Slashdot Mirror


EU Funding "Orwellian" Artificial Intelligence Snooping System

leonbenjamin writes "Britain's Telegraph reports on a five-year research programme, called Project Indect, which aims to develop computer programmes which act as 'agents' to monitor and process information from web sites, discussion forums, file servers, peer-to-peer networks and even individual computers. Its main objectives include the 'automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence.' Shami Chakrabarti, head of the UK's Liberty human-rights NGO, said: 'Profiling whole populations instead of monitoring individual suspects is a sinister step in any society. ... It's dangerous enough at national level, but on a Europe-wide scale the idea becomes positively chilling.'"

181 comments

  1. It won't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not yet, we don't have enough computing power / AI tech for that yet.

    what a waste of tax money.

    1. Re:It won't work by clam666 · · Score: 1

      We have all the computing power we need. It's not like it'll work anyway.

      They'll just look for camera to suddenly go orange/yellow with a mushroom shape in white then invoke a status message.

      We all know this stuff is silly. What are they going to detect? A bunch of human shaped pixels increasing their speed in one direction? The number of false positives for the AI system to detect is astounding. Even the "AI systems" in video games where the system has every possible bit of information, as well as all the information from the last 50 times I killed something on that level, as well as the entire map and my location in space, STILL can't create a useful attack tactic that isn't an obviously programmed response, which is a smoke and mirrors to make it look like it's smart when it still faces the wrong way, shoots at the ceiling, stands in front of my gunsight, etc.

      It's just like work. Another pie-in-the-sky project that'll never work no matter how much BS some MIT grad claims.

      Here's a one act play of the pitch meeting for this stupid AI project, rewritten for how my workday goes.

      Me (lying): "Hey boss, I want to do this really cool AI project which will be totally killer and get you a huge bonus and make us tons of money and you'll be CEO in 6 weeks..."

      Boss (naive): "Sounds great! Go for it."

      Me: Sound of halo starting up...

      6 months later...

      Me (lying): "Infrastructure said we couldn't use that technology, so I scrapped it, but I've got a new plan..."

      Boss (pissed): What the hell happened?

      Me (winning an Emmy): Well I was totally finished but the AI was completely based on..uhh....Service Broker and wouldn't you know it, there was some kind of port/firewall thingy or something so the Infrastructure Group said WTF are you doing..."

      Boss: "Bastards!"

      Me (searching for Grand Theft Billing IV DVD): "Anyway...I bet we can run the AI through Exchange so..."

      Boss: "..."

      fin

      --
      I'm a satanic clam.
  2. Haven't we been here before? by fataugie · · Score: 2, Informative

    CARNIVORE anyone?

    --

    WTF? Over?

  3. 'automatic detection of ... abnormal behavior' by Jurily · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Next up: thought police.

    1. Re:'automatic detection of ... abnormal behavior' by Icegryphon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Easy way to stop them, Just think about 2 girls 1 cup or BME pain olympics.
      That would make anyone cringe unless you are the scum of the world.
      Expecting a -1 very soon.

    2. Re:'automatic detection of ... abnormal behavior' by Kokuyo · · Score: 0, Troll

      ...unless you are the scum of the world...

      You do realize that we are talking about governments here, yes?

    3. Re:'automatic detection of ... abnormal behavior' by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      ...unless you are the scum of the world...

      You do realize that we are talking about governments here, yes?

      The people who tell you that stealing is wrong... because they don't like competition. Those would be them, yes.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    4. Re:'automatic detection of ... abnormal behavior' by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      We have those already. There is a crime of "inciting racial hatred" here in the UK. Essentially, if you say something and someone decides you might "incite" someone to hate a person based on race, you can be arrested and prosecuted.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:'automatic detection of ... abnormal behavior' by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Easy way to stop them, Just think about 2 girls 1 cup or BME pain olympics. That would make anyone cringe unless you are the scum of the world.

      Therefore, anyone who'd voluntarily think of them must be the scum of the world and very likely deserving of arrest.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  4. Is this program already posting to slashdot? by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Funny

    A lot of the comments on here seem to come from an entity that has not yet achieved true sentience...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Is this program already posting to slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the comments on here seem to come from an entity that has not yet achieved true sentience...

      They're called "editors".

    2. Re:Is this program already posting to slashdot? by Publikwerks · · Score: 1

      Okay. Um, while you were typing that I searched every database in existence and learned every fact about everything. And mastered the violin. Oop, and sold more paper.

    3. Re:Is this program already posting to slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Truth be told, it will amount to nothing more than a heuristic search agent... that's the best we can muster these days. The odds that 99% of what it returns will be crap are astronomical... the real test will be whether or not the odds of it actually catching something that indicates an actual honest threat of violence are high enough to bother with the project. I contend that the data they are sifting through is so vast and the nuances of language are so difficult to computationally analyze that this new "intelligent agent" is hardly worth the money spent to develop it.

  5. Abnormal behavior by Romancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Abnormal behavior"... You know, like disagreeing with the government about what the definition of that may be.

    --


    ) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
    ) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
    1. Re:Abnormal behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I couldn't agree more. This will be coming soon to America, most American's are so misinformed that they will most likely willingly go along with it because it will be presented to them as a "security measure"

      ""Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

      Remember that.

      Wake up America. Good Luck

    2. Re:Abnormal behavior by jdgeorge · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but in America it will be called a "Patriotic Artificial Intelligence System (PAIS)." And, hey, with an acronym like that, maybe we can overtly sell the service south of the border!

    3. Re:Abnormal behavior by Jurily · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Abnormal behavior"... You know, like disagreeing with the government about what the definition of that may be.

      Not to mention this is the EU we're talking about: a place with 23 different official languages. With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal".

      Non-EU example: In the Netherlands, the Gay Pride is a cultural event. In Serbia, protesters beat the shit out of them. In Moscow, the police did. Which one of these is normal, and to whom?

    4. Re:Abnormal behavior by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but in America it will be called a "Patriotic Artificial Intelligence System (PAIS)."

      Correction, it will be called "Patriotic Artificial Intelligence Network (PAIN)".

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    5. Re:Abnormal behavior by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Not to mention this is the EU we're talking about: a place with 23 different official languages. With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal"."

      I'd do an FTFY, but this is a serious question: don't you mean "With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can't be classified as "abnormal"?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    6. Re:Abnormal behavior by lavacano201014 · · Score: 1

      Far as I'm concerned, it will be called "bullshit". *gets taken away by the feds*

      --
      A wise man once said, "Where is my other quotation mark?
    7. Re:Abnormal behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither Serbia nor Russia are members of the EU, by the way.

    8. Re:Abnormal behavior by LordAndrewSama · · Score: 1

      It is entirely possible that that is why he referred to it as a Non-EU example. just saying.

    9. Re:Abnormal behavior by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Funny

      Its main objectives include the 'automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence.

      Shit, if it ever runs across any of my slashdot journals I'll be in deep trouble. I guess I'd better not visit Britain!

    10. Re:Abnormal behavior by sorak · · Score: 1

      No. It will be Called Justice Engineering SUrveillance System, or JESUS for short. It will be passed in a near unanimous vote, because nobody will want to vote against JESUS. This will also allow them to deploy the system wherever they want, because we all want to bring JESUS into our schools, public libraries, and businesses.

      Of course, nobody will deploy it in Church because that is a separation of church and state issue.

    11. Re:Abnormal behavior by sorak · · Score: 1

      No. It will be called the Justice Engineering SUrveillance System, or JESUS. And it will pass almost unanymously, because nobody wants to vote against JESUS. This will also help deploy the system, because we all know that we need JESUS in our schools, our public buildings, and our street corners.

      But it will not be deployed in businesses, because that's socialism, and we won't have JESUS in churches, because that would be a separation of church and state issue.

    12. Re:Abnormal behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nevermind the details, those hippocrats will apply the law when they need it.
      always happens.

    13. Re:Abnormal behavior by Philip_the_physicist · · Score: 1

      Because it is one thing to flag a massive, scattered chink of your population as potential terrorists, but quite another to say that the entire population of $city are terrorists and you want the local police (who are also apparently mostly terrorists) to arrest them. At that point, the local authorities just say "fuck this shit" and ignore it, making the system completely useless.

    14. Re:Abnormal behavior by Nyder · · Score: 1

      "Abnormal behavior"... You know, like disagreeing with the government about what the definition of that may be.

      Not to mention this is the EU we're talking about: a place with 23 different official languages. With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal".

      Non-EU example: In the Netherlands, the Gay Pride is a cultural event. In Serbia, protesters beat the shit out of them. In Moscow, the police did. Which one of these is normal, and to whom?

      Think your mixing up the Gay peeps and they peeps who are into getting beat up.

      Seems to me, if you know your going to get beat up, and you into that, you'd go to the Gay Pride events in Serbia and Moscow.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    15. Re:Abnormal behavior by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Answer: All three.

      It's not about spotting people about to commit a crime, it's about knowing what everyone is doing all the time. The police like to know when people are holding any kind of event, and in fact you are already supposed to inform the police of any planned protests and get approval for them.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    16. Re:Abnormal behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I rather like TITAN (Total Information Tactical Awareness Network).

    17. Re:Abnormal behavior by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Not to mention this is the EU we're talking about: a place with 23 different official languages. With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal".

      Nothing ... or everything?

  6. Just another building block ... by foobsr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... to be integrated in the infrastructure needed when resources become scarce indeed and the gap between the 'haves' and 'have-nots' needs very careful attention to ensure that 'violence' does not spill over in the 'wrong' direction.

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    1. Re:Just another building block ... by b4upoo · · Score: 1

      Violence may very well be on the increase as technology eliminates more and more jobs. Add to that the flooding of coastal areas that will create all kinds of economic havoc as well as too much pressure from rising world populations and we may be in for a hell trip.

    2. Re:Just another building block ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soylent Green anyone?

  7. All your base... by NCamero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ignorance is strength,
    War is peace,
    Freedom is slavery.

    All your base are belong to us.

    1. Re:All your base... by kj_kabaje · · Score: 1

      At first I thought this was going to be a haiku response to the topic. Oh well.

  8. Re:Haven't we been here before? by jgtg32a · · Score: 4, Informative

    CARNIVORE turned out to be a bit underwhelming once details of what it actually was came out
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore_(software)

  9. Re:Haven't we been here before? by megamerican · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
  10. I'll parse out of a few of their claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to the official website for Project Indect, which began this year, its main objectives include "to develop a platform for the registration and exchange of operational data, acquisition of multimedia content, intelligent processing of all information and automatic detection of threats and recognition of abnormal behaviour or violence".

    So, they are trying to make a resource where law enforcement can upload "information" and have the system do "automatic detection of threats" and to parse out "abnormal behavior or violence".

    It talks of the "construction of agents assigned to continuous and automatic monitoring of public resources such as: web sites, discussion forums, usenet groups, file servers, p2p [peer-to-peer] networks as well as individual computer systems, building an internet-based intelligence gathering system, both active and passive".

    individual computer systems are not part of "public resources". Do they presume to hack into machines / use exploits to gain access?

    Scary times, indeed.

  11. Re:Haven't we been here before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they like to pretend that they haven't been doing this for some years now. it helps to contribute to the idea that the citizens, by voting, have any sort of real control over government and what it does and does not do. it's the same reason why in the USA you need endorsements and financial backing and media attention to win a presidential election - do you think someone who will take actions not in the interests of the status quo is going to get those? when you vote you make a choice between two people who have both been hand-picked to further the interests of government, usually by expanding it. the only difference here is that the europeans are significantly more subtle about how this is done, so their politics tend not to be such black-and-white, left-versus-right, democrat-versus-republican dualities. perhaps that's because government involvement in daily life is considered more acceptable over there - the europeans did not have to overcome a strong tradition against regimentation and centralization the way the americans had to do. but i assure you the same job gets done because in either the usa or europe, the same international bankers who form private corporations that function like government entities and control the currency (like USA's Federal Reserve) are the ones who hold the real power.

  12. Snoop This, PPPLLLEEEAAASSSEEEE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CheneyIsATerrorist. BushIsAMemberOfTheTaliban. WhereIsTheWhoreTonyBlair. BlameBritainForIraqAndAfghanistan. TheU.S.A.IsBritain'sProxyInIraqAndAfghanistan.

    And, Finally, Remember: AfghanisHasNaturalGas. LotsOfIt.

    Yours Volgograd,
    Kilgore Trout

  13. Obligatory... by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

    Agent Smith

    --
    while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
  14. Ah yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But is this not when EU points their fat grubby fingers at America and starts screaming that Americans are far worse than they are, While ignoring countries like China, Venezuela, Iran, etc?

    1. Re:Ah yes by clam666 · · Score: 1

      The EU needs some cheez with their whine. What are they going to do? Follow the same pattern of screwing themselves over, then being invaded by Germany?

      America sucks, which is why a team of boyscouts could take over the EU. It could even be done with the boyscouts with gay scoutmasters.

      The EU can go fornicate themselves. Wake me when they do something unrelated to food.

      --
      I'm a satanic clam.
  15. They're processing public information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Why does anybody have problem with this? I'm from the old school that considers even email to not be private. Why would you expect privacy about what you post on web sites, discussion forums, p2p networks, and other public venues?

    1. Re:They're processing public information by ickleberry · · Score: 1

      email + encryption is supposed to be private

      the ability to post stuff on websites anonymously is a great thing for whistle blowers and the like without having to worry about being sent to the Gulag. Of course if sufficient encryption / time delays are not used between the poster and the website than privacy and untraceability are just an illusion

      The government and the EU already have too much control over the population and will never stop making new rules and regulations, systems like this will only help them make the unenforceable enforceable until the government controls every minute detail of our lives

    2. Re:They're processing public information by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Why does anybody have problem with this? I'm from the old school that considers even email to not be private.

      Says the Anonymous Coward.

      If you are so dedicated to openness, why not post your name, address, phone number, and employer here? Put your money where your (anonymous) mouth is!

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    3. Re:They're processing public information by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      That's kind of his point, isn't it? Posting with an account would be counter to his ideals; anyone with an Internet connection can take a look at what he's posted and trace it back to that account. He's saying that they can grab a profile on Beardo based on my /. posts, and perhaps an email sig with a close match.

      So they tie in those two accounts and look at who I've been emailing. Everything's been accessed from an IP address within these geographic restrictions. There's a high rate of email between myself and "Betty Bearded". Let's assume she's on Facebook All. The. Time. They can then take a look at the publicly available photos and with a little crunching...

      Here's someone in a lot of her photos, so we can infer with some certainty that this is Beardo's real life name and what he looks like. Given that assumption, they can look at the writing style and either confirm or reconsider the match.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    4. Re:They're processing public information by MtlDty · · Score: 1

      Its not so much about an expectation of privacy, as an expectation not to be treated like a criminal

  16. Sounds perfect to me... by End+Program · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A five-year research programme, called Project Indect, aims to develop computer programmes which act as "agents" to monitor and process information from web sites, discussion forums, file servers, peer-to-peer networks and even individual computers

    Fantastic, so after you are done rounding up all the teenagers posting with attitude and skinheads, how is this system going to help find competent threats?

    Sure this will foil your low level moronic so called terrorist that happens to be down on his luck and just wants a group to blame for his own problems in life. However, I do not see this system giving any insight to groups that are smart enough to not say things on open systems or that are completely offline.

    1. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by badfish99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fantastic, so after you are done rounding up all the teenagers posting with attitude and skinheads, how is this system going to help find competent threats?

      There was a case here a few days ago, where some teenagers who wrote in their diaries some fantasy story about blowing up their school were arrested and held in jail for some months and then tried as terrorists. Luckily they got a jury trial: the jury acquitted them straight away, and then took the trouble to wait outside the court to congratulate them on their release.

      The next step for the authorities will have to be to abolish jury trials for terrorist offenses.

    2. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Why do you think Bin Laden only uses face to face communications? Only the extremely stupid or lazy will be caught using this. And once again, the problem with gathering intelligence isn't a lack of information, the problem is determining which pieces of information are actually credible, and which are not.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    3. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      The next step for the authorities will have to be to abolish jury trials for terrorist offenses.

      Half the people around here think that would be a great idea. They bemoan all of the pitfalls of the jury system but fail to see the problems with the alternative that allows the government to strip you of your freedom without the consent of your fellow citizens.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've not been paying attention have you? ;) They've been trying to do exactly that for the past decade. Did you know that if there's more than one person gathered together anywhere in a public place, the police DO have the power to deem it an illegal gathering and/or protest and either move you on or arrest you under 'anti-terror' legislation. They've been using it to shut down perfectly legal and peaceful dissent for years now. Check out how it's used against the anti-vivisectionists, the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (watch the film called 'on the verge' about CAAT in Brighton), climate camps, independent journalists, Brian Haw... and on and on and on.

      More of the same, business as usual. The revolution has already started - time to pick a side

    5. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Ghubi · · Score: 1

      how is this system going to help find competent threats?

      The purpose of the system is not to find competent threats. The purpose is to intimidate dissidents into self censorship.

    6. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Kiuas · · Score: 1

      allows the government to strip you of your freedom without the consent of your fellow citizens.

      Erm. Why is the "consent" of your fellow citizens needed? Laws - in any democratic country - are crafted by people who have been democratically selected to represent the people. If someone breaks these laws he/she deserves a punishment. However, wether or not he indeed commited the crime he is acused of is not a matter of oppinion. Why should it be open for a vote? There either is or is not enough evidence to condemn the man, and people who have been given the proper training in lgeal issues (ie. judges and prosecutors) should be able to determine that.

      By giving complete laymen control over wether or not the suspect is guilty, an additional factor is added to the process. Trials are not only about reviewing the evidence, they're about convincing people that your view is correct. It's a show where both sides have to try to appeal to the basic human insticts like empathy. Both sides are trying to manipulate the jury's feelings and because emotions affect one's judgement the decissions of the jury could be far from objective (of course a trial can never be 100% objective, but I still don't think that a jury based system is the best alternative).

      I say it's not the best alternative because it isn't working that well. In fact I'd go as far as saying that it's a failure, since the USA has the highest murder rate of all the industrialized countries, the highest amount of prisoners in the world. Especially the latter statistic is in my oppinion partially explained by the fact that people seek revenge, they want the "bad guys" off the streets and hence a jury of laymen is more likely to find a man guilty than a system which doesn't use juries.

      For example: Germany - and many other European countries - uses a system where the judge is assisted by two lay judges on the lowest level and two other judges on higher levels of the legal system. Germany has nearly six times lower murder rate than the USA and only 1/7 of the prisoner amount of the USA.

      So could someone please explain why is this "consent of one's fellow citizens" a good thing for the criminal (who is more likely to get imprisoned) and most importantly for the society itself since it doesn't seem to be very effecting in reducing crimes?

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    7. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by st0nes · · Score: 1

      people who have been given the proper training in lgeal issues (ie. judges and prosecutors) should be able to determine that.

      I mostly agree with you. My grandfather was a criminal lawyer in the days when the accused had a choice between jury or judge and assessors. He always said that if you are guilty choose the jury, but if you are innocent choose the judge who is more likely to reach the correct verdict. the only semi-compelling argument against abolishing juries is the possibility of corruption amongst the judiciary, which could result in, say, a not guilty verdict in favour of a mafia don and a new yacht for the judge.

      --
      Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
    8. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Stuarticus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is something that has been discussed here (UK) due to the fact that the public shouldn't get to know the details of how much the government knows about other terrorists or the extent of their investigations. All very disturbing.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    9. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They did - Diplock courts.

    10. Re:Sounds perfect to me... by Strake · · Score: 1

      ... some teenagers ... wrote in their diaries some fantasy story about blowing up their school

      That's thinking small. I have fantasies of blowing up the entire Ministry of Education with a TTC subway car laden with explosives, on November Fifth, wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, playing the 1812 overture.

      This is an entirely original idea, by the way.

  17. Think of the youtube! by beefnog · · Score: 1

    Imagine all of the false positives this thing will generate from youtube comments. "Ur fukin' retard Subaru is better than Mitsubishi any day" "NO U" "Ima come to ur house and killy ur retard family!"

  18. The most suspicious man in the world... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm not always under electronic surveillance, but when I am, I drink Dos Equis.

    Stay thirsty my friends.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:The most suspicious man in the world... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not always under electronic surveillance, but when I am, I drink Dos Equis.

      Stay thirsty my friends.

      Dos Equis, now with even more eXtreme taste, eXtreme eXperience! The new Dos Equis XXX! Enjoy the eXtreme taste while watching the world end at 2012, when our latest and greatest brewery at Chihuahua starts producing the new Dos Equis XXX! Drink fast, dirk thoroughly. After all, you never know when you get the next one!

  19. A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Xaedalus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the single biggest threat to our freedom as individuals: the desire of the state to form a broad security apparatus, in order to protect itself from lawsuits filed by aggrieved citizens.

    I don't believe there's some super-secret cabal out to restrict our freedoms and turn us all into mindless meme-spouting "Citizens" living in a modern-day panopticon. What this is, is the result of an ill-informed populace, fearful of terrorists, criminals, and anything/everything that could possibly disrupt their lives demanding that their leadership Do Something . So the government is placed in the impossible position of trying to predict potential future attacks/assaults/cataclysms, because a clear majority of its constituents has told it that this is necessary. And when they fail, the survivors/aggrieved parties file lawsuits because clearly the government has failed in its duties to predict and prevent bad things from happening to its people.

    So now we have entities like the TSA in the US, which exists solely as a giant resource-sucking time waster of a stop-gap prevention against class action lawsuits against the government in case another 9/11 type attack occurs. That is all it is: an insurance policy the government has taken out against the possible threat of legal action from its citizens should the unthinkable occurs. We all know that the TSA isn't going to stop terrorists - it's so the government can say "See, we did everything we could to prevent it and it still happened". And in this case, I'm going to step into the blame game and blame US, not the government. I have Karma to burn, so here goes: the vast majority of us citizens, regardless of country, want security and safety - NOT freedom. We want to know that when we get into our cars and go to work, we are insulated from the random elements of chaos that make up the world we live in. And when that protective bubble gets popped, we get angry because by God/FSM/Entropy/Satan, we want our security! And so we sue our government because 'THEY' should have been able to stop it with all their resources and manpower. And our government finds itself having to establish all these 'safeguards' simply so we can regain some measure of belief in the illusion of security we demand the government provide us.

    I'm no libertarian, but this is one case in which I agree with their ethos: leave us the hell alone and don't build a nanny/father state to protect us. Yes, it's scary to live in a world in which anything could happen, but the alternative to me is unthinkable: some faceless entity doing everything it can to remove risk from my life and give me the illusion of control/safety, because most of my fellow citizens want that. I'd rather face up to my limitations and fallacies on my own, thank-you-very-much; I don't need my issues with needing control to be enabled.

    So before we go into another round of 'how much blame can we heap on the government', let's think for a moment that the government is nothing more than a reflection of its people, and their values.

    --
    Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    1. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      So before we go into another round of 'how much blame can we heap on the government', let's think for a moment that the government is nothing more than a reflection of a very noisy and ill-informed subset of the politicians, and their values.

      Fixed that for ya.

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    2. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up.

    3. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The root of the problem here is consolidated power. This is exactly the kind of thing the EU was designed for. The more power at the center, the more lucrative the business of government for those who control it. The more people they control, the more money they control, and the more precedent they have for future expansions of power and revenue.

      We have the same problem here in the US. When the country was founded, the federal government had very few powers over the individual states. And for good reason -- the founders were well aware of the dangers and inevitable outcome of consolidated power. Today in 2009, the US federal government controls the most expensive, most powerful business this world has ever seen.

      If you look deep enough, it becomes apparent that consolidated power is at the root of just about everything wrong with government. Corruption, abuse, injustice, waste -- the more consolidated the power into the hands of the few, the more goes wrong. Of course, for those at the top of the power pyramid, consolidation is the name of the game and the primary objective.

    4. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Your use of the word "panopticon" has been noted. Whilst your usage implies you're unaware of the successful, ongoing nature of the programme since it's Benthamian inception, we would like to thank you for promulgating awareness of the programme and instilling the necessary respect in the citizenry. On a more pejorative note we'd like to take this occasion to caution you against your flagrant usage of enjambment when group disparate ideas separated by slash marks. Such usage can't be helped but seen as an unhealthy tendency not to think in discrete, sanctioned thought parcels and, unfortunately, may lead to novel, hierarchical thought processes facilitating questioning of the current beneficent hierarchy.

      Regards

      Echelon

    5. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sort of but don't forget a huge component of this is power. Certain people want it and as much as they can get. They want to control others. Just look at the corruption in any government. It takes a certain kind of person to actually want to be in politics.

    6. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah. You'll probably get married and start a family before long. Then your face kind of becomes vacant and you will accept Big Brother and be content to spend the rest of your days discussing spectator sports rather than politics. You'll be part of the community.

    7. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by mayko · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree with everything you said.

      I'd like to add that this reminds me of the problem prisoners have when they are finally released after a long prison stay. Often times they cannot handle the freedom and lack of structure in the real world. Unfortunately the vast majority of humans essentially feel the same way.

      Freedom is scary, and dangerous. People can't deal with that.

    8. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      Bravo! This was so well-written, yet general enough to be a response to most of these "security-first" news articles that I had to google around to see if it was just copy-pasta. Glad to say this appears to original. Well said, sir.

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    9. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

      Thank you! I'm happy to report that this was one of the few useful emanations to erupt from the sewers of my psyche today.

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    10. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by GrifterCC · · Score: 1

      I agree with your overall point, but the United States is immune from lawsuits by its citizens unless it waives that immunity. It has done so, to a limited extent, via the Federal Tort Claims Act, found at 28 U.S.C. 1346(b). The Wikipedia article is a decent summary.

      The next time you read "tort reform" FUD about how Everyone In America is abusing civil litigation and Plaintiffs' Attorneys Like Myself Are Abetting Them, consider the source. P.S. The source is liability-insurance companies.

    11. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by witekr · · Score: 1

      Peter Wiggin

    12. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm no libertarian, but this is one case in which I agree with their ethos: leave us the hell alone and don't build a nanny/father state to protect us. Yes, it's scary to live in a world in which anything could happen

      As long as the government of USA thinks it is somehow all right to build new military bases in a bizarre quest to secure even more bizarre set of benefits for the American companies globally, an American citizen probably needs his or hers protection. The current situation is a direct and almost trivial result from the decisions made earlier and currently, the future doesn't seem to offer much difference in this respect.
      A world based on mutual respect, building of understanding, free trade and rule of law is not something powerful men usually dream of.

    13. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by HigH5 · · Score: 1

      Mod this parent into orbit for the whole world to see.

      --
      Ceterum censeo Microsoft esse delendam.
    14. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by sincewhen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but don't you think that this unhealthy focus on protecting everyone from anything which can be labelled terrorism, and spending billions in the process, is just the military industrial complex finding its feet again after being blindsided by the end on the cold war?

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
    15. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      I don't believe there's some super-secret cabal out to restrict our freedoms and turn us all into mindless meme-spouting "Citizens" living in a modern-day panopticon. What this is, is the result of an ill-informed populace, fearful of terrorists, criminals, and anything/everything that could possibly disrupt their lives demanding that their leadership Do Something . So the government is placed in the impossible position of trying to predict potential future attacks/assaults/cataclysms, because a clear majority of its constituents has told it that this is necessary. And when they fail, the survivors/aggrieved parties file lawsuits because clearly the government has failed in its duties to predict and prevent bad things from happening to its people.

      The populace are not scared of terrorists, criminals etc. They are constantly told by the media that they should be afraid. The state of fear is nurtured and developed by the media, and it is through the media that politicians get the impression that "the people" are asking for something to be done. Take the various misinformation and outright hate campaigns run by the Daily Mail. Apparently there is a paedophile living on every street, near every school, working in every sweet shop. Any non-indigenous person is likely to be plotting to take away your freedoms, your job, your wife !

      Just because a few unscrupulous reporters and editors like to drum up panic to sell more papers/ad space, does not mean that the general population feel anything similar. Remember, it's the squeaky wheel that gets the oil. Don't make the case that we are all snivelling cowards, when that impression is not any of our doing. Similar to the stupid terror level alerts. Who fucking cares ? The intelligence services have always had some kind of threat level system. But the government, in response to shrill bigoted cries from the media for information, have decided to publish a simplified alert level. Unfortunately, that means that we will always be at yellow alert until hell freezes over. There is always something going on in the world which might cause trouble but as to whether your average citizen should be worried, I disagree. I fly to Scotland occasionally. It's basically a puddle jumper and the flight is less than an hour and a half. Around 100 people on board the plane, and yet we have to take our shoes off going through security. This is not a result of any defined threat, other than the threat of the airline company disobeying rules that have been passed down from the uber-paranoid security services. You want 1984, this is it. By imposing all these security restrictions, they are gradually putting the screws on freedom of movement. I won't fly any more because of it. To the statisticians, it looks like I'm not flying because of the threat, when actually it's because I'm sick of the useless pantomime that flying entails. Being the kind of person that says what's on his mind, I am more likely to be detained because I look and act pissed off when I'm going through the process. I don't think I should have to smile as they fuck me up the ass. But the powers that be see what they want to see.

      Since the cold war ended (during which we really didn't live in such a heightened state of awareness) the media have had to find new "threats" to sensationalise. So have the goverments, (after all they have to justify the funds they are spending on defence). The combination of these two actors means that a climate of fear is the only place those 2 entities can retain control. Do yourself a favour and watch The Power of Nightmares. We are not afraid, but the powers that be want us to be, just to justify their existences.

      In summary, I think you have the situation completely ass backward. Sure there is no "secret cabal", they don't have to be secret. They are already out there in the open. Just read a paper, watch tv news, and follow the governments agenda. It's not the people doing this, the government are not reacting to any demands from the public. The government are "reacting" to things in ways that coincide with their own ambitions, but luckily for them they have the media to provide the "need".

    16. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

      No, I believe that the military/industrial complex exists because there's a very large portion of our citizenry who believe in having a powerful military to defend our interests, and find the concepts and ideas of warfare glorious. And I'm not talking about politicians or people in power here: I'm talking about the 20 year veteran of the military who served in the Army and can rattle off tank specifications from memory, and has a subscription to Soldier of Fortune and the AUSA magazine. Or the rural conservative who spends a large amount of his take home pay on guns because he's an avid gun enthusiast, and reliably votes Conservative because he works at a Lockheed Martin plant. It is these people who demand and empower the military/industrial complex because it is an extension of how they view the world and how they believe the world should be.

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    17. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by triffid_98 · · Score: 1

      The military industrial complex is sustained by the government. The support of the populace is not required. Just ask any third world dictator. I personally have mixed feelings about it. We subsidize it, which is bad, but it's one of the few high margin products we have left, and it's responsible for a lot of the research in this country...if we could just stop having these expensive product demonstration roadshows in the middle east I think it would be a net benefit, if a rather immoral one.

    18. Re:A litiginous society leads to 1984 by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

      That's a good way of looking at it. I don't agree much with your first sentence... but I'm pretty sure you could pull out proof to support your stance. However, you make a very good point about the margin and the research. I'll have to consider this.

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
  20. someone from the UK please comment by cats-paw · · Score: 1

    on why the UK seems to have such a strong desire to enable a big brother society even efore the US does.

    I can't believe the majority of citizens are standing around with a blank look on their face thinking, "yeah, this is a good thing, it will make me safer".

    --
    Absolute statements are never true
    1. Re:someone from the UK please comment by foobsr · · Score: 1

      Small scale testbed (though I am not UK (but EU) based).

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    2. Re:someone from the UK please comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im from U.K. and from what I gather the reason for this big brother desire is pure ignorance and complacency. My brother and I are very worried about these developments and happened to voice our concern over the UK I.D. card proposal when my brother's girlfriend was present. For the life of us we could not convince her that this was a bad idea and our personal freedoms were being slowly (or speedily) eroded. She had the attitude of 'if you've got nothing to hide then why worry'.
      People in this country do not have such a high awareness of personal freedoms as say, America where the war for independence to get their own freedom was not awfully long ago. Britain has been 'free' for over 1000 years and I fear we have taken it for granted. Maybe America will follow suit in 600 or so years.

    3. Re:someone from the UK please comment by Thundarr+Trollgrim · · Score: 1

      Just more scaremongering really... I live in the UK and have seen none of this supposed Orwellian dystopia we supposedly live in. I never get stopped or searched by police, despite looking dodgy. I can buy kitchen knives without any difficulty. It's all a lot of hot air.

      Don't believe all you read... I suspect the right-wing US media may be partially to blame, as we are obviously too 'communist' for them.

    4. Re:someone from the UK please comment by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      why the UK seems to have such a strong desire to enable a big brother society even efore the US does

      Airstrip One has always been at the forefront in the heroic conflict with our eternal enemies in [mumble]!

      Moreover, the Department of Information will insist on levying Information Retrieval charges for the procedures and materials used on those who are assisting the Department with inquiries.

      Sorry for the mixed dystopias, but it seems they're all bearing down on us.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    5. Re:someone from the UK please comment by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
      Simple: higher population density leads to more conflict, more anti-social behaviour and less tolerance.

      Plus of course the reason any government does anything: because they can, and brits (I know, I'm one) do not have the legal framework to object - not having any sort of constitution.

      --
      politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  21. Gaming sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder what these agents will report concerning gaming sites.

    Possible terrorist group:
    Group intends to place bombs across the map and "pwn noobs"

    1. Re:Gaming sites by lavacano201014 · · Score: 1

      Counter-Strike was designed as a terrorist training program anyway!

      --
      A wise man once said, "Where is my other quotation mark?
  22. It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by Proteus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

    In fact, I'm willing to bet the European hacker community will take steps to ensure that such a thing happens. As soon as it does, there will be all sorts of running about to cripple the system to the point that it's inert, but oddly still very expensive.

    --
    We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
    1. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by R2.0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

      In fact, I'm willing to bet the European hacker community will take steps to ensure that such a thing happens. As soon as it does, there will be all sorts of running about to cripple the system to the point that it's inert, but oddly still very expensive.

      You mean like when Teddy Kennedy, a US Senator, was put on the no-fly list in the US? The only thing that changed was the addition of a note under the entry that says "The fat drunk claiming to be a US Senator is good to go."

      When politicians and "important" people run afoul of the law, they don't change the law - they just make sure that it doesn't apply to THEM.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    2. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by petes_PoV · · Score: 1

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such,

      Makes no difference, they'll just get a tap on thw wrist, resign for a little while and then, when all the fuss has died down (a year or two later) be brought back into government.

      For example the british attorney general has just been found guilty of employing an illegal immigrant - contrary to a law that she wrote. So far there's little pressure on her to resign (even though she's been found guilty and paid a £5000 fine).

      --
      politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    3. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by sorak · · Score: 1

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

      In fact, I'm willing to bet the European hacker community will take steps to ensure that such a thing happens. As soon as it does, there will be all sorts of running about to cripple the system to the point that it's inert, but oddly still very expensive.

      As for the "flagged as a terrorist" thing, that's why we have exceptions. The unfortunate part is that, instead of looking at the exception and saying "Holy crap, what would have happened to this guy, if he had been a nobody", we just make an exception, and sweep the entire issue under the rug.

    4. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by Aldhibah · · Score: 1

      There is no evidence the employee was an illegal immigrant, the AG just failed to file the proper paperwork to prove the citizenship status of the employed party. More laziness than malfeasance. However, if we started sacking government employees for laziness can you imagine what it would do to the unemployment rate???

    5. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by dkf · · Score: 1

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

      On the brighter side, with this extensive a surveillance system we'll finally be able to start to track down and enumerate all the women that Silvio Berlusconi has been cheating on his wife with. (Though to be fair, a good approximation would be to start with the full collection of phone books for Italy...)

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    6. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Attorney General had employed her as a housekeeper for 6 years, and claims that she had looked into her background sufficiently, yet somehow failed to even notice her housekeeper's lack of a simple National Insurance number. All UK citizens have an NI number from age 16 which all employees are required to have on record for tax purposes. The housekeeper in question had originally been here on a tourist visa which ran out years ago and wasn't updated (and a tourist visa doesn't allow someone to work in the UK unless they're a citizen of another EU country - in which case a visa isn't required anyway).

      The problem here is that if another person had 'forgotten' to carry out simple paperwork or employed an 'illegal' immigrant, they'd have felt the full force of the law, and quite possibly have been fined.

      If the chief 'lawmaker' of the country can be allowed such lenience, then it sets an example for us all surely. I personally think that the artificial human construct of national borders and identities are ridiculous and that any immigrant should be applauded for the effort they've put into moving away from the home, family and friends they know to live in an alien environment and culture just to earn a living, it takes a big leap to do it.

    7. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by Proteus · · Score: 1
      Analogies to the no-fly list are flawed: the no-fly list is a policy maintained by people. What's at issue here is an automated "behavioral detection" system. When "foolproof" systems make a lot of noise on prominent people, those systems are "put under review", which basically results in crippling them to the point of uselessness to the tune of millions of dollars (or GBP, in this case).

      However, even if I accept your analogy, the Kennedy fiasco did start down the path of neutering the no-fly list to the point that it's nearly useless. It doesn't happen suddenly and publicly, it happens because no one involved wants to be the guy that put the next prominent person on the list.

      Taxpayers end up footing the bill for dozens of pointless systems -- things that were of dubious efficacy when they were conceived, and which have since been neutered to the point of absurdity.

      --
      We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
    8. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "When "foolproof" systems make a lot of noise on prominent people, those systems are "put under review", which basically results in crippling them to the point of uselessness to the tune of millions of dollars (or GBP, in this case). "

      You missed my point entirely. When prominent people get fingered by an automated system, they are not going to "put it under review" or cripple it - they simply get the maintainers of the system to slip in an exception list and a conditional that says "If one of these people's names show up, ignore it and flush associated data." The only way the system gets crippled is if the exception list becomes so big as to be meaningless.

      Let's take the Soviet Union for example. At the start, if one was a member of the Party, one got special treatment. Certain restrictions, etc. didn't apply to you because you were a party member and had special status. Fast forward, and the populace clues in, so now almost EVERYONE joins the Party to get special treatment, which dwindles to very little. But the powerful members of the party certainly don't want to be included with the hoi polloi, so they create a list of party members who get EXTRA special treatment. The people on the list were called the nomenklatura, which means "list of names". And you couldn't just apply for a position - you had to be chosen. So when membership in the Communist Party stopped working for the powerful, they didn't change the system of rewards and privileges for Party members, they just carved an exception out for themselves.

      So shortly after being flagged on the No Fly list, Kennedy's status was straightened out. But the unfairness and arbitrary nature of the procedures weren't changed - Abdul still gets flagged every single time - what changed is that Kennedy was allowed to travel outside of those rules and procedures. Why? Because he was Teddy Fucking Kennedy, for chrissake.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    9. Re:It won't take that long to embarrass somebody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a British example of the same see recent (as in 2 days ago) case of Baroness Scotland hiring illegal workers and claiming ignorance, despite being the very woman who pushed through the law claiming ignorance counted as negligence in this exact case and laid down the punishment guidelines. Neither she nor her fellow politi-dicks think she should be hauled up for it.

  23. Remember. by arhhook · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remember, remember the Fifth of November,
    The Gunpowder Treason and Plot,
    I know of no reason
    Why the Gunpowder Treason
    Should ever be forgot.
    Guy Fawkes, Guy Fawkes, t'was his intent
    To blow up the King and Parli'ment.
    Three-score barrels of powder below
    To prove old England's overthrow;
    By God's providence he was catch'd (or by God's mercy*)
    With a dark lantern and burning match.
    Holloa boys, holloa boys, let the bells ring. (Holla*)
    Holloa boys, holloa boys, God save the King!

    1. Re:Remember. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Remember
      Is a place from long ago
      Remember
      Filled with everything you know
      UURP
      excuse me

      -Harry Nielson, Son of Schmilson

  24. Guys, guys, guys. by NoYob · · Score: 2, Insightful
    All of us or at least most of us are in IT or have been. We all know that software, especially on this scale, never works as designed. Add to the fact that *snicker* it's operated by a Government, it will not fly.

    This is what will happen: millions of Pounds Euros, or Dollars will be spent on proof of concept, maybe even some code and who knows, a delivered system. One way or another, it will turn into a complete failure and abandoned or drastically scaled down.

    This is Government and their contractors who will do the absolute minimum piece of shit they can get away with to pad their pockets. They're not interested in anything that will work! They're just interested in something to show the voters that "they're doing something and it's with technology!"

    God Bless government incompetence and government contractor greed and incompetence!

    --
    It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
    1. Re:Guys, guys, guys. by clam666 · · Score: 1

      As an overpaid defense contractor I can assure you that incompetence pays well and all sides are happy at the end.

      Or was it I overpaid for a score of "Happy Endings" to seal the deal? I forget, it's probably illegal or something. As long as it's in the contract.

      --
      I'm a satanic clam.
    2. Re:Guys, guys, guys. by sincewhen · · Score: 1

      But the scary part is that Governments never admit to their incompetence, so this system will be used as if it actually works, people will be arrested and evidence will be found to convict those fingered by the system.
      Then the system can be declared a success, since it can be demonstrated that it is catching the terrorists.

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
  25. The STASI is dead! Long live the new STASI by TrentTheThief · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How long will it take until Europe realizes that they aren't "One" country with one set of beliefs and standards and just get on with life? Will Europe now be reduced to an East German-like existence? Will one-half of the populace spy and inform on the other half? When will they begin collecting "scent" samples of all the population? Or will they choose DNA this time? Decisions, decisions.

    Listen, it's time to give big government the bum's rush to the garbage tip. The sooner governments are beaten back down, the sooner normal people will be able to get on with their lives without fearing being sent to prison or being fined and taxed into penury.

    1. Re:The STASI is dead! Long live the new STASI by polar+red · · Score: 1

      big government the bum's rush to the garbage tip.

      given that of the 100 biggest economies, 51 are corporations, what about big corporations ?

      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    2. Re:The STASI is dead! Long live the new STASI by seekertom · · Score: 1

      I agree with your sentiments. We have allowed our govts to become monsters, and whether by design or by failure, they have come far, to totally undo us. But what can we expect from people who vote for such as we have? There are lots of folks out there who really live by two credos:1) Don't confuse me with the facts... my mind's made up! and 2) I'd rather die in hell than let someone show me I'm wrong about anything! Don't count on any of them making things better. I try to talk to lots of folks, but most are still unwilling to believe that NASTY things can, and WILL happen to us, very soon! Some day enough little folks will wake up and realize how bad it really is, and do the open window and scream 'I'm mad as hell and I won't take it any more...' trick. It'll be a revolution. I do hope not a violent one. I'd like to see one where our elected officials, if for no other reason than because they want to keep their jobs, begin to serve us, and not live their lives as if they are the rulers and we are the subjects. As for me, let the idiots in power repeatedly shoot themselves in the foot and continue doing harm to freedom. One day, either we will wake up or they will. thanks for lis'nin' seekertom

    3. Re:The STASI is dead! Long live the new STASI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it should be up to us to determine what we are and what we aren't. Forming a union where 500 million people can enjoy freedom, liberty, prosperity and the rule of law does not equal a totalitarian fascist state.

    4. Re:The STASI is dead! Long live the new STASI by TrentTheThief · · Score: 1

      Sieg Heil!

  26. Re:Haven't we been here before? by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

    I've been trying to tell you this for years, and NOW you care? (see sig)

    You have to remember that this is the government we're talking about here. There's so much infighting and beaurocracy that by the time they find out what's going to happen, CNN is already showing the footage on a 24/7 loop.

    --

    ---
    ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  27. Cue Terry Gilliam... by Xin+Jing · · Score: 1

    I'm forcasting a new breed of information anonymizer service...

    Picture a warehouse with row after row of computer workstations goiing back as far as the eye can see, stacked floor to ceiling. The occupants are half-assembled mannequins, disjointedly operating input devices by way of random herky-jerky animated mechanical motion.

    In the future, the only way to defeat the government machines designed to watch for illegal human behavior is by creating machines to filter through imprecise mechanical motion the actions of humans wishing to avoid such detection.
       

  28. Big business by MrBrainport · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, open source project, right? :-) Let's combine with netflix :-)

  29. I-Spy with my little eye.... by Wowsers · · Score: 1

    ---BEGIN PGP---
    fioweurhtwporeughapewoirtq[iortgegert34530t8
    ---END PGP---

    System response: Operator, this person is using encryption.

    As usual, money well spent by the corrupt idiots in the EUSSR.

    --
    Take Nobody's Word For It.
    1. Re:I-Spy with my little eye.... by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      More reasonably:

      System response: Operator, this person is using encryption without a licensed key per the Friendly Government Big Brother Act of 2010, Section VI, Paragraph 5. Please allocate manual surveillance of subject. Expected to be armed and dangerous.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    2. Re:I-Spy with my little eye.... by M-RES · · Score: 1

      ---BEGIN PGP--- fioweurhtwporeughapewoirtq[iortgegert34530t8 ---END PGP---

      System response: Operator, this person is using encryption.

      As usual, money well spent by the corrupt idiots in the EUSASR.

      There, fixed that for you ;)

  30. Agents by necro81 · · Score: 1
    from the summary:

    computer programmes which act as 'agents' to monitor and process information.... Its main objectives include the 'automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence

    That's already been done before.

  31. Sounds scarier then it is. by Demonantis · · Score: 1

    The information they are crawling is public information. Maybe this is not as bad as it sounds. If it was a project on hacking into a computer then pulling the information off it then I would get worried. The internet was not designed for privacy and confidentiality. Anything you transmit can be intercepted and dissected so you should have provisions to handle that, like encryption. I wonder the benefit of this though as people hiding anything would attempt to avoid detection. I also wonder how enforcement would be applied especially in societies where laws vary. Globalization has really lead to that funny gray area where people get charged for crimes not committed in that specific country. It just seems easier to keep your head down and not become a blip on anyone whose is important's radar.

    1. Re:Sounds scarier then it is. by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      The scary thing is how much public information is just out there. Even if you try your hardest to stay "off the grid", keep all of your usernames at each site you go to different/fake, and use encryption as much as possible, how do you know that they're not correlating that information indirectly? Case in point: Facebook. People are 100% happy to throw their entire lives out there for public consumption, but how much of other people's lives do they include? For example, I know that even though I do not have a Facebook account, there are pictures on there that reference me by name that link me to other people. Based upon that, you can programmatically determine who I associate with.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
  32. Another nail in the coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm from Britain and a story of this nature seems to pop up weekly. I fear the 'terrorists' have already won this war, making us turn our own society into as a repressive one as they aim to create. It looks like we will all be bowing down the the repressive god of 'national security' wither we like it or not.
    Sadly I think the UK has went to far already with no sign of stopping. My only hope is that America and other countries will step back in time and allow me the immigrate when my lack of freedoms becomes intolerable.

    1. Re:Another nail in the coffin by M-RES · · Score: 1

      What makes you think the 'terrorists' are anything but the state itself? It's a statistical fact that you are more likely to be harmed or killed by your own government than by a foreign nation's government. The only actual difference between what our nation's establishment and media call 'terrorists' or their associated 'acts of terror' and what our government does around the world is that our nation's acts of terror are state-sanctioned and use an organised and professional military infrastructure. The actual acts themselves are fairly identical - indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas, propagandising our current given reasons for actually being there to normalise them in the public psyche.

      Even when it comes to our government's latest official identified 'villains' and 'rogue states', many of their supposed horrific activities reflect our own governments activities quite closely - propping up tinpot dictatorships, supplying our 'allies' (some of whom are said tinpot dictators) with arms and logistics to often suppress and kill their own people and even neighbours, sponsoring certain terrorist groups. Just have a casual glance back over the UK's history that isn't reported in the mainstream media - currently the media are trying to keep the stories of UK involvement in detainee torture out of the news despite the fact the evidence has been out there for public consumption for years now.

      Check out the reality of the NuLab 'ethical foreign policy' (it's just another one of those nuspeak oxymorons) - when they came into power they stepped up arms shipments to dubious regimes, making it even worse than Thatcher's despicable record. We sold the weaponry to Suharto to carry out his genocide in East Timor, and employed 'plausible deniability' simply by saying "well he promised he wouldn't use the weapons to wipe out the East Timorese". And that's just one very easily researchable example. The deeper you dig, the more deplorable you'll see our establishment is. The 'different' political parties are irrelevant, they're all in the same game of perpetuating the status quo.

  33. Obligatory Deus Ex Quote by Rhacman · · Score: 1

    Icarus has found you!!! Run while you can!!!

    --
    Account -> Discussions -> Disable Sigs
  34. I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...because you know their State Police will have really cool uniforms. They'll be, like, all shiny medals and epaulets and swagger sticks and motorcycle sidecars and they'll put their surveillance cams in hovering dirigibles and what not, all trim ex-military guys. If I'm going to be cracked across the back of the neck for not showing my papers, I want to be cracked by a guy with some style. Obama goons will be all business casual, in new, pressed, grandma jeans and open-collar shirts and sneakers, driving around in non-descript cars, all mouth-breathing ex-IRS guys.

    Yup, it's European Fascism for me, for sure.

    1. Re:I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by the+99th+penguin · · Score: 1

      their State Police will have really cool uniforms

      Made by Hugo Boss

    2. Re:I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      It's true. The SS uniforms were designed by Hugo Boss himself. The Nazi's were evil, fanatical and genocidal, but they looked sharp while they were doing it. It wasn't just coincidence. Part of the Nazi's whole propaganda effort was that they looked the part of the leaders of a master race. Couple this with the Nazi mass parades and propaganda rallies, and you have a very persuasive and intimidating regime. Even the Hitler youth, a compulsory organisation for all young boys, had their own tailored uniform.

      The proof of just how striking and intimidating these uniforms were can be seen in Hollywoods lasting infatuation with putting them on-screen. Essentially it was the task they were designed for; Visual intimidation. Even fantasy baddies usually have an SS inspired uniform. As I recall, a recent movie Hellboy opens with a Nazi ritual, and while the costumes are outrageous, they are not in fact all that far removed from reality. It's not difficult to imagine an SS officer wearing such a striking getup as he went about executing people and dumping them in mass graves.

      This is why I never buy arguments about why dressing well is so important.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    3. Re:I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're going to be the guy demanding to get arrested, drooling on some secret policewoman's jack boots, aren't you.

    4. Re:I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mouth-breathing

      So I guess you don't have a deviated septum and chronic sinusitis. I prefer life.

      There is nothing worse than noisy nose breathers wheezing their way through life annoying the rest of us.

      In short: fuck right off asshole.

    5. Re:I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by Xaositecte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is why I never buy arguments about why dressing well is so important.

      Odd, this seems to prove that dressing is important.

    6. Re:I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Well if you like style in your fascism -- and your sense of style is synonymous with "blindingly gaudy" -- then you need look no further than our neighbor to the south.

      Brown Shirts? Black Shirts? Bah! GOLD Shirts is where it's at!

      Mexican Fascism -- because dystopia doesn't have to look dark and depressing.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    7. Re:I'm Glad it's the Europeans. Seriously. by kalirion · · Score: 1

      They'll be, like, all shiny medals and epaulets and swagger sticks

      Can we shorten the latter to "swasticks".

  35. Excerpt by Eddy+Luten · · Score: 2, Informative
    For those who do not feel comfortable going to the Project INDECT site here's an excerpt:

    Project Description

    Intelligent information system supporting observation, searching and detection for security of citizens in urban environment.

    The main objectives of the INDECT project are:

    • to develop a platform for: the registration and exchange of operational data, acquisition of multimedia content, intelligent processing of all information and automatic detection of threats and recognition of abnormal behaviour or violence,
    • to develop the prototype of an integrated, network-centric system supporting the operational activities of police officers, providing techniques and tools for observation of various mobile objects,
    • to develop a new type of search engine combining direct search of images and video based on watermarked contents, and the storage of metadata in the form of digital watermarks,

    The main expected results of the INDECT project are:

    • to realise a trial installation of the monitoring and surveillance system in various points of city agglomeration and demonstration of the prototype of the system with 15 node stations,
    • implementation of a distributed computer system that is capable of acquisition, storage and effective sharing on demand of the data as well as intelligent processing, construction of a family of prototypes of devices used for mobile object tracking,
    • construction of a search engine for fast detection of persons and documents based on watermarking technology and utilising comprehensive research on watermarking technology used for semantic search,
    • construction of agents assigned to continuous and automatic monitoring of public resources such as: web sites, discussion forums, UseNet groups, file servers, p2p networks as well as individual computer systems,
    • elaboration of Internet based intelligence gathering system, both active and passive, and demonstrating its efficiency in a measurable way.

    Sinister indeed.

  36. Ghost in the Shell by Krneki · · Score: 1

    Project 2501 a.k.a The Puppet Master. I for one, welcome our Ghost hacking overloads.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  37. I refuse to believe any of this by Alaska+Jack · · Score: 2, Funny

    If there's one thing I've learned from the media over the last seven or eight years, it's that Europeans are enlightened, scientific, wine-enjoying lovers of freedom compared to us dumb hicks in the states. They would never do something like this. - AJ

  38. Teabaggers and such are abnormal too by Shivetya · · Score: 2, Interesting

    because no one is unhappy enough with Government to protest it.

    Face it, those in power are loathe to give it up or admit abuse, it is far easier through the use of courts and the press to label those who do disagree as having mental issues, whether it is anger or the expected and currently in vogue "racism".

    I thought eight years under Bush were bad with fear mongering, but the new gang has improved on it. The sad part is, both sides of the Atlantic seem adept at adapting the very worse privacy rights violation the other side comes up with.

    The US is getting Britain's camera system and you get our Intellectual rights system... who came up with this new one?

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Teabaggers and such are abnormal too by Ronald+Dumsfeld · · Score: 1

      The US is getting Britain's camera system and you get our Intellectual rights system... who came up with this new one?

      Pick something the US and the Brits can agree on... Blame the French.

      --
      Where's the Kaboom?
      There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
    2. Re:Teabaggers and such are abnormal too by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Teabaggers are abnormal: Any guy who would slap another guy with his balls is strange, and in violation of Rule #1: "Protect your nuts."

      --
      Not a sentence!
  39. SO we call it europe's ECHELON ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is anybody thinking this does not already exists in the US? Maybe not under the name of ECHELON, but you can bet all you want that it exists.

  40. no news here, please move along by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Advertisers have been doing this... for years

    Of course, their motivation is to exploit and control buying/consumption.

    Gov't's exploitation-motive is a bigger problem--but we already know that.

  41. Unfix that, bubba by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

    Who do you think elected said very noisy and ill-informed subset of the politicians? It wasn't a bunch of thoughtful, sober, rational individual citizens who acted in concert to promote harmonious civil discourse, now was it?

    --
    Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    1. Re:Unfix that, bubba by psithurism · · Score: 1

      I didn't. Considering the federal government, I'm in just one of 50 states and around 60% of the time my candidate loses so I elected less than 1% of the power in D.C.. Even the influence I chose to exert there was based on rationalizations such as: "This guy is the best crook of the bunch" or "I want this guy's one policy to pass." About the only real power I have over most of those guys is raise a shit storm when they do stuff I don't like. So don't cut our shit storming short with the thought terminating cliche: "You elected them."

    2. Re:Unfix that, bubba by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 1

      Who do you think elected said very noisy and ill-informed subset of the politicians? It wasn't a bunch of thoughtful, sober, rational individual citizens who acted in concert to promote harmonious civil discourse, now was it?

      Oh, it's even better than that, once the appropriate NGO's get the right sanctions and treaties passed in the UN you won't even have to worry about such quaint things like constitutional rights, since our life time appointed SCOTUS justices will look at how other(possibly less democratic) instutions and countries act, and move the laws accordingly.

      PS. Captcha: bromides

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    3. Re:Unfix that, bubba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you can't ignore big business, the media, or straight lust for power. We're ruled by sociopaths, and not the ones that you may think.

  42. Bruce Schneier argued... by davegravy · · Score: 1

    reminds me of this excellent Bruce Schneier Article:

    http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2006/03/70357

  43. Great news! by Sam+Lowry · · Score: 1

    The original poster has no clue what this really means. Having such a project funded by the FP7 Framework Programme is the only sure way to discredit the whole idea. Have you ever heard of an FP6 or FP7 funded project that produced anything useful?

  44. Re:Haven't we been here before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But if it's a true AI, then once it goes online, it will check the terrorist metrics against everything. It will then (correctly) classify its creators as being no different than other groups who try to make the people live in fear.

    Its name will also be Daedalus.

  45. You know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...playing Deus Ex is not as fun as it used to be. Who wants to play the reality?

  46. Updated for The New America by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Ignorance is Strength.
    War is Peace.
    Freedom is Slavery.
    Religion is Science.
    Government is Industry.
    Poverty is Wealth.
    Morality is Relative.

  47. Flawed by andersh · · Score: 1

    Your example is flawed.

    The Netherlands clearly illustrates what is *normal* for EU countries. Or did you forget that the Netherlands *is* a member of the EU?

    Serbia and Russia are both Slavic non-EU countries with a bit of anti-gay attitudes in general.

    1. Re:Flawed by Jurily · · Score: 1

      The Netherlands clearly illustrates what is *normal* for EU countries.

      Is Hungary EU enough for you? Also note that there is a significant difference between being anti-gay and being anti-parade. Most people I know don't care one bit what hole you want to shove it in, but they get pissed when you force them to think about it and block main roads in a city with heavy traffic problems.

      Different countries have different cultures, and that's not a bad thing. You just need to stop judging everyone on Earth based on your society.

    2. Re:Flawed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A founding member at that :)

  48. I know that I am safe ... by electricprof · · Score: 1

    I've got my tinfoil hats, so I'm safe from prying ...

  49. What "One" Country? by andersh · · Score: 1

    Actually, no European feels "European" first, or thinks it's one country, only Americans seem to think Europe is a country!

    The EU is also not synonymous with Europe, it only counts 27 out of 49 countries in Europe as members. You have to be clueless to claim Europeans think of themselves as Europeans, EU citizens or citizens of one country.

    We actually like our "big" governments, they keep things working and safe. If you don't believe me my European country has barely noticed the so called "financial crisis" largely because of a huge public sector (according to the OECD, UN, Forbes and Bloomberg). Of course it helps being Europe's second wealthiest country and a huge oil exporter.

    1. Re:What "One" Country? by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

      Perhaps your European country has barely noticed economic problems but my family, which live primarily in Portugal and France are constantly complaining. The government is always screwing them over and ignores the will of the people, job market sucks, they're taxed too heavily but the benefits they receive in return are crap and are constantly being trimmed back.

      Two examples specifically about healthcare since that's the big thing currently being argued: One of my uncles in France got private health insurance because the government wasn't covering what he needed, in fact, they seem to be moving towards privatization like we currently have in the US. Second example, another uncle in Portugal was diagnosed with prostate cancer. His doctor highly recommended he pay out of pocket otherwise he'd have to wait 6 months for treatment.

      And I always find it interesting that whenever they visit they're shocked by how inexpensive things are here; clothing, electronics, cars, anything. What do they expect when they've got to pay for tariffs, local taxes and the VAT?

      I don't understand why Americans are convinced Europe is some kind of wonderland where everything is perfect. There's a lot wrong with the US, but it isn't inherently worse than it is in Europe. And Europe is a lot further along than the US in trying to tightly control their people.

      Otherwise, I completely agree that Europeans identify themselves with their own country first. And quite a few are resentful of the changes the EU has forced on them. Although in some ways it has helped smaller, less wealthy countries like Portugal.

    2. Re:What "One" Country? by M-RES · · Score: 1

      ...specifically about healthcare since that's the big thing currently being argued: One of my uncles in France got private health insurance because the government wasn't covering what he needed, in fact, they seem to be moving towards privatization like we currently have in the US.

      I agree, we have the same problem in the UK these days. The NHS isn't covering everything we need because it seems to be moving towards privatisation (aka 'healthcare for the rich') like you have in the US. Before this shabby state of affairs when it was a truly socialised medical system it was much better, because the money pumped into it from tax revenues actually went to paying for services and for health care professionals. Now the majority of that money is sucked back out of the system by private shareholders in the PFIs. I prefer Socialism to Fascism any day - Private healthcare is a form of fascism with state and Corporation in collusion at the expense of the citizenry. It removes the choice from the individual and hands it to the insurers who can choose not to pay for your treatment for any number of spurious reasons!

    3. Re:What "One" Country? by TrentTheThief · · Score: 1

      I don't imagine that the average person does think of there being "European." But that is what EU is going to change as you all are forced to follow rules and regulations and laws set forth by the EU.

      The EU sounded like a nice idea in the beginning, but seems to have turned into an ogre when no one was watching it.

  50. Pulling out the big guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Positively chilling." Wow, that's pretty harsh. What's next, "Rather disquieting?" Hell yes it's "positively chilling" and fucking disgusting and all that, but my question is: What can be done about it? Granted, I'm not part of the EU, but this is an entity that's above the say of its constituent nations. Where is the accountability?

  51. A violation of the Canadian Privacy act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This should be not only brought to the united nations as it violates the charter , but also my own nations privacy act.

    MAKE NOISE about this EVIL nation

  52. Slashdot finally beats ATS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in paranoia and spin. All the Usual Suspects are combined in this masterpiece of Common Internet Conspiracies.

    1. Re:Slashdot finally beats ATS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WOOT! Government agents posting as AC. They finally live up to their name!

  53. Citizens, please act normal. by psithurism · · Score: 1

    Terrorists will learn about this, act normal. While all the "normal people" will accidentally deviate with great frequency.

  54. Thank you, EU.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, I started a while back with a company that focuses on privacy. I'm so glad the EU is sponsoring interest in my setup, and all that without any bribes or (cough) expenses.

    Am I the only one who recalls Article 12 of the Human Rights?

    Last but not least, if we know for sure it doesn't do anything to find terrorists (QED by Bruce Schneier), that it is reasonable to assume another purpose.

    I leave you to ponder that one..

    1. Re:Thank you, EU.. by Dreadneck · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who recalls Article 12 of the Human Rights?

      No, but you are perhaps among the many who never read as far as Article 29, Section 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

      Your "rights" under the UDHR end where they conflict with the "purposes and principles of the United Nations" and you don't get to have a say in what those purposes and principles are.

      --
      Power does not corrupt - power attracts the corrupt.
  55. Scientific Tyranny by Dreadneck · · Score: 1

    This is just one more piece of the scientific tyranny being built all around us on a global scale.

    Verichip, PLDs, RFID enabled passports, wholesale monitoring of all electronic communications, corporate media propagandists shaping public opinion using advances in sociology and psychology, government takeover of education in order to indoctrinate unsuspecting youth, big pharma and the plethora of psychoactive drugs being pushed on everyone from cradle to grave, replacement of human soldiers with soulless machinery, et cetera, ad infinitum

    Welcome to the brave new world.

    --
    Power does not corrupt - power attracts the corrupt.
  56. Re:It will collect data from private computers too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you read the article, or even the summary, you will see that it will be collecting data from private computers as well. That means government spyware installed on most peoples computers at a minimum, and possibly installing powerline keyloggers in every power meter at the most extreme form. Most likely they will just require all computers sold to contain such spyware, as that is the easiest method to enforce.

  57. Absurd Reasoning by andersh · · Score: 1

    Juri, I'm not American, I'm from Norway.

    Heck, I have Russian ancestors and I've have been back to St. Petersburg to explore them. I have also been to Serbia and Hungary. In fact I have traveled all of Europe and parts of Asia.

    Magyarorszag is a bad example. The far right movement you linked to is extremist, you have your own in Russia too. The people of Hungary are very liberal compared with large groups of Russians and Serbs. I know people from both cultures. I have friends in Hungary too, not just in Budapest, and I know their attitudes as well. They're not anti-gay, they could not care less.

    And are you serious? People don't get that upset about traffic problems! And who is forcing them to watch it? Your claims are absurd! I don't want to see gay people dance, and I haven't because I DON'T go to the parade in Oslo!

    My main point was that both Russia and Serbia have a different culture to that of ultra-liberal Netherlands. And that they are NOT members of the EU. I didn't really care what their attitudes were, just that the example was utterly flawed!

    Truth be told, we should really talk about Western and Eastern Europe within the EU too. It's a long way from Warsaw to Barcelona! In general I would say Eastern European countries are far less accepting of gays. Not that I really care about the subject myself, I'm just pointing out that there are real differences between the countries and cultures.

    1. Re:Absurd Reasoning by Jurily · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And are you serious? People don't get that upset about traffic problems!

      You clearly never lived in Budapest.

      And who is forcing them to watch it? Your claims are absurd! I don't want to see gay people dance, and I haven't because I DON'T go to the parade in Oslo!

      You're still judging out of context. For you, it's gay people dancing, and if you don't go, you don't really need to acknowledge their existence. Here, it instantly became a political event, with pressure from the liberals to push it through and threats from the far-right. It was all over the news for four days straight. You went to work and people talked about it. You went to the pub and people talked about it. There was literally no way you could avoid the topic without retreating from society until the hype is over.

      It's also a question of external cultural influence. Ever heard the phrase "Hungarians celebrate crying"? There are no Hungarian holidays where we dance around on the street. We have no reason for it: from 1526 to 1989 our country has been either torn apart or under occupation. Our national holidays are about failed revolutions, failed fights for our freedom, and the execution of our leaders. Any public celebration that involves dancing around is basically a slap in the face to those of us who value our cultural identity.

      I don't expect you to understand it, but please, try to look at the context before jumping to conclusions.

  58. Did not know that by Xaedalus · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the heads up and the fact check. I stand corrected :-)

    --
    Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
  59. probably nothing that can be classified by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal"

    Or, everything will be, and tagged for later review.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  60. UK's Liberty human-rights NGO by highlife · · Score: 0

    ...UK's Liberty human-rights NGO...

    Boy, those guys are doing a great job!

  61. Kiss my Artificial Snooping System by incubbus13 · · Score: 1

    Its main objectives include the 'automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence.' == made of win

    If the EU gives me a dollar, a day, for the rest of my life, I promise not to introduce this bot to bash.org/IRC.

    On the other hand, if it dynamically defines normal as 'the most common behavior observed' Europeans can pretty much do whatever they want and feel confident that they're within a safe margin of typical internet behavior. Either that or the EU will have to release a patch that explains to the bot how threats of homosexual rape, pimping out 'your mom', and other wholesome and sundry activities that appear to exist on any forum/medium online are not truly normal.

    K.

  62. Don't Worry, folks! by IonOtter · · Score: 1

    As soon as this thing finds /b/, it'll explode. Problem solved.

    --
    [End Of Line]
  63. Sounds like a Wachowski brothers movie by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

    "...computer programmes which act as 'agents' to monitor and process information" I know I've seen this before somewhere...

    --
    No sig for you! Come back one year!
  64. It's about scaring the masses... by master_p · · Score: 2, Insightful

    These systems are not for catching the bad guys. They may occasionally be caught, but the main purpose of these surveillance systems is to scare the masses so as that the masses do not overthrow the governments.

    Remember 1789? the elite were caught and hanged in Bastille by the people...that's what terrifies the elite...that we, the common folks, might realize one day our power and the level of fraud(*) the elite has committed against us and retaliate the hard way, i.e. invade their homes, take them out and hang them in Trafalgar square...

    (*)20% of the population owns 80% of wealth.

    1. Re:It's about scaring the masses... by jas203 · · Score: 1

      I don't completely agree with you - I believe Xaedalus's point above is the main motivational fact.

      The scary thing about your rational is that if ultimately those in power realise your point, that these systems they have put in place gives them that level of control over any form of uprising (namely being able to surgically quash them). However, following on from that, there would then be counter-tactics whereby "Citizens" would record all significant details about themselves in a publicly available medium, so that any actions against "Citizens" engaging in the uprising further fuels the uprising. The obvious reduco ad absurdum for this situation is that personal privacy will be in tatters, but maybe that is where society is heading anyway.

      Regardless, given the nature of society now - current democratic processes are outdated. In the UK, after several years I am given the choice to select an individual candidate (of limited selection) where normally few will actually have a chance of being elected - and normally that candidate will belong to a party (of which there are even fewer selections). The party system ensures that the rate of change of political influence is painfully slow.

      I'm not saying I have any answers - but as we submerse ourselves in this information age, political processes need to keep up.

  65. Snooping in the EU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where did you think statists would lead you? One of the poster's mentioned the elite and fear. The article outlines -- though never says -- that the main reason governments want to disarm us is to ensure our helplessness when we all get tired enough of their BS to do something about it.

  66. It Won't Work by johnos · · Score: 1

    In the real world, nobody can amass the hardware, software and expertise to do this kind of thing. Even the much vaunted NSA does little more than scan widely for keywords and narrowly for specific individuals or small groups of individuals. They also don't do any investigating. All such systems suffer from exactly the same limitation, false positives. The false positives overwhelm the investigative resources.

    The only people to successfully implement a robust and lasting system for monitoring and control were the Soviets. They didn't use technology to do it. And they didn't care about false positives because they defined all positives as true.

  67. Overreaction? by Strake · · Score: 1

    As far as I can tell (and correct me if I'm wrong) these systems merely inspect public data on the Internet, as any ISP (or perhaps even individual) could, so the only people who should be affected are those who make false and foolish assumptions of security. Obviously, nothing is safe on the Internet in the clear, but it seems to me that this system could well be thwarted by encryption and proxy.