to perform crimes/violent acts. So even a person who is trying to exercise a peaceful influence could be "selected" if their rhetoric were powerful enough to influence other actors.