What are they so afraid of that they need to invasively spy on everyone?
this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2023
325 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
59402 readers
4099 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The usual. Journalists, democracy, threats to fascism and corporate profits at home and abroad.
The 1% are aware they have retribution coming down the pipes and are trying desperately to stop it. French Revolution style. Notice the NSA didn’t stop 1/6 ? All an excuse for unconstitutional spying.
They don't want the world to know the truth about Jeffrey Epstein and their human traffic sex crimes. No wonder why hasn't anyone released all of Ghislaine Maxwell list yet. (they are covering their asses)
If you think that's the worst dirty laundry the government has to air, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Cool, what's your best offer? Cash only
Where else are they going to get their metrics?
Dude, I bought a pair of Bose headphones yesterday. I get the home and the first thing they try to get me to do is download their app. Of course, sketchy (to me, anyway). So I dive into the “cookies/tracking data” section, which links me to the “privacy policy” which links me AGAIN to “information we collect and how”—all different documents with their own tables of contents. Legally binding documents.
They get people to sign away their rights to ANY privacy. They can “map your head movements” and what seemed to be…the shape of your head(?), they can PASSIVELY LISTEN TO ANY SOUND “around you,” they can intercept any any all information that passes through the headphones/microphone, record all biometrics…
Needless to say, I didn’t download the app. But these were the best headphones I’d ever put in my ears, right out of the box. So I went onto the SMS chat (while they were the best, the pair I had were defective)…and the first message I get is…A GODDAMN LINK TO A DIFFERENT PRIVACY POLICY. “Simplified” so it seemed like I was just giving them permission to record the SMS conversation “for training purposes,” but THANK FUCKIN GOD I dug deeper, BACK INTO THE MAZE OF SUBCLAUSES AND OBSCURED LINKS AND SEPARATE DOCUMENTS to find that they were trying to get me to sign THE ORIGINAL GODDAMN PRIVACY POLICY. And all I had to do was REPLY IN THE CHAT. That would’ve been apparently my consent.
So I called, because I wanted to use these headphones. They were so perfect. I asked to speak to the legal dept, if I can use the headphones without SOMEHOW, their privacy policy surreptitiously taking effect/being tacitly agreed to.
Well, you can’t reach the legal dept. so fuck it. Fuck BOSE, fuck these great headphones. I’ll suffer inferior headphones if I can’t be promised that I don’t sign away my organs and/or all possible information.
For good measure
FUCK YOU BOSE.
Oh yeah, my point was that they are taking everything they can, at all times. We are giving up everything. We’ve lost this battle. Big time. And we paid for it. Literally. Those headphones were $200 ON FUCKIN SALE. Goddamn, I hate capitalism and the modern world.
That's crazy, but believable. I have a pair of Bose 700's kicking around that one of my kids uses, but they don't have the app. I wonder how they can potentially consent for data collection without breaking any data collection laws.
I mean. They put out all the disclaimers, collect the data anyway, and if they get sued they bury the person suing in paper, or if the person looks like they might wind up effecting a ruling that changes the legal interpretation in a way that is disadvantageous to the company, they settle out of court.
That way the courts never change the interpretation of the laws in a way that harms them, and bought politicians won’t do that. Plus a company that can legally record you can also just freely share those recordings with the police, so politicians aren’t going to impede that.
Things will get very funny in a few years when “AI” gets cheap enough that all those recordings wind up processed, tagged, and automatically shared with law enforcement or marketers.
It’s only a matter of time before saying “I want pizza” in the privacy of your own home results in a text from a national pizza chain.
To bring this back around to the NSA, they're prevented by law to do data collection on American citizens who fall outside the exceptions like this FISA bill. The one loophole is that private companies have much more leeway in whose private information they can collect, and NSA can use American tax dollars to buy your personal information that's illegal for them to collect themselves. Now NSA is a military intelligence organization and they're not supposed to toss their intercepts over to US law enforcement like the FBI, but they do.
So we’re paying for it twice. Paying the companies as we sign their contracts blindly because we have the product in our hands and then we pay the companies AGAIN with all of our goddamn tax dollars.
Fuck capitalism
I don't think they need to be afraid of anything. They could just be looking for more blackmail material or just the raw feeling of the power to watch me take a number two whenever they want.
9/11
Bad bot linking to pay walls and not posting the article text.
It's incredibly important to do so because conservative and right-wing media is all free. They don't paywall anything. This is part of the disinformation brain-drain. The quality, real stuff is locked away but the bullshit is out for display.
Start displaying the real stuff.
If you mean this article on Wired itself, it’s not pay walled, though annoying. Click the V (chevron) to hide the Subscribe Now thing.
Or if it’s indeed pay-walled in your area, open it via Germany by search this -> https://metager.org/meta/meta.ger3?eingabe=A%20Controversial%20US%20Surveillance%20Program%20May%20Get%20Slipped%20Into%20a%20%E2%80%98Must-Pass%E2%80%99%20Defense%20Bill
find the article, and use the “OPEN ANONYMOUSLY” link. Many annoying things will be filtered too.
If it's free, you're the product. (In this case the target of propaganda.)
This used to not be true for things that were not only free-as-in-beer but also freely licensed; but nowadays literally the only reason why anyone in their right mind might want to edit Wikipedia is that they think they can influence public opinion that way, so it is definitely true there too.
Funny how defense spending is “must pass” but social security and other safety net spending is not.
Or keeping the government open isn’t.
Same way they made indefinite detention of American citizens legal: make the yearly NDAA dependent on it and you could mandate that every State of the Union starts with a compilation video of dogs being silly and it would pass.
It's never fun stuff like that, though. It's always things that would be political suicide to even suggest in countries with functional governments. Because the things the Republicans want are always heinous, especially the things they want most.
I was with you until the last sentence. Things like that are usually supported by many or even most Democrats too. The Democratic Party isn't a civil libertarian party, at all.
I have not researched these specific cases, so may be wrong about them.
I have not researched these specific cases, so may be wrong about them.
You're not obligated to do research on every individual bill the political parties push and what rider clauses they slip into unrelated bills. That's fine.
You, however, should have research and examples to back it up if you're gonna "both sides" this. The Democratic party is far far far from perfect or what I would want, but at the very least most of them seem to be campaigning in good faith or at the least not inciting actual violence and treason.
Saying "so may be wrong about them" isn't a free pass. Know that people read what you say, and we have a huge problem of political apathy (circa 2016) due to the constant repetition of "but both sides are the same." Let's please not exacerbate it unless we're bringing facts and evidence to the table.
Know that people read what you say, and we have a huge problem of political apathy (circa 2016) due to the constant repetition of "but both sides are the same." Let's please not exacerbate it unless we're bringing facts and evidence to the table.
This so much ☝️☝️ thank you
Things like that are usually supported by many or even most Democrats too
Good thing the world isn't a binary where rightful criticism of one "team" automatically confers praise on another.
I'm painfully aware that the lesser evil is still evil and that only a few specific types of people are well-represented in Congress, most of them not very good people.
Is it for p0rn watching? I feel like with the current Temporary Speaker of The House, it would be for p0rn watching
Gross.
Strip that shit out and put $100b for ukraine in there.