Interesting article, but this is something that has been happening and will continue to.
Technology being put to use to seek out enemies of the state for the world governments is nothing new.
Atleast it is a good thing that companies are making good money in the process. Your privacy? That was lost long ago.
It was only a matter of time before this happened. Atleast be glad that we've not yet reached the stage where they'd bother having your entire genome sequence to create solutions and replacements for you:-)
Perhaps the author of the article has just read Cryptonomicon or something.
Get over it, companies will track you, governments will monitor it. And there will be people who will beat both, and people who will be susceptible to both. Unfortunate, but hey, paranoia does not help either.
And oh, first post?
Reminds me of...
by
gpinzone
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
...how the Bayesian spam filters operate (on a much smaller scale). They find predictors of "spam" like these guys find predictors of "terrorists."
If the false positives of this system finding terrorists are as low as the ones that identify spam, is it really unreasonable to consider that probable cause for an investigation? At least, until the 0.000001% slips by and causes a lawsuit for wrongful arrest.
profiteering?
by
SHEENmaster
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Today, however, companies that excel in connecting the data dots are finding a lifeline in a customer whose IT ineptitude is matched only by its means: the U.S. government, which will spend $53 billion on information technology this year. The Federal Government's inability to share and analyze information became clear in the months after the 9/11 attacks.
While I want argue against the governments inability to do anything but waste money, I do think that these "anti-terrorism" dealies are going too far. We know that they are spending $53 billion on information technology. When they spend it on a hammer or a toilet seat I know that something is getting done, but "information technology" makes me suspicious.
Granted my opinion is largely a result of window flags selling in excess of twenty dollars and not hearing the results of such spending. In fact, I haven't heard of a single terrorist act averted since 9/11. It couldn't hurt to inform us when the spending pays off; could it?
Is this information actually getting results, or is it just profiteering of the corporations that we so love to slander and libel?
-- You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Uber Loyalty Card in the UK (Nectar)
by
Boss,+Pointy+Haired
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Three large British retail companies have recently created a joint loyalty card.
Nectar has been set-up by Sainsbury's (a supermarket), Barclays (a financial services company) and BP (a petrol filling station company).
I didn't mind Sainsbury's knowing that I eat junk, but now that they're telling Barclays what junk I eat I end up with Barclays putting my life insurance premiums up.
Interesting stuff.
Plots that have been averted...
by
MyNameIsFred
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
...I haven't heard of a single terrorist act averted since 9/11...
You haven't been paying much attention to the news have you. Let's see, we had the plot to attack ships in the Straits of Gilbrater that was averted, the possibly overblown Jose Padilla - Dirty Bomb case, and the capture of key operatives such as Abu Zubaydah, which surely put a dent in al-Qaida's plans.
Frankly the problem is attacks such as the Twin Towers are always going to stick in your mind more than a brief news report that Abu Zubaydah was captured. Also there is always more skepticism that capturing some guy actually averted a plot -- see Jose Padilla. We will never know whether he would have actually done something. There will always be second guessing on whether a plot was really averted.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting article, but this is something that has been happening and will continue to.
:-)
Technology being put to use to seek out enemies of the state for the world governments is nothing new.
Atleast it is a good thing that companies are making good money in the process. Your privacy? That was lost long ago.
It was only a matter of time before this happened. Atleast be glad that we've not yet reached the stage where they'd bother having your entire genome sequence to create solutions and replacements for you
Perhaps the author of the article has just read Cryptonomicon or something.
Get over it, companies will track you, governments will monitor it. And there will be people who will beat both, and people who will be susceptible to both. Unfortunate, but hey, paranoia does not help either.
And oh, first post?
...how the Bayesian spam filters operate (on a much smaller scale). They find predictors of "spam" like these guys find predictors of "terrorists."
If the false positives of this system finding terrorists are as low as the ones that identify spam, is it really unreasonable to consider that probable cause for an investigation? At least, until the 0.000001% slips by and causes a lawsuit for wrongful arrest.
Today, however, companies that excel in connecting the data dots are finding a lifeline in a customer whose IT ineptitude is matched only by its means: the U.S. government, which will spend $53 billion on information technology this year. The Federal Government's inability to share and analyze information became clear in the months after the 9/11 attacks.
While I want argue against the governments inability to do anything but waste money, I do think that these "anti-terrorism" dealies are going too far. We know that they are spending $53 billion on information technology. When they spend it on a hammer or a toilet seat I know that something is getting done, but "information technology" makes me suspicious.
Granted my opinion is largely a result of window flags selling in excess of twenty dollars and not hearing the results of such spending. In fact, I haven't heard of a single terrorist act averted since 9/11. It couldn't hurt to inform us when the spending pays off; could it?
Is this information actually getting results, or is it just profiteering of the corporations that we so love to slander and libel?
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Three large British retail companies have recently created a joint loyalty card.
Nectar has been set-up by Sainsbury's (a supermarket), Barclays (a financial services company) and BP (a petrol filling station company).
I didn't mind Sainsbury's knowing that I eat junk, but now that they're telling Barclays what junk I eat I end up with Barclays putting my life insurance premiums up.
Interesting stuff.
Frankly the problem is attacks such as the Twin Towers are always going to stick in your mind more than a brief news report that Abu Zubaydah was captured. Also there is always more skepticism that capturing some guy actually averted a plot -- see Jose Padilla. We will never know whether he would have actually done something. There will always be second guessing on whether a plot was really averted.