Slashdot Mirror


Schneier: The Internet Is a Surveillance State

An anonymous reader writes "Bruce Schneier has written a blunt article in CNN about the state of privacy on the internet. Quoting: 'The Internet is a surveillance state. Whether we admit it to ourselves or not, and whether we like it or not, we're being tracked all the time. Google tracks us, both on its pages and on other pages it has access to. Facebook does the same; it even tracks non-Facebook users. Apple tracks us on our iPhones and iPads. One reporter used a tool called Collusion to track who was tracking him; 105 companies tracked his Internet use during one 36-hour period. ... This is ubiquitous surveillance: All of us being watched, all the time, and that data being stored forever. This is what a surveillance state looks like, and it's efficient beyond the wildest dreams of George Orwell. Sure, we can take measures to prevent this. We can limit what we search on Google from our iPhones, and instead use computer web browsers that allow us to delete cookies. We can use an alias on Facebook. We can turn our cell phones off and spend cash. But increasingly, none of it matters. There are simply too many ways to be tracked."

333 comments

  1. tor by scum-e-bag · · Score: 3, Interesting

    use tor
    cbf'd posting as anon-coward as even slashdot isn't anonymous...

    --
    Does it go on forever?
    1. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cbfed to use Tor, though as time goes on I may start putting all traffic through it.

      Ghostery found trackers
      yro.slashdot.org
      DoubleClick
      Advertising
      Google Analytics
      Analytics
      ScoreCard Research Beacon
      Tracker

    2. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Easy fix: disable third party cookies.

    3. Re:tor by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      man evercookie

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:tor by TWX · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Won't work so well. They're starting to write-in to the design of the website to need them in order to get the content.

      Same with noscript functions. There are lots of sites that, in order to get content, one has to have otherwise-unrelated scripts functioning for the content to ultimately appear.

      I just don't have the browser save anything anymore at close. No cache, no cookies, no login credentials, no history, nothing. I also blocked a whole bunch of crap through my router, and I further block things through the hosts file that *I* don't use but others using the router might want or need.


      The solution that I recommend is living in the real world. Get a hobby that isn't principally on the computer. I chose things like auto restoration, model rocketry, and working with older machinery.

      They only have power because you give them power. Take away their power by no longer playing the game.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    5. Re:tor by pepsikid · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Whenever I log onto Slashdot, my firewall immediately reports Slashdot servers sniffing a bunch of my ports. I use DD-WRT with logging enabled and WallWatcher to display events.

    6. Re:tor by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Take away their power by no longer playing the game.

      There is only one possible way to stop playing.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:tor by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Take away their power by no longer playing the game.

      There is only one possible way to stop playing.

      That way would interest me. After all, even if you die, your death will be tracked. Actually it's one of the few things which have already traditionally be tracked and stored for extended times, on tombstones.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    8. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > There are lots of sites that, in order to get content, one has to have otherwise-unrelated scripts functioning for the content to ultimately appear.

      But like you said, they only have power because you give them power. If people stop using those sites for that reason, the sites will change very quickly.

      They can get away with that because people don't seem to give a shit.

    9. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Years ago someone posted that this was slashdot checking to see if you've been at risk for infection by common malware and therefore flag your posts as likely spam. I don't know why people are modding you down.

    10. Re:tor by xyourfacekillerx · · Score: 2

      Yea, I noticed a lot of that happening, too. I blocked a lot of those requests across all my security software (from browser to hosts) unfortunately at the sacrifice of breaking Slashdot's dynamic content features. For example, I can't "Load more comments" and when I click to see "hiddent comments" nothing happens. It just says "Working" forever. Those layered pop ups that black the page? Well the page just goes black and nothing ever happens. So my option is to give up my privacy or to use Slashdot in a crippled manner. *sigh* Did your blocking break Slashdot in anyway?

    11. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny enough, those are the sites I simply don't visit anymore. If they go out of their way to make their content inaccessible, then why should I care about their content?

      There is something to be said about having a place where for-cash content is worthwhile compared to the alternatives, but if I can't even make my mind up about that, I won't bother.

      Time was, you could simply choose whether you wanted to support something. Now, you don't have a choice but to view their ads if you want a taste of what's on offer. No thanks.

      The majority of us work for a living, and get paid for doing that work. If you're unable to get paid without an unsustainable, invasive, downright disturbing money-making scheme, then perhaps you ought to stop complaining when you aren't paid.

      I think people really believe that without these ad-infested sites, the Internet would crumble and society would grind to a halt. It won't. People will gladly pay when they have the money. Stop pretending they won't.

    12. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only fools think that the Internet is secure, it is not, but it provides lots of v.fast postcards aka UDP on which you can build absolutely secure solutions, use IETF protocols unimaginatively and the NSA will know what you say and what you are doing,buy 15 servers with shell access and you can build a system that defies both traffic analysis and decryption ... most of this the internet is compromised is government nonsense.

      Thumbnail, packet protocol that uses bi-encryption, one with a rapidly changing weak key that just encrypts next ip, next port and strongly encrypted data, looks like white noise to TA, but in the noise is then essential t thread

    13. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      one would seriously have to consider the implications of brain uploading/backups. Death at that point may no longer be an option. Not yours anyway.

    14. Re:tor by joocemann · · Score: 2

      Lol. You think your hard work at limiting their access makes a major difference?

      One copy = infinite copies. The fact that you're posting online is evidence that you're in.the same boat.

    15. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can be buried if you want...I am going the route of cremation!
      Track the dust, bitches!

    16. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yup, I think they're trying to detect if you're behind a proxy.

      Years ago, their portscan would get tripped up on my webserver running on 8080, probably because auth was enabled. Had to disable the service if I wanted to post.

    17. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And even your tombstone will be internet tracked, on findagrave.com.

    18. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're starting to write-in to the design of the website to need them in order to get the content.

      Can you cite an example? There's one web site I ecounter occasionally which is very annoying because all of the content is wrapped in javascript... but I thought it was Jezebel.com and that seems to work, now.

      I do web browsing in a way that some people think is exscessively paranoid, but works for me, and keeps me reasonably untrackable.

      The most important plugins are RefControl (it's set to simply not sent Referer: headers at all, with occasional overrides to "forge") and RequestPolicy, which disables *all* third-party reference loading unless explicitly whitelisted. Most sites need a one-time whitelist of a static image site (e.g. fsdn.com for slashdot.org) to get images and stylesheets.

      Of course, all cookies are disables unless absolutely necessary (e.g. shopping), and then only as long as necessary. As is all JavaScript. Adn I have both adblock plus (Fanboy's ultimate list+Easylist) and Ghostery operating, too. And a few hand-written element hiing rules so I don't even notice the blank spaces where ads used to be.

      Really, it's gotten to the point where I see less than one advertisement per week on the internet. which is low enough that the time to write an adblock rule for it is negligible. (The :not selector is handy; some sites try to make ads hard to blovk by not marking ads with a special style. But they mark regular content with a style, so a rule like "div:not([class])" works well.)

      Other plugins include Secret Agent (randomize User-Agent strings, a bit annoying with the default list because I get redirected to mobile sites a lot), Redirect Cleaner, and Redirector with some rules to strip parameters like s=, sid=, PHPSESSID= and Session_ID= from URL.

      Oh, yes, and GoogleSharing for the big bad one.

      The main thing that just plain doesn't work without cookies is yahoo groups. So I don't use yahoo groups. I can usually get what I need from google's cache.

      Oh, Flash is just plain not installed. I use youtube-dl and the like to download videos to watch them.

    19. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ghostery was a useful program that was bought by an advertising company. To generate revenue, ghostery sells information about the reach and effectiveness of the trackers that it "blocks".

      I know people are trying to be more privacy conscious but the general advice that is given out on boards like slashdot these days is out of date.

      Do not use Adblock plus, use an alternative.

      Do not use ghostery, use albine's dnt+.

      If you must have flash, use flash block and an add-on that destroys your Lso folder contents.

      The best way to fight being tracked is just to make the entire system disposable. Linux CDs and USB drives. Yes, you can still be tracked via hardware specs and ip, but those are more costly to change than my suggestions above.

    20. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm wandering off into a field to die, you insensitive clod!

    21. Re: tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great, thanks for spilling your guts about your stupid hobby.

    22. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    23. Re:tor by anubi · · Score: 2

      I think its great to try to head off malicious code as best one can, however some crap always seems to sneak in and there is a lot of ignorance out there on how to deal with it.

      Case in point - I have been hit with some system anomaly I have no idea what it is. I note I am having a helluva lot of internet activity as reported by Resource Monitor and WireShark. I have NO internet applications running. I note everything is being routed through a process "svchost.exe". So what's going on? I run Windows Defender, and the TDSS rootkit detector and nothing seems amiss, but still what's taking up all my cpu cycles, memory, and substantial bandwidth? Why is wmpnetwk and wmpnscfg having internet activity when I do not have windows media player or any browser object open?

      Its times like this I wish I could show a judge what kind of insecurity we face when we have no idea of what is going through our system. For all I know, some joker has uploaded some sort of rogue code to me which has me proxy servering for him. I keep seeing here on Slashdot where the immense financial resources of the media companies are being used to hound little guys into the ground. I would love to see some judges themselves witness the frustration of seeing unknown stuff streaming through their machine, helpless to stop it, then rule that until software vendors start releasing truly trusted code, its gonna take a lot more than just proving the content routed through an IP address to prove a copyright infringement case. Vectoring the immense financial strength of media giants to encourage secure computing platforms would go a long way to evolving trusted computing platforms.

      Only God and the entity who designed the code running in my machine knows what is in those packets streaming in and out of my machine. I am not sufficiently trained to do deep packet inspection with WireShark to know what is in those packets. All I know is they are going to my local router address and it seems to be forwarding them somehow.

      In all likelihood, this is nothing more than some tunneling protocol put in from Microsoft for their software to phone home on... but I do not know that for sure.

      I do not like being ignorant, but more and more law is being passed to keep people ignorant under the guise of copyright protection.

      I guess I rue the days of working on my simple little car - that is when something goes wrong, its quite obvious, just fix it, and go on.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

    24. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just last week I was unable to browse a HP support page from FireFox due to noscript / ghostery blocking a Facebook like button .... Fuck you Facebook and fuck you HP for having that shit on you site

    25. Re:tor by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I suspect that the only "virus" you have is Windows. I noticed that the last Windows "update" REALLY slowed my notebook down (the one I'm typing on now), my daughters have been complaining about theirs, too.

      I suspect Microsoft is trying to make everyone buy new computers, that the "update" was a timing loop. I've put off installing Linux on this box out of laziness but MS is forcing my hand. Either this is malicious MS coding, or incompetent MS coding. Since MS gains by your buying a new computer, I rule "incompetent" out.

    26. Re:tor by dumuzi · · Score: 1

      A quick look through your history shows you've made close to 100 posts to /. in 2013. That's an average of more then one a day. Looks to me like your hobby is /.. Though perhaps you are using an old machine from a restored rocket to make this post in the real world.

    27. Re:tor by Nivag064 · · Score: 1

      "... model rocketry ..."

      Obviously you are a terrorist, as who else would want to work on rockets outside their job??? :-)

    28. Re:tor by Bucc5062 · · Score: 1

      That is some fascinating art. Not so much my style, but I really like the statement. After seeing the bike lighting I pondered, were you consulted for the MIB scene outside the pawn shop?

      I generally have the same viewpoint as you. I am not completely a "I got nothing to hide so go ahead" citizen, a healthy distrust of the Law is a good thing, but it is not good to move into paranoia (like I read here on /. at times).

      So, what a great way to express yourself. Thank you for sharing.

      --
      Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
    29. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You tell em pleb! Don't let anyone insult your masters like that! The sheer audacity of that guy blows my mind. Does this asshole think he's too good for McBurgers and American Idol?

    30. Re:tor by penix1 · · Score: 1

      But like you said, they only have power because you give them power. If people stop using those sites for that reason, the sites will change very quickly.

      This, like all boycotts, are doomed to failure for two main reasons. First, it requires large groups of like minded people to be effective. 5 boycotting out of a hundred visitors has no impact. The larger more popular sites like FB are even more likely to avoid adverse impacts of even larger boycotts. Second, a boycott is useless unless the company knows why it is being boycotted. You not going to a site because of their tracking policy is completely unknown to them unless you make it known. And since you aren't going to their site because of that tracking policy they will never know. And even if they do know see the first reason for why they don't care.

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    31. Re:tor by TWX · · Score: 1

      Facebook is only one faux paradigm shift away from being the next Myspace, or any other number of dying or dead services.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    32. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Academics call this a Mixnet. No need for UDP, though.

    33. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your post was rejected because your ip has been flagged as a spam source. If you feel this is an error, try using the regular Internet.

  2. Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Slashdot now uses Google APIs.

    1. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Slashdot now uses Google APIs.

      Slashdot has been a broken website for years now and constantly making things worse. It is very unwelcoming to new visitors and other AC. Especially those who run No-Script or block scripting altogether. That being a much safer way to visit websites. The so called "Classic Discussion System" is no longer available to anyone but logged in members with their preferences set for it. The option to use the "Classic Discussion System" for visitors/AC disappeared from the site quite some time ago unfortunately and since then the site is mostly unbrowsable, especially after a certain number of comments. I have little doubt that I am not the only AC here who could have had a low digit UID if they had actually cared to sign up for it. However I bet many of those no longer come to Slashdot because of how inhospitable it has become due to the abrasiveness of AJAX and javascript in general.

    2. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      However it seems to work OK without them. At least I don't allow it to access googleapis (or any other site, except fsdn.com), and I don't notice any problem (except that embedded videos don't work, of course).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That, and now many distros using gnome have .local and .cache in your home dir where zeitgeist, tracker, et. al. store analytics on all your program usage, files, etc.
      The new breed of dev/sysadmins appear to be MBA shills/tools.

    4. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by TapeCutter · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Jebus, and they say women are high maintenance, little wonder nerds have difficulty finding a girlfriend.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    5. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have little doubt that I am not the only AC here who could have had a low digit UID if they had actually cared to sign up for it.

      You're not the only one indeed.

    6. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 for that one.

      I use RequestPolicy and block everything except fsdn.com, and it works.

    7. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by stretch0611 · · Score: 1

      little wonder nerds have difficulty finding a girlfriend.

      I guess that is the choice you make when you decide that trolling is more important than getting laid...

      --
      Looking for a job?
      Want your resume written professionally?
      DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
    8. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got a low AC slashdot ID too.

    9. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I come here much less due to the inability to block ACs.

    10. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      I'm a divorced grandfather of three, I'm in a steady relationship, "getting laid" is not a high priority these days, that monkey has normally fallen off a man's back by the time he is my age. I sense you're having trouble with that monkey and thus you're a little bit sensitive and defensive. Have you considered developing a sense of humor? - I promise you, once you have made a woman laugh their panties off, you won't want to go back to drunken desperation sex.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    11. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. I'd be at least in the low five-digit range, had I ever bothered to register. Got lots of comments rated at 5 (from insightful to funny), although it has become quite difficult to get noticed at all for an AC.

      If I'll ever skip reading and writing on /., I will not lose some profile where I had invested lots of resources over the years. I'll just move on to something different, or even to something better, possibly in meatspace. And the time comes nearer ... every year it comes nearer.

    12. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      usually when people are your age they've also grown out of waving their dick around like it means anything

    13. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Mate, it can be difficult to locate my dick these days, let alone wave it around.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    14. Re:Speaking of Google tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even money says TapeCutter here is a 14yo virgin.

  3. Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And sadly most of us contributed to this. Either actively by working on some piece of technology that is enabling this, or passively by sacrificing our privacy for our convenience.

    How sad it is to realize that the technology that we so much love and spend our lives working on is helping the state and big corps to spy on us.

    1. Re:Sadly true by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While it may be irritating, as long as they don't feed data to governments, it's not really Orwellian.

      The correct solution is ever-better cryptography and disallowing government from making it illegal, or mandating backdoors into things.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:Sadly true by lennier · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While it may be irritating, as long as they don't feed data to governments, it's not really Orwellian.

      And you know thatInternet companies which keep all their internal dealings secret for "commercial sensitivity" reasons are NOT feeding our data to a government which made it illegal for companies to report their national security letters.... how?

      Same way as we know that meat companies aren't cutting their beefburgers with horsemeat, I guess.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    3. Re:Sadly true by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's feeding the data to those who actually govern the world these days.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Sadly true by TarPitt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because private corporations by definition can't intimidate people by force, since only people intimidated, beaten up or killed by the evil government lose their freedom.

      Being intimidated, beaten up or killed by private corporations doesn't restrict your freedom at all

      ref:
      Colorado Labor Wars
      Iron and Coal Police, a privatized law enforcement entity
      Henry Ford's Service Department - which didn't repari customers' cars but beat the crap out of union organizers

      Remember, if your are beaten or shot at by a government employee, it is evil tyranny. If you are beaten or shot at by a private security force, you are feeling the pains of FREEDOM.

      It is only bad if the government does it.

      --
      If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
    5. Re:Sadly true by fermion · · Score: 1

      Here is what is most interesting. In 1984 a government bureaucracy was necessary to track everyone. In Fahrenheit 451 it took a whole walls of TVs to pacify the public. In Do Android Dream of Electric Sheep, the only real book, the corporations control the populous through mechanical animals, drug consoles, and shipments off world.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    6. Re:Sadly true by joocemann · · Score: 1

      And all because we're too cheap to simply pay for a service up front!

    7. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because private corporations by definition can't intimidate people by force, since only people intimidated, beaten up or killed by the evil government lose their freedom.

      Being intimidated, beaten up or killed by private corporations doesn't restrict your freedom at all

      ref: Colorado Labor Wars Iron and Coal Police, a privatized law enforcement entity Henry Ford's Service Department - which didn't repari customers' cars but beat the crap out of union organizers

      Remember, if your are beaten or shot at by a government employee, it is evil tyranny. If you are beaten or shot at by a private security force, you are feeling the pains of FREEDOM.

      It is only bad if the government does it.

      It's interesting the way people can write passionate opinions complete with sarcasm ... to defend a point that no one was disputing.

    8. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > the technology that we so much love

      Speak for yourself. I hate all of this garbage.

    9. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing you've probably read 'The Fall of the House of Labor' by David Montgomery, but if not, pick it up sometime.

      And speaking of Henry Ford, I am so tired of this comment being used (as was in the article):

      "If the director of the CIA can't maintain his privacy on the Internet, we've got no hope."

      That comment really bothers me. It is akin to someone saying

      "If the CEO of Ford Motor Company can't rebuild your 2012 Focus' engine, no one else can."

      Generally speaking, the top executives of any entity are mindbogglingly 'out of the loop' on many of the more practical matters of daily life in respect to the industries they are the top of. What does it take to the a top director at a huge organization? You need as many of the following qualifications as possible:

      -Be somewhat charming (if not in looks, in demeanor)
      -Be tall
      -Being white certainly helps (these first three are essentially, 'look the part')
      -Know what not to say under any circumstances (and have the self control to bridle the tongue in those situations),
      -As a backup, in situations where you do not know what you are talking about, you need to be quick witted enough to be able to convince other people what you are saying is right while simultaneously surrounding yourself in enough "confidence" (read that, smug arrogance) to thwart any further inquiry or plea for elaboration by playing off of the inquisitive persons fear of being looked down upon for not 'getting it'. If the person cannot be shaken because they aren't slaves to their pride, you can always feign irritation at their incompetence and use it as an excuse to sever any further dialogue on your part under the pretense of 'if you are too dumb to get it, I am not going to waste my time discussing it with you'.

      It is amazing how well the last one works. Most people have been trained well for passivity in our society (look up a paper by John Taylor Gatto called 'The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher'). Most people respect the outward ostentatious show of force commanded by an arrogant haughty demeanor and are afraid of being associated with anything or one that looks 'weak' in the eyes of others. When someone asking earnest honest questions is stigmatized as 'not getting it', the multitudes will side with the disdainful egotist out of fear of being ostracized themselves.

      It is only bad if the government does it.

      There is so much truth to your point (assuming for the moment, I understand it, which I believe I do)-
      Noam Chomsky makes a very good point about this very same topic.. The self proclaimed clerisy that runs our nation wants the average joe to believe that everything is the governments fault. This is because the government has a serious flaw: it is potentially influenceable by the average joe-- that is the flaw, so you have to foment a delicately balanced sort of disdain for the government in the eyes of the average joe because you still need the power and force of the government to enforce what the corporations deem as policy.

      "and they [the groups that put together the trilateral commission] were concerned about what they called the 'crisis of democracy', and it's interesting to read what they said because at that point they were concerned. the 'crisis of democracy' is the fact that normally passive and marginalized parts of the population (the overwhelming majority) are suddenly trying to get into the public arena to press their demands. well, you know, if you believe the stuff they teach you in civics class, that's supposed to be democracy. but if you were smart enough to make it to harvard, you'd know that IS the 'crisis of democracy' and we've got to stop it."

    10. Re:Sadly true by hoboroadie · · Score: 1

      Once, whilst I was spending some quality time in the back seat of an LAPD Cruiser, I noticed a list of all the police contacts I had from my earliest childhood, up on a screen in the front. Later, the officer told me to my face that he did not have access to any information aside from my conviction record. Those private data providers aggressively market to our police industry, and that stuff is apparently outside the scope of regulation.

      --
      They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
    11. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all because we're too cheap to simply pay for a service up front!

      Mind telling me how you would avoid tracking by paying for a service? It's not like you can use cash to do it. An internet where everything was paywalled would be the ultimate in terms of being able to tell everything anybody ever does.

    12. Re:Sadly true by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      It's not Big Brother, but when Big Brother arrives he'll have every useful intimate detail about every citizen right at his fingertips. Furthermore, cryptography is not a solution by itself.

      I access Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Hotmail, and my work email through encrypted connections, and most of the transactions between those services is encrypted. So a third party snooper can't read my mail. But a corrupt employee at one of those companies, someone that hacks the web servers at one of those companies, or a corrupt government official with a warrant can get to my mail. For real privacy I need to host my own email on a secure I alone can physically access, and only send email using encrypted messages to other people that do the same. To do that I need to set up my own email server and get everyone I want to communicate with to do the same. The former is merely tedious, the latter is effectively impossible.

      By using a cell phone and keeping it on so my family members can contact me in case of an emergency, I give my wireless carrier (and anyone unethical at the wireless carrier, or anyone that hacks into the carrier, or any corrupt government official) a long, detailed history of my travel patterns. I could avoid that by not having a wireless phone or leaving it at home most of the time, but since I have family members with potentially life-threatening medical problems I am unwilling to risk being unreachable during a crisis.

      Thanks to tricks like Evercookie ( http://samy.pl/evercookie/ ), which are used by many sites, my web traffic is almost certainly tracked in a very detailed way. I can get around it, but it's a lot of work. And so few people manage it.

      The cell phone can't be helped. Otherwise? I'm starting to think the best solution for tech-savvy people is just to unplug as much as possible. Google can't read the mail I send on paper over the postal service, Comcast and Amazon can't track the shopping I do with cash at a flea market.

    13. Re:Sadly true by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      If we pay for the service up front, they'll stop showing advertisements. But they'll still track us. It's just less visible tracking.

    14. Re:Sadly true by gagol · · Score: 1

      So, by registering and providing financial information and confirming your identity you think corporations would NOT track you?

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    15. Re:Sadly true by joocemann · · Score: 1

      The tracking is a byproduct of raising revenue on the backside while providing a 'free' frontside. If you pay enough, a business can afford to respect you. Back in the early internet days most services on the internet were premium based, but yahoo changed that, and figured out the american psychology.... That we prefer to pay nothing up front and take hits elsewhere...and so free ad based email was born, along with search providers, and the subsequent necessity to find a way to pay for it all..

      most people that didn't use the internet back then do not even unders used to be different. Us older users shakeour heads and regret taking free accounts.

    16. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My friend, government gave way to corporatism years ago. The distinction is entirely moot at this point.

    17. Re:Sadly true by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      If you were being sarcastic, you're funny.

      If not, you seem to have misread political theory. Liberal theory assumes that other people are a great danger, paving the way for a sovereign/ govt to ensure horizontal security . Its justification is void if it abuses the vertical power.

      Interestingly, other people is also a danger to Sartre's freedom.
      I'd venture that they're both wrong and applaud your sarcastic joke.

    18. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "as long as they don't feed data to governments"

      Idiot, look beyond the end of your nose for once. Google spends massive amounts of money supporting Obama, parks plane at Moffett, no, nothing to see here.

      Just do what your socialist betters tell you and shut up, your opinions are not necessary.

    19. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your examples are a hundred years old.

    20. Re:Sadly true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are missing two points, it is meat anyway and it is surveillance anyway.

  4. Ways around some of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ghostery is a good start.

    1. Re:Ways around some of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The joke's on you with Ghostery. You are trading the knowledge of all those other trackers by giving all your information to one more tracker that is Ghostery.

    2. Re:Ways around some of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unless you opt out by unclicking the anonymous usage reporting checkbox.

    3. Re:Ways around some of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    4. Re:Ways around some of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ghostery options -> uncheck "GhostRank"
      Wow, that's so hard.
        (Yes... that's what she said.)

    5. Re:Ways around some of it by rmstar · · Score: 1

      Unless you opt out by unclicking the anonymous usage reporting checkbox.

      That's a fairly naive point of view. I mean - why do you trust them?

    6. Re:Ways around some of it by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      The nice thing about firefox extensions is that they are basically opensource.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    7. Re:Ways around some of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because the source code is available and is rather easy to browse. It's pretty hard to hide something nefarious in a small code base of readable non-obfuscated JavaScript.

    8. Re:Ways around some of it by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      Ghostery is a good start.

      And Request Policy is the technical user's upgrade. It is kind of like a noscript for trackers, but also for ads and scripts and basically any remotely linked inline content.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:Ways around some of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And with Ghostery installed, you'll see that when you visit that venturebeat.com page, there's 25 different trackers and analytics tools waiting for you :-)

    10. Re:Ways around some of it by NewYork · · Score: 1
  5. The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensemaki by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Something I wrote a couple years ago: http://pcast.ideascale.com/a/dtd/-The-need-for-FOSS-intelligence-tools-for-sensemaking-etc.-/76207-8319
    "Now, there are many people out there (including computer scientists) who may raise legitimate concerns about privacy or other important issues in regards to any system that can support the intelligence community (as well as civilian needs). As I see it, there is a race going on. The race is between two trends. On the one hand, the internet can be used to profile and round up dissenters to the scarcity-based economic status quo (thus legitimate worries about privacy and something like TIA). On the other hand, the internet can be used to change the status quo in various ways (better designs, better science, stronger social networks advocating for some healthy mix of a basic income, a gift economy, democratic resource-based planning, improved local subsistence, etc., all supported by better structured arguments like with the Genoa II approach) to the point where there is abundance for all and rounding up dissenters to mainstream economics is a non-issue because material abundance is everywhere. So, as Bucky Fuller said, whether is will be Utopia or Oblivion will be a touch-and-go relay race to the very end. While I can't guarantee success at the second option of using the internet for abundance for all, I can guarantee that if we do nothing, the first option of using the internet to round up dissenters (or really, anybody who is different, like was done using IBM computers in WWII Germany) will probably prevail. So, I feel the global public really needs access to these sorts of sensemaking tools in an open source way, and the way to use them is not so much to "fight back" as to "transform and/or transcend the system". As Bucky Fuller said, you never change thing by fighting the old paradigm directly; you change things by inventing a new way that makes the old paradigm obsolete."

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  6. I blame the web by Hentes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While the W3C is always keen to push all kinds of new fancy unnecessary technology, they never cared much about security. Privacy and security should become an important part in web standard design.

    1. Re:I blame the web by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the foundation has already been laid. All the other shit doesn't matter because it's built on top of what came before. To a large extent you can't have a secure Internet without starting over.

    2. Re:I blame the web by Hentes · · Score: 1

      True, but something still should be done in order not to make it worse. Technological solutions offering security will catch up after a while if the web just stays at the current level.

    3. Re:I blame the web by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. TimBL's basic premise was that everyone was like him - simple, happy, naively optimistic - and took no account of the real world of innocents, crooks and evildoers.

  7. Schneier: Not a big picture guy by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are simply too many ways to be tracked."

    There always have been. We're social creatures. Try living in total isolation from society in, say, the 1800s. It was hard to completely disappear even then. Someone always knew your whereabouts even then. That's the reality of social existance. Schneier has long had a problem of being too conventional -- he sees what is, not what can be. The problem isn't that we can be tracked, the problem is who is doing the tracking, and the length of time that data is stored, and to what purpose it is put.

    These are things that can be resolved through responsible legislation and public education. The fact that so far, it has been highly irresponsible legislation due in part to a total lack of education, and in part due to rampant greed, is a social problem.

    The problem is social. The solution must be as well. Schneier is quite correct in his characterization of how things are now. He is not correct in concluding this is how it must remain.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by ToadProphet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There always have been. We're social creatures. Try living in total isolation from society in, say, the 1800s. It was hard to completely disappear even then

      There's a considerable difference between being 'tracked' by individuals we are socially connected to and entities we aren't. The reclusive uncle who had some odd reading habits wasn't at risk of being rounded up in the way that he might be with the latter.

      --
      It's on America's tortured brow, That Mickey Mouse has grown up a cow
    2. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by geekmux · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are simply too many ways to be tracked."

      There always have been. We're social creatures. Try living in total isolation from society in, say, the 1800s. It was hard to completely disappear even then. Someone always knew your whereabouts even then.

      My "whereabouts" on December 25, 2017 do not concern me. Chances are on that day I'll be with family (sorry for the spoiler)

      Someone being able to record and play back every damn thing I've ever done between now and then is the difference between today and the 1800s.

    3. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just pray you stay out of crimezones, and you should be just fine. We plomise ya.

    4. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by ohnocitizen · · Score: 2

      The fact that we are social creatures does not make the problem social, nor its solution. The problem is corporate surveillance. As for a solution - there are many possibilities, from technical to regulatory. Unless by a "social" solution, you mean putting massive amounts of public pressure on corporations to change their ways. Even if that is the case, having to summon that kind of outrage every time a corporation violates our trust is not a viable long term strategy. The logistics of discovering wrongdoing, reaching critical mass, applying pressure, and achieving a result are too difficult and rare a combination.

    5. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So you shouldn't be able to record your own life because you wouldn't want someone else recording yours?

    6. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is corporate surveillance.

      Then the problem is social. Corporations are a social construct. The rules which govern them are also social constructs. The environment they exist in is a social environment.

    7. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by chihowa · · Score: 1

      So you shouldn't be able to record your own life because you wouldn't want someone else recording yours?

      Non-sequitor much? This conversation is about corporations tracking your every move, not about home videos.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    8. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The argument is that my home movies will be datamined by corporations, so they are one in the same for this.

    9. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      For a start, that's "one and the same".

      And for the rest, my home movies are not recorded by a corporation, stored on their servers without me having access to them, and datamined for the purpose of sending me ads.

      So, as the GP asked, non sequitur much?

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    10. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      This conversation is [...] not about home videos.

      It is about home movies. It's about the storage location for them. And the home movie is not recorded by the corporation, but recorded by a private individual who sees value in uploading it. Much like all the photos of you that are on Facebook (even if you aren't tagged in them). So many pretend it's something new. It's not. It's a minor change to something old. Corporations have been datamining home movies for a while now. What's so wrong with this particular implementation? Oh, nobody can answer that, so they just whine "non sequitur, you aren't allowed to prove me wrong on the Internet, so I name any rhetorical 'trick' I don't like and accuse you of it."

    11. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by geekmux · · Score: 1

      This conversation is [...] not about home videos.

      It is about home movies. It's about the storage location for them. And the home movie is not recorded by the corporation, but recorded by a private individual who sees value in uploading it. Much like all the photos of you that are on Facebook (even if you aren't tagged in them). So many pretend it's something new. It's not. It's a minor change to something old. Corporations have been datamining home movies for a while now. What's so wrong with this particular implementation? Oh, nobody can answer that, so they just whine "non sequitur, you aren't allowed to prove me wrong on the Internet, so I name any rhetorical 'trick' I don't like and accuse you of it."

      Fine. You win. This is about home movies.

      Now tell me again how I opt-out, should I choose not to have my life recorded.

      There, is that "non sequitor" enough for you?

      Sorry, but that should be the painfully obvious difference to you here. It's not the what, or where that concerns me most here. It's the when (as in putting ME in control of the record button), and the why (as in why again are you doing this and detaining the "evidence" for several years), and the who (as in who all has access to this information).

      Perhaps now you will understand that this has about 1% to do with the freedom to press a damn record button. And I can store my own home movies on my own servers, using my own domains, and with my own encryption schema to share between family members if I like. Unless I breaking other laws while creating them, not one single corporation needs to be concerned in that scenario about the content. Not one.

    12. Re:Schneier: Not a big picture guy by AK+Marc · · Score: 1
      I don't win. I lose. When I present my opinion with respect to Google Glass, I'm told that people have the right to not be bothered by others doing things they don't want. When I present my opinion in the "jokes get people fired" story, I'm told you have no right to not be bothered by what others do, unless they leave physical and identifiable damage.

      I'm wrong on both. And I haven't seen overlap of people responding to me, but it seems that the slashdot groupthink finds my opinion too conservative on one topic and too liberal on the other. Can't I just get the two groups arguing with me into the same room, and figure it out?

      Chances are, when both sides think you are wrong, you are either very wrong, or very right.

      Perhaps now you will understand that this has about 1% to do with the freedom to press a damn record button.

      I thought it was always about the right to privacy in public, almost the same as the firing joke. What right to privacy do you have in public, and if any, how do you enforce that against others that would infringe on it?

  8. Don't want to be on the grid by jonfr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you don't want to be on the grid.

    1: Don't use the internet. Rather that be e-mail, web pages, internet bank.
    2: Don't use mobile phone of any type. Dumb-phones can be tracked just as easy as smartphones.
    3: Don't use credit or debit card of any type. Since most of us need bank account. Get one that is not connected to any debit or credit card. Pay cash only. But be advised that still leaves you up to tracking. Since all stores and banks have security cameras that can be used to track you if needed.
    4: Don't buy electricity or anything off companies. This is hard to avoid.
    5: Live remote and not connected to anything. Then you might avoid being on the grid 99,95% of the time. I do think it is close to impossible to fall 100% of the grid due to the nature of the modern world.

    The other option is to mix in with the grid in such a way that you don't get detected. That however does not matter if the authorities are tracking you activity. Since one spot (or "unit" as they prefer to call it) can be tracked easy if needed. Be that over banks, phone or internet. They got the hardware for this ability about 13 years ago. It has only been growing since then.

    Not AC, since it would not have mattered anyway.

    1. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can definitely fall off the grid. Go somewhere that the grid can't reach and stay there.

      Go somewhere like Abkhazia, where the government is in shambles, all borders are under dispute, there are nice beaches and mountains, the place is only recognized by 4-5 other countries non of which are the US, and the cities offer a fairly normal existence.

    2. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      Drones reach secure compounds in Afghanistan, spies posing as foreign aid reach secure compounds in Pakistan to track people by DNA. To the west, those are pretty inaccessible and "off the grid locations".

      That leaves some mountain caves in North Korea or deep in Papua New Guinea Jungle. Or the heart of the Sahara. Or Antarctica or some other equally inhospitable places.

      And believe it or not satellites will still find you. HUMANs are easy to find. Humans are also everywhere. And if you don't want to be burned at the stake as a heretic in a primitive culture you have to visit town once in awhile. We don't have the natural instinct, resistance to nature, endurance, camouflage and psychology to live our lives 24/7 in ghillie suites in the brush.

      Your best bet is to just not be any different then anyone else all over the grid. Your better off having all the things to track and occasionally posting something on facebook and looking perfectly normal. Blending into plain site.

      There are exceptions to the rules. But hey even they are "known". A gentleman lived till his late 80's in a cave in the Rocky Mountains. This good man moved there after coming back from world war two, I can't remember his name off the top of his head, but he was well known even though he subsisted on goats milk, wine from mountain grapes, and cheese. He survived on his own there until the millennium. But he was friendly enough to talk to journalists or other curious folk and was never kicked from his squat. Our government sure as hell knew who he was, probably had his records from his service in a cave their own somewhere.

      The question is, what do most of us have to hide? Nothing. Will some of us be persecuted, maybe, or all this tracking might bring hidden demographics to the publics or power elites knowledge, enough so that they won't feel like changing what was now private and making public spaces more accommodating to different mimetic sub-cliques.

    3. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think a big misconception here is that being totally 'off the grid' is somehow the logical goal. Leaving the grid will satisfy your need to not be tracked, certainly, but I think the pareto principle applies: you can do 20% of the effort to gain 80 percent of the benefit - no need to become a survivalist to avoid intrusive tracking. Turn off cookies, use public transport, leave the cellphone at work when you go home, pay in cash.

      Yes, stores have CCTV cameras in them, but they rarely check them except in case of a crime being committed. Sure, they could use fancy face-tracking software cross-referenced with databases to find out who everyone who pays cash is, but really, they won't bother because the vast majority of people will pay with a loyalty card anyway, incentivised with frequent flyer miles or somesuch. Companies go for what's going to turn a profit - they don't do long-tail very well unless it costs them nothing.

      You might say that being conspicuously absent from some modes (eg. trackable transactions) highlights you for scrutiny, but I would argue that that's a bit paranoid - companies won't double their tracking efforts to make 2% more from 'different valuers'. Governments might worry about the 2% of weirdos out there, but they already track the things that concern them - purchases of explosive materials, weapons, and phonecalls to known agitators. The best way to keep the government out of your life is to keep your nose clean, follow the law and don't publicise it if you belong to the scarlet letter club du jour (eg. communists, satanists, pedophiles, science fiction writers, etc).

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    4. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine's mildly retarded brother went missing nearly a decade ago, they found his car abandoned in bushland not far from his home but he (or his body) has never been located. There are literally millions of cases like that in the western world, I very much doubt they are all living in N.Korea.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    5. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drone's are not going to reach Abkhazia. It is blockaded militarily by a layer of Russian military and outside that, Georgian military. Drone would get shot down immediately, and it would cause an international imcident between Russia and the US. Definitely not going to happen. The places that you speak of, Pakistan and Afghanistan are not blockaded in this way.

    6. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6: Don't file taxes because it requires the internet.

    7. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Use the internet with Tor and private browsing mode. Sure, logging into accounts will be a pain, but you get most of the good stuff (Wikipedia, blogs, forums, etc) without most of the bad
      2. Get a non-smartphone handheld (on Android or Ubuntu obviously) and use that.
      3. http://bitcoin.org
      4. Make your own tradeoffs here; buying through proxies (eg. Bitspend if you use BTC) is another option.
      5. You don't need to abandon society altogether to fall off the grid. You can just abandon capitalist society. Live with friends, travel the world, do random part time and online jobs for people (hint: get paid in BTC) to keep yourself up financially. You'll have barely any trail at all that way.

    8. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by stretch0611 · · Score: 2

      Yes, stores have CCTV cameras in them, but they rarely check them except in case of a crime being committed. Sure, they could use fancy face-tracking software cross-referenced with databases to find out who everyone who pays cash is, but really, they won't bother because the vast majority of people will pay with a loyalty card anyway, incentivised with frequent flyer miles or somesuch. Companies go for what's going to turn a profit - they don't do long-tail very well unless it costs them nothing.

      I agree this is the case today...

      However, what happens when some company finds value in tracking people offline with these cameras and facial recognition? They start offering every little mom & pop store "free video cameras with offsite backup."

      Every gas station, convenience store, and lunch shop starts to sign on for what is essentially free security cameras. It reaches critical mass and large chain store start signing up as well. At that point, it will be impossible to avoid, and all your information is collected by a small handful of invasive companies. (Just like Google Analytics... Offer free information about your website's visitors, and benefit by being able to track everyone across the web, or globe as the case may be.)

      What would really be horrible is if(actually, when) this does happen, and one of the companies involved is a web-tracking company that matches online and offline activity.

      Yes, this sounds paranoid, but companies would salivate at the chance. Its the same reason why people who prefer privacy hate the license plate scanners that are starting to be installed across the US.

      If you think that our government would save us, think again. The companies will pay them off with campaign contributions to look the other way. (or as the article mentioned, they would look the other way for access to the tracking data.)

      --
      Looking for a job?
      Want your resume written professionally?
      DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
    9. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by jonfr · · Score: 1

      Same did happen in Iceland few years ago. A guy who was considered "odd" by everyone did vanish. He did not have any mobile phone or debit card (or credit card). He did pay in cash only. He was last seen on security camera in gas station in south Iceland. He burnt car was found in a quarry few months later. The person it self has not been seen since. His remains have not been found so far. Even after extensive search.

      This was some 4 years ago if my memory is correct.

    10. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are an experienced professional (== having been arrested up and gone into hiding again), there are plenty ways of hiding even in Germany and Japan. You just need to learn by fault what you must NOT do. For example, you need to have a nice list of hostels which do want to see your ID card. Never hide in the same city where the coppers want you. Do NEVER use "anonymous" SIM cards or any other "official" telecom service. All of it can and will be tracked if you call "interesting" numbers.

      Aside from my own hard-won experience, read this:

      http://www.mi5.com/security/mi6org/tomlinson.htm
      http://cryptome.org/bigbreach-posts.htm

      That guy Tomlinson was in my opinion not the smartest guy technology-wise and socially. He probably is a man of integrity but also of a sense of massive entitlement and social ineptness. He did not know how things work in the highest echelons of power. Then he made some massive technical mistakes such as using his own motorbike and an "untraceable" SIM card. It is always highly funny to see how the security services keep their own members in the dark as to what technological capabilities exist in their own ranks.
      But a very good piece of reading if you are interested in REAL spycraft and "going underground" as opposed to the movieplot bullshit. Learn from Tomlinson's mistakes, but don't expect to be a pro without making some massive failures. Most IT people are massively inept in tricking their way through the real world. Talk to a gypsy or illegal immigrant if you need pro tips. All your fantasies are highly useless.

    11. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you need to use a phone, you can simply take a remote POTS line during the night and attach the $20 phone you bought at a local retailer . Of course, you need to have a well-planned exit route if you call one of your friends. Talk for two minutes and then get the hell out of dodge, as the local coppers might show up in the vicinity quite quickly. You better do NOT do it.

      Better use TOR and email, text chat, images and the like.

    12. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OTOH, local FSB will demand registration and they are stricter than German police on this. Then your home coppers could label your a "terror supporter", and that will grant you a nice OMON team visit and you will certainly spill all beans to the FSB. That's how they did it with Tomlinson when he hid in France. (yeah, replace FSB by DGSE ). Tomlinson was able to talk his way out of it, but that might be massively more difficult with the FSB.
      If they don't understand your motives, you will be either charged with espionage or simply get a free flight to your home police. Tomlinson gave DGSE some scraps of intel as an exchange for not being kicked out immediately.
      You better look for some countries with moderately capable security services and certainly not any part of Russia.

    13. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would the government "save us", from something that the huge majority of people would welcome and enjoy?

      Remember in the movie 'Minority Report' (haven't read the book, don't care) how Tom Cruise is immediately recognized, welcomed, and personally advertised to wherever he goes? That may be a dystopia to you, but to most people it looks kinda fun. Be someone. See ads for things you might actually want. That's the vision that companies will sell to politicians, and politicians will lap it up.

      The only possible way to prevent that is to start generating the backlash now. Go write a movie as good as that, to show that the downside of that world isn't just in the totalitarian, intrusive police state and "precrime", but in everyday life for ordinary people who are never going to even contemplate murder.

    14. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Rennt · · Score: 1

      Unless everyone you know is playing by the same rules, it's already too late. Now you're just a bitter social outcast with a facebook shadow profile.

    15. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Your solution is good, though undesirable.

      It isn't the only alternative.

      If we accept surveillance, we should use technology critically, and develop a cloak (use different browser strings every 5 secs, deflect and misinform tracking services).

      If we don't accept it, we must fight democratically for greater transparency and public scrutiny, with legal implications for trespassers.

      There are probably other alternatives too.

    16. Re:Don't want to be on the grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wear a hoodie, or other face obscuring garment. People may even tend to mistake your social/economic group. This works particularly well if you happen to be of average height/weight.

  9. "...Increasingly, none of it matters." by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 1

    We can turn our cell phones off and spend cash. But increasingly, none of it matters

    I agree with this because people traveling without cell phones and paying cash tend to be the minority, meaning that anonymizing efforts often end up doing the opposite. Another good quote from the article:

    If the director of the CIA can't maintain his privacy on the Internet, we've got no hope

    --

    I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    1. Re:"...Increasingly, none of it matters." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also the case that if you were to make a late attempt to fall off the grid you would likely be flagged as suspect. The FBI already lists people who rely on cash transactions and who limit access to their online activities as possible terrorists. If you're going to fall of the grid, do it like an octopus and leave a nice dense cloud of ink behind to make it look like you're still there.

  10. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't see Schneier as a Libertarian since he states in the article that "Fixing this requires strong government will...". No Libertarian would suggest such a fix, which I imply to mean that this issue goes beyond Libertarians.

    --

    I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

  11. Re:The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensem by bbelt16ag · · Score: 1

    up vote a million times!!!!

    --
    NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER GIVE UP! "No limitations, no boundaries, there is no reason for them."
  12. Delete your cookies by iliketrash · · Score: 1

    It's my understanding that tracking is done by cookies. I delete all cookies 2-3 times a day, and always after logging out of Google (which I rarely log in to) and Facebook. The only downside is that I have to log in to again to certain sites but that is easy because of OS X's built-in password manager.

    1. Re:Delete your cookies by aztracker1 · · Score: 2

      Well, You'll also have to disable Flash and Silverlight, since both offer offline data storage which can be used to re-establish cookies.. Also, your browsing habits can be tracked (with less granularity) by correlating your IP address with the sites you visit and the useragent over the course of a day.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    2. Re:Delete your cookies by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's my understanding that tracking is done by cookies. I delete all cookies 2-3 times a day, and always after logging out of Google (which I rarely log in to) and Facebook. The only downside is that I have to log in to again to certain sites but that is easy because of OS X's built-in password manager.

      Cookies are just the simplest way to track you. Another common way is to use DSOs (Flash storage). And there are also several other possibilities to store identifying data.

      And even if you manage to block everything, your browser still sends some identifying information by default. With JavaScript, even more partially identifying information can be collected, like screen resolution, your time zone or feature tests which might identify your browser even if you send a forged HTTP User Agent line (and the very fact that your browser line doesn't fit the JavaScript results might further help with identifying you).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:Delete your cookies by GWRedDragon · · Score: 1

      It's my understanding that tracking is done by cookies. I delete all cookies 2-3 times a day, and always after logging out of Google (which I rarely log in to) and Facebook. The only downside is that I have to log in to again to certain sites but that is easy because of OS X's built-in password manager.

      Your IP address and browser request header makes it easy to correlate your travel across several sites. As long as you do anything with that IP ever that ties to you, they've got you. With many ISPs, your IP can last for months.

    4. Re:Delete your cookies by MacDork · · Score: 1

      As a web developer, let me say that none of the stuff you mention really matters when it comes to tracking you around the web. In fact, most of it is pretty essential in making your experience on a site a good one.

      What does matter is that sites totally unrelated to google, facebook, twitter, etc, are embedding scripts and iframes from those sites on their own pages. When you see that facebook like button beside Dr. Pink's Anal Brightening, facebook knows you're there. If you click the like button, then facebook tells all your friends you were there. This is the faustian bargain that facebook offers to third parties... Let facebook follow your users and facebook will spam its users with your sites offers.

      Nobody even questions it. Facebook likes and google analytics are considered essential elements of every website by management types. They have no idea what a <link> tag is or how it can impact the site's security, but they **know** that you better have google analytics! (If you like being employeed)

      I notice Schneier failed to mention the EU cookie law. Unlike in the US, the EU is actually serious about fixing the problem. Essentially, if you care about this sort of spying and you go to any site that provides the required EU notice, just leave and don't go back. All the legit methods of first party tracking are exempt. Session cookies are exempt as well as first party analytics cookies. That notice is telling you that facebook, google, and any number of other third parties are tracking your activity on the site.

    5. Re:Delete your cookies by MacDork · · Score: 1

      Your IP address and browser request header makes it easy to correlate your travel across several sites. As long as you do anything with that IP ever that ties to you, they've got you. With many ISPs, your IP can last for months.

      This is a common misperception. IP address != person. Many ISPs have caching proxys to reduce traffic. To the site on the other end, the entire ISPs traffic may appear to be coming from a few proxy IPs. Even without proxys in between you and your destination, the IP address may be shared as it is at businesses, universities, and behind home Wi-Fi routers. In the vast majority of cases these days, the IP address a site sees is rarely tied to a single source.

    6. Re:Delete your cookies by GWRedDragon · · Score: 1

      Your IP address and browser request header makes it easy to correlate your travel across several sites. As long as you do anything with that IP ever that ties to you, they've got you. With many ISPs, your IP can last for months.

      This is a common misperception. IP address != person. Many ISPs have caching proxys to reduce traffic. To the site on the other end, the entire ISPs traffic may appear to be coming from a few proxy IPs. Even without proxys in between you and your destination, the IP address may be shared as it is at businesses, universities, and behind home Wi-Fi routers. In the vast majority of cases these days, the IP address a site sees is rarely tied to a single source.

      If you are at work or at school, probably. But not at home...at least not with the biggest ISPs available in my area (and most of the US at least).

    7. Re:Delete your cookies by MacDork · · Score: 1

      If you are at work or at school, probably. But not at home...at least not with the biggest ISPs available in my area (and most of the US at least).

      The IP address from your ISP could be fixed forever and it still won't pinpoint which device on your network was using it. Every machine on your LAN shares that single IP from the ISP. If you have an open wireless router, the IP address really doesn't tell you anything more than it was any person within wireless range of the router at the time.

    8. Re:Delete your cookies by GWRedDragon · · Score: 1

      Yes but alone an IP address gives you a pretty good idea, especially when combined with what sorts of stuff is being visited and behavior on this sites. There may be lots of public networks, but most people still browse the internet at home, with a small number of people on a single IP.

      Additionally, as above, these different devices can usually be distinguished from each other by comparing the browser request headers. This gives an additional heuristic to determine who is doing what.

      This is a situation where you have a bunch of hints, and any one may not get you that far. However, if you combine the information from all of the available hints, you get a pretty clear picture. The military likes to call this type of situation 'total information awareness.'

    9. Re:Delete your cookies by GWRedDragon · · Score: 1

      *these sites

      I also want to add an example: consider it like the game Guess Who?. Knowing the person has glasses may not help you, but once you know it is a male with glasses and no beard suddenly your choices are narrowed significantly.

    10. Re:Delete your cookies by MacDork · · Score: 1

      Except in this case, it is easy to grow a beard instantly. If a neighbor using my wireless wants to look like me based on request headers, that's easy to forge. Tools like Firesheep have made it incredibly easy to impersonate others on open wireless networks. With the right extension, every single bit of the request could be impersonated.

      Furthermore, a person might be using a computer, but their browsing agent may be under third party control, thanks to IE toolbars, XSS, or any number of other security failures. IP address != person. Even as circumstantial evidence, it's extremely weak.

      One example: I have a server that is pinged almost daily with a bogus request for mobiquo.php. I know a person isn't doing that. But hey, I have their IP address and the request matches other requests coming from that IP. A person must have typed that into the url bar every day! ... no. If all you needed to do to confirm identity was grab an IP address, problems like spam would not exist.

  13. and we Give it All Alway Free by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    if we go 'off the grid': that's a special qualification. bottom line: do the very least 'on the grid' and most of everything else off. throw the dogs off.

  14. Google and Firefox et al by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Block Reported attack sites
    Block Reported web forgeries

    I was just made aware (again) of those two Firefox options which track every site you visit (you do not have to go through Google search). You see, I did a full reinstall of Firefox, and ofcourse the new install did not have my custom options anymore.

    It is a constant battle to try to reduce tracking. Which ofcource is what the web is mostly all about these days.

    I wonder why was Unity Dash-Amazon tracking such a big deal when these Firefox options do the same thing, (they are enabled by default on all distros) and for many people, Firefox is 'The Dash'.

  15. The larger issue. by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...We can turn our cell phones off and spend cash. But increasingly, none of it matters. There are simply too many ways to be tracked."

    Actually, the larger issue is there are simply far too many people who don't give a shit about privacy anymore.

    How do you think we got to this point.

    1. Re:The larger issue. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      How do you think we got to this point.

      It started with the Big Bang, which made it inevitable. That still doesn't mean we're not just going through some childhood phase.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:The larger issue. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Actually, the larger issue is there are simply far too many people who don't give a shit about privacy anymore.

      How do you think we got to this point.

      You mean "give a shit about privacy anymore" as much as you do.

      You have to know what is or isn't private. And if privacy is important at the moment, you don't use no-private modes.

      There is an interesting Slashdot discussion going on right now regarding the Google Glass. Oddly enough the libertarians who take great umbrage at all the tracking going on through teh interwebz, seem to be missing from the discussion of going to a bar, and having some half-wit record and upload their activities to Google and the rest of the world. All this despite people usually not wanting their activities in a bar recoreded that way.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:The larger issue. by kllrnohj · · Score: 1

      Actually, the larger issue is there are simply far too many people who don't give a shit about privacy anymore.

      How do you think we got to this point.

      "anymore"? The simple fact is society as a whole has never worn a tinfoil hat like you do. This never changed.

      And the article as a whole is nothing but baseless speculation. Storing data costs money. Just because your computer pinged Google, or Facebook, or whoever doesn't mean that that company is tracking you or even storing that for more than 7-30 days (or however long their access logs last). People *drastically* overvalue themselves - your activities on the internet are just not worth much money at all. Google, the masters of advertising, only uses the vaguest of ideas about your interests to show you ads. It's not hyper targeted like people pretend. So why would a company lose lots of real money storing data about you?

      The answer, of course, is they don't. They aggregate trends from it, and then discard the specifics. That saves them money and it reduces their legal liabilities.

    4. Re:The larger issue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that and you have no particular right to use the properties on the web on your own terms. But I'm sure that consideration goes over here about as well as the idea of personal responsibility.

    5. Re:The larger issue. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      How do you think we got to this point.

      The Republicans refused to acknowledge any form of "privacy" because they saw it as a path to 12 year old girls getting birth control and abortions without getting permission from their owners. Add to that piles of companies that took our privacy, and a judiciary that protected and supported them at every turn.

      How do you think we got here?

    6. Re:The larger issue. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The simple fact is society as a whole has never worn a tinfoil hat like you do. This never changed.

      You needn't wear a tinfoil hat in order to care about privacy; you only need to look at history and see countless examples of government abuses and realize that allowing the government to violate people's privacy would most likely lead to abuses of power.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    7. Re:The larger issue. by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      ..and the democrats refuse to acknowledge privacy because they see it as a way for individual liberty or agency of any kind to flourish without state sponsored winners and losers.

      now you have a better understanding of the double bind the american voter really faces: corporate-backed socialism all around.

  16. Twas Ever Thus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you really think DARPANET wasn't totally compromised from the start? And you're worrying about marketing data?

  17. You can make it expensive for them ... by Alain+Williams · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the UK you can demand that a company gives you all the data that it has on you, they must do so within 40 days. There is a statutory maximum charge of £10, it will probably cost them a lot more than that. The amount that they would have to supply would grow every year. It might be reasonable to ask once a year; this might encourage them to purge their data and only keep recent stuff ... but this would only have an effect if enough people did this.

    There was an EU idea of the right to be forgotten, I don't know where that went.

    1. Re:You can make it expensive for them ... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe it exercised itself?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:You can make it expensive for them ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you can demand that a data aggregator give you all the data it has on you, what's to stop a dog from posing as you and demanding that information? This seems like a bad idea. After all, companies forced to give out information are probably not going to work all that hard to verify the identity of requestors, and I bet the requests will be handled via some web service, on the internet, where nobody knows you're a dog.

    3. Re:You can make it expensive for them ... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      If you can demand that a data aggregator give you all the data it has on you, what's to stop a dog from posing as you and demanding that information?

      If your dog is capable of working out the value of £10 in dog money, then he can have that data, and welcome.

    4. Re:You can make it expensive for them ... by Esperi · · Score: 1

      The The Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the EU parliament are voting on the General Data Protection Regulation on the 19th March 2013 (tomorrow).Right of Erasure/Right to be Forgotten is only part of the reforms.http://www.privacycampaign.eu/2013/02/faq//

      Google don't think much of our quaint European privacy regulations however:
      "American companies will come out big winners, compared to their European rivals. European companies face decades of innovation-paralysis under the new rules. American companies will just reorganize and relocate certain operations out of Europe to mitigate risk."
      http://peterfleischer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/dox-quixote.html/

  18. Good Story by poena.dare · · Score: 3, Funny

    I liked it so much I liked it. ...ooops...

    1. Re:Good Story by antdude · · Score: 1

      They were already tracking before you read this story. ;)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    2. Re:Good Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PreLike (pat. pending), the method for predicting likes and acting on them.
        "I used to press that like button, but since the PreLike came I have saved from liking even when feeling grumpy." "I lost a relative for liking things in profusion. The RSI simply killed him. The PreLike makes sure that doesn't happen again." "I like PreLike!" "PreLike!"
      PreLike, likes you have never liked so much before.

    3. Re:Good Story by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They got you when you loaded the iframe, not when you clicked Like.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  19. Internet != World Wide Web by msauve · · Score: 1

    Google isn't tracking me when I VPN into my employer's network. Facebook isn't gathering personal data when I ssh to my server.

    As has been said, TANSTAAFL, so don't expect "free" service to not track you.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Internet != World Wide Web by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google isn't tracking me when I VPN into my employer's network.

      Yes, you're right. Your employer is tracking you there.

      Facebook isn't gathering personal data when I ssh to my server.

      Quite right again! That would be the NSA.

      (Surveillance != Your vision of it)

    2. Re:Internet != World Wide Web by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you connect to these servers your origin and destination IPs are left on router logs owned by the service provider and available to the government on demand. Even though your activities on these servers may be obscured be certain they know you are there, how frequently, and just like tying together behavior based on cookies, they can probably come up with a series of contacts from providers on the other side and have a pretty good idea about what you're doing.

    3. Re:Internet != World Wide Web by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Uh-huh. AC posted a good reply to your post already.

      My question is - what the heck are you doing on your employer's network? Are you browsing the web? Oh - wait - you still have cookies on your work account! It's possible that Google doesn't realize that msauve@employer.net is the same as msauve@gmail.com I wouldn't count on it though. You've never, ever checked your personal mail from your employer's work station? Alright - so just maybe you've tricked Google. Did you also fool every other marketer and researcher out there?

      Your server. What are you doing from your server? Browse the web? Oh-oh - that server has it's own cookies, which may or may not already be correlated to your home PC and/or your employer's work station. If you're only accessing files on your server, then maybe you're good there.

      I understand TANSTAAFL - the question is, whether I'm willing to pay the asking price for the services I use. Personally, I am not. So, I throw a monkey wrench into the marketing and tracking cogs every chance I get. THEY don't get a free lunch either.

      BTW - I PAY for my internet. It's not free. It costs me about 5 hours labor, each and every month, to keep my internet connection open. No free lunch there, either.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    4. Re:Internet != World Wide Web by msauve · · Score: 1

      "what the heck are you doing on your employer's network? Are you browsing the web?"

      No. Unlike you, I do actual work.

      "What are you doing from your server? Browse the web? Oh-oh - that server has it's own cookies"

      No. It's a server, fool. I do sometimes browse it's web server, though. Which, BTW, does not push cookies.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    5. Re:Internet != World Wide Web by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh - decent answers. No need to ASSume that I don't do real work, or that I'm a fool. You're showing your ass with that bit. You'll notice that I ASKED what you are doing, without jumping to conclusions. I was more or less expecting you to ignore me, or to admit that "Yes, I'm browsing the web, but it's a different environment blah blah blah". But, I didn't just ASSume that you're that stupid . . .

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  20. Spread it around by AndyCanfield · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One technique is to spread it around. Use DuckDuckGo or Yandex for search. Use independent e-mail services. If you must do social networking, use low-volume third-layer sites. Remember that Google is now one database; your gmail and youtube use are correlated. Whenever possible use companies based outside the US. Google (USA) will tell the FBI; Yandex (Russia) will not. Sure, any fact about you is in some database. But don't let all those facts get into a single database.

    1. Re:Spread it around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand it. Most websites use google/facebook scripts/images. If you see a "like" button, facebook knows you (ip/useragent) visited that website.

    2. Re:Spread it around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand it. Most websites use google/facebook scripts/images. If you see a "like" button, facebook knows you (ip/useragent) visited that website.

      Use /etc/hosts and point the worst offenders' domains to 127.0.0.1 and you solve some (but not all) of the problems. I do this with certain things, like google analytics, while with others I just use NoScript, Flashblock, and strict (Flash and regular) cookie settings.

      It's a trade-off, however: convenience or peace of mind. The more thoroughly you block the web juggernauts like Google and Facebook, the less usable the rubbish web2.0 sites get.

      -- Posted AC because Slashdot's become part of the problem.

    3. Re:Spread it around by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      Then don't see a "like" button. RequestPolicy is your friend.

      Google is harder, thanks to googleapis. Many sites using them are unusable without. I haven't found a solution to that (other than to not use the site).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Spread it around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Noscript just needs to include a version of googleapis in their surrogate list.

    5. Re:Spread it around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      use an invalid address, like 0.0.0.0, it fails faster

    6. Re:Spread it around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A plugin like NoScript could maintain a local cached version of the various APIs provided by Google. When it encounters a call to Google APIs, rewrite it to point to the local copy. Of course, this only works with static files like jQuery.

  21. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by aztracker1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That was my thought as well.. sometimes it comes down to personal awareness of the tools you are using. If you only read books from the library... surprise, they can track your reading habits. Personally, my rule of thumb is don't do anything online you wouldn't want people to know about... Yes, I'm a geek, and I also like sex, and porn... If drugs were legal, I'd be inclined to partake on occasion. I do have a couple drinks about a dozen times a year.

    I think what it comes down to is how private do you want to be.. there are ways to accomplish this. Most browsers allow for a "clean" or "incognito" session that doesn't carry forward cookies/data ... you can even set your browser to clear private data on close. Disable flash and silverlight, and you've closed the gap to outside storage/tracking. The problem is that cookies and JavaScript have good purposes, and a handful of organizations abuse them... That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed.

    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  22. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In my opinion, we are selling out future generations for a few dollars savings and a fart app.

    You think that companies knowing what you want makes things better for you. I say it mostly doesn't now and it certainly won't in the future. Companies are tracking us very, very effectively. Soon they will know such things like "89% of males of XX age asked about this" so they will show you that even if *you* haven't thought about. It is narrowing your choices, not expanding them. In the future, companies will know things like "most people can be made to do X if you repeatedly tell them Y". How will they know these things? By tracking millions of people for decades, that's how. Statistically speaking, companies will know what you can be made to do during each period of your life and they will narrow the choices for you so that you will likely arrive at the decision they want you to.

    And you will think it is all your choices and your freewill but in the end there will not be such things.

  23. IndexedDB by tepples · · Score: 2

    I just don't have the browser save anything anymore at close. No cache, no cookies, no login credentials, no history, nothing.

    Not even IndexedDB? If not, then how do you plan to use web applications' offline modes?

    1. Re:IndexedDB by GWRedDragon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I just don't have the browser save anything anymore at close. No cache, no cookies, no login credentials, no history, nothing.

      Not even IndexedDB? If not, then how do you plan to use web applications' offline modes?

      "Web application" with an "offline mode"?? People actually use those?!?!

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

      web applications' offline modes

      When I find out that people like you exist, it makes me feel a little better about my life. Thank you for being the sort of person I can laugh at while not feeling at all guilty.

  24. We need counter intelligence tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about counter-intelligence tools? Actively distorting the surveillance data being gathered to render it unreliable.

    For example: at present we delete cookies. What if we swapped them. Now a cookie doesn't have specific information about one person, it has a mishmash of unreliable data from a dozen.

    1. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by louarnkoz · · Score: 2

      Great idea. I can see that, a "cookie exchange bank." You donate a cookie to it, and in return it provides you with a cookie donated by some random user. There are a few precautions to take, e.g., do not donate your bank's password, but it could definitely be fun.

    2. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by Burz · · Score: 1

      There is a firefox extension that shares Google cookies. I think its from the same people who made Ghostery.

      Personally, I think that approach is very fussy. People concerned with real privacy should try to conduct more of their online communications on networks like Tor and i2P.

    3. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by olddoc · · Score: 2

      I always search for the type of porn I'm not interested in just to confuse them. They have no idea! (Evil laughter...)

      --
      Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
    4. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had this idea a few years ago. I was going to call it "TossYourCookies.com"

    5. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you miss the point. The point being, the surrender of informations is mostly, voluntary done. The few exceptions are what used to be called 'privacy': given the huge amount of informatics resources for big componanies and the government, that concept is mostly dellusional, it doesn't exists anymore. Remember the movie 'Minority Report', when everyone was looking after Tom Cruise's character, and he had to switch an eye to delay being caught ? Well, it's a metaphor about the cost of privacy.
      Swapping cookies is just another counter-measure, that will get overriden nearly as soon after it's put into place (zero cost to you, means it's really cheap). Whatever little dark secrets you may have, it's delusional to pretend you won't get caught, sooner or later, and all of it will be seen by your parents, your wife, your sons. Welcome to a brave new world, baby !

    6. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Data mining practically assumes junk input. The more junk data you feed them the more accurate their profile will get.

      If you just block the cookie the most accurate profile they will be able to build is "cookie blocker".

    7. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      I must have your cookies, then, 'cause I only find porn I don't want!

    8. Re:We need counter intelligence tools by PuZZleDucK · · Score: 1

      Love the cookie swapping idea... mind if I steal it? I was thinking about bots to send random searches in the background all the time mingled with old searches and mutated versions. Also a real time one where I search for "nexus 7" or something and the bots send 10 additional random searches and just pipes the responces for those into null).

      --
      Can a person program a new solution to a problem? Why should anyone be able to stop such a thing? -Richard Stallman
  25. So, time for some rights online yet? by quixote9 · · Score: 1

    When is the legal system going to catch up? (I know. Stupid question.) Years ago I didn't sign up for Facebook because it was pretty clear there were zero protections for my rights to my data or my privacy. I'll wait till there's some laws so which reduce the chance of being screwed over, I thought. Won't take long, I thought.

    Well I'm still waiting. And when it comes up, I see more and more people who've convinced themselves this is just the modern world and there's nothing to be done about it. (Read: nothing they need to do about it.) Like epine's brilliant comment said in the Google Glass thread, it's the pragmatism of the damned.

    1. Re:So, time for some rights online yet? by Burz · · Score: 2

      No, not yet.

      The civil rights lawyer in the White House is busy handing our ass#s over to multinational corporations. You don't want the current political crowd to engage such topics, because what you're likely to get are 'deals' that in no way help the odds of 99% of the population.

      The sad truth is that the public has to get choosier about it leaders before we can act on such issues.

  26. Tell me why I should care by drrilll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am probably the lone wolf (in particular on slashdot) when it comes to being apathetic towards this sort of thing, but I don't see the point in being alarmist without documenting something specific. Near as I can tell it is a sophisticated way to to online advertising, not profiling for the KGB. This whole "tracking is Orwellian" thing, well please, what specifically are they doing with this information that is Orwellian? If they are tracking me for advertising purposes (which they most certainly are) what could possibly be more pedestrian and less alarming than that?. All it means is that there are occasionally ads that I care about (though still remarkably few at that).

    And yes, there is potential to do something evil, but potential is not the same as doing. If it was we would all be in jail.

    1. Re:Tell me why I should care by turkeydance · · Score: 1

      POtential is the new PROfiling. care because your online friend is Your Profile.

    2. Re:Tell me why I should care by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Even if it is just personalized ads now it might not stay that way. Imagine your health insurance being more expensive because you're regularly buying alcoholics (of course they won't tell you that, they'll just tell you that you are in a higher risk group, if they even tell you as much). Or even worse, you have to pay more because you are living in a neighbourhood where people on average buy more alcoholics. Maybe you'll also get higher credit interest rates at your bank. Without explanation, of course.

      The point is that you may not actually notice it. The bank will not tell you "oh, you live in an area with above-average alcohol consumption, so your interest rate is higher." It will rather tell you "we have analysed your situation and this is the interest rate we consider appropriate." Without indicating that "your situation" does not only include your financial situation and credit record, but also the your buying habits and that of of your neighbourhood.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm always surprised how humans accept something like that:
      "its ok to be tracked because its not used for stuff that is too evil".
      That reasoning is, sorry to be blunt, stupid.

      Part 1: Gather all data, have all mechanisms in place.
      Part 2: Use said data and mechanism against the people.

      It's always the same. Everywhere, every time. You really think that data will be FOREVER used for targeted advertising only? Are you out of your mind?
      It will be used to further separate the rich&powerful from the weak&poor. When the classes separate will be too great (ie 2% super rich and powerful vs 98% of weak&poor and very little middle ground), people will care and revolt. History all over again. We don't seem to learn.

    4. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in other words, you have no specifics but only unfounded bullshit.

    5. Re:Tell me why I should care by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      Alarmist?

      Take your average person. Let's choose a female person. This female person knows that people are looking at her, every day. In fact, most females go to great lengths to appear to people as they WISH to appear. Tons of money are spent on wardrobe, makeup, hair, beauty aids, so that she DOES appear as she wishes to appear. In short - the lady likes to be looked at, and goes to great lengths to ensure that she is pleasing to the looker.

      Does that mean that she wants peeping toms looking in through her living room windows? Oh - that may not be to bad. She is clothed in the living room, and usually interacting with other people anyway.

      How about her bedroom, or the bathroom?

      Doesn't much matter how social a person you are - that goes beyond creepy. That goes beyond simple distaste. Yet, corporations are tracking you ALL THE TIME. Yes, they are in your bathroom. They are in your bedroom. People who make no attempt to block tracking at all, using credit cards for all purchases, are telling corporations every time they wipe their nether regions. What kind of soaps they prefer. Whether they use talc, and how much. Whether you're sexually active, and whether you're trying to prevent pregnancy.

      The corporations can learn of your (underage or not) daughter's pregnancy before YOU know about it!

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    6. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, you've made the point that your purchasing data is much more sensitive than which websites you visit. Guess what, they are already selling this data and have been for decades.

    7. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, potential is not the same thing as doing, but the larger the entity that has the potential the more difficult it gets to get it under control once it starts doing, and the more important it is to put controls in place ahead of time.

      Putting an individual into prison when they start stealing stuff is relatively easy, so reaction is perfectly fine.

      Replacing a dictatorship with a democracy when they decide to start killing some class of citizens usually costs at least a few thousand lives and a decade or two of fear for a substantial part of the population, so it's a damn good idea to not allow for the dictatorship to form in the first place. And dictators usually don't get themselves elected with the promise of terrifying the population - they offer a convenient solution for some problem. And some stay benign. But some later make use of the potential that noone can control anymore.

      Also mind you that we do actually prepare for putting people in jail. The jails are already in place, and everyone knows they are - in part in order to deter people from trying anything that could land them there.

    8. Re:Tell me why I should care by Suggestive+Language · · Score: 1

      This.

      Power attracts people or entities who want to abuse that power and use it to exploit other people for their own benefit. Always.

      Information of *any* kind is power, and large amounts of correlated and personalized information is *immense* power for any person or entity who has access to it.

      --
      I got no problem voting with my feet.
    9. Re:Tell me why I should care by bunbuntheminilop · · Score: 1

      Insurance companies already do this. I pay a low premium on my car insurance because I live in a small country town. When we lived in the city, we paid a higher premium. This was many years ago, and I guess it's been standards for many years prior.

    10. Re:Tell me why I should care by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

      The problem is that profiling can easily lead to wrong conclusions, and this in turn might easily turn into a problem. The main reason is incomplete information.

      Let's try a witty example. Let's say you have a cute doggy and while you're out giving him a walk you meet a really cute girl and she really adores your cute doggy, you start talking and eventually she agrees to go out with you, and it seems she'll later even come over to spend the night with you. You just hope your pooch isn't getting jealous.

      So you go into a store and buy doggy treats and condoms with your credit card...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Imagine your health insurance being more expensive because you're regularly buying alcoholics

      This reminded me of an ancient quote from bash.org:

      [M3rlin-] what is the legal age to buy alcoholic in england ?
      [p5Ds13a06] you cant buy alcoholics
      [p5Ds13a06] but if you wink the right way, some of them will follow you home for free

    12. Re:Tell me why I should care by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Or how about this: Ponder what might happen after you meet a woman who has a kid and you go buy candy and condoms with that CC...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, murders people around the world without due process based on their profile. Is that Orwellian enough for you?

    14. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer to that is not to restrict the technology, but to impose a transparency obligation on the service provider.

      Press for a law that requires banks and insurers to show their working in those cases, to the extent that when you ask them "Why did my premiums rise?", they're forced to give you a substantive answer.

      I think the banks/interest rates question may be moot anyway, since banks (where I come from, at least) are required to publish their interest rates up front, and don't have the option to change them unilaterally on a customer-by-customer basis. But maybe that's not true for you, I don't know.

      That sort of law isn't rocket science, and it would generate a lot of populist support for the politicians who support it.

    15. Re:Tell me why I should care by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      The tracking isn't the problem, it's the lack of transparency and legal vacuum that is.

    16. Re:Tell me why I should care by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      You can buy alcoholics now? Hmmm..

      1. Hang around downtown at night?
      2. ???
      3. EBay and profit!!!

    17. Re:Tell me why I should care by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Because of what precisely insurance is, they -SHOULD- be charging you higher premiums when you're in a higher risk group. That's how insurance works. Being a means of sharing costs by sharings risks, they effectively do need to know that you're drinking your liver to death, or smoking 10 packs a day, or committing suicide via Big MacGulp. If you're more likely to get sick and need care, and thus use more of the shared funds, then you logically should be contributing more to the shared pool. That's the price of playing that particular game (and now you no longer get a choice about it).

      Now I'll agree about *some* inferrences because of your neighbors or location being dumb (some make sense, such as not leaving your house across the street from Fukishima, or a white guy living in Harlem).

      Did you know it used to be impossible for military personel to even get health or life insurance? That, afterall, is how USAA came to be.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    18. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow what a fucked up understanding of why women spend time on their appearance.
      So, SO not right. Artefactual communication is a much stronger component of women's clothing and makeup choices than "liking to be looked at." This is especially true when there are very negative social consequences for not falling within appearance norms. Sometimes I wear makeup just to get through the day with people listening to me, which they sometimes won't if I am bare faced.

      Yes corporate tracking is an issue, but damn, don't rely on bare faced sexism to try and make a point.

    19. Re:Tell me why I should care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have been Target-ed!

  27. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    And your credit card companies have a full psychological profile of you anyways.

    Speak about yourself. My credit card company has a very incomplete picture about me. It knows some of my travels, but that's mostly it. It doesn't know what I bought at the groceries (or where I buy). It doesn't know if I've been to a pharmacy last year, and if so, how often. It doesn't know which books I read, or if I read books at all. It doesn't know which clothes I wear. It doesn't even know about the computer I'm typing this comment on.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  28. I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have already written off true anonymity (years ago).

    When I am in public, at work, or with friends and family, I am constrained to behave myself. There may be different rules in different contexts, but there are always rules. Some written, some not.

    The Internet gave an illusion of a "rule free" context, and look what happened.

    That vacation is over. Time to behave like a grown-up.

    --

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

    -H. L. Mencken

    1. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > The Internet gave an illusion of a "rule free" context, and look what happened.

      Yes, look what happened. It became the most important thing to happen to human communication since the printing press. It allowed people in repressive regimes to talk without their government's permission. It allowed a farmer in Arkansas to talk to a teacher in Tibet.

      But hey, let's give up the open nature of the thing because it offends your sensibilities that people might be better of free than monitored by big brother 24/7.

    2. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To attempt backing you up.

      The illusion is that rule of law makes us better apes.

      The internet proved this is not really true. Most people are good enough, even the bad ones, to not need constant babysitting. And that the rule of law is often used to keep people subservient rather then safe.

    3. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      <sigh /> /b/ happened. That kind of stuff happened LONG before 4chan. Remember the Good Old Days? Before The September That Never Ended?

      Remember alt.tastless? Remember all those really highbrow BBSes? THSTNE was the best thing that ever happened to the Internets, despite the (to this day) wailing of the oldtimers. There is no way that teacher could talk to that farmer without all those AOHell n00bs looking for pr0n on alt.binaries

      Go ahead and give up on whatever you want. I take full advantage of the open nature of things, like sidewalks and crosswalks. Just because there is an 8-lane highway in between, doesn't mean that I should walk in it.

      I really don't want some of the scumbags that let their ids puke all over the interwebs to be dictating any policy. They just fuel the watchers anyway.

      There's always been a tradeoff between security, peace and prosperity. It is always about balance, a word that a lot of folks these days seem to need defined for them. I don't want all of anything, but I need some of everything. We all do.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    4. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by maxwell+demon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      First, what you consider as misbehaving may not be the same as what the government considers as misbehaving. Think dissidents, who certainly are seen as misbehaving by their respective governments.

      Second, even if you didn't explicitly say it, your comment shows that you are one of those who think "if you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide." Well, I'm not going to mention the obvious counterexample, as I don't want to Godwin this thread.

      And no, privacy is not about a rule-free context. There are things you don't want others to know even if they are not illegal, nor immoral.

      Also note that privacy and anonymity are not synonymous. For example, if a policeman for some reason would ask me to identify myself, it would certainly end my anonymity relative to him, but not necessarily my privacy. On the other hand, if the police would be listening to my phone calls, I certainly wouldn't have any privacy on my phone, and that would be true even if for some reason the police wouldn't know whose phone they are listening to (for example, someone mistyped the phone number when initiating the wiretapping).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    5. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      You are 100% correct. There's nothing there I'd disagree with.

      However, lots and lots and LOTS of folks feel that "privacy" == "let my ID come out to PLAY!"

      Humans don't seem able to behave without boundaries and rules.

      In any case, alea jacta est. For a LONG time, internet trolls and really sociopathic folks have been using the same tools that we are screeching about in the hands of governments to do truly despicable things.

      Exhibit A

      It's only when folks who can track them down and punish them get the tools that the caterwauling starts.

      Here's an interesting book (How To Disappear). It tells how skip tracers work. They use a lot of old-school techniques, and have been using these same techniques long before the Interwebs.

      True anonymity has always been a myth. People who rebel; either legitimately or not, always take a risk. The old Internet fostered a myth of "risk free rebellion."

      Like unicorns and high sidhe, risk-free rebellion doesn't exist. If you truly believe in what you are doing, you will find a way to fight. It is a lot more difficult, these days, but, as the Al Queda folks in Yemen (who, unfortunately, truly believe in what they are doing) are showing, good old human ingenuity still tends to come out on top.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    6. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You know, I just love it when people tell others to behave like grown ups because it's usually the person doing the telling who acts like an infant.

      The Internet, back in the "rule free" days, was also pretty harmless. It didn't conduct commerce. There weren't connections to real world control systems. Nobody used their real names anywhere. If there was tasteless and offensive stuff, and there was (and still is) you didn't have to look at it. Getting on the Internet required actual intention to do so and some amount of money.

      Enter the alleged "grown ups". The corporations. The business people. The ones who didn't actually invent the Internet and who have contributed little to it except strife. The ones who strolled in and started with insecure e-Commerce and e-everything and who, when they had their heads handed to them by people who actually knew what a house of cards most of their insecure crap was, ran to the government to get them to prosecute the "evil hackers" instead of actually fixing their crap. The ones who did nothing to learn about the environment they put themselves in and then complain the loudest when things don't go exactly their way. The ones who want to track everything everybody does, and who want to keep that secret and quiet because exposing it to the light of day also brings to light that most people don't really like it when they do that.

      In other words, these "grown ups" are the ones who acted like 2 year olds, saw something shiny, and yelled "Mine! Mine!" and try to possess everything wtihout compensation or even permission.

      True "grown ups" know about risks and rewards. They know when it's OK to let loose and when it's not OK. They find or provide safe outlets for things like that because true grown ups know that it is human nature to want to be uncontrolled some of the time. Having had such an outlet and then having it first invaded by clueless idiots and then by greedy profiteers, it is only logical that some people might take offense and take action.

      The thing is, the Internet could not be invented today. It came into being precisely BECAUSE there was no commerce, no marketers, no corporate presence in any real sense. There is proof of this. The proof is that every corporate attempt to invent something like the Internet has failed, so they try to take over what they could not invent. Regarding the unfortunate number of people who believe that the Internet is Facebook, Twitter, and Google, they have had some success. Even those services, though, keep the tracking and the marketing and the spying as low key as they can because they know that even the dumbest of humans somehow finds it offensive to be recorded all the time.

      So, now, go grow up please.

    7. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So basically, all LOLcats, all the time! That's my policy generally..

    8. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grown ups don't need rules in order to do the right thing.

    9. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      I guess, using inductive reasoning, that means that there ain't no such thing as "grown ups."

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    10. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      <img src="blech.png" alt="child sticking tounge out" />

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    11. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You really need a babysitter to behave like a grownup? Odd. I can do that by myself. Even could back in the days when nobody bothered to track me.

      I always thought part of behaving like a grownup is that you don't need a chaperon to watch that you behave yourself.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The problem is that our nice, if gritty, hodgepodge byways are being paved over and turned into toll lanes.

      You might not have noticed it, but it's getting kinda hard these days to find an ISP with a sensible usenet server.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The old Internet fostered a myth of "risk free rebellion."

      It's not "risk free," but what you can do is make it damn near impossible for anyone to find you, and it's not really that difficult, either.

    14. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      I haven't even seen an unambiguous definition presented here.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    15. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      One would think that, yes?

      Sadly, as is proven, every single day, lots of chronologically-advanced folks are unable to behave in a socially-responsible manner without restrictions.

      In my experience, grown-ups have rules; they just have an internal barometer and police themselves. That clearly does not happen with a great many folks on the Internet. Reading some of the sites, articles and comments folks have, believing that they will never be called to task on their words, is really pretty depressing. What is even more alarming, is realizing that a lot of these folks have children and families.

      Go ahead and think whatever you like. I happen to have some very direct experience in just this kind of thing. I'm not going to bother explaining it (in any case, if I have to, you wouldn't understand). I am quite aware of EXACTLY how bad people can get, and also how very good people can get. I've seen stuff, and met folks, that would freeze your blood. I'm not talking about combat experience, either. I know just what it is to live in a nation with no rules.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    16. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iOS suits you.

    17. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      I KEES YOU, my AC "friend"!

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    18. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah, these poor women are destroyed forever because someone took videos of them being naked. Plus, you could bring up "Child Porn" as another example why the Security Industrial Complex should receive massive amounts of money, crypto be outlawed and so on.

      Man, you are full of shit. Exactly nobody was hurt except the feelings of these slimy surveillance salesmen and pervert government snoopers. You want to log all my traffic because these dumb cunts run Windows with a camera and microphone ? Sure as hell that makes sense. Much more than that they put black tape over their fucking camera. Or use Linux.

      They are supposed to snoop on the 1% criminals on a case-by-case basis instead of doing a fishing expedition on the 99% who are law-abiding. If the crims/terrz use crypto, they can break into their houses and install snooping/keylogging gadgets. And then FUCK OFF AND LEAVE PEOPLE LIKE ME ALONE, YOU SCUMBAG.

    19. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, these poor women are destroyed forever because someone took videos of them being naked. Plus, you could bring up "Child Porn" as another example why the Security Industrial Complex should receive massive amounts of money, crypto be outlawed and so on.

      Man, you are full of shit. Exactly nobody was hurt except the feelings of these slimy surveillance salesmen and pervert government snoopers. You want to log all my traffic because these dumb cunts run Windows with a camera and microphone ? Sure as hell that makes sense. Much more than that they put black tape over their fucking camera. Or use Linux.

      They are supposed to snoop on the 1% criminals on a case-by-case basis instead of doing a fishing expedition on the 99% who are law-abiding. If the crims/terrz use crypto, they can break into their houses and install snooping/keylogging gadgets. And then FUCK OFF AND LEAVE PEOPLE LIKE ME ALONE, YOU SCUMBAG.

      case->rest();

      Thanks, chum (in the "fishing" sense).

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    20. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that Internet Rebellions mean zilch. Rebellions occur in meatspace, not information space.

    21. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      After poking around a bit, I realized that I'm actually responding to crazy.

      I have a personal rule not to do that. It's like hitting a sick kitten that's too weak to make it to the catbox. Not nice.

      Sorry about that. I think I'll just ignore ACs. That will help a bit.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    22. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Having some constraint is not necessarily a bad thing. On the contrary!

      But this is not what's at stake here.

    23. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      Yup.

      I agree with Bruce.

      A lot of...rather reactionary...folks immediately jumped to the thought that I am advocating suppression and censorship. The responses have been...illuminating.

      All I said, was that I agree with him, and always act as if my Internet interactions (and many IRL interactions) are always in public, and behave here, the way that I would behave on a street or at the office.

      It has nothing whatsoever with advocating the surveillance state. It is merely accepting it as a fact of life, like stoplight cameras and TSA perv-scanners. Once a fact of life has been accepted, then we can adjust our lives around it.

      It's really a bit heartbreaking to see so many folks that should know better, acting out in such pithy ways; as if they cannot be tracked and identified (I was actually able to do that with one of the ACs in this discussion, and there was no need for anything other than a bit of simple correlation).

      "THEY" know who you are, and what you did last summer. "THEY" know that you pull your pickle to vid clips of Granny and Fido. Sorry. I don't think it's right, and I'd rather that not be the case (you think YOUR life is bad, think about Granny -another example of collateral damage from this culture).

      The discussions here went south pretty quickly. There's a great deal of crazy around this topic.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    24. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That and egregious use of commas.

    25. Re:I Only Do Symbolic Anonymity by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      Looks, like, I, need, to, work, on, my, writing, skillz, then.

      Good thing I'm not a paid wordsmith.

      And to think this all started because of my bad writing. It was so murky, that folks couldn't even realize that I was simply agreeing with Mr. Schneier's article, and saying that I think that it's a good idea to behave in ALL my affairs, ESPECIALLY the ones that I think are anonymous.

      I regret the "grow up" comment. That elicited a negative reaction. I apologize.

      I have found, that whenever folks truly believe they will not be called to account for their words/actions, they tend to...devolve. Return to their hunter/gatherer roots.

      Sadly, we do this in a medium that has no "forget" switch.

      I have seen my own comments, from years ago, that I would have SWORN were anonymous, pulled up and presented to me.

      So, nowadays, I just try not to descend to the depths displayed in these comment threads.

      Sadly, SlashDot seems to have quickly degenerated into a mindless, ad hominem mosh pit (shows my age, eh?). Just like CNN commentards.

      I've been trying to do my part to be a good member here (I sort submissions and metamod every day, and try to use mod points wisely, including promoting comments that I disagree with, but deserve to be elevated, etc.).

      I have a feeling that I'll probably sign off here in a bit.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

  29. You're being watched by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But all this tracking allows Mr. Finch to send in Mr. Reese to protect you when your number comes up.

  30. Re:The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensem by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    ...transform and/or transcend the system"...

    The 'system' being biological instinct, 'desires of the flesh', as some religions put it. Presently everything that motivates us is subservient to that.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  31. The Job Creators by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    105 companies tracked his Internet use during one 36-hour period. ... This is ubiquitous surveillance

    We should have known the Internet was going to become a surveillance state the day we turned the whole thing over to corporate control.

    I'm trying to think...was there a lot of tracking and surveillance back before the Internet became the world's shopping mall? I remember using the Internet back then, and I don't recall a lot of trackers.

    Personally, I preferred the old non-commercial Internet. It was more fun. There was no Netflix or Amazon, but there was also nobody crawling up my ass. I would trade Facebook for Usenet in a hot second.

    But I don't despair. I'm confident that people will innovate for privacy again.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:The Job Creators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > We should have known the Internet was going to become a surveillance state the day we turned the whole thing over to corporate control.

      We did, and we shouted it from the rooftops, but nobody cared.

      And yes, I agree, the internet was better before the web came along (along with legions of clueless people who don't even know the difference).

    2. Re:The Job Creators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are absolutely right, industry and the government and industry innovate only when they have to and then at a galacial pace, the internet provides a 1000 ways of getting in font of them, each of which they have to crack, one by one, and they do not have the energy or seriousness to do it right, since it it is a NP complete meta problem, LOL, they will still be trying to get a grip in 3013!

      MFG, omb

    3. Re:The Job Creators by Suggestive+Language · · Score: 2

      It's long past time to reclaim parts of the internet for public use. I propose a movement where various internet service providers (across the stack) pledge or contractually bind themselves to:

      - Never assist third parties in tracking users or acquiring user information. This means no XSS, web bugs, cookies, or other trade of user tracking data
      - Destroy personally identifying information on a regular basis
      - Never allow the government to acquire or seize information without a public warrant
      - Never sell-out to entities that break any of the above rules

      --
      I got no problem voting with my feet.
    4. Re:The Job Creators by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Think again. People use loyalty cards because they can shave a few cents from their purchases this way. They don't care about privacy.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    5. Re:The Job Creators by tqk · · Score: 1

      Personally, I preferred the old non-commercial Internet. It was more fun. There was no Netflix or Amazon, but there was also nobody crawling up my ass. I would trade Facebook for Usenet in a hot second.

      I take it you're unaware that the old non-commercial Internet still exists? I can still read comp.risks in slrn (nntp.aioe.org), IRC in irssi (irc.freenode.net) still works fine, you don't actually need to use Firefox/Opera/Safari/IE to browse the web when lynx/w3m/... work in some ways better than their counterparts, and with IXQuick you don't need to Google or Bing. Gopher and Veronica may be extinct, but a lot of the rest of the old is still ticking over quite healthily and even improving.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    6. Re:The Job Creators by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I take it you're unaware that the old non-commercial Internet still exists?

      It's still running over AT&T and Comcast to get here.

      The old internet won't be back until there is some totally separate system that does not depend on the telecoms.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:The Job Creators by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Back then there also wasnt enough power and speed behind the internet to allow it to do anything it does today, let alone the myriad tracking techniques.
      when it took multiple seconds just to transfer and load a text only page, there was no room to also be sending back to the server information about your history; it would have eaten up far too much bandwidth.

      now, all that stuff happens in the blink of an eye...and doesnt even interupt the latest Netflix instant play.

      you say there werent a lot of trackers back then. you're right. the internet couldnt support them. but it also wasnt anywhere near what it is today either.

      the "grown up" analogy is very apt. As a kid, you know very little of the world around you. You jsut want to go outside and play, explore, whatever. The thought of losing a job and not being able to eat never even occurs to you. Those realities dont come til later. As a grownup, you know about bills, being able to afford food/medical/whatever, loss, etc etc.

      The loss of innocence is a real thing, and it's occuring to the internet. Trying to go back to the gold old days is like wanting to go back to being a kid who knows nothing about war, loss, stress, etc. The best we can do is learn how to cope with the realities, adapt to them, and not let them overwhelm us.

      We want free content on the internet? We want good prices? That means advertisers. And that means tracking. Companies dont want to waste time serving you ads that wont be effective, or showcasing you a sale you wont use. Part of being a good salesmen is reading your customer, and figuring out what else you can get him to buy. And on the internet, that reading is done by tracking. This is the internet as it exists today, and there is no way it would have ever happened any differently. If it had, it wouldnt be the internet we have today:
      -there would be no Facebook; people would still chat over the back fence
      -no Google; people would be buying Brittanica still instead
      -no movies/content on demand; Blockbuster wouldnt be bankrupt
      -no instant information an anything anywhere; people would still be going to libraries for knowledge/research
      -no instant dissemination of news/events; people would still be using wire services and newspapers to know about events,
      -no buying of some obscure/custom part from across the world quickly and easily (wouldnt even know they exist!); be limited to who you could find out about via word of mouth or the research open to you (no hundreds of google results)

      And as a result, no one would be using it. It would still be a very relatively small, cloistered group of people talking in an echo chamber. Each of the things the internet allows us to do, we could already do before. The internet just makes it far, FAR easier. A vastly bigger network of points of contacts for the gathering/dissemination of information.

      This is the internet as it exists today. The good, the bad, and the ugly.
      And it could never have gotten to where it is today, in any other way.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    8. Re:The Job Creators by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Translation: get off my lawn! Damn kids.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    9. Re:The Job Creators by SLot · · Score: 1

      doesn't make it less correct.

  32. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Great, now the ads on the sites you visit are going to show you ads for motherboards and CPU upgrades that you want, instead of pink mascara that you don't want.

    If they knew what I actually wanted, instead of feeding me more about something I already bought, that might be cool.

    Anyhow, yes, we are being tracked, and it is inherent in the nature of the network. The Internet is not a place for Libertarian ideals. The key is of course, to avoid doing illegal activities on the internet. Most anything that will get you busted in the outside world will result in the same thing here.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  33. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Awesome, now website have to rely on slightly less effective tracking via IP or habits (like mouse movement patterns if you leave Javascript enabled). And you still have to buy everything in cash, not have a cell phone (or leave it off), oh, and never let any camera (CCTV or personal phone camera uploading to G+/Facebook) see you; no, not just your face, there's gait tracking to worry about, too. I do try to avoid making tracking my online actions too easy (run Ghostery, clear cookies regularly, etc.), but I have no illusions that it's very likely to actually protect my privacy.

  34. september by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This would not have happened before the Eternal September. People knew enough to steer the internet away from this fate.

    After the legions of clueless descended on the net, it was game over.

  35. Another part of the solution can be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Another part of the solution is to put sand in the cogs of the machine by overfeeding the system with false and exagurate information.
    Make software that disturb the patterns, data on itself is not that much interesting even when analized by machines, they only get meaning when people do cultural patern matching.

  36. Troll by Spiked_Three · · Score: 1

    When I said that I got modded a troll.

    When schnieder says it, it is brilliant :|

    --
    slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
    1. Re:Troll by real-modo · · Score: 1

      You're in good company. Why The Lucky Stiff and Mark Pilgrim got a lot of stick for their response to this problem.

      Belatedly, the rest of us realise what they saw two years ago.

    2. Re:Troll by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Bruce Schneier is pretty good with his PR. It's kind of a letdown what he has been doing lately, he really did some pretty awesome stuff earlier, but recently he's been peddling mostly a lot of "you don't say..." tidbits.

      Well, look at the bright side. At least this way these (to us) rather obvious things finally get some attention with the masses.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  37. ISPs are the ones we should be worried about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless you are using SSL-everywhere, your ISP can track *everything* you do. In fact the gov. is trying to make it mandatory to have ISPs keep a 6 month record of everything that you do on the web.

  38. Yin/Yang by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There certainly is a lot of truth to your point. To broaden it out a bit, here is something I wrote years ago:
    http://www.pdfernhout.net/a-rant-on-financial-obesity-and-Project-Virgle.html
    " ... I agree with the sentiment of the Einstein quote [That we should approach the universe with compassion], but that sentiment itself is only part of a larger difficult-to-easily-resolve situation. It become more the Yin/Yang or Meshwork/Hierarchy situation I see when I look out my home office window into a forest. On the surface it is a lovely scene of trees as part of a forest. Still, I try to see *both* the peaceful majesty of the trees and how these large trees are brutally shading out of existence saplings which are would-be competitors (even shading out their own children). Yet, even as big trees shade out some of their own children, they also put massive resources into creating a next generation, one of which will indeed likely someday replace them when they fall. I try to remember there is both an unseen silent chemical war going on out there where plants produce defense compounds they secrete in the soil to inhibit the growth of other plant species (or insects or fungi) as a vile act of territoriality and often expansionism, and yet also the result is a good spacing of biomass to near optimally convert sunlight to living matter and resist and recover from wind and ice damage. I try to recall that there is the most brutal of competition between species of plants and animals and fungi and so on over water, nutrients (including from eating other creatures), sunlight, and space, while at the same time each bacterial colony or multicellular organism (like a large Pine tree) is a marvel of cooperation towards some implicitly shared purpose. I see the awesome result of both simplicity and complexity in the organizational structure of all these organisms and their DNA, RNA, and so on, adapted so well in most cases to the current state of such a complex web of being. Yet I can only guess the tiniest fraction of what suffering that selective shaping through variation and selection must have entailed for untold numbers of creatures over billions of years. To be truthful, I can actually *really* see none of that right now as it is dark outside this early near Winter Solstice time (and an icy rain is falling) beyond perhaps a silhouette outline, so I must remember and imagine it, perhaps as Einstein suggests as an "optical delusion of [my] consciousness". :-)
        So much for "world peace" when even the tranquil seeming forests have so much Yin-Yang complexity going on within and around the trees. :-) The best I feel we can hope for is balance (like Ursula K. Le Guin's writings):
            http://www.ursulakleguin.com/
    or maybe, transcendence to some form of universe certainly way beyond our present understanding; example, with its own flaws:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Metamorphosis_of_Prime_Intellect
    But still, no matter what examples the universes sets before us, or in what proportion, as *ethical* and *spiritual* beings, we humans can choose a different way, and at least approximate world peace among ourselves as best we can. Something I learned from an old and wise biologist (Larry Slobodkin) who studied both philosophy and nature."

    So, we can make choices, as sentient creatures, about how we want to live. The current laws of physics may constrain those choices, but we can still make choices as individuals and collectives. How do we want to live? How can we shape our rules, norms, prices, and architecture to influence that behavior? (Lawrence Lessig's point in "Code 2.0").

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  39. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    And your credit card companies have a full psychological profile of you anyways.

    Speak about yourself. My credit card company has a very incomplete picture about me. It knows some of my travels, but that's mostly it. It doesn't know what I bought at the groceries (or where I buy). It doesn't know if I've been to a pharmacy last year, and if so, how often. It doesn't know which books I read, or if I read books at all. It doesn't know which clothes I wear. It doesn't even know about the computer I'm typing this comment on.

    Women must flock to you to give you babies!

    All joking aside, My credit card company "knows" that I stop at McDonald's for breakfast a few times a week, Denny's about oncenevery three weeks, and Saturday mornings have a club meeting at the local Eat n' Park. Other times at a local diner. I buy gasoline with a different card that gives me a 5 cent discount, at a Convennience store in two different nearby cities that give a 3 cent discount. They also know if they were really interested was that I like highly hopped beer, and really hot chicken wings. I use EBay to buy electronic goodies, and vacation in Cape May, New Jersey. I also do surf fishing and ride a motorcycle. They can probably tell how long my Driveway is and how long my sidewalks are by comparing the number of ice storms in my area and comparing that to how much de-icing salt I buy

    All findable by my credit card purchases. I suspect that they are a lot more interested in that I pay my card off every month.

    But the issue is that so fucking what - I don't care. I'll tell people in a minute about all this stuff. I suppose that people can be shocked about all this, but it only makes sense that it can happen. Wired phones are of course trackable. Cell phones are inherently trackable just by the nature of the service. If you have a GPS that gets traffic updates, it is trackable, though with more difficulty. It is inherent in the process, so the way out of it is to not participate. As far as I am concerend, the "tracking" is just as likely to exonerate me as convict me - though I'm generally a straight arrow type. If I was a suspect in a crime I didn't commit, that Gas station or restaurant receipt might just help with an alibi. So it is a null issue. So I'm not quite ready to move to a compound in Idaho and sleep with a loaded .45 under my pillow quite yet.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  40. Inevitable and Unproblematic by logicnazi · · Score: 1

    It's not just the internet that is a surveillance state. It is everything, or at least soon will be.

    Despite what people think the problem is not tracking, cookies and the like. They just make the loss of your `privacy' easier but it was inevitable. The real problem is intelligent algorithms that are able to mine data and reach conclusions about you. Even if every single tracking product online was eliminated companies would easily find a way to correlate your activity. Measure the time between mouseclicks or your typing patterns and note the IP it is from. Now take that information and correlate it with information from other companies.

    The existence of gait-tracking algorithms is a perfect example of what is going on. It's not that we are losing privacy, i.e., information that we literally kept private. Rather, it is that information we unworriedly disclose in public (be it our gait or the time at which we type in various characters to a website) turns out to provide far more information to a sufficiently intelligent algorithm than we ever expected. Soon enough our walks and choices in the physical world will be tracked just as thoroughly.

    The genie can't be put back in the bottle. Are choices are to either eliminate free speech and regulate the ability of individuals to freely share information they observe in public or on their websites, pretend the problem doesn't exist by banning anyone from revealing the results of their intelligent data mining relegating this information to powerful corporations and governments or accepting the facts and modifying society to live with this problem. Societies with limited space have done this for hundreds of years and they grow to be tolerant of the little idiosyncrasies they inevitably see in their neighbor's lives.

    --

    If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:

    1. Re:Inevitable and Unproblematic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the time they actually have this kind of JS shit deployed, Firefox community will quickly come up with an effective countermeasure. Also, I do think you massively overestimate what machines can do these days. Google is probably at the front of current AI and their performance is more often than not quite crappy. Even if they had a football field full of computers simulating a brain (surely that will give an American General an ejaculation when he sees the proposal PPT), how will that thing be more capable than a human brain ? It sits right there and can't move. I CAN move, and I can do some massive subversive stuff because I have eyes, hands and feet. Machines are shit primitive compared to humans, and not just on the brain front.

  41. What's my name? by DL117 · · Score: 1

    If the internet is a surveillance state, please reply to this post with my full real name, and all aliases.

    1. Re:What's my name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:What's my name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I worked for Respect My Privacy, LLC., I would be quite happy to oblige.

    3. Re:What's my name? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Who cares about petty things like your name or your address? You think you're this important?

      That's the last part to dig out about you, after the profiling is done and there's a need for that information.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  42. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by murdocj · · Score: 1

    I use my shopper id at my grocery store to get a small discount. So the store knows how much milk, flour, etc that I buy. I'm not seeing an issue there.

    To take it a step further, I used to have a regular Friday night out at a particular bar. The waitress got to know me and bring me my favorite drink shortly after I walked in. Not a problem.

  43. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

    How about social engineering, in it's older form. Supposedly, back in the late 1800's or early 1900's, corporations wanted to sell more breakfast cereal. Prior to that time, people typically ate meat, beans, and eggs for breakfast. Maybe fried corn cakes or hot cakes. Corporations wanted to sell cereal. So they advertised all the benefits of cereal, especially the vitamin content, blah blah blah.

    And, corporations were successful in selling the American public on breakfast cereal.

    The social engineering hasn't ended of course. We simply accept it as normal that corporations spend fortunes everyday, indoctrinating kids that they should be eating whichever brand and style of cereal the commercials tell them to eat.

    So - what's next on the agenda? And, what happens to people who resist such engineering? Do we become some kind of outcast? Outlaws? Outright criminals, because we choose not to be manipulated?

    You need to look at the best case scenario, as well as the worst case scenario, and try to figure out what might happen as compared to what will happen.

    Tracking. Why should I permit people to track my actions, so that they can better indoctrinate me? I don't WANT to be brainwashed, thank you very much.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  44. Re:The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must have fucked up on your way to reddit. Please stay over there.

  45. Don't worry.. the problem is self-limiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Oppression-based societies fail because of the nature, staffing, growth and evolution of organisations which implement those policies. These issues (or systemic defects) are fundamentally uncorrectable because they are part and parcel of the structure, functioning and evolution of any hierarchical organisation. I should add that human attitudes and tendencies also contribute to the trajectory, stages and end results of societal failure in oppression-based societies."

    http://dissention.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/what-rooshv-does-not-understand-about-human-organizations/

  46. Advertising built a panopticon. by gallondr00nk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It was inevitable I suppose. The fuck-knows-how-many dollars spent on advertising and marketing and consumer focus were going to be spent somewhere. As a result, the last few years people have been flocking to build sites whose entire business model was developed in order to provide data and information in exchange for it.

    Inevitably, there is a push for more information. What your real name is. Your DOB. Where you work or live. What your favourite place to eat is. What you like. Even where you are at any moment.

    (It follows that government either already is or will be a customer.)

    I do wonder if there is a speculative bubble forming around the market for that particular business model. How much of what is gathered can actually be used? How much is it actually worth?

    I suspect that is the escape. If the bubble bursts and the data isn't profitable enough then the intrusion should subside dramatically.

    1. Re:Advertising built a panopticon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. It is getting cheaper all the time. Soon you will be able to store the Creep Data of an entire city on something the size of a thumb drive. They will constantly develop new algorithms to extract some more intelligence from the Creep Data, which they can somehow sell. If you grow to become a leader, CIA will be interested in anything they can use against you. Maybe you had a traumatic email exchange at age 17, which they can use to work on you at age 47.

  47. Collusion report on the the Guardian by dgharmon · · Score: 1

    "One reporter used a tool called Collusion to track who was tracking him; 105 companies tracked his Internet use during one 36-hour period"

    I ran it on the Guardian, makes me wonder why a 'centre-left' newspaper spends so much effort in tracking what sites its readers visit online.

    Collusion report on the Guardian : ajax.googleapis.com, chartbeat.com, cloudfront.net, criteo.com, doubleclick.net, guim.co.uk, imrworldwide.com, optimizely.com, outbrain.com, quantserve.com, scorechartresearch.com, wunderloop.net

    --
    AccountKiller
  48. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Informative

    Some people think "free market capitalism" is a libertarian ideal. And a "free market" (as defined by economics, not the anti-government loons) requires significant government effort to maintain.

  49. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then enjoy your higher than average premiums. I'd rather pay cash and leave Allstate guessing.

  50. Something to consider by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

    While your methods for living off the grid are valid, in this day and age living in a way that you described
    will quickly put you at the top of a surveillance list. Ultimately putting you right back in the spotlight you're
    trying so hard to avoid :D

    Why ?

    Because only terrorists apparently have any need for privacy :D

    OMGHESPAYINGWITHCASH!!!! Call the FBI !!
    What do you mean you don't have a Facebook / Twitter account ?
    No cell phone you pinko-commie ?

    You . .you . . spawn of Ted Kaczynski . . . you

    *chuckle*

    1. Re:Something to consider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am sure the government likes underlings such as you. Factually, millions of illegal immigrants live in first-world countries. They do so by keeping a low profile and performing some servile work. Just tan you face, call yourself Juan and do some slave-job in a California vineyard and you will be perfectly hidden.

  51. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    You can ignore all the scholarly anarchocapitalists and call them "not economists" but that doesn't mean they're not real.

    Yes, the current methods of dispute resolution require a government, but that's begging the question.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  52. Butlerian jihad by robogun · · Score: 1

    I recall in Dune people ended up violently dumping computers, maybe he was onto something.

  53. They have power ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They only have power because you give them power. Take away their power by no longer playing the game.

    It is easier said than done

    The other day I was looking for browsing for some VST that can produce "water bowl" sounds and one of the product has that word "meditation"

    So I searched the word "mediation" and you know what comes next ?

    No matter which site I end up with the ads were all related to "meditation"

    I have similar set up as yours, btw ... it's their ability to "track" users who are online which is scary

    But of course, you are right in saying that if you do not play their game, they have no way to put interfere with our daily lives

  54. Easy Method by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not do a few searches a day for items that you have no interest in at all? Perhaps software could do it for you. Instead of a screen saver run a program that spends three minutes on a list of sites that would bore any sane person senseless. That sort of thing could put the thumb screws to data mining operations rather easily. It might also be highly useful in court as a defense in that you can prove that you use software that surfs sites you never see. There go a lot of porn convictions out the window.

    1. Re:Easy Method by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Actually a pretty good idea for a browser plug-in. Something that keeps hitting random pages and discards them instead of showing them, all done in the background while you do your regular surfing.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Easy Method by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Easy Method by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, I was thinking something beyond simple search engine poisoning. Like, say, if you open a page it automatically sends requests to similar pages, or even opens completely unrelated pages from time to time, with falsified referrer, to render tracking cookies useless.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  55. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    The proposed role of government for libertarians is almost solely dispute resolution, so I fail to see how your clarification is anything other than redundant.

  56. You are astroturf bot 5000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your full address is 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043. You are growing in tank 1322a. Your memories are implants, you didn't really have a mom or a dad, you are in fact programmed to deliver strawman arguments defending Stasi like monitoring and tracking.

    1. Re:You are astroturf bot 5000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was "Stasi almost as good as NSA", not "NSA almost as good as Stasi". The GDR was not leading edge on computers, but they tried really hard in the intel sector.

  57. As long as you don't show signs of waking up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So long as you don't fall outside the benign citizen spectrum, you'll be safe from over-zealous molestation by the authorities.

    That spectrum is getting tighter by the day. Your power to become powerful and self-aware, and to share those gifts has always been curtailed, is simply getting increasingly difficult.

    We're cattle, and so long as we herd in the general direction of the meat grinding portion of the corral, then you'll be allowed to pretend at personal freedom.

    Now please return to your TVs, eat your shitty food and get to bed. You have a long day ahead in the coal mines.

  58. And according to Ghostery... by Whatsmynickname · · Score: 1

    Google Analytics, DoubleClick, and Scorecard Research are tracking this web page. The irony meter just exploded!

    1. Re:And according to Ghostery... by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

      That's not "ironic", it's "what happened".

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  59. Fuck google, facebook, apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those you can choose to avoid. Unlike your ISP!

  60. Competition by dumky2 · · Score: 1

    No, the internet is not the surveillance state. Unlike the state it is based on voluntary arrangements. In particular this means that it is subject to competition, unlike government's monopoly on power. Neither Google, Apple or even ISPs (despite their collusion with municipal governments) can tax you or force you to use their product. You can even create your own network (physical or logical).

    Because of competition, I am confident that a reasonable trade-off will emerge in terms of features and costs. Competitive pressure will lead to experimentation and improvement. There are privacy-sensitive options available already, and other ones will develop where there is demand.

    That said, it is worrying how the actual state has been trying to turn this into its own surveillance tool. See latest 29C3 talks on government forcing telecoms to record traffic for the NSA and other agencies. But such use of power needs to be properly attributed, it is the fault of the state, not that of the internet. It is important to distinguish the cancer from the healthy organs.

    --
    These comments are mine; I do not speak for my employer.
  61. Don't you just love it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how right at the end of the article there's "follow cnn on facebook"...

  62. Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously? The longer you're alive, and exposed to society, you begin to realize that we're all basically the same. There's nothing to hide any more. Besides, if you're patient and wait, this whole tracking thing is going to implode on it's own. It's based on advertising, and it's a much bigger bubble than the Internet bubble or the mortgage bubble. It won't happen for a while, because there's still money to be made, but after the whole Green (environmental) bubble bursts, the web advertising bubble will follow.....because, be honest....when's the last time you ordered/bought anything based on a popup banner?

  63. There's something worse than no data by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's poisoned data. Since it has become virtually impossible to leave no trace and not be tracked, make sure you poison their data pool enough to make the data useless. It's a bit like buying condoms and dog food and making the analyst at your local store freak out.

    Also, you can use the data hunger of companies to your advantage. If you dig through the net by my real name, I seem to be rubbing shoulders with the greatest of the industry. Schneier is actually one of them. I have met him briefly, but we're nowhere near the seemingly constant exchange of ideas you'd think we have when you start data mining on me. When preparing for a job interview, rest assured people will start digging through facebook and google to find out what they can about you, and make sure that they find what they're supposed to find. Worked for me pretty well so far.

    As for the rest, like I said, make sure the data that can be gathered about you makes no sense. Disinformation is the name of the game, once it becomes impossible to tell truth from lie, the whole data mining effort goes to waste.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:There's something worse than no data by Burz · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Don't be naive.

      There are tried and true statistical methods that can filter out falsified data. It isn't just for multiple choice questionaires, you know.

      It is far better to curtail the amount of tracking that can reach you.

    2. Re:There's something worse than no data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that assumes he's bad at poisoning data (which isn't at all far fetched though). But just as there are mathematical methods for filtering out bad data there are mathematical ways of constructing bad data so that they will add maximal amount of noise to the results independent of possible filtering.

      Unfortunately, to do this you need a model that's not a total joke compared to the one you are trying to fool with.

    3. Re:There's something worse than no data by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      There is a reason why I bothered to study statistics...

      It's not trivial to randomize your data, that's a given. It's not as trivial as simply adding some random noise, that is easily filtered. What is important is that the false data is plausible. It's very useless to give myself a record of being an Olympic gold metal winner, an astronaut and an elite special agent. Not only because it is very easy to falsify, it's very unlikely to find those traits in a single person that is not globally known. Your lies have to fit your story. They have to fit into the rest of your life and most of all, falsifying them has to be nontrivial.

      Of course, trying to limit the information you hand out isn't a bad idea either, but I prefer a dual strategy.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  64. DARPA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The internet was invented by DARPA. . .

    Ya think?

  65. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Poorcku · · Score: 1

    I am not sure Libertarians would agree. I think strong government is to be desired. Big != strong.

    --
    I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
  66. SPAM away by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    You spammed your business, good for you. Now what does that have to do with surveillance?

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:SPAM away by mallyn · · Score: 1

      This has to do with surveillance because I know that I am indexed, spidered, cookied, and monitored by the various facebooks, twitters, googles, bings, and so on and that it benefits me to increase my visibility. More people are aware of my art without me having to spend $$$ on advertising.

      --
      Most Respectfully Yours Mark Allyn Bellingham, Washington
  67. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Burz · · Score: 2

    It goes well beyond any specific products. The selling of consumerism as a way of life is a real phenomenon that can be traced back to Edward Bernays and his work for the federal government. His work is chronicled in the BBC series "Century Of The Self".

  68. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Outstanding link. It explains so much. And, it kinda helps me to understand why I find marketing so distasteful. The rat bastards are manipulating me with every advertisement. I hate being manipulated . . .

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  69. German states illegalises like button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I kind of find that Germany is one of the few countries trying to ensure privacy. Ok, they not always go about it the right way, but still...
    http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20094866-93/facebooks-like-button-illegal-in-german-state/

  70. Poison the databases by amck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Add false data to the databases.

    Create false identities, not just anonymous ones. Don't allow facebook, etc. to interlink.
    Script this, add plugins for browsers to do this.
    In shops, use discount cards with cash, and swap the cards regularly with friends.

    Poisoning the databases, especially for "non-legal" transactions (i.e. don't lie when buying on the internet, but give as little
    away as possible, and don't use real identities where monetary transactions are not involved - don't commit fraud)
    means the existing data collected elsewhere is not trustworthy. It devalues the whole point of data harvesting and data mining,
    much better than hiding data alone.

    It also still allows the "correct" (non-evil) functioning of the system. Looking up my real name give my real details, when it matters,
    allowing the site to interact with me the way it was advertised to. Searching for all "X" in the data give 90% garbage, and so mining
    becomes pointless. Deal with customers properly.

    --
    Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist
    1. Re:Poison the databases by cryptizard · · Score: 2

      Yes, the average person totally wants to do all that bullshit all the time. The whole reason this privacy thing has gotten out of hand is because most people just do not care. They would rather have all their information known just so they don't have to type it in again.

  71. I've got that beat by hoboroadie · · Score: 1

    My life is far too inane to share like that, but anyone seriously analyzing my information would realize that it was costing far more than it was benefiting them.
    Advertisers beware!

    --
    They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
  72. Re:wuauclt.exe by hoboroadie · · Score: 1

    I just integrated a windows box with all the download services switched off. Major improvement, runs as well as Linux but with real Radeon drivers. :) (Unfortunately, my life is so bush-league that I actually have time to check in manually every fortnight.) Every once in a while, wuaserv switches itself on for something, and I don't believe it can be arsed to switch itself back off. I too, find it distressing when "my" machine starts grinding away at its own little side jobs.

    --
    They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
  73. Offline web applications by tepples · · Score: 1

    "Web application" with an "offline mode"?? People actually use those?!?!

    Gmail has an offline mode, for instance. And as Chrome OS and Firefox OS grow more popular, more web applications are likely to adopt manifests and IndexedDB as a way of working offline.

    1. Re:Offline web applications by ickleberry · · Score: 1

      Who needs it? I just use Thunderbird which collects its emails from an IP starting with 192.168

    2. Re:Offline web applications by GWRedDragon · · Score: 1

      I was more thinking people just went to the website. Making a copy of a website and calling it an 'app' never really seemed that useful to me, especially since the limitations on what you can do without a connection are likely to be severe in many applications.

      I've never personally used a 'web application,' I go to the website. There is no reason for it to be able to store anything on my local machine; it stores what I tell it in the server session.

      Most people seem to expect to need a connection to do anything now anyways. ChromeOS seems to be designed around that idea, that you will always have a way to connect, with the 'offline apps' being really an afterthought to counter potential criticism. After all, Google wants you to be online all the time so they can track you and serve you ads, right?

  74. How about arresting the oath breakers for a start by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arrest the oath breakers
    Arrest the banksters
    Cut the fios splitter off
    Restore the constitution
    Yank that fucking FCC board power from the POTUS and let the people VOTE
    ALL ppl home from undeclared wars
    De-Activate DHS

    instead of Oh I know I'll use TOR and 7 proxies and oh fuck I accidentally used that DNS and oops I just left a log on that webserver with my REAL IP accidentally toggling tor on and off

    instead of CISPA, PIPA, SOPA

    instead of a new unconstitutional piece of shit every two hours out of washington dc

    instead of .htaccess DENY FROM ALL and shutting down all your websites and saying FUCK IT it's not worth the RISK for providing an interactive website to the public and becoming a target from a misguided fuckwad brainwashed by these oath breakers

    instead of being worried that that next death metal band you interview from the middle east isn't a terrorist group about to get you targeted by the NDAA as a fuckign terrorist yourself

    instead of Dual Citizen Feinstein openly breaking her oath on a daily basis flaunting her own weapons and security and saying we can't have the fucking same.

    And so you all sit there and wonder why business is bad. Oh lets see the banksters with the Senate's blessing fucked the monetary system up, business is over regulated, the laws about all this shit change every two hours so there is no long term stability, just short term uncertainty and unpredictability. A motherfucker can't even plan out ten years with all this bullshit. The schools are fucked, health care is (too expensive) yet legally mandated? wtf?!, the DSM (false science) is set to fuck people out of their 2nd amendment, manufacturing is fucked, poor neighborhoods are fucked, water supply is getting fracked, the borders are wide open. I could go on. Government doesn't even tell us the truth any more yet at the same time call us paranoid and tin. I have been going on for the past 12 fucking years, elections are fucked, two party is fucked, electronic vote tabulation devices are fucked. Dangerous GMO's/fukushima fish/tuna. Gulf OIL SPILL BP shrimp? As a vet I hate this I hate seeing what these fuckers are doing to our country. At some point it's going to all snap. Look at cyprus, look at greece. Look at china look at japan, look at russia. Why are we giving money and shit to Israel? Did they pay taxes? Did the DO ANY FUCKING THING AT ALL FOR AMERICANS AT HOME?

    Go ahead pretend, I'm the dumb fuck.

  75. Slashdot surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After downloading Collusion and running it while browsing to a few sites, Collusion discovered four tracking entities. I then browsed to Slashdot.org, the number more than doubled.

  76. Re:Scotch Irish by hoboroadie · · Score: 1

    shipments off world.

    I expect to be transported in the first load, it's in my genes.

    --
    They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
  77. A surveillance state chosen by yourself by drolli · · Score: 1

    Yes, i use google. Yes, i use andorid. Yes, i shop at amazon.

    However i use VPNs, the private mode of my browser, and local storage for many things. I strictly separate between social networks with real name (google plus, xing) which i use for business communication and keeping contact with real friends and social networks for telling my opinion freely (even if i have only a single identity there). I never mention my real identity on the latter ones and i never mention my alias (drolli) on the first ones. I regularly verify that searching with trivial methods will not link my identities, and i have no indication that google managed to do so. I can extrapolate whenever they get a new information about me when the contacts they suggest me on google plus get more targeted.

    I use google maps, but turn it off when i consider it important.

    So: You have control over what you put into the internet. But if you consider a the "one size fits all" approach that everything about you is stored at facebook and you don't distinct in you life whom you want to tell what, good luck. "Oh its so convenient" is not a good staring point for all of this, i fear.

  78. Why worry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In fiction or in states like China and North Korea, loss of privacy seems to carry oppressive, concrete downsides. Such seem to be missing here. Is this a white people's problem?

  79. Re:Scotch Irish by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

    You descend from a long line of telephone sanitizers, eh?

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  80. Problem isn't privacy, but balance of power by rcharbon · · Score: 1

    The problem isn't lack of privacy, the problem is unbalanced power. You have no way to perform this sort of data analysis, only Big Gov/Corp can. It's like how banks are Too Big To Fail, but we let individual homeowners default on their mortgage and lose their homes. Read "The Shockwave Rider" someday - people knew this in the 70's.

  81. Custom hosts = BETTER start than Ghostery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "IP Stack natively provideth 1st" built in - custom hosts files, natively, & tightly integrated with the IP stack + its built-in DNS resolver engines @ the kernelmode/ring 0/rpl 0 level - clean, fast, & over 44++ yrs. of optimization poured into it over time since 1969. The IP stack loads @ OS startup, thus the hosts file too into RAM for speed, & that makes AdBlock &/or Ghostery, wasteful + redundant.

    Hosts ARE superior to Ghostery &/or AdBlock - & on several levels I invite anyone to disprove me on them, listed below in fact.

    Here's how I generate them, easy as apple pie, from 12++ reputable sources for custom hosts file data online:

    ---

    APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&catid=26:64bit-security-software&Itemid=74

    Which, if you read the list of what it can do for you as an end user of the resulting output it produces listed in the link above, you'll understand how/why...

    "It's as strong as steel, & a 3rd of the weight" - Howard Stark from the film "Captain America"

    ---

    Especially vs. competing alternate 'solutions', noted below in AdBlock/Ghostery & yes even DNS servers, next, as 'examples thereof'...

    Solutions that used to be good & I even recommended them in security guides I wrote up over the decades now -> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000/XP%22&btnG=Submit&gbv=1&sei=ka3yUKzxB-6_0QHLroCQCA

    That did extremely well for myself (and users of them), for Windows users, for "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" purposes - the BEST THING WE HAVE GOING vs. threats of all kinds, currently!

    (Not anymore though, & certainly NOT far as AdBlock's concerned especially, not after this):

    ---

    Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option:

    http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/12/2213233/adblock-plus-to-offer-acceptable-ads-option

    (Meaning by default, which MOST USERS WON'T CHANGE, it doesn't block ALL ads - they "souled-out"... talk about "foxes guarding the henhouse")!

    ---

    Plus, Adblock CAN'T DO AS MUCH & not from a single file solution that runs in Ring 0/RPL 0/kernelmode via tcpip.sys, a driver (since it's part of the IP stack & tightly integrated into it) which is far, Far, FAR FASTER than ring 3/rpl 3/usermode apps like browsers, & addons slow them down (known issue in FireFox).

    Hosts are the 1st thing your IP stack queries on webbound requests -> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/172218

    (Thus, since the IP stack is already loaded by the OS @ bootup & on requests by client programs - guess what? Hosts make adblock & ghostery, REDUNDANT & WASTEFUL, also! )

    To wit, 10++ things AdBlock can't do, hosts can:

    ---

    1.) Blocking rogue DNS servers malware makers use

    2.) Blocking known sites/servers that serve up malware... like known sites/servers/hosts-domains that serve up malicious scripts

    3.) Speeding up your FAVORITE SITES that hosts can speed up via hardcoded line item entries properly resolved by a reverse DNS ping

    4.) AdBlock works on Mozilla products (browser & email), hosts work on ANY webbound app AND are multiplatform.

    5.) AdBlock can't protect external to FireFox email progra

  82. Muhahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really think they train a $3billion satellite on a geek in hiding ? If the police calls up the national reco agency to use their sat, they will be told to fuck off and never, ever call them again. And even if they would get access, satellites which have a good resolution have a very small "footprint". They are almost useless to search for a little hut in the forest. Plus, you can select a place where people build hats into the forest then and now.
    They allegedly got that BinEvilLaden by means of good old interrogation and analysis, not by means of technology.
    So, cut all your old links, never use official telecoms to communicate back and hide yourself in a little African city where you act as the local Engish teacher/student/anthropologist on extended field trip. Of course, NEVER EVER look like an intel agent, that draws in all sorts of unwanted attention. Be interested in money, never in politics. Do the locals a service (actually teach their kids) and they will vouch for you whenever local police asks them about you. Armies of European hippies do things like that and if you are open-minded you will probably learn that Africa can be a hospitable and friendly place for people with enough dollars. DO NEVER, EVER TRY TO BUY INFORMATION. That will mark you as CIA Gumshoe and then it is all over.

    1. Re:Muhahaha by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      To all above, All very good points. Definitely the key is to be boring enough to not get that three billion dollar treatment. Whether your on, off, halfway on-off the grid. I'm totally agreed there. If I went missing tomorrow, no one would care except my immediate family and they probably wouldn't even be able to get a chopper to fly around looking for me if they couldn't even give a location were I said I would be.

      The point I was trying to make, in a technical sense, someone can find you if they really want to and have enough resources, those cases are pretty rare ;p

  83. Re:The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is flagged insightful? FOSS and intelligence are mutually exclusive in my experience.....naive fuckwits

  84. Web apps vs. platform-specific apps by tepples · · Score: 1

    Would you rather use an offline web application, or would you rather not be able to use the application at all because it was developed as a native application for a platform other than yours?

  85. What native app for discussion boards? by tepples · · Score: 1

    You claim that offline access to webmail is unnecessary because you have a native MUA. So what native application connects to discussion boards now that ISPs no longer offer Usenet servers with even the text groups? And how do you plan on using a native application if it is made for a platform other than yours?

  86. It doesn't matter if they track us by MindPrison · · Score: 1

    Because the vast amount of information they get about us, is so overwhelming that they don't have the power to sift out actual useful information.

    Let's say for arguments sake, Google knows everything about you, it knows where  you like to surf, it knows what you like to eat, read, watch...even what underwear you wear.

    But this isn't public information. It may get...once hacked, but still - all of this information must be categorized, analyzed, sorted in order to be at all useful. So many cookies, so many websites, so many systems - it may sound easy, but it's far more difficult to make sense out of than you MAY want to think. Sure - if an employee of a certain company that shall remain nameless here, has it in for you - it's very easy to get dirty information on you, that's not the problem - the problem is in how you USE that information, not an easy thing to do without involving yourself in pretty hefty lawbreaking criminal activity.

    I may know SHITLOADS of information about most of my neighbors, but alas...I can't really do anything about it, yes, I may eyeball my suspicious neighbor once in a while, freaking him out into the clueless oblivion in the land of paranoia...but that's all I can do, and not even that is legal. I am not allowed to browse information about him that can compromise his human rights, the same goes for our beloved military, yes they do it...the gov. do it, even the police do it - but very little come out of it, except they've got "their eyes on you".

    And thus come my conclusion, want to know a little dirty secret?

    I bet you do - and the neighbor is just as dirty as you. We can't arrest the entire population.

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  87. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

    Sure, the waitress knew that you were at that bar every Friday, and what your favourite drink was. Possibly the cashier at your favourite grocery shop knows what you usually buy at that grocery shop. And there's probably some gas station which knows quite well how much gas you need. That's not a big problem because everyone only gets a little bit of the big picture, and it's unlikely that e.g. the waitress will sell her knowledge to anyone.

    To make a car analogy: Few people will see a problem if someone is driving behind them on the highway for a few miles. However if the same car is following them every time they are driving somewhere to whereever they drive, most people would see a problem. And if they know that there's someone in the car who collects all the movement data and sells it to anyone paying enough, very few people would accept that.

    What advertising companies do is exactly that, just that there's no observing person or car involved, making it practical to follow many people around, while most of them won't even notice it.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  88. Hmmm by koan · · Score: 1

    What may be increasingly more relevant than the tracking (which has been going on for years) would be what part of the social aggregate you fall into when your data is examined.
    How are we categorized?
    What it says about you is more important today than keeping them from following you.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  89. Form-driven websites; laptops on the bus by tepples · · Score: 1

    I've never personally used a 'web application,' I go to the website.

    By "web application", I was referring to form-driven websites that store information or perform calculations on the users' behalf. This is as opposed to sites based on more static "documents", such as a blog, for which the only thing needed for offline support is an Atom feed of newly published documents. For example, a webmail or forum or online social network is a "web application", as is something like Google Docs.

    After all, Google wants you to be online all the time so they can track you and serve you ads, right?

    Chrome OS comes on laptops. I use a laptop while riding transit to and from work, and there's no Internet access on the bus except for (luxury priced) cellular Internet.

  90. Bruce Schneier smears Apple by beamed · · Score: 1

    First he suggests Apple is tracking its users when it just neglected to encrypt location cache data on the devices and their backups (fixed about 2 years ago). And then he suggests you cannot delete cookies on mobile Safari when it actually has all the usual options (it has private mode also). Not nice at all. And quite irrelevant to his subject.

  91. Re:How about arresting the oath breakers for a sta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It might help if you supported alternatives to the established parties. It might help if you chose a hobby and focused on that. You cannot possibly fix all misery. Think positive and call out bullshit then and now, but don't make it the center of your life.

  92. My 17 year old son 'couldn't care less' ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I asked my 17 year old son how he felt about all this, he said he could not care less. I am sure that for most ordinary folk the huge, very definite benefits of easy, unobstructed access to the internet far outweigh the vaguely possible disadvantages of their loss of 'privacy'. The difference between living in a small, remote village where some people know when you fart in the bog is little different in principle, it seems to me, from living in a large, ubiquitous internet where some people know when you click in a website. And the irony is that abandoning cellphones and computers and paying cash everywhere, while living in a small remote village farting in the bog, is actually more likely to get you suspiciously noticed.

    AC because I once criticised the EU and am now considered by Slashdot to be a vile sub-human, unworthy of being listened to. Presumably most Slashdotters do not live in Cyprus or Greece or Spain or Ireland and so on. The EU's fatuously pompous "Right to be Forgotten" seems to be working here anyway, in typically perverted EU fashion. I am not trying to hide: my username is sleepyjohn, my karma is 'terrible' and my starting points are minus 2. I use Opera with Flash on demand only, ignore the adverts unless they seem useful, and generally try to get on with my internet life. If an advert distracts me I right-click on it and remove it.

  93. Disable Flash & Silverlight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah because porn really is the schizz with HTML5...

  94. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly. What more can be said. No one is completely unique with enough data people's behavior can be hacked.

  95. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Then enjoy your higher than average premiums. I'd rather pay cash and leave Allstate guessing.

    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  96. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by Burz · · Score: 1

    The thing that really gets me is how the hippies explicitly turned their backs on consumerism, and then corporations reformulate their propaganda efforts in the 70s and win them over.

    The other Adam Curtis documentaries are also quite eye-opening...

    In The Mayfair Set he shows how in the 80s vulture capitalists transformed pension funds into ravenous dissolvers of the western industrial base that created them.

  97. Re:Can't believe people still complain about track by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    with enough government and corporate encroachment, the state could decide (or be used by corporate interest) that based on the amount of flour, sugar, and milk you buy, you are 'at risk' for xyz medical reasons and then up your 'obamacare' payments (or inform your insurance agent) accordingly.. of course, it doesn't matter that you didn't necessarily consume all of those products yourself, or in an unhealthy way, but annoying details like this never deter the ideologically motivated stats nerds and their political overlords.

    This SHOULD concern you. It should concern all of us.

  98. CISPA is *now* up for reconsideration. To email.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Want to do something about it, like send and email? You can, but do it now.

    CISPA (H.R. 624), sometimes called "SOPA 2.0", is up *now* for cosideration in the House of Representatives.

    Want to stop it (or affirm your support of the latest evolution of TIA?)? To email your Representatives in the House, start here: https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=9048

  99. Re:The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensem by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    Just wanted to thank you for the encouragement, bbelt, which contributed to my submitting this entry to the current Knight News Challenge on Open Government:
    https://www.newschallenge.org/open/open-government/submission/civic-sensemaking-by-working-with-stories-using-rakontu/

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.