Slashdot Mirror
NSF-Funded "Dark Web" to Battle Terrorists
BuzzSkyline writes "The National Science Foundation has announced a new University of Arizona project, which they call the Dark Web, intended to monitor all terrorist activity on the Internet. The project relies on 'advanced techniques such as Web spidering, link analysis, content analysis, authorship analysis, sentiment analysis and multimedia analysis [to] find, catalog and analyze extremist activities online.' The coolest part of the project is a tool called Writeprint, which 'automatically extracts thousands of multilingual, structural, and semantic features to determine who is creating "anonymous" content' with an accuracy of 95%, according to the release."
The coolest part of the project is a tool called Writeprint, which 'automatically extracts thousands of multilingual, structural, and semantic features to determine who is creating "anonymous" content' with an accuracy of 95%, according to the release."
So when they get it wrong, and the police storm my front door instead of my neighbors, will it still be "cool"?
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
...to out Dan Lyons as "Fake Steve."
Other than that, I'm afraid this is the sort of technology that's only "cool" when it isn't being used on you.
Change NSF to NSA, and the summary would make just as much sense...except "terrorist" would be defined as whatever the current politicians in power decide it to mean.
Space race, nuclear power, this kind of technology. Just goes to show, if you have a good idea, find a way to use it to further the war machine and political agendas and prepare to get buried in money. Can someone please figure out a way to weaponize a cure for cancer?
Public use of any portable music system is a virtually guaranteed indicator of sociopathic tendencies. -- Zoso
Instead of posting anything anonymously yourself, just tell someone else to post it. There speling errors will not be the smae as your's and their sentence structure will be different.
... but they won't be able to tie it to him unless he also posts a lot of stuff non-anonymously.
Okay, they'll be able to group all of his posting as being posted by him
One man's "terrorist" is another man's "Freedom fighter".
I don't think it's reasonable to call it spying.
You're right, it's not spying, it's surveillance.
That doesn't really make it any better, however.
AccountKiller
...that the Bush administration's definition of 'terrorist' includes Democrats, pot smokers, vegetarians, and people with two arms and two legs. Then why was Vietnam veteran and triple amputee Max Cleland branded a traitor?Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Another 'its for the children' type of maneuver.
This should scare anyone that likes their right to free speech. And yes, even terrorists should have the right to *speak*. If you restrict their right to speak, its not much of a stretch to restrict yours too.
Be afraid.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If only those terms could be so eloquently applied in real life. But, in the real world they are often politicized. In fact the text you quoted uses quote marks around the words terrorist and freedom fighter to imply that it's merely what's said. Dictators will always run propaganda campaigns against rebels labeling them terrorists. Freedom fighters will always be left to achieving their goals through unconventional tactics that will more often than not be labeled "terrorist" tactics. Insurgent armies seeking to take over a country and install their own dictators will often be called "freedom fighters" by the people who back them. I agree that the terms should used with some analysis and discipline. Which is why you take any person or group being labeled as "terrorist" or "freedom fighter" with a good dose of skepticism.
New! Device Legs: These legs will help your poor OEM installed product escape any hamfistedness it may encounter. Ava
are you aware of any incidents involving colonists in 1776 blowing up markets full of children?
I'm pretty sure nothing of the sort happened, but i'm willing to hear evidence to the contrary.
Those were greatly less "evolved" times, and yet, my impression is that those at the forefront of political dissent were vastly more humane in spreading their message.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
Back in 1776, the terrorist were organized military fighting organized military. Can you seriously see no difference in fighting a war and blowing up random stranger walking down the streets hoping it is a soldier? Do you seriously think that stocking arms, ammunition, and other supplies or hiding in a church because you know the other side won't go there is comparable to fighting in the open?
I would agree if the insurgents would act in a military manor. but as of yet, they are completely happy with killing innocent people (iraqis, reporters, medical workers, people attempting to just live their lives) to show their "outrage" at the occupying forces. This isn't comparable by any means to a revolution in 1776.
But their "terrorists" as you inaccurately call them where locals, not foreigners. Our terrorists (where terrorists means groups/individuals using terror tactics) are outsiders. Your connection isn't interesting, it's wrong and most likely motivated by sophomoric partisanship.
/. equivalent of "wrong/disagree". OR put on your grown up pants and realize that there is a world outside of Bush (or at least i hope there will be!). /voted for Gore and Kerry, will vote for whichever Dem gets the nom /served my 4 years and would have done more but for a medical problem /despised Bush since 98 when i had the misfortune of living in Texass
There is a difference between a rebel and terrorist, *if* the speaker is using the terms *honestly*. Terrorism, terrorist tactics, have a specific meaning, it doesn't mean "military activity by people we dislike". Rebels generally give a stand up fight, they are a defacto army. Terrorist aim to change policy through inciting fear (terror). 9/11 is a shining example. We were terrified, and we changed our policies.... A rebel army would do things like attack a loyalist munitions depot, seize radio stations, capture real estate etc. Terrorists do things like poisoning water supplies, setting off bombs in places where people usually feel safe (bus stops, market squares, night clubs). This is not to say that rebels and loyalist types won't use terror tactics.
England couldn't have won for the same reason we can't win in Iraq. The enemy is the population, it wasn't initially, but terrorist groups and religious types made it so. Bush didn't read The Prince.
My point is that terrorist and rebel are NOT RELATIVE TERMS. *Our* revolution, *their* rebellion... those are relative. Terrorism is not relative, it has a specific meaning. It has a real and functional, objective meaning. If England called us terrorists, they would have been dishonest. If our revolutionaries were throwing pipe bombs into crowds in London, that would be terrorism. If we misuse the terms we dilute their meaning and effect. That causes ambiguity, ambiguity makes manipulation easier and communication harder.
That's why it grinds my oats when someone says "you can't have a war against terrorism because it's a tactic, not a person". That's a sophomoric claim. Terrorism refers to people in the same way that Catholicism refers to people that are Catholic. AQ is a part of terrorism, just ONE PART. "The War against Terror" (tWAt) is a war against all the groups that use terrorism. "The war against" metaphor is stupid and needs replacing. But efforts to say that terrorism is a tactic and can't be killed/beaten is misleading. Terrorism is not a monolithic unit like a government, but it still consists of people. It might be more precise to say "War against Terrorists".
But be a good little partisan and call me names like neocon, sheeple, chickenhawk or whatever will impress your friends and avoid being objective. Mod me down as troll or flamebait since that is the
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!