Slashdot Mirror
Fighting For Privacy With Art and Words
HomeSkillet writes contributes this link to an interesting NYT feature on the recent works of privacy activist, wearables pioneer and artist Steve Mann. Mann has been mentioned here a few times before, but in light of current moves to scan, monitor and track your every move by subtle and unsubtle means, it's never been more relevant. Can anyone suggest a non-registration source for this story?
check this link:s ical/25CYBO.html
http://archive.nytimes.com/2001/09/25/science/phy
http://archives.nytimes.com/2001/09/25/science/ph
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Privacy is of the utmost importance. Its the freedom we need the most. The art highlighted in these article is a relevant and valuable expression of things that have come and are to come.
The article's spiked chair being useable by cardholders/citizens only and the other link to the wearable camera is an allusion to the underpinnings of fascism.
I get worried about the direction the US government is taking towards us. Half my company is foreigners, and good ones at that. The plausibility that they will become suspect or deported is minimal, but given some of the new legislation in the mill, it is possible to deport resident aliens if they contributed to an organization that terrorizes or makes threats. That could conceivably include Greenpeace.
Expatriate resident aliens are the best people, most of the time. They are not eligible for welfare, must take care of themselves, do no vote and pay taxes. I would fight to defend the rights of my friends at work.
The advent of the Orwellian era is near, I urge everyone to go to the EFF (www.eff.org) as soon as possible and write the senators and congressmen. And if you are from the EU or Canada or some other place, write them too. I'm still in shock about Skylarov not even getting a semblance of habeas corpus, and is being tried on laws that do not apply to him or what he did. And now the SSSCA and the Anti-Terrorism (Implement Fascism) bills by Adolph Ashcroft.
I am hurt by what happened September 11th. Black ops, special ops and "surgical" retaliation is a good thing. But suspending the rights of people who aren't even Arabic, and coining new criteria for "cyber-terrorism," proposing national ID cards and indiscriminately deporting people is NOT a smart thing to do. And developing legislation with such broad and far reaching wording is dangerous to everyone the world over.
The brain drain will begin, where mega corps of the US will have expatriates arrested for violating something inane. Soon, all the people will stop coming because they are afraid. And possible the greatest nation for development with the soundest fiscal policy will become and intellectual pariah.
Remember, stay moderate. Don't jump to conclusions about things, and make sure to check out the art in these articles, its an expression of what's to come.
- Z
Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
What I think of this article
By: Karma Whoring fag.
This article is important to me because it is about freedom. Freedom is important because of the statue of liberty and the declaration of independence and twelve million dead German Nazis.
The man in the article was funny because he had a beard and big goggles. He went to MIT. It said so on his shirt.
I did not read all the words. I did not read any.
I think privacy is important because I like porn. A lot. I do not want anyone to know my porn. The statue of liberty protects my porn.
He is an important artist. Because he wears his goggles in public and makes people react to him and he likes privacy.
In conclusion I think this article was very important I hope timothy likes me.
Please mod me up.
I love his chair and the analogies it represents. It points out the idiocy of buying something that you can only use under certain circumstances.
For the SSSCA, maybe a book that you buy that is chained to a desk. Its your book, bought and paid for. But you can only read it at the desk. If you try to take the chain off you go to prison as a terrorist. Because we all know only terrorists would want to read a book anywhere but a desk.
These laws are madness, I can only pray that they are rejected by our leaders.
-- When a fool hears of the Tao, he will laugh out loud.
i just love how extremist paranoid freedom lovers attempt to define the protagonist.
along with thad, steve is one of the best known wearables pioneers. one of my favorite examples to show to people new to wearables is steve's condomwoman sequence:
in particular, the before & after photos =)
I work in the Computer Vision and Robotics Research lab at UCSD. We have done research in many of the areas mentioned in the article, and are beginning some wearable computing starting with a PC-104 & i-glasses setup that another Grad student is working on. Wearables are cool stuff, we're already seeing phones, pagers, pdas, and watches unified.. next is more interfaces to the REAL world like he sums his article with.
/.'ers do already. But rather than blatantly rejecting any form of surveillance as I typically see on here and other forums, maybe appropriate questions should be asked about why/how/who has access to the data being taken. These are the issues at the heart of the problem.
But on to my main point. We've been operating for some time towards a concept we call Ubiquitous Vision, which means that basically we will eventually be able to look at any space (indoors/out), from any perspective and resolution using a distributed network of a variety of types of visual sensors, including mobile ones. The decreasing size and cost of these sensors makes this approach possible, and also is interesting from a user's perspective because of the freedom to choose the view of the scene.
We do get quite a few comments related to the potential impacts of such kinds of surveillance to people's everyday lives. Like he mentions in the article, as long as this kind of surveillance is possible for everyone - not just a select few (corporations, government, etc..) then there exists some kind of natural balancing mechanism. What's scary would be if only some specific organizations had access to the information and everyone else was prohibited from using it or doing their own surveillance.
However it seems essential to mention a point made before by people more intelligent than myself. It isn't the technology that is at fault for comprimising your privacy. It is the people who use it that need to be responsible, and the people who feel it is being used irresponsibly that should speak up, as many of you
I personally think soon we will begin to see high-profile social organizations responsible for regulating the use of surveillance and making policy to protect us. EFF comes to mind. With the increased media attention now, I think we are on a collision course with this issue on a national/global scale. More to come, and it's going to be a very interesting and complex debate.
Just my $.02
Brett
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
A Dutch collegue mentioned that in Holland all people are required to register with the authorities wen they move into a new area. Now, this is all very good when trying to cut down on benefits fruad and all that, but it didn't do the Jewish communities much good when the German forces marched in....
No, I'm not suggesting that this is liely to happen, but I think we should think about how much ionformation we want other people to have about us. Remember, the phrase "knowledge is power"? How much power do you want the next government to have over you?
Given the recent MORI opinion poll where an alarming number of (UK) people were not only pro ID cards, but also saw nothing wrong with having Religeon and DNA data (!!) on these cards, this is certainly a hot topic. And yes, an ID card is just the first step....
Tom
Oh arse
Does this kind of technology scare anyone else?
Having glasses that let others see through his eyes and can modify what he sees to provide information or block nuisances seems nice enough at first glance. I can imagine alot of neat uses for this tech and can even imagine it becoming somewhat common, if made portable and high quality enough. But what about ways this might be exploited in the future?
Once it's common, what's to stop a hacker or the government from breaking in to look through my eyes. Now, that's a scary thought. How about a worse one? Programmers and their backers designing these things to filter out aspects of the world because they are politically unpopular or show competitor's products? Or how about inserting ads into other parts of life? I wouldn't want to look at walls in my own house and be shown advertisements.
So long as the user is truly in control I suppose it's okay, but who knows what a greedy corporation might try to do with his tech.
This type of camera is illegal in many states. As part of it, you may be required to wear a sign that says, "By being in my presences you assent to being recorded." Of course this would be in a font that only an eagle can read.
Fight Spammers!
Absolutely. I agree %100. My state of religious interest is of no consequence or right to the government. In a supposedly free county(USA), the government(city, county, state, and federal) should have zero interest whatsoever in the citizens religion of choice.
As for ID cards, well, that's a touchy subject for me. Anything that is allowed to be on my drivers license I would agree to put favorably on a national ID card. In the USA, each State issues their own driver's license. Why? No freakin' idea. I think a national ID card should also substitute for my drivers license.
I believe that when you are convicted of a felony, you should be required to make a DNA submission to a national archive for testing in previously unsolved cases, as well as kept on record for when you get out.
Many criminals are repeat offenders. Having their DNA on file would just help catch them more often.
digitalunity
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Can anyone suggest a non-registration source for this story?
/. staff enjoy watching posters trip over themselves to be the first to get it in.
So do you guys take bets on when the first archives link will appear?
Or maybe you just like throwing Karma to the horde?
Now we all know it would be trivially easy to replace each "http://www.nytimes.com/" with "http://archives.nytimes.com/" automatically when it's submitted, but apparently
You could be accused of breaking in, and we all know what that means!
For an insight into why face recognition software is a threat to non-terrorists please take a look at this article.
In switzerland, this is also the case. When you change cantons (the subdivisions of switzerland) you have to notify the authorities. This means than moving from one city to the other implies a lot of annoying paperwork. Carrying you ID card is also mandatory.
Honnestly I don't feel that my privacy is so much threatened. The difference lies first in the policy of the state (here there are serious laws about privacy) and in what information is gathered, and how it could be used and the legal background (I have more obligations, but the are IMHO better laws to protect me).
A state needs to gather information, the problem is it should require some work. Face it, a lot can be learnt simply by watching what you do, but it requires a lot of resources (a guy trailing you). The problem is not what information can be found out (low tech surveillance can find a lot out), but how difficult it is - this is where the issue with technology lies. Having access to sensitive information a no cost is the problem.
- Where you live, the state needs to know this simply for taxing. I would be asthonished that a modern states has no idea where it's citizen live.
- Unique identifier, while it makes sense that the state assigns you one, this number should only be used by the state, and not other organisations.
- Your religion, ethnic group, etc... I don't see why the state should know this, nor any other organisation. This was one the first bad things with the Jews, I think there was some code to mark jews in official documents - bad.
- Who you are - this seems quite natural around here, also think that the information on the card is a problem only if the card is checked. This implies police-people, so it's work to collect acutal data. Having a security officer checking I am who I'm supposed to be while bording a aircraft makes sense.
I would be worried if there started to be bar-code scanner in certain places, say the entrances of restaurants, or subways. This would be very bad. For the moment, corporation seem to do much more intrusive stuff.
- Your DNA, this is linked to your medical record and should be treated as such, nobody except you doctor should have access to this.
Also remember that laws are very important. What is the penalty for breaching privacy? Most european countries have a much stricter approach than the US. And it's pointless to make a distinction betweeen corporation and state, once the info is gathered, it's to late. Strong corporation will have access to state information, and the state will be able to access corporate information.at least the spiked chair didnt take a picture of your a$$ assuming you agreed to the sit-license, but remind me not to get within steve manns FOV.
Would anyone more enlightened than I know what (where) in the world Redes
is?
This it is the forum of the subjet of Networks that distributes in the third course of the degrees of Technical Engineering in Computer science of Systems and Technical Engineering in Computer science of Management of the University King Juan Carlos of Madrid. ( from Google translation )
This isn't some grand conspiracy (if it were, it would be easy to do something about it). But look at it from the point of view of the people who get to make the rules. If they forbid picture taking, little happens. If they allow it, they are in trouble if something bad happens, or at least they risk exposing their organization to embarrassment if the pictures are used for something negative.
I think it's important to document our life in pictures for many reasons, and that's why it's important to keep cameras acceptable whereever we go. What can you do about it? Carry a camera, the unobtrusive snapshooting kind, and snap away. Don't dress up like an alien or be in-your-face or antagonistic--that only upsets people and raises valid concerns. But do use your camera: take pictures of your girlfriend picking out a new dress, pictures of your family waving good-bye at the airport, pictures of having lunch at the mall, pictures of furniture that you may want to buy (to show your family), etc.
Anyone else see the irony of a story on a privacy activist on a site that requires mandatory registration?
I was really shocked to read that in some stores there might be one-way mirrors in changing rooms with camera's behind them. Is there an easy way to detect these? Are there simple rules-of-thumb that might indicate a one-way mirror instead of a normal one?
The worst terrorist attacks in recorded history happened only two weeks ago, and you folks are discussing the recent works of privacy activist, wearables pioneer and artist Steve Mann? My *god*, people, GET SOME BLOODY PRIORITIES!!!
I'm shocked that the deaths of so many innocent people mean so little to you fucking nerds.
fighting for privacy, and wearing a silly hat!
If nobody else has already linked this article. It's scarey that info gets leaked to big corps who could use it for anything.
This sig made only from recycled ASCII
Interpretive dance - imagine the havoc this would wreak on any form of motion/gps detection/tracking
Finger Painting - for all you Gulliani haters out there, I'm painting you a message with one of my fingers ... can't hear it ? here ... let me turn it up for you ...
Origami - oooh but hey, let's go one step further, instead of paper, let's use body parts as described in the linked article
Opera - as a recovering wagnerian baritone, it would be easy to enter a subway train, and threaten to continue bellowing until passengers meet my demands.
...
... can you think of some others ? Let's hear'm
Certainly, we've got to be careful not to let our civil liberties become victims of the recent terrorist attacks. However, art forms that attract attention to the performer I think are more a narcissistic mockery of the madness than anything else.
BTW, yes, I have an undergrad degree in the liberal arts, so there is a sense of ascetics with this nerd
... so let's have some fun
healyourchurchwebsite.com - WWJB?
Surely anyone who cares about there privicy would tell a cold-caller to piss off! Hardley suprising the results were dubious!
Not only that but questions were asked about terrorist attacks before questions about ID cards were asked! Talk about loaded questions.
Hardly suprising when you find the survey was sponsored by Rupert Murdochs News Of The Screws!
For more info read the Regester articlel
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/21849.htm
It links to the Mori site.
Please tell everyone about how dogey this poll was. We cannot have people beliving this crap
Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
Don't believe what you read is the truth.
have you even seen these guise? just whoreabull.
our worst enemIEs are plotting against US, on network tv, & buy manipulating our "leaders".
Dr. Mann fights technology with technology, wearing computers on his body and cameras in his glasses so he can "shoot back" by recording everything he sees. The billboards and advertisements posted on every public surface are a form of "attention theft," he says, so he has invented technology that replaces these messages with whatever he would like to see. When he is wearing his "eyetap" glasses, which project an image onto the retina of his eye, a condom ad in a bathroom becomes a picture of a waterfall.
"If the eye is the window of the soul," he argues, "then that window needs a shade. If the brain is a computer, then the eye is an open port, an unsecured opening against hackers."
A wireless connection provides a constant Internet link. With his wearable computer, Dr. Mann can see and hear things invisible to his visitor.
Is it just me, or does this sound a lot like something out of Snow Crash? While reading that article, I kept wondering if "Bruce Schechter" is actually a pseudonym for "Neal Stephenson". I wonder how long it'll be before long-range retinal scanners become the norm.
The publication is freely available. Not patented, and no export laws because it was created outside USA.
I don't know about legal issues, but most stores will try to confiscate your camera or kick you out if they catch you taking pictures.
:)
;)
I found this out recently when trying to take pictures at the mall on a photo outing... we had to switch to a discreet point-and-click and even then we ended up getting caught twice and followed around by the security guard. Most stores, for whatever reason, really dislike photos being taken, but the mall in particular. I've shot photos in grocery stores and Wal-Mart, which is a bit easier due to the size and being able to duck away from employees... but they'll still ask you to stop if they find you.
Places where I have been able to take pictures include Barnes & Noble and Starbucks; at B&N they look at you odd or just don't care, and Starbucks, as well as most restaurants/coffee shops, don't seem to mind as long as you refrain from disturbing the other customers. We usually sit at a booth against a wall, that way no "innocents" get stuck in the shots that could come back and complain about being stuck on the internet later.
We also took photos at a Pier 1 imports, where the employees actually spent more time asking questions about what we were doing, mostly because they were curious. It seems to be much, much easier to take pictures in a "stand-alone" store or a strip centre than the actual mall. There's a big taboo on the mall... not sure why, unless it's just to make you spend $5.00 on those crappy photo booths. But if you do attempt to drag your camera into JC Penny, be prepared to put up a fight with the clerks when they try to take it away.
Sorry for rambling, but it's very seldom a topic I actually know about is posted on here.
My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street
Place your thumb nail against the mirror, if there is a gap between the real one & the reflection, its a real mirror.
Gareth
I really can't be arsed to think of a sig.
An interesting quote from someone who's tagline says exhorts freedom over conformity: ...
If anything you can complain about the
This guy (I'm assuming a guy because I only know of one woman capable of singing Wagnerian Baritone roles) "CAN" complain about anything he wants. Including wanna-be-artists.
except, he's saying he wants the blue pill?
There's a Register article which sums up my thoughrs quite nicely, this tilme on the subject of face-recognition software. The main story is about Visionics capitalising on the WTC attack. Excerpt below:
The danger of face recognition technology is not so much how it might be used today, but how, one day in the future, it could be exploited to search for just about any sort of unfashionable person.
We simply don't know what sort of government we'll have in 20 - 50 - 70 years' time. If today we should permit these tools to catalogue our faces because we trust the government we have at the moment, our descendants may well curse us if a Fascist regime ever comes to power.
It's a mistake to put the basic tools of mass oppression into the hands of any government simply because we have, at the moment, laws protecting us from its abuse.
Laws change; governments rise and fall. If we should hold fast now, a repressive future regime would have a hard time making a sudden power play for this sort of technology. However, if, thanks to our current state of doubt and insecurity, we allow it to become an everyday feature, we may not even notice its abuse until it's too late to stop without mass civil commotion.
We owe our children and grandchildren better. We owe them the right to be free men and women, to accept the risks of living in an essentially and eternally dangerous world, to come and go as they please without justifying themselves to underpaid nitwits and without submitting to a biometric scan to enter a restaurant, attend the cinema, watch a ball game, or meet friends at the airport.
We owe them their essential humanity.
Tom.
Oh arse
I figure that this will work like most other technology these days.
The camera-glasses and associated computer equipment will be expensive. Companies will offset these expenses just like in the early days of the internet...with ads. Don't expect to see that pretty waterfall while you're in the john, what you'll be seeing is an animated ad for condoms, maybe with sound..arranged by the company that got you the glasses for cheap!
And once the companies decide that ads are being ignored, they'll go to a pay-per-view model. Just make sure your subscription doesn't run out while you're driving.
And come to think of it, what a great platform for subliminal advertising! You can insist to no visual ads, but paragraph 85(s) of the licensing agreement will subject you to ads beamed directly to your brain!
Why is it you guys don't want to acknowledge the NY Times for the article and abide by THEIR "license" agreement? I mean the license issues (re:GPL) are so important to Linux you spend hours arguing about minutia, but you feel free to skate around the NY Times quite reasonable (and free) requests. How hypocritical is that?
The revolution will NOT be televised.
One of my co-op students last year went to work for Steve Mann. He said it was a very strange experience - Mann had him come in to work at 11 pm, say, and work until 7 the next morning. Then two days later he would change it to 9-5.
Mann sometimes puts on ALL his gear and wanders around downtown Toronto. I saw him once, and talked to him for a bit. Also a very strange experience - he was acting as though nothing was unusual about what he was doing.
another artist who has been doing the same sort of things probably for a much longer time & that might be worth sneaking a peek at is Stelarc. There is also an interview with him at ctheory in the archives.
I see some 'tard moderated you down.
Don't worry, I'll knick him with meta-moderation.
Perhaps some hippie type who couldn't stand that someone complained in a creative and humourous way ?
I personally enjoyed the post.
Is privacy really the freedom we need the most?
I'd think I value more the freedom to live my life not having to be afraid of being executed the next day for a random reason or for no reason at all.
It's an age-old scenario--when you don't have the abilities to produce something truly artistic--take an artistic medium and add some socio-political twist to it and THEN say it's art. Looks to be Photoshop 10, pre-requisite for Photoshop 101.
PegQuin--I've got a sneakin' suspicion
Here's the format of your joke: "hi, this is funny because blahblahblah, get it? hahahaha" Your sense of humor reminds me of the scene from "Roadtrip" where the boys are in the car talking about cheating on their girlfriends, and one young man's analogy is "..it's like, if you spread peanut butter on your testicles and let your NEIGHBOR'S dog lick it off, then it's not cheating.." pretty dumb, eh? Kinda like your joke. Ironic, that you (in karma whoring mode, I'm sure) try to play up to the moderaters at the end of your post..ooo..you're all so in on that little joke of yours, eh? Kids today..sheesh
Your credit history, purchasing habits, biographical information, tv viewing habits, web surfing habits and almost anything else you would care to keep to yourself can be revealed to people who do not know you with very little real effort. For most people reading slashdot, most societal notions of privacy were erased before they were born.
Use a credit card? Use your SSN as an id? Have a driver's license? If you answered yes to two out of three, then you can pretty much forget about personal privacy because you started building your own consumer database long ago.
Go into any mall or major store and you are on camera. Go into any major office complex and you are on camera. Most cities have cameras at busy intersections. Satellites can provide amazing surveillance of ground activity anywhere.
Basically the only place you can be assured that you are not on candid camera is inside your home with the blinds drawn. Soon even this will evaporate - within five years there will be technologies that will allow someone to deposit a wireless camera in your house that will be too small for you to detect if it is well placed.
Is this a reference to something?
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
I think I read some cyberpunk piece where a character suffers because *ackers insert Brazilian (?) spam into his vision.
Maybe Neil Stephenson's Victorian book whose name I forgot, when the girl escapes her mother's house with her brother and they go along a porn district?
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
Until you learn the difference between a group, Slashdot, and its individual members, you deserve to be ignored and down-moded
The message was a reply to the story posting, if you didn't notice; intended for the editors who posted the story and run the place and anyone else for whom the shoe fits.
You wouldn't want someone to get around the GPL on a technicality. If you want GPL'd code you need to abide by the rules. Likewise, if you want NY Times content you ought to abide by THEIR rules. "Big media", your paranoia about being tracked, etc. is irrelevant.
But, above all, remember that Slashdot is not a singular entity.
Excuse me, but if our account #'s are any indication I've been around here a lot longer than you have, so piss off. The GPL is all about ethics, but they seem to only matter if it's the GPL that's being violated. Real ethics don't work that way.
And if you think I give a flying rat's ass about the bullshit that passes for moderation around here then you've got another think coming. Real karma has nothing to do with Slashdot.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
I found this out recently when trying to take pictures at the mall on a photo outing... we had to switch to a discreet point-and-click and even then we ended up getting caught twice and followed around by the security guard. Most stores, for whatever reason, really dislike photos being taken
I got kicked out of a mall for filming also. I think the reasoning is that the people who pay for space in the mall would think that it upsets customers to have some guy walking around filming people. Which is their right, and probably true. While you may be filming your girlfriend picking out a dress, I may be filming your girlfriend picking out a dress too. And what do you think of that? It's bad business. They have cameras, but they try to keep them unintrusive. Generally a good balace of "make them visible to potential shoplifters", and "make them invisible to average shopper" seems to be the norm. You wouldn't probably go to a store if they had security guards walking around with camcorders, it would just be weird. I wouldn't anyway.
The book 1984 by George Orwell [NT]
--Remove chicken to e-mail
One of Ashcrofts first orders was to let the INS hold people indefinitely, with no charge. There is a few hundreds rotting away as we speak. And this is no martial law. It will not be lifted when the enemy is defeated. Of course, terrorism can never be fully defeated, but that's yet another story.
My favourate responce to this is to tell 'em that prison cells/graveyards are full of people who thought they had nothing to hide.
That and presenting them with a print out of their bookmarks to BeetOffPicturesGalore.com !
Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
Don't believe what you read is the truth.
This is especially useful against SUV/cell phone users, loser kids in their souped up honda civics, and BMW driving executive-types.
Maybe one day I will post their ugly faces on the web...
I take a lot of photos each year, and I've never had a problem in malls or restraunts provided I'm with a group of people and they were clearly the subject of the photos.
:-)
One case in fact I was with a group of 12 or so on a dinner outing, and after taking lots of photos of the group, I took quite a few of the "ambience", picking up lots of strangers along the way. Admittedly this is something that has drawn complaints in the past, but with so many people (and the fact we had been ordering multiple rounds) no one said anything.
Just give them bogus info, who cares? And don't tell me all you privacy freaks aren't registering on any pr0n sites!
Has anyone actually seen any negative effects of registering for NYT access? I broke down and registered last week after hearing they had some unique articles on the WTC attack and haven't seen any fallout from it yet. My experience is shared by some others who have registered.
Of course, I used one of my spam-target email accounts for the registration. Better safe than sorry.
- If we aren't supposed to eat animals, then why are they made out of meat? - Steven Wright
I worked in this guy's lab for a year.
Most of the stuff that you are reading about is embellished beyond belief...
His "reality mediator" stuff is just motion tracking (and makes some pretty rigid assumption such as no parallax), all the sequences you see are post processed video (doesn't work in real time)...
MODERATORS: This isn't a troll. It's a discenting opinion. If you have to look that up, maybe you shouldn't be modding my post.
digitalunity
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
I bet he has a hard time keeping all the wimmin off of him, huh? That wearable computer is SUCH a turn on and .. and those SHADES!! I'm getting wet just thinking about it!!
DO ME STEVE!!!
damn, that shit hurtz
Ind Aed Gnaught, Friend. Do You Reave?
fucktard.
H4sIAI8qsjsAA3POKMosLsnMS1RwTC/NzEktSlRPUUhKLSlJLV IoLs8sSc5QyE1VSM5IzCwqBgDjmk5ZLAAAAA==
CNET radio did an interview with Dr. Mann about
the SeatSale Exhibit.
There's a OGG version of it at
http://www.eyetap.org/seatsale/seatsale_cnet.ogg
and more information and links at
http://www.eyetap.org/seatsale
Why do you wankers have to comment each and every ****ing time that the tremendous and FREE New York Times website requires registration? Is that such an unbearable burden. Get off your stupid high horse.
I just read the article by logging in as 'cypherpunks' with a password of 'cypherpunks'. Generally, most popular sites have that account already established. Large group of people who don't like to be tracked on the Net use that shared login. Try it... (um, doesn't work on Slashdot however... *shrug*).
The exhibit was produced WELL before the
events of sept11.
I didn't read the book but I watched the TV show :)
Actually, I read the book but didn't remeber this part.
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu