 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 17 Jan 03 - 04:19 PM I think if you desperately want the sky to fall, you can find a way to see it everywhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: DougR Date: 17 Jan 03 - 01:07 PM Aw let 'em go, Lep. They got to pick on somebody and I'm a visible target. As far as I know GWB doesn't tune in to the Mudcat (if he did would his ears turn red or what?) Thanks for your thoughts, Amos, and your defense of kat. I've sparred with kat for years, though, I suspect she can handle herself pretty good. I still maintain that my lifestyle hasn't changed a whit since the implementation of all those policies most of you fear. I supect yours hasn't either. I have not noted the sky falling, have you Amos? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 17 Jan 03 - 12:53 PM And quit pickin' on Doug. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 17 Jan 03 - 12:52 PM There is nothing to worry about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jan 03 - 03:09 PM "I believe the Feds are going to concentrate on real threats to the country, not folkies." Well, Doug, you might ask Pete Seeger and a few others about that. As I recall, he had a little experience along that line. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: NicoleC Date: 16 Jan 03 - 02:57 PM Amos: clap-clap-clap-clap-clap! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Rustic Rebel Date: 16 Jan 03 - 02:53 PM Well Said Amos!! *and the crowd cheers* Bobert hugs on surveilliance, now that ought to make 'em stand and run! (joke Bobert!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 16 Jan 03 - 02:31 PM Oh my, DougC... as someone who tiptoes dominant party lines, and ushers quips and digs in the finest peanut gallery fashion, it is reasonably certain that you are afraid to take a stand that could be even remotely cinsidered "against the grain" to status quo political power... What are you afraid of? ;^) ...Bobert's hugs? ttr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Amos Date: 16 Jan 03 - 02:22 PM DougR: Excuse me for butting in. But I think it is important to emphasize that opposing surveillance does not mean someone has any goddamn thing to hide!!!. Opposing the cancelation of Roe v. Wade does not mean one is an aboritonist or pregnat. Opposing witch-hunts does not make one a witch. Opposing the erosion of freedom does not make one a terrorist. This sort of slimey illogic is the kind of rhetorical device that makes the buschbunde so despicable. They will resort to any semantic slant to cover up the objectionable parts of their actions. While I do not think everything they do is objectionable, I sure as hell object to being lied to. Perhaps you do not feel this way, which is certainly your right; but cut the crap about "what have you got to hide"? You have got to know that is pure illogical bullshit. There is such a thing as a valid principle, and it is certainly valid to defend one's civil liberties on that basis alone. Inclulding the liberty of being left the hell alone by 'people' who think they know what is good for you. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: GUEST,Mrs. Earbore Date: 16 Jan 03 - 02:20 PM Well, I think it's a splendid idea. It might raise the fashion conscience of the unwashed masses. I abhore having to see those nasty "t shirts" and ratty, unwashed "bluejeans" on everyone, nowadays! Continual video survelliance might improve everyone's manners, as well! Mrs. Audley Earbore III |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: DougR Date: 16 Jan 03 - 02:12 PM kat: what is it you are so concerned somebody might find out about you? Oh, I know! You don't want L. H. to know you are a closet Shatner fan!! *G* DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: SW Keyloggers and Big Brother From: GUEST,sorefingers Date: 16 Jan 03 - 12:05 AM Why would anyone worry, from what I see here - Mudcat could BE big brother and everything would be the same, besides it has many members and who would be so hard hearted to deny the odd Guitar picking Dylansongsining pot toking CIA man his fun? Perhaps they are still in Oklahoma looking under rich kids beds for traces of something a little bit stronger?, who knows. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Rustic Rebel Date: 15 Jan 03 - 11:52 PM There must be someone smarter out there, then 'them', who can come up with a program that blocks theirs. Peace, Rustic |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 15 Jan 03 - 11:31 PM There's nothing to worry about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: katlaughing Date: 15 Jan 03 - 11:19 PM Time to call our Congresspeople and register our support for Sen. Feingold. Here's a partial article: Pentagon database plan hits snag on Hill A plan to link databases of credit card companies, health insurers and others--creating what critics call a "domestic surveillance apparatus"--raises concern on Capitol Hill. WASHINGTON--A Pentagon antiterrorism plan to link databases of credit card companies, health insurers and others--creating what critics call a "domestic surveillance apparatus"--is encountering growing opposition on Capitol Hill. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisc., is planning to introduce a bill on Thursday to halt the Pentagon's Total Information Awareness program. A representative said on Wednesday that if passed, the legislation would suspend the TIA program until Congress can "review the data-mining issues." Even if Congress never acts on Feingold's proposal, the unusual step of trying to suspend a military program may prompt the Defense Department to review the TIA program in a way few other tactics could. The bill will also provide TIA critics with a focal point for activism. If fully implemented, TIA would link databases from sources such as credit card companies, medical insurers and motor vehicle departments for police convenience in hopes of snaring terrorists. It's funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: DougR Date: 21 Dec 02 - 11:57 PM Gee whiz, TTR you say you agree with me, then you tear into GWB! Be consistent will you? You're either with me, or you're against me! :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 21 Dec 02 - 07:30 PM I don't think I'll be able to fit the religious left in until April or so, unless I cut out meth labs, or ashtray dumpers. I've been pretty much ignoring marijuana growers for a year and a half. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 21 Dec 02 - 07:22 PM All the best! When they set you after the religious left, I'm sure to be on your list... *BG* ttr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 21 Dec 02 - 07:15 PM Well I have all the facts at my disposal and I haven't had time to look at them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 21 Dec 02 - 07:14 PM Go get 'em leprechaun! Meth is destroying America way more than any 'political subversives', or religious right for that matter... It's a sad state of affairs, and I don't envy the tough and seemingly endless job served your way... Do you have any answers for this pandemic problem? No, I mean solutions! ttr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Cluin Date: 21 Dec 02 - 07:12 PM "The paranoid is a person with all of the facts at his disposal" - William S. Burroughs |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 21 Dec 02 - 06:57 PM Well in the spirit of the holidays, I would certainly appreciate it if all you Mudcat subersives would just turn yourselves in. Tell them Agent leprechaun-zebra-two-six-niner-alpha pointed you toward the light, so I'll get credit for it. Two more felony arrests this month and I get a George Foreman grill! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 21 Dec 02 - 06:05 PM Yep, I gotta agree with you DougR! This is the tamest site around... We folkies are way to thoughful and considerate to be much more than a nusiance to the big bad wolf... While the younger bolder radical fringe is getting serious, paying strict attention to details, gathering damaging information... the PC digital age is about to turn on the heat! Survailence is for the lazy fascists... World Peace and Prosperity is going to avail itself from the last vestiges of the American Spirit... Little does GWB know, but he's just out of touch enough to be unaware of the great good that will be done to civil liberties in this country when we have had enough of him, and vote him back to his 'fruitful' personal life! There is a large (increasingly angry) contingent of well informed people in this country who are actually going to vote (heaven forbid) after their long silence... Look around you! Where are the contented, open hearted folk of yesteryear? Many of us are right here at the 'cat! Love ya! ttr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: DougR Date: 21 Dec 02 - 05:30 PM The fact that Mudcatters are concerned about Big Brother monitoring their every move is a bit amusing to me, and that's why I post "the sky is falling" messages on such threads as this, Bill D. I believe the Feds are going to concentrate on real threats to the country, not folkies. Folkies are probably just a tiny prick in the universe of suspects, if suspects at all. Instead of worrying about such things as the subject of this thread, I think we should be spending our time figuring out ways to ensure that GWB is re-elected in 2004! :>) DougR DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 21 Dec 02 - 04:33 PM If I'm not mistaken, Jesus Christ was a bit of a subversive... We wouldn't want him to be setting any bad examples, now would we? Merry Christmas one and all! ...and covet your wife, silly! ttr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Bill D Date: 21 Dec 02 - 03:30 PM well, now that they have some idea what to look for and who is doing it, I think they HAVE caught a few worthy things. "subversive songs and poetry." are probably not REAL high on the priority list right now, but IF they have the ability, they can do other things, and songs & poetry would just tend to confirm their worries. What if Joe McCarthy had the internet in the 50s? Why he might have acted like, oh......like George Bush and Poindexter...*grin* (the sky is not exactly falling, Doug R, but parts of it are full of spy satellites...YOU, no doubt, are not being looked at too closely, being of the |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: SINSULL Date: 21 Dec 02 - 02:27 PM Yes. And with all that careful monitoring four planes and two towers slip through unnoticed. They are far more likely to zero in on subversive songs and poetry. SIGH! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Bill D Date: 21 Dec 02 - 01:58 PM " Don't they need a wire tap to monitor me?"...well, not exactly, Mary...it depends. If 'they' know certain things about you...your email, your ISP, your Social Security #, your credit card #...etc., they could follow a lot of what you do easily. And *If* they decide you are worth monitoring, real experts can do amazing tricks!...........remember a few years back when they caught that famous hacker who was an expert at NOT being monitored? It took awhile, but they tracked him down. I think the latest proposal is a plan to make that sort of tracking a bit easier. __________________________________________________________________________ "the sheer volumn of E-Mails and internet browsing, even if automated, should kill any meaningfull moinitoring." piffle! What do you think the CIA and NSA are doing to look for useful data right now? They don't of course, get everything, and clever spies use encrypted messages anyway, but they can learn things from the timing and source of traffic, even when they can't read the content. With supercomputers and a few known facts, they can get reams of stuff, and winnow it down and learn a lot.....(the program to search the spectrum for possible alien broadcasts is based on looking for meaningful patterns in billions of lines of data---it would be even easier if they knew what patterns would be most useful and likely) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Gareth Date: 21 Dec 02 - 01:38 PM Hmmmm ! Monitoring the 'Cat may reval a few subversives, on the other hand, and I commend the Xmas Tavern thread, is it not more likely to reaveal a mass of overweight folkiis into bestiallity, hard drinking and perversions involving possums and bhodrans, oh and music to boot. This almost seems the occasion to request a song competition for an "All purpose terrorist Song". Joshing apart, the sheer volumn of E-Mails and internet browsing, even if automated, should kill any meaningfull moinitoring. Unless of course they have reason to suspect you are a "bad guy" - In which case asume you phone is tapped, your letters opened etc., and the Lord help you if you try to buy Charcoal, Sulpher and Saltpetre and it shows up on your Tesco's loyalty card. Which reminds me can any Catter recall the full version of that Parody of the "Lincoln Poacher" sung in left wing circles in the 60's and 70's - The Chorus goes - With Moscow Gold and Dynamite we'll set the People free, Ah - Tis my delight on a Friday Night to bomb the burgoisie " I'am afraid memories are fading like the VSC badges I used to wear !!!! Never mind - I'll post seperatly for that ! Gareth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: SINSULL Date: 21 Dec 02 - 01:18 PM I use dial-up for my connection. Don't they need a wire tap to monitor me? Hee hee. They will no doubt choose to monitor all the folkie sites (remember the McCarthy hearings?). Wonder what they will make of Paw, Cletus, and the Reg Boys. Would you want to wade through Spaw's prolific postings? Of course, we may finally find out Gargoyle's true identity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Bill D Date: 21 Dec 02 - 12:54 PM well, London's surveillance cameras are peanuts compared to this idea. I actually don't have much argument with monitoring PUBLIC behavior and catching red light runners and bank robbers and shoplifters, etc. But when they get close to reading my private emails or tracking what I buy and what websites I visit, I get quite grumpy! I run standard firewalls and other stuff, and I 'know' how to use unbreakable cryptography, if it ever comes to that, but it is difficult to cover all the bases. (and *grin*, a checker at Safeway TOLD me to simply re-register my supermarket card using a fake name if I didn't want to be monitored! I'd lose a few privileges, but would still get the standard discounts) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: JohnInKansas Date: 21 Dec 02 - 07:07 AM It's a matter of keeping up with the neighbors. A fairly recent Technology Review article on "privacy" reported that, per capita, London has more surveillance cameras than any other location in the (known) world - and they appear to be all operated by the 'phone company under contract to the "security administration" (I think that means the cop shop), giving the police the "contractual right" to "see" anything that is or has been on camera. (???) Maybe it's just the "all the guys in the club need the same toys" thing. Several U.S. cities/counties have been "tracking" cell phones to assess traffic density and flow - and to adjust signals accordingly. To tell how fast traffic is moving, they've got to stay "on" an individual conversation long enough to tell how far it moves - but of course they don't "personally identify" the speakers(????). I wonder if they have to pick up on the subject of conversation to tell that they've stayed with the same phone. (???) For about $95 (US) at my local lumber yard, you can get your own video surveillance camera and monitor - and for about $350 (US) you can get the "rf" model that radios the signal from camera to monitor so they can't follow the wire back to you. For under $500 (US) you can have the "rf" model with five camera switching.(???) ("Concealable" cameras, about the size of an AA battery, are $75 or so each, but don't get a very good picture.) And then we've all got the supermarket card. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: DougR Date: 21 Dec 02 - 01:11 AM Uh oh. The sky is falling again. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: GUEST,Dan Kelly Date: 20 Dec 02 - 07:15 PM Ha! Good one lep. Sign me up, too, I'm sick of work. I never really pondered this as multi-billion dollar nationwide navel-gazing. (Forgive me if I sent this twice. My first one vanished, strangely, as I hit send. It's got me a little weirded out, in fact, wondering where it went. . . ) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: leprechaun Date: 20 Dec 02 - 06:57 PM Oh deary me. I suppose they're going to recruit folks like me to monitor all the new data. As if I wasn't busy enough already. My favorite FBI guy that was helping me bust drug dealers already got peeled off for homeland security. And is he ever bored. I suppose I'll be bored too when I have to spend hours in front of a computer analyzing data for national security. I just hope congress appropriates some money for this project, so at least I'll get some overtime out of the deal. Sometimes I wonder why they even bother. I mean, if you want to find terrorist sympathizers or anarchist hatemongers, all you have to do is go down to any busy intersection near any major university. You couldn't stand there and swing a dead rhesus monkey without hitting some kind of subversive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Bill D Date: 20 Dec 02 - 06:15 PM oh..my gracious, TIA...that is too much! They have captured the essential spirit of it TOO well!....It makes me shudder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Bobert Date: 20 Dec 02 - 04:21 PM And guess who's gonna be the one doing the eves-dropping? Yep, convicted felon Johnny Poindexter, that who! Same guy who got caught in the Iran-Contra scandel and then, if that wasn't enough, went before Congress and commited perjury. Welcome to Tom Ridge's America! Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: M.Ted Date: 20 Dec 02 - 04:16 PM The information and intelligence system is already overloaded--there are not now, and probably will never be, enough resources to interpret all the raw data that they are gathering now, let alone the raw data that this will generate--This means that, most likely, its only use will be abuse-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: TIA Date: 20 Dec 02 - 02:37 PM Read this -- so close to true it isn't funny (Okay, it is funny) http://www.theonion.com/onion3847/bill_of_rights.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: Bill D Date: 20 Dec 02 - 01:45 PM yep.....why am I not too suprised?...The basic premise, stopping terrorism and tracking down criminals and such is fine...but you KNOW if they set this up, it will be abused eventually. There is always someone who finds a 'need' to peek and pry, and this has the potential to sort thru billions of transmissions, using supercomputer technology, and find out what YOU said about Shrubs. You think Watergate was naughty? You think breaking into Ellberg's psychiatrist's office was extreme? Wait till all they have to do is install some software, design some 'interesting' search algorithims and push a few buttons. A truth...."You may indeed be paranoid- but they also MAY be after you." |
|
Subject: BS: Digital Surveillance and Big Brother From: katlaughing Date: 20 Dec 02 - 01:27 PM Full story of the following may be read here NYTimes: Bush Administration to Propose System for Monitoring Internet By JOHN MARKOFF and JOHN SCHWARTZ The Bush administration is planning to propose requiring Internet service providers to help build a centralized system to enable broad monitoring of the Internet and, potentially, surveillance of its users. The proposal is part of a final version of a report, "The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace," set for release early next year, according to several people who have been briefed on the report. It is a component of the effort to increase national security after the Sept. 11 attacks. ******************************************************************* And, in Washington D.C. protesters/marchers, etc. will now be on camera: clickety. |