How Silicon Valley Helped the NSA

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Silicon Valley Helped the NSA

Posted by samzenpus on Sunday November 10, 2013 @10:08PM from the with-a-little-help-from-my-friends dept.

theodp writes "The U.S. tech giants' pledge to up their privacy game in the wake of reports that all-your-data-belong-to-the-NSA rings a little hollow to Abraham Newman, who reminds us that such protections run counter to the business model and public policy agenda that tech companies have pursued for decades. 'For years,' writes Newman, 'U.S. information technology (IT) firms have actively backed weak privacy rules that let them collect massive amounts of personal data. The strategy enabled the companies to work their way into every corner of consumers' lives and gave them a competitive edge internationally. Those same policies, however, have come back to haunt IT firms. Lax rules created fertile ground for NSA snooping. In the wake of the surveillance scandals, as consumer confidence plummets, technology companies' economic futures are threatened.'"

163 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 22:26 · Score: 4, Insightful

How all of us were "ok" with the companies collecting this information. When an intelligence agency combines this info, we suddenly scream for privacy. I'm scared enough that google accesses my Gmail content, and Apple my iMessages and contacts.
1. Re:Strange by mrbluze · 2013-11-10 22:40 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  When the telephone was invented, it was obvious to all and sundry that it was prone to eavesdropping. It's the case with all forms of communication. Privacy is never a given, it is something that has to be actively sought and maintained, like any other human "right". What is insulting is that companies are going out of their way to betray the customer. I am not thinking so much of software giants but Intel which forces you to relinquish your privacy with apparently no way to get around their backdoors.
  
  --
  Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
2. Re:Strange by Mitreya · 2013-11-10 23:11 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  all of us were "ok" with the companies collecting this information. When an intelligence agency combines this info, we suddenly scream for privacy.
  Google does not have the ability to put us on the no-fly list. "Ok" or not, the threat level just isn't the same.
3. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 23:30 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  All of us were NOT "OK" with companies collecting this information. If you were, I'm sorry for you. In order to be OK with that you'd have to believe that corporations don't have disproportionate power over peoples' lives, that they won't sell you out in a heartbeat because it's profitable or because they don't want to be bothered, and most importantly, that information once collected won't be abused. Information will ALWAYS be abused and there are only two cures for that: don't collect it in the first place, or jail the abusers of it. That latter is kind of satisfying, but rather hard to pull off unfortunately. It is far better to not allow the collection in the first place, and that means reeling in corporate power in addition to government power.
  You say the threat level isn't the same. I would submit to you that the only reason we don't have private corporate armies running around the US (we used to) is that they have simply outsourced that task to the government. So when you speak of government or corporations in this country, you're just talking about the same large entity which has to be stopped.
4. Re:Strange by AHuxley · 2013-11-10 23:31 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Most wanted to believe the articulate sock puppets:
  Legally you had the US Constitution to keep the US gov away.
  Legally you had teams of in house (corporate) lawyers defending the 'brand' from hints of warrantless gov collaboration.
  Your political leaders that would 'out' any goverment domestic spying just for party political points.
  The US stock market would never allow the US gov to risk its international sales and would side against warrantless gov and keep sales up.
  You had the public, gov hardware and software 'interface' that would be uncovered very quickly with great press coverage by so many skilled staff.
  You had staff, academies and skilled members of the press who would find some trace.... and then win media prizes with the story of the decade...
  Skilled academics, code reviews, gov standards, software brands and teams of individuals had all looked over net encryption and found it usable for consumers.
  After Snowden it was all found to be a hoax.
  Political leaders did nothing, lawyers said nothing, academics educated the junk code to generations of fee paying students, the tame press never followed any stories, corporations took gov cash and helped, telcos ensured the optical was in place. Mercenaries and contractors enjoyed the overtime.
  The brands are now a joke.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
5. Re:Strange by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-11-11 00:00 · Score: 2
  
  This fascistic "only following orders" mindset really needs to be nipped in the bud. America understood that it was unjustifiable in the 1940s, but it's their first refuge now.
  If for profit(*) you maintain a product knowingly used for evil, you are just as responsible as the person directing you.
  (*) A person who has little choice will have diminished or zero responsibility. So, a destitute person who gets a job as a cleaner for Google when there is nothing else on offer, or someone given forced labour in a prison, cannot really be judged.
6. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 00:07 · Score: 1
  
  All of us were NOT "OK" with companies collecting this information. If you were, I'm sorry for you. In order to be OK with that you'd have to believe that corporations don't have disproportionate power over peoples' lives, that they won't sell you out in a heartbeat because it's profitable or because they don't want to be bothered, and most importantly, that information once collected won't be abused. Information will ALWAYS be abused and there are only two cures for that: don't collect it in the first place, or jail the abusers of it. That latter is kind of satisfying, but rather hard to pull off unfortunately. It is far better to not allow the collection in the first place, and that means reeling in corporate power in addition to government power.
  You say the threat level isn't the same. I would submit to you that the only reason we don't have private corporate armies running around the US (we used to) is that they have simply outsourced that task to the government. So when you speak of government or corporations in this country, you're just talking about the same large entity which has to be stopped.
  Well, The Market is supposed to protect us against this kind of stuff. If we don't like having our private information passed around like Pokemon cards, we take our business to a company that doesn't do that.
  Wait? They ALL do it? We don't have a choice? It must be meddling Socialist Government forcing them to be that way!
7. Re:Strange by WoLpH · 2013-11-11 00:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Even besides that. It doesn't matter if you're ok or not. Even if you don't share your information, if one of your friends has your information on a phone and shares this with facebook it will still be shared...
  Regardless of whether you've ever consented to share it with facebook or anything else.
8. Re:Strange by LWATCDR · 2013-11-11 00:14 · Score: 1
  
  I really want to help all of the people on slashdot to get it once and for all.
  Private is what happens in your own home. And once you let in many other people say for a party... Well that is pretty public as well.
  What happens on the internet, at a bar, at a party, or anywhere else is in public.
  That cell phone conversation you had while waiting in line at the store? Public.
  That party where you got drunk and naked? Public.
  Email? As private as a postcard.
  What do you people don't get about this. If you want something private you have to keep it private.
  If you facebook like the International Society of Furry Loving Child Molesting Doms it is not private and people will find out.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
9. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 00:19 · Score: 0
  
  Fortunately, some people just aren't willing to give up on having any privacy, as you have. Your archaic notion of privacy has no place in any free country.
  
  Private is what happens in your own home.
  Why? The government could install surveillance equipment in your home, just like they can monitor your communications.
  Merely because someone could monitor your communications does not necessarily make them public. Email is most certainly not public, even if it is somewhat easy for powerful entities to monitor.
10. Re:Strange by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 00:27 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "How all of us were "ok" with the companies collecting this information."
  Speak for yourself, Kemosabe. There were a lot of us who have been bitching about the invasion of privacy all along. Were we listened to? Of course not - we were shouted down. "There is no privacy on the internet, everything you put out there is available for public consumption. Grow up dummy, if you've done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide!"
  Always, the conversation was derailed with just such words.
  Fact is, conversations on the internet are about as private as discussing your private life on the town square. Of course it's not "private", but you don't expect snoops to be actively engaged in eavesdropping activities. On the town square, you can look around to see if the town gossip is lurking behind the nearby bench. Or, whether the Chief of Police is loitering within earshot.
  The internet? Only some of the more savvy users are aware just HOW LITTLE privacy they have. We are forced to avoid monitoring and eavesdropping. And, it's impossible to tell just how effective our efforts are. And, we know all the while that if NSA or any other agency takes an active interest in us, they can just tap into everything at the ISP level.
  Those of YOU who were "ok" with data mining - it's about time you woke up, and understood that we have valid concerns. Now - what ya gonna do about it? Can we get NSA and a few dozen of the programs that they support defunded? Can we get some of the various police tools shitcanned? What are we gonna DO? Resort to the darknets? That really isn't a solution. All that the NSA has to do, is to install a few thousands of their own onion routers and I2P routers, and whatever else comes along. Perfect MIM attack vectors, since they straddle the backbones anyway.
  What ya gonna do? Just sit around and bitch, with those of us who have been bitching for years? Do you have a plan?
  You might join us, in writing your congress critters. Repeatedly. Often. Write to your own, and everyone else's as well. Sign all the online petitions that you can find. Start your own petitions. And, bug hell out of your congress critters. They HATE to get hate mail. They much prefer not to hear from you at all, and they love fan mail, so send the HATE MAIL.
  
  --
  "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
11. Re:Strange by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2013-11-11 00:27 · Score: 1
  
  Google does not have the ability to put us on the no-fly list. "Ok" or not, the threat level just isn't the same.
  But they could affect your credit score which, given the ever expanding uses (like employment, housing, even dating) can have an even larger effect on the average person's life than being on the no-fly list.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
12. Re:Strange by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 00:33 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Actually - you DO have some choice. Did you fill out that frequent shopper's survey? Chump. Did you supply your telephone number the last time you purchased a pizza over the counter? Chumped again. Do you give out your cell phone and email address everytime a vendor requests it? Chumped, chumped, and chumped, over and over again. Do you use that credit card for ALL your purchases? You are so chumped!
  Use dollar bills, in person, and refuse to supply information of any kind to the vendor. THEY DON'T NEED ANY INFORMATION TO MAKE A SALE!!
  But, if you insist on getting that penny discount on your next bag of Cheeto's, go ahead and play their game.
  
  --
  "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
13. Re:Strange by LWATCDR · 2013-11-11 00:43 · Score: 1
  
  Email is trivial for anyone to monitor. It is sent in freaking clear text and has been since day one. It is like handing a folded piece of paper to a courier at best.
  The idea that something that you post to a bunch of your "friends" on a social networking site is private is pure insanity. You need to get a grip on simple reality public is public.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
14. Re:Strange by SirGarlon · 2013-11-11 00:49 · Score: 1
  
  Google does not have the ability to put us on the no-fly list.
  No, but it does have the ability to control what you see on the Internet. In fact, it is doing so already, and claiming it is for your own good! Which is more important to you -- to get on an airplane or to get online?
  
  --
  [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
15. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 00:50 · Score: 1
  
  Email is trivial for anyone to monitor.
  Anyone? Most people aren't even close to savvy enough to do so. And again, the mere fact that it's possible doesn't make it okay, and it doesn't make it public. Hopefully people become more enlightened than you when it comes to matters of privacy, because your ideas have no place in any free country.
  
  The idea that something that you post to a bunch of your "friends" on a social networking site is private is pure insanity.
  Straw man. I never mentioned social networking garbage even once.
  
  You need to get a grip on simple reality public is public.
  And 1 = 1; pointless. If I invent a device that can see through your house's walls, I suppose everything will become public. Now, I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a world where the mere fact that it's possible for someone to spy means that your actions or communications are public, and I think we should oppose anyone who wants to make the world that way; they're most likely authoritarians.
16. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 01:06 · Score: 0
  
  I can choose whether or not to use Google's services. I cannot choose whether or not (foreign) government agencies will log my data.
17. Re:Strange by dougmc · 2013-11-11 01:12 · Score: 1
  
  This fascistic "only following orders" mindset really needs to be nipped in the bud. America understood that it was unjustifiable in the 1940s, but it's their first refuge now.
  America learned that it was unjustifiable only in the very, very most extreme cases in the 1940s.
  If your commander orders you to put a bunch of people into a room and fill it with cyanide gas and you do it ... you might be held accountable for that years later, maybe. (i.e. only if your side loses the war, and you're one the folk they can track down and extradite.)
  But if your orders don't involve killing innocent, unarmed, non-threatening people in cold blood -- America expects you to do what you're told. And really, even if your orders do involve killing innocent, unarmed, non-threatening people in cold blood -- you're expected to do what you're told too.
  If your military commander orders you to do something, and you don't do it -- bad things happen to you. Now, there is a small chance that years down the road the courts will vindicate you if you decided not to murder a bunch of people -- but if all you did was protect somebody's right to privacy? Yeah, you're going down.
  I do agree, the mindset has issues, but our military commanders expect their orders to be carried out, and dissent is only tolerated in the most extreme cases (cases that should never happen, as such orders should not be given.) But if the order is to tap some phones or sniff some networks ... if you refuse to do it, well, you'll get fired and they'll get somebody who does. And you won't be vindicated in the courts, you'll just be blacklisted to some degree in trying to find new work.
18. Re:Strange by BitZtream · 2013-11-11 01:16 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Not all email is sent in clear text. Some admins aren't clueless.
  For instance, my mail server communicates with many other mail servers using SSL, including when talking to other servers. Yahoo, Google, and Outlook.com all use TLS and upgrade to a secure connection on HELO. Likewise my mail servers REQUIRE SSL AND AUTHENTICATION for picking up mail or sending from our addresses. Include SPF in the mix and the only clear text version of the mail is sitting on my server hard drives and the client machines.
  I'm fairly confident the NSA hasn't gotten into my system yet, and they didn't fake our certificate chain since its an internally generated chain that no cert provider is in, just our own not network connected CA.
  Email can be secured with current technology and protocols. Easily.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
19. Re:Strange by gl4ss · 2013-11-11 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  you were ok with it since they only had to pay off two dudes of two parties for it.
  as to competitive edge? actually there is no actual proof of it giving a competitive edge whatsoever. if it did, american companies wouldn't have been so fucked so many times. it does give an added cost of business though, as you need to spend time pestering the people for their postal codes etc shit and as you spend time sending mail to addresses they haven't been living at for years.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
20. Re:Strange by BitZtream · 2013-11-11 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  Neither are required for life in even the slightest way. Plenty of fully functional people have jobs, homes and families and they never fly and don't have Internet access.
  Just as a reminder, since it seems to be forgotten so often.
  Airplanes are barely a 100 years old.
  The Internet, or more specifically, the web, is only about 20.
  These are not 'requirements' for life. You will survive without either.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
21. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 01:30 · Score: 0
  
  Not all of us were okay with it.
22. Re:Strange by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/09/13/jesse-kline-u-k-surveillance-state-goes-too-far-by-putting-cameras-in-school-bathrooms/
  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/spy-cameras-are-used-to-target-student-protesters-2290783.html
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins_v._Lower_Merion_School_District
  I started out looking for a story from a few years ago. The United Kingdom child services was installing cameras into the homes of troubled youth. Has the internet been "sanitized", or was that a false story? Even false stories are usually available to find again. Things that make you go "Hmmmmm".
  But, yes, the government can install surveillance equipment into your home. The UK has apparently done so.
  https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/204775/Surveillance_Camera_Code_of_Practice_WEB.pdf That PDF only applies to surveillance in "public places". It does make reference to yet other regulations that might not be "public places".
  
  --
  "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
23. Re:Strange by geminidomino · 2013-11-11 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  Meanwhile, in the real world, grown-ups occasionally need to buy things that aren't sold at the corner deli.
24. Re:Strange by BitZtream · 2013-11-11 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  Can we get NSA and a few dozen of the programs that they support defunded?
  Two things are wrong with that statement:
  A) You don't defund things, thats just being a fucking baby and showing your ass when you've lost, change the farking laws in the first place.
  B) Contrary to what you might think, the NSA is a vital organization for our nation. It does need put back in its place, but completely getting rid of it would be utterly stupid. 'The terrorists' and I mean the real ones aren't going to shut down their spy networks, and they certainly have them even though they aren't going to be NSA capable (maybe!), they will still do better than nothing. North Korea, Syria, Iran, some warlords in different parts of the southern hemisphere ... all of these guys are going to continue doing what they do regardless of the existence of our NSA. Don't you think its better to at least stay one step ahead of them?
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
25. Re:Strange by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-11-11 01:38 · Score: 1
  
  I had thought that the most powerful outcome of the Nuremberg trials was its impact on the public view of necessary ingredients for freedom. IOW, you can never have freedom unless each person acts as a rational individual, questioning everything.
  Even if the law hadn't changed, the Western value system had been refined - the civil rights movement of the '60s, for example, was the product of post-war enlightenment. Even the hippy movement was an albeit sometimes directionless expression of, "Question everything!"
  But either I have misread the message, or its impact has been lost as veterans and their immediate families+friends have died. I'm sure it's a lot of the latter. 2013 is the first year without a surviving WW1 veteran to stop us forgetting. That scares me a little.
26. Re:Strange by SirGarlon · 2013-11-11 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  It depends on who you are. For example, I find it difficult to imagine finding a new job in my field (programming) without using the Internet.
  You might argue that I do not "need" to find a new job. To which I would retort, that is an argument against freedom itself.
  
  --
  [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
27. Re:Strange by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 01:51 · Score: 2
  
  And, that is such an adult comment. I got my first paying job in 1971. Graduated high school in 1974. Joined the Navy in 1975. Discharged from the Navy in 1983. Need I go on?
  I have walked out of stores where the staff was overly prying. "Why do you need my phone number?" "It's required, we're supposed to ask everyone!" "Good bye then!"
  If you CHOOSE to be corporate America's chump, that's fine. But don't make excuses to me for it.
  
  --
  "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
28. Re:Strange by Fuzion · 2013-11-11 01:54 · Score: 2
  
  Neither are required for life in even the slightest way. Plenty of fully functional people have jobs, homes and families and they never fly and don't have Internet access.
  Just as a reminder, since it seems to be forgotten so often.
  Airplanes are barely a 100 years old.
  The Internet, or more specifically, the web, is only about 20.
  These are not 'requirements' for life. You will survive without either.
  Technically no freedoms are 'requirements' for life, you can survive without them. 150 years ago people of a certain skin colour didn't have any freedoms in the US yet they were alive. Even now, in many countries, plenty of people have jobs, homes and families without ever having the chance to freely express their political views.
  The standard for freedoms isn't what's a 'requirement' for life, and it'd be a very unfortunate world if it was.
  
  --
  "Knowledge makes us accountable." - Che Guevara
29. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 02:05 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, look up what happened to the troops that perpetrated the Mai Lai Massacre:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre
  and get back to me with your idealism.
30. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 02:13 · Score: 0
  
  > Fortunately, some people just aren't willing to give up on having any privacy, as you have.
  Fortunately, some people continue to live with a utopian mindset of freedom and privacy. Those items were bought and sold long ago by politicians (who were collectively voted into office via a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the foot - courtesy of "We The People") and their varied moneyed interests. What exists now is an illusion of freedom and privacy.
  > Your archaic notion of privacy has no place in any free country.
  Another illusion of the utopian mindset. The notion of a free country also went by the wayside. Most people don't even realize it yet.
31. Re:Strange by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:20 · Score: 1
  
  1. There are cheap, cash-only grocery stores near me - but they're only open while I'm at work. So I have to shop at one of the places that offers "free" membership cards with a 30% discount. I'm lucky enough that I could refuse the membership card without completely breaking the household budget, and I could just live with the $50 or more extra I would spend per month on groceries without it. But most families can't afford the difference.
  
  2. Paying cash for all of my fixed expenses, like the cell phone bill, electric bill, mortgage, car insurance, etc... involves a lot of driving and is a pain in the neck. If I mail out checks or use automatic bill pay - which is what most people do - my bank or credit union knows too much about me and my service vendors know which bank and account number I have. So that's information sharing that it's just not practical to work around. What do you do, get a big batch of cashier's checks from a different source every month and mail them out?
  
  3. Your internet service provider knows a lot about your browsing habits. If you use a VPN service, then all of that information about your browsing habits reside with the VPN service (and for all you know the whole damn company is an NSA front to keep a closer watch on paranoid users). Either way some company has access to your browsing habits unless your entire internet existence is spent on the Tor network or something similar.
  
  4. If you have a cell phone, unless you leave it at home (and if you leave it at home, why have one?) your cell phone company knows your travel habits.
  
  Your advice is useless. Paying cash when you get a pizza won't make any significant difference in your privacy.
32. Re:Strange by drinkypoo · 2013-11-11 02:27 · Score: 1
  
  I am not thinking so much of software giants but Intel which forces you to relinquish your privacy with apparently no way to get around their backdoors.
  Stop worrying about intel. AMD is including a TPM in their CPUs too, it has other purposes as well so it has another name but it's the same shit when you distill it. And all the ARM processors are also working on including them. Anyone who doesn't will find themself in a poor position when they're the only ones not permitted to play DRM video.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
33. Re:Strange by drinkypoo · 2013-11-11 02:30 · Score: 1
  
  I hope a bitch (which is what she'd be) will check my credit score before dating, and save me some fucking trouble.
  The issue of credit checks by employers is an ugly one, though.
  The issue of housing is also an ugly one; it's illegal to be homeless, but you can still be denied housing. Compare to car insurance, where SOMEONE has to insure you (used to be GEICO, dunno who it is now.)
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
34. Re:Strange by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:30 · Score: 1
  
  Pandora's Box has been opened, no matter what Congress does we have no reason to believe the NSA's surveillance or corporate spying on citizens will ever get better.
  
  I think the real solution to this is ignore the political side completely, and work on technological solutions. Make the next version of SMTP work like the Tor network. Make something like Diaspora or Status.net (open source social networks) so easy to setup and run that it's a few taps on an iPhone, Android phone, Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, etc... and it has no central hosting servers. Make the default behavior in web browsers strip out third party cookies, and switch the way fonts and plugins are enumerated so that web browsers no longer have unique footprints. Maybe convince companies to accept payments in Bitcoins, or the successor to Bitcoin, whatever that is, so that you buy Bitcoins from your normal bank account but then make your bill payments with Bitcoins, and thus your bank doesn't know your bills and the companies that bill you don't know your bank.
  
  We can't trust the politicians to fix this - the spooks and the executives are salivating over everything they can do with additional information about us. The only fix is to make it computationally infeasible for them to learn about us. It's up to us, the engineers, to stop 1984.
35. Re:Strange by drinkypoo · 2013-11-11 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  I have a safeway card so old it doesn't have a name. They look at my receipt and go "Thank you, Misterrrrrr...." and I say "You can call me THE BLANK" and take my receipt and go home.
  But Google knows all about me :)
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
36. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 02:39 · Score: 0
  
  Fortunately, some people continue to live with a utopian mindset of freedom and privacy.
  Utopias don't exist. Fortunately, what I ask for is not perfection, but merely the willingness to continue fighting.
37. Re:Strange by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  Actually - congress has the sole authority to fund government programs for a reason. It is their final check on things. They can, and have, simply defunded things that they ultimately disapproved of. Remember Acorn? If I were to dig, I could find more, I'm certain. The appropriations bills are part of the checks and balances system. It's not so different from your own personal life. "I want this and that and two of these!" But, when the cost is tallied up, you decide that you just can't afford all of that stuff, so SOMETHING is just not paid for.
  I won't get into a discussion about how vital NSA is. But, the NSA could be defunded, dismantled, and the necessary functions taken over by a new agency with very strict controls. All the personnel at NSA could be gone just as fast as their offices could be cleaned out.
  
  --
  "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
38. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 02:43 · Score: 0
  
  Who is the "all of us" who were OK with corporate spying? I have never used Gmail or Facebook, and I'm not a raving paranoiac. I simply don't want my personal life to be ad-supported and mediated by corporations.
39. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  You can do better, and actually get what you walked in the door for: give false information. Make up a few fictitious people, and remember their details. Poison their dataset and waste the time of marketers and data overlords, all while enjoying that delicious pizza.
40. Re:Strange by geminidomino · 2013-11-11 02:48 · Score: 2
  
  Then you should be old enough to know that, valid or not, your "loyalty card" rant was almost completely out of context for the discussion at hand.
41. Re:Strange by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  My grocery store actually had some bug in their software in which about 100 customers all had the same name. The cashier would routinely refer to me by some name I had never heard during the checkout process. That suited me fine, but eventually they noticed the error and issued new cards for all of us.
42. Re:Strange by BringsApples · 2013-11-11 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  And we still have the:
  The People will not stand for this, and the streets will be filled with people up in arms.
  Laws have been broken, political leaders will be held accountable for their actions (or lack thereof).
  The hardware in place (data center(s) costing millions of tax dollars a year, for electricity alone) will be used for something else, for the people.
  No one will go to work for the NSA, causing it to collaps
  
  And yet, not. The only fight there is to be had for common folk, is to stop playing a part in this type of society. Start growing your own food, and/or speak with your neighbors about doing the same. Localize your needs. Stop depending on electronics to be your technology, Nature has so many things in place already that are so much more technically evolved than anything that man can make, and it's just matter of learning how to recognize and use them.
  
  Check out the work being done by Simon G. Powell and Paul Stamets. Maybe there's more like them out there, but those are the ones that I relate to the most.
  
  --
  Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
43. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 03:17 · Score: 0
  
  Then you should be old enough to know that, valid or not, your "loyalty card" rant was almost completely out of context for the discussion at hand.
  Given that the discussion at hand is of how businesses collect your personal information, that informed, accurate "rant" on how businesses collect your personal information was exactly on topic. It is your "take it and like it, bitch!" attitude that is out of place. Why are you so offended that someone may choose not to give their personal information to retail businesses that do not need it? Are you in the data mining business? Or are you just one of those chumps with too big an ego to admit he made a mistake?
44. Re:Strange by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  AC makes a more intelligent comment than you do. He encourages me to poison the data base. I like that.
  You still make excuses for cooperating with the invasion of your own privacy. My "rant" was entirely in context. Don't cooperate with the assholes. They need no information for your day-to-day business. As for your supposedly more important stuff - don't buy on credit, and you don't HAVE to supply any information. I have a debit card in my pocket, and I have cash money. I use the card sparingly. When I walk into a convenience store to pay for three gallons of gasoline, I DO NOT give any information in exchange for the "privilege" of pumping gas. (yes, three to four gallons, my normal fill up for a Honda GL500 @ 50 mpg) Utilities are paid with old fashioned checks, drawn on an old fashioned checking account. Larger purchases are often paid for in CASH, with no paper trail left behind.
  Does my banker know where I live? Yes - but I don't use BofA or any other bank you would readily recognize. Everything is handled in-house, in town. Small town private banks are like that - they aren't tied into the world wide data bases. Regions keeps sending me literature, hoping that I'll switch over to them - but they offer me NOTHING to pay for the invasive crap that will come along with the account.
  As I've been trying to say - you go ahead and enjoy your relationship with whatever bank(s) you do business with. And, I'll enjoy mine.
  
  --
  "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
45. Re:Strange by sl4shd0rk · 2013-11-11 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  Privacy is never a given
  Seems to me, that unless stated otherwise, I should be able to have a private conversation with someone (email, phone, etc) without having to worry about the conversation being recorded and accessed by someone for means which it was not intended.
  If employers and health care providers are already "googling" people for information about rates and employability, imaging the same private companies accessing an NSA scoring system to gather the same insight. It's not just about people's personal lives, it's about demographically/socially/racially/etc. profiling people for profit.
  
  --
  Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
46. Re:Strange by Gravis+Zero · 2013-11-11 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  How all of us were "ok" with the companies collecting this information. When an intelligence agency combines this info, we suddenly scream for privacy. I'm scared enough that google accesses my Gmail content, and Apple my iMessages and contacts.
  i was fine with google taking my info because i know they a singular goal: use the information to provide more targeted ads. they don't care what you are interested in, just get an ad to you. Microsoft and Apple have a bad track record of psychopathic behavior and denying any responsibility for their actions. the NSA has psychopathic behavior and a god complex which is extremely dangerous.
  you may think this is extreme but it's no exaggeration when i say the NSA has no problems with killing anyone that posed a threat to them. snowden had already done the damage, so there's no point in killing him after the fact. though if the CIA thinks he's cooperating with another government, the CIA will slap a bomb to the side of his car. if you still think i'm paranoid, consider that you previously thought the NSA spying on and tracking everyone was a delusion.
  the mistake we made was underestimating the enemy. make no mistake, the NSA mindset is that everyone is an enemy, even the people and government they are sworn to protect.
  
  --
  Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
47. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 04:19 · Score: 0
  
  We are not "ok", we have no choice. Actually we can choose between a couple of big companies which do the same collection and share the data with the same NSA. And yes, collecting all the data in one place and making it easily accessible with very optional supervision makes a big difference. We still don't know who has the access besides low ranked "analytics". We know politicians requested snooping, so we can assume they got the results. I.e. a selected group of politicians has access to all collected data. Which means for every single person they can track locations history, emails history, phone calls, health records etc. And, of course, "friend Netaiahu" has full access through his representatives in the US government.
48. Re:Strange by celle · 2013-11-11 04:40 · Score: 1
  
  "Utilities are paid with old fashioned checks, drawn on an old fashioned checking account. Larger purchases are often paid for in CASH, with no paper trail left behind."
  Like your name, number, license number, etc. isn't already on the check and most places won't process it without knowing it. As for large cash transactions, businesses are required to report large cash or credit transactions. The door about the freedom of cash you talk about was closed long ago. All cash is serialized so tracking is definitely possible. As for dealing with local banks, that only works as long as the locals have a good opinion of you.
49. Re:Strange by gnasher719 · 2013-11-11 04:44 · Score: 1
  
  i was fine with google taking my info because i know they a singular goal: use the information to provide more targeted ads. they don't care what you are interested in, just get an ad to you. Microsoft and Apple have a bad track record of psychopathic behavior [wikipedia.org] and denying any responsibility for their actions.
  
  Please give us some examples of what you call "psychopathic behaviour".
50. Re:Strange by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 05:08 · Score: 1
  
  "As for dealing with local banks, that only works as long as the locals have a good opinion of you."
  And, you find that to be unbelievable, or something? Yes, the locals have a pretty good opinion of me. Strange, isn't it? They KNOW that I'm good for whatever, they don't have to check a computer database.
  
  --
  "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
51. Re: Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 05:24 · Score: 0
  
  Sounds like these local banks must know a lot about you. You were saying?
52. Re:Strange by LWATCDR · 2013-11-11 05:51 · Score: 2
  
  "Email can be secured with current technology and protocols. Easily."
  "Include SPF in the mix and the only clear text version of the mail is sitting on my server hard drives and the client machines."
  So only when it is on your server. And even then it is not secure for your other users since you can read it. Most sys admins are too ethical to do such a thing but I have run into at least one that read everyone's email. Again I say no more secure than a postcard. Anyone in the postal service can read it.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
53. Re:Strange by LWATCDR · 2013-11-11 05:58 · Score: 1
  
  No in your home you have what is called an expectation of privacy. You do not have that expectation of privacy at a party, on the street, while driving, on an airplane, at a bar, club, or party. Email may have an expectation of privacy but it is a foolish one to expect since it is almost always stored in clear text on someone's servers. It is foolish to depend on it with anything important since it takes only a sysadmin to break that trust and Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo all scan your mail for ads and to get ride of spam.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
54. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 06:06 · Score: 0
  
  So we should all just give up?
  Hell, I taint the data pool whenever I (legally) can. And my friends don't share my information, not and remain friends.
55. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  K, so your email servers requires SSL, which is what? One-way authentication? LOL, man, you are so easily to hack by the man-in-the-middle attack.....
56. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 06:13 · Score: 0
  
  If you ignore the political side, the politicians will simply make the technological solutions illegal. They won't have to know what you're saying, they'll throw you in jail just for hiding it.
  The problem is, not only is it not a fair game, but they (but not you) get to change the rules anytime they want to.
57. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 08:33 · Score: 0
  
  That sounds like a pain in the ass for little gain. Many of us trade off some privacy for convenience. I used to write my checks by hand each month for my bills. Waste of my time.
58. Re: Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 08:49 · Score: 0
  
  Exactly how, if you use self-signed certs and pre-distribute them to your clients?
59. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 09:27 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, there's significant choice here. One company is famous in fact for being especially bad for this, yet tech geeks seem to jump on a bandwagon, recommend them for search, email, mobile phone OSes, mobile phones, ...
60. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 09:53 · Score: 0
  
  But google can you your IP on the no access list, or tagged as a ip that pushes viruses (red screen of death basically). If you're an online biz, you're dead in the water. Lack of fund to live is about the same or more than getting on a plane for a flight.
  There's no real privacy regs, the corporations are just trying to find a balance of what the public will accept and how much they can get more in revenues, favors from gov't or investors.
61. Re:Strange by recharged95 · 2013-11-11 10:00 · Score: 1
  
  Yep, why ask for info: if that store has a CCTV (to see you and your parked car on their lot), stores their money in a safe or bank (can count serial #'s on bills). And keeps receipts (id-ing what you bought)...
  The world of opt-in/opt-out is coming to close folks and becoming a more tactical situation. Even if you opt-out, I'll eventually have the ability to single you out and then make up a profile of you using public info...the systems are that good nowadays.
  Just live in group housing, and share mail (unrealistic?)...
62. Re:Strange by Gravis+Zero · 2013-11-11 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  i was fine with google taking my info because i know they a singular goal: use the information to provide more targeted ads. they don't care what you are interested in, just get an ad to you. Microsoft and Apple have a bad track record of psychopathic behavior [wikipedia.org] and denying any responsibility for their actions.
  Please give us some examples of what you call "psychopathic behaviour".
  well off the top of my head, microsoft has a string of bold face lies, anticompetitive behavior (strong arming OEMs and demanding "protection" money for Android come to mind) and then there is greatest lie of them all, Bing. even when it was unquestionably clear that they were copying results from google, they claimed they didn't and referred to their method of copying as "another vector" of data collection. as for Apple, they invented a deportation raid to get back their iphone 5 prototype. there is also the prototype macbook that was sold on ebay that they extorted out of the seller who had obtained it legally (i know the full story, i talk to him on IRC).
  there is a lot more than just that and in all cases there was no change in behavior, no remorse, no admissions of fault. that is psychopathic behavior. as for google, they aren't attacking people using patents and they have come clean and cooperated when they were in the wrong.
  happy now?
  
  --
  Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
63. Re:Strange by WoLpH · 2013-11-11 15:16 · Score: 1
  
  No, I don't think we should give up. I am just trying to point out that making people aware of this has more effect than refusing to use these services.
  People are not aware that this happens and/or is possible.
64. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 22:42 · Score: 0
  
  No in your home you have what is called an expectation of privacy.
  I completely agree! The point was that we can't arbitrarily decide that certain things are public merely because it's possible for people to listen in.
  
  Email may have an expectation of privacy
  I'm glad you agree, then.
  
  but it is a foolish one to expect since it is almost always stored in clear text on someone's servers.
  In practice, I agree. But we should not give up.
65. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-12 00:45 · Score: 0
  
  > REQUIRE SSL AND AUTHENTICATION
  Your servers may but in 99% of cases, your email client does not authenticate the server.
  Stock standard server side SSL is only useful for protection of content in transit via encryption.
  It will not stop man in the middle, nor will it stop storage or onbound transmission in the clear.
66. Re:Strange by kermidge · 2013-11-12 01:00 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed.
  It's morality, a quaint concept these days. Just because it's _possible_ to listen in, for instance, doesn't mean it's right to do so. That little bit seems to get lost in most of these 'discussions'.
  For that matter, all those pointing out how ordinary emails are sent plain-text, so what? Consider the header to be the envelope, just like of a letter via snail mail; works for me. Somebody has to physically do something to read an email by opening the file, just as someone has to open the envelope for a regular letter.
  Part also is the slippery slope thing - if I agree that Google can have an algorithm seek keywords in my emails in exchange for using their Gmail service, what comes next? Is it a straight trade, or the camel's nose? (yeah, mixed metaphors and all, sue me [grin])
  From the summary, "as consumer confidence plummets, technology companies' economic futures are threatened.'" Gosh and golly gee, I don't see a whole lot of consumer confidence plummeting, do you? Nor do I think that somehow Google's, for example, fortunes are particularly threatened - or have I missed something?
67. Re:Strange by ahabswhale · 2013-11-12 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  You don't think a giant multinational corporation could make your life miserable if it really wanted to? You must live inside of a Disney movie.
  
  --
  Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
68. Re:Strange by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-12 06:48 · Score: 0
  
  It is political power and not economic/technological power that is coercive (suggestions/nudges come with backing of legal penalty and prosecution)...Why would I worry about Corporations having technology and information unless they are in bed with the Govt.?
69. Re:Strange by spectrumlogic · 2013-11-12 14:29 · Score: 1
  
  Recently there were some posts placing “reasonable expectation of privacy” at the center of this debate. When you write your congressmen, be sure to include a sentence or two directly stating you DO, as a matter of fact, have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” for ALL electronic personal and business affairs. This convenient legal distinction drawn between papers and e-mail/phone conversations appears to deflect applicability of 4th amendment protections. This distinction is a grotesque extension of a “laissez faire” concept...with the 3 letter agencies surreptitiously thrown in the mix. It ensures power, influence and capital rule the electronic waves. We would do well to remember the lessons of that era. One-up-manship guarantees the murderer wins out over the pickpocket. No one really wants to let the net degenerate to a dominion where treachery replaces innovation. We must protect whatever integrity we have left...building it back will be a long process. That process begins by formally recognizing privacy and protecting against electronic invasion with some of those unreasonable punishments that we keep taking about. It seems to work pretty well for the USPS.
Who can spare a thought for such matters by korbulon · 2013-11-10 22:29 · Score: 5, Funny

When the next iPhone will be curved?
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/13/11/11/0353252/apple-developing-curve-screen-iphones-and-improved-sensors
1. Re:Who can spare a thought for such matters by dorre · 2013-11-10 23:04 · Score: 1
  
  Dude, my mod points had expired when I finally found an insightful topic completely wrongmodded (+2 off-topic at the moment). Nice touch with the italics .
2. Re:Who can spare a thought for such matters by cold+fjord · 2013-11-10 23:53 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  When the next iPhone will be curved?
  I'd prefer it if the next iPhone were be cured, but that is too much to hope for.
  
  --
  much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
3. Re:Who can spare a thought for such matters by Cordus+Mortain · 2013-11-11 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  I'd rather my current iPhone to be cured thanks!
4. Re:Who can spare a thought for such matters by CannonballHead · 2013-11-11 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  You see those devices from Hammerfell? They've got curved phones. Curved. Phones.
Vote with your feet by FriendlyLurker · 2013-11-10 22:31 · Score: 4, Informative

Take your business elsewhere whenever possible. Only thing that will make companies sit up and pay attention is when their bottom line starts to be affected. Computer professionals advise non-techy business types on how best to protect sensitive company information against the massive industrial espionage spy network. People may not care about their facebook page and personal email is being compromised, but they sure as hell care when their companies sensitive business information is put at risk...
1. Re:Vote with your feet by AHuxley · 2013-11-10 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  Yes new firms in distant lands will offer amazing new deals on servers, local support and boasting of no links in the UK or USA.
  Hardware will be rebuild and air gapped. Many will still use and enjoy the 'free' US brands but trust is gone.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
2. Re:Vote with your feet by rmstar · 2013-11-10 23:48 · Score: 1
  
  There is a lot of market potential in air-gapped hosting!
3. Re:Vote with your feet by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-11-11 00:07 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  tl;dr return to the '80s and '90s where businesses had servers in their server room.
  Never left it. Feels good, bro. My only "conspiracy theory" (in that I extrapolated from the available evidence quite a bit) has turned out to be mostly accurate.
4. Re:Vote with your feet by Cordus+Mortain · 2013-11-11 02:41 · Score: 1
  
  I've always wondered if there's an opportunity in Canada for exactly this, for this exact reason. And as an added bonus they can keep their cooling cheap during winter - just run a water cooling pipe out into the -40C snow. All you need is decent VPN into the data center and it's all good.
5. Re:Vote with your feet by currently_awake · 2013-11-11 11:12 · Score: 1
  
  The free market only works if it is free. When the government decides to change the ground rules, there is no choice. There is no vote with your feet. Nobody will be allowed to provide phone/internet/email that doesn't include spying, and using crypto won't change that one bit. They will just ban crypto and vpn.
6. Re:Vote with your feet by SonicSpike · 2013-11-11 12:40 · Score: 1
  
  yeah, last time I checked the NSA's reach was worldwide. And US courts have upheld the 3rd party doctrine where any information a 3rd party has about you (phone records for instance), is not subject to the same Constitutional protection as your personal effects are.
  
  --
  Libertas in infinitum
There is no free lunch by arjun.jrao · 2013-11-10 22:32 · Score: 1

Well, it costs money to run all the servers and machines that deliver cat videos and the latest pictures posted by your secret crush. Who's going to pay the bills for those servers ? Someone somewhere has to pay. Either you pay upfront with cold hard cash, in which case you can make indignant noses about unlawful uses of your data. If you don't want to pay cash, and instead have a "free" service, your data is what the developers will try to monetize. And there ain't a goddamn thing you can do about it. Of course, the NSA has gone a step further with their data collection by forcing companies with even paying customers to hand the user data over to the NSA. In this case, get the Internet off the US hands. I see balkanization of the internet in the future.
1. Re:There is no free lunch by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 22:43 · Score: 0
  
  Well, if that business model requires tracking of all user's lives, then maybe that business model should be illegal, don't you think? On the other hand, that business model is exactly what the US police state wants, so it won't be illegal. It's unfortunate that we have yet another dictatorship in the world. But I think it will kill itself sooner rather than later. Fuck you USA. And fuck you the people of the USA for letting it happen. Please stay where you are and don't spread your disease to other countries.
2. Re:There is no free lunch by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 22:51 · Score: 0
  
  There is no problem with "free lunches". If the lunch isn't free, then charge for it, or provide information detailing with you're giving up using it.
  Paid services and software has all the same problems as any "free lunch" or "free as in beer" scheme.
  The problem is with limitless run-away agencies, politicians selling out their own population and lack of sane regulation and governance.
  Free Software is part of a solution.
  Period.
3. Re:There is no free lunch by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 22:52 · Score: 1
  
  I have many times the server power that is necessary for serving all the data I want to be available online. My internet connection is sufficiently fast for hosting most of it -- all of it if I can use distributed hosting. The cost of hosting is negligible. If there were no Youtube or GMail, the cost of doing it yourself would not crush anybody. Those services feed on laziness, not necessity.
4. Re:There is no free lunch by Narcocide · 2013-11-10 23:20 · Score: 1
  
  Wait a minute, don't blame this shit on me. I've been telling everyone that social networking was dangerous and evil since "Instant Messaging" was invented in the 90's. None of them ever fucking listen to a damned thing I say though and neither did you. You have only yourselves to blame.
5. Re:There is no free lunch by geogob · 2013-11-10 23:30 · Score: 2
  
  There is no free lunch
  It depends. From the point of view of the company CEO accepting to help the NSA or other agencies, there might be a lot of free lunches. That all that counts, right?
6. Re:There is no free lunch by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 00:00 · Score: 0
  
  So Microsoft isn't collecting any data on, say, Xbox Live users, because that service is a paid service?
7. Re:There is no free lunch by phayes · 2013-11-11 00:21 · Score: 2
  
  Riiighht. The Internet will be balkanised because the US is only govt doing this & there is no cooperation between the intelligence agencies. Hey, it's not like the Communications that the French govt was complaining about was collected by the DGSE & then passed onto the NSA as the price for the USA deploying drone assets to Mali, or that the Germans perform "legal" surveillance of their population secretly or that the Brazilians spy on diplomats or ...
  Government heads are protesting much too loudly about NSA practices that they already knew about & that they themselves indulge in. I smell grandstanding to internal audiences & my prediction is that will be little long term effect.
  
  --
  Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
8. Re:There is no free lunch by SirGarlon · 2013-11-11 01:01 · Score: 2
  
  Either you pay upfront with cold hard cash, in which case you can make indignant noses about unlawful uses of your data. If you don't want to pay cash, and instead have a "free" service, your data is what the developers will try to monetize.
  I would love it if I could pay for an effective search engine that didn't track my search habits in order to alter the results.
  I would love it if I could pay for a social network to keep in touch with my friends and business contacts and it didn't spy on me and spam me and sell my information to all and sundry.
  I would love it if I could pay for news that didn't watch me back, or for videoconferencing that gave me the same privacy assurances my landline phone has (weak as those may be).
  These paid service you speak of, they don't exist. The choice is between surveillance-funded services, and no services at all.
  
  --
  [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
9. Re:There is no free lunch by drinkypoo · 2013-11-11 02:36 · Score: 1
  
  I would love it if I could pay for a social network to keep in touch with my friends and business contacts and it didn't spy on me and spam me and sell my information to all and sundry.
  It's called your own website. Put up a site based on any CMS, say Drupal, and then have all your friends create accounts there. But if you're paying someone else to run a site, then by definition you're paying someone else to compile data on you. Then the government gives them a choice between turning over the data or going to PMITA prison.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
10. Re:There is no free lunch by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  Google and Facebook make their money through advertising. I expect them to track users for that reason. That doesn't concern me - when I don't want them to know what I'm doing, I use a different browser in which I never login to either service and I have third party cookies disabled.
  
  But what about your cell phone company, your internet service provider, your bank, your physical retailer with an account system (warehouse retailers with memberships like Costco, grocery stores with outrageous prices if you don't get a membership, pharmacies), your online retailer. I pay them all directly, and they still track me extensively. I don't trust Google or Facebook to maintain my privacy, but I don't blame them for being data hoarders either. That's their entire business model. But PNC, Bank of America, Verizon, Comcast, Sprint, Amazon, Costco, Rite Aid, etc... already profit from my business, they're just assholes to collect additional information to sell to other companies and the government. I'd take my business elsewhere, but there are very few companies I can trust not to track me for profit.
11. Re:There is no free lunch by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 04:04 · Score: 0
  
  I would love it if I could pay for a social network to keep in touch with my friends and business contacts
  
  You can. It's this marvelous new invention called "The Internet". It turns out that you can use it to keep in touch with your friends and business contacts.
  In fact, it even has protocols and programs just for that purpose. They have names like "email", and "IM". You can even encrypt your emails and IMs so that people in the middle, between you and your friends and business contacts, cannot read what you say.
  I know it's a huge leap for most people to make, but you don't need to pay Facebook to spy on you in order to talk to your friends using the internet.
12. Re:There is no free lunch by Douglas+Goodall · 2013-11-12 15:59 · Score: 1
  
  Where I live, I have a simple choice between a 768Kb DSL or COMCAST. What kind of choice is that. And I guess that means that my internet traffic is broadcast around my neighborhood before it hits the POP on the fat coax.
13. Re:There is no free lunch by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-13 02:23 · Score: 1
  
  My choice is Comcast, unless I want to pay for satellite internet or use a 3G (4G is not available from any cell phone carrier in my area) cell phone plan. I'm sure Comcast has a list of every website I've visited since I moved into the house and sells it to advertisers.
  
  I've kicked around the idea of getting a VPN service like ProXPN or something. Then they can track my every move and sell it to advertisers, but I'd rather see some tiny company (ideally, one based in another country) have this information than my ISP. But I've been too lazy to make that move. I don't want to use Tor because it slows down browsing speeds.
The competitive edge is surely the NSA? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 22:32 · Score: 1

Surely the competitive edge is the hidden market for private data the NSA created!
So business models can undercut rivals by selling your private data to the NSA in secret, and it's really a government subsidy controlled by the military, but is never revealed because it's hidden behind terrorist scaremongering.
The only data that cannot be subpoenaed by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 22:34 · Score: 0

The only data that cannot be subpoenaed is data that doesn't exist. Collecting data which can be used for tracking is the original sin, and the biggest sinners are Google et al.
1. Re:The only data that cannot be subpoenaed by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  I disagree that Google is the biggest sinner. Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and Microsoft's Bing and Hotmail track us because that's their entire business model. Targeted advertising is what they do, that's all. That's evil, but it's open evil.
  
  The biggest sinners are banks, cell phone companies, credit card companies, internet service providers, grocery stores, physical store retailers, and only retailers. They get our money directly, and they choose to track us extensively anyway. That's the real sin - "We pretend to have a straightforward pay-for-service relationship with you, but we also pull all the dirty tricks that Google, Facebook, and Yahoo do."
Useless opinion is useless by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 22:35 · Score: 0

Oh certainly Google doesn't want LAWS protecting privacy. That doesn't preclude them whatsoever from encrypting everything. They still get all their own data, and now it's even protected, hypothetically, from the US government which apparently already has cost millions of not billions to US tech providers, but also protection from their competitors cracking their data in a similar fashion.
So they have all the reason in the world to encrypt it, after all the NSA doesn't pay them anything while their angry customers do. But we can also conclude Abraham Newton is a facile idiot.
1. Re:Useless opinion is useless by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:41 · Score: 2
  
  It's useless encryption, though. Thanks to the Patriot Act, the NSA can ask Google to decrypt and hand over any information on any person for no stated reason. Google can't even challenge the order in court. Google's decision to use encryption internally was a publicity stunt that only convinced people who didn't take five minutes to think about the value of that encryption (i.e. none).
Corporate America by Ukab+the+Great · 2013-11-10 22:35 · Score: 1

Has far more data that is likely to hurt you than the NSA does, and they have no problem selling to anyone with enough money. Potential employers having access to my salary history without my consent scares me and will hurt me far more than the government knowing I called my aunt yesterday. Likewise with my insurance company knowing that I visited Dunkin Donuts yesterday. Put away your tinfoil hats and see the real threat.
1. Re:Corporate America by FriendlyLurker · 2013-11-10 22:39 · Score: 1
  
  Corporate America in general can't directly intercept and store your emails, chat logs and VOIP sessions. They have little data fiefdoms dominating partial areas on your online life related to their respective businesses, wheras the NSA has built massive data warehouses to record and store all your bases...
2. Re:Corporate America by MrBigInThePants · 2013-11-10 23:02 · Score: 1
  
  How amusing. That really is a good one. Not sure how you got so many people in on the joke.
  You are all implying that the NSA (i.e. the government) and corporate america are separate entities....
  My my, what a chuckle.
  You were joking......right?
3. Re:Corporate America by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 23:31 · Score: 0
  
  Even if they were separate entities, the government simply has much more power to harm me than corporations, and they routinely use it to harm people.
4. Re:Corporate America by cheekyjohnson · 2013-11-10 23:35 · Score: 2
  
  Put away your tinfoil hats and see the real threat.
  What tinfoil hats? Are you suggesting that it is crazy to be afraid that the government might abuse the massive amount of power we've given it, even though every government has abused its power without fail? The people who work for the government are humans, not perfect angels; thus, it makes no sense to me to not be wary of them.
  Of course, I don't think corporations having all this data is a good thing either, but there are no tinfoil hats present here.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
5. Re:Corporate America by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 01:01 · Score: 1
  
  You really need to read up on CISPA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_Intelligence_Sharing_and_Protection_Act
  If passed, then all corporate data becomes government data, and government can and will choose to share that data with yet other corporations. In short, you will no longer be able to distinguish between corporate and government surveillance - it will all be intertwined.
  
  --
  "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:Corporate America by Runaway1956 · 2013-11-11 01:04 · Score: 1
  
  There's no DIFFERENCE between corporations and government. Look at CISPA. Read it, and understand it.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_Intelligence_Sharing_and_Protection_Act
  
  --
  "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
7. Re:Corporate America by cheekyjohnson · 2013-11-11 01:08 · Score: 1
  
  Well, okay... but my post didn't really strongly suggest that there were significant differences to begin with. I'm aware that any information these corporations have will likely also fall into the hands of government thugs.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
8. Re:Corporate America by BitZtream · 2013-11-11 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  No, Google, Yahoo and Microsoft do it for them, then run the analytics for them, and sell them the results.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Backward by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2013-11-10 22:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

Lax rules created fertile ground for NSA snooping.
No, rules don't make any difference to criminals, NSA or otherwise.
It is the high value of centralizing all that data info which makes for fertile ground.

--
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
1. Re:Backward by AHuxley · 2013-11-10 23:40 · Score: 1
  
  Yes centralising and the setting of global "US" standards. You wanted to book a room, sell, buy, trade, fly, call, fax, email - a US entity was in someway setting global interconnects and multinational support. Your safe encryption was their joke.
  Everything could be sold on for marketing, value adding, research, fine print.... all safe back to the 'allowed' buyers.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
2. Re:Backward by drinkypoo · 2013-11-11 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  No, rules don't make any difference to criminals, NSA or otherwise.
  Citation? You can't prevent murder by outlawing it, but you may well reduce it.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
3. Re:Backward by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 06:43 · Score: 0
  
  You can't prevent murder by outlawing it, but you may well reduce it.
  Citation?
Government doesn't need fertile ground. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 23:25 · Score: 0

"... Those same policies, however, have come back to haunt IT firms. Lax rules created fertile ground for NSA snooping."
Fertile ground?
What part of a Federal order that says "plug this black box into your WAN router and don't ask questions." needs to be fertilized?
Government asks no permission, and therefore does not abide by rules, firm or lax. Corporations agree under the duress that they all enjoy the luxury of being a US corporation. Don't play by the rules, you'll find yourself out of the capitalist boys club, one way or another.
And any corporation claiming they're going to tighten up security is merely going to increase password minimum length by a character or two, call that "secure", charge you $1/month more for it under some bullshit privacy surcharge, and rake in millions, all while continuing to allow Government to monitor everything.
Snowden revealed the actions of today's NSA. Nothing has been done to interrupt that. And why anyone would assume a US corporation holds that power is beyond me.
Yeah right by StripedCow · 2013-11-10 23:25 · Score: 2

... as consumer confidence plummets ...
As if the average facebook user cares about privacy.

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
1. Re:Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 23:55 · Score: 0
  
  the average FB user draws their curtains at night, and does not post pics of them on the shitter..
  anyone saying "the average", or "most fb user dont care about privacy" is entirely INCORRECT. Some friends share personal stories and humble moments with friends, but they are friends, not the general public or a non-friend.
  any luck finding the real-deal behind FB, (akamai,onavo), the PRISM scandal (SiSense)?
  THE NSA IS OVER-RELIANT (yea, even dominated by) on ISRAELI COMPANIES.********* PRISM= an illegal israeli operation developed and sold by SiSense,
  one of the many israeli-front-companies in SiliconValley.
  If noone cares about privacy, lets see what those israeli-front-companies are hiding.....
2. Re:Yeah right by kwalker · 2013-11-11 07:34 · Score: 1
  
  Oh they care, for the most part. They just don't think about privacy.
  
  --
  ... And so it comes to this.
Fuck the NSA by magic+maverick+ · 2013-11-10 23:41 · Score: 1

More stringent security measures. Universal electronic surveillance. No-knock laws. Stop and frisk laws. Government inspection of first-class mail. Automatic fingerprinting, photographing, blood tests, and urinalysis of any person arrested before he is charged with a crime. A law making it unlawful to resist even unlawful arrest. Laws establishing detention camps for potential subversives. Gun control laws. Restrictions on travel. The assassinations, you see, establish the need for such laws in the public mind. Instead of realizing that there is a conspiracy, conducted by a handful of men, the people reason—or are manipulated into reasoning—that the entire populace must have its freedom restricted in order to protect the leaders.
Of course, I would sound like a paranoid if I invoked the Illuminati, so I won't. *cough*
Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they are not out to get me.

--
HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
1. Re:Fuck the NSA by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 00:51 · Score: 0
  
  Just because you are insane doesn't mean you can't drive a car or post on Slashdot.
2. Re:Fuck the NSA by magic+maverick+ · 2013-11-11 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  You're a moron. That quote, that quote's from 1975. People have been warning about overreaching government for a long time (long before 1975). I was just giving an example of that. You seem to imply that you think I'm crazy. It doesn't take a crazy person to recognize that "Western" governments have been getting more authoritarian and totalitarian as technology progresses. Soon enough we'll be at the stage of voluntary always on telescreens (c.f. Microsoft's Xbox and camera). The police state loves that sort of stuff. And "Silicon Valley" (i.e. the tech companies) are more than happy to help out, because they can sell more stuff, and make more money. All hail the almighty buck. No. Fuck that shit.
  We should string the tech company executives up alongside the politicians and bureaucrats. And when the revolution comes, apologists will also be up against the wall.
  
  --
  HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
3. Re:Fuck the NSA by drinkypoo · 2013-11-11 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  It's just the typical cycle. Rewind to the 80s, hippies passing out flyers on streetcorners warning of the trilateral commission's influence on American finance and people throwing them away saying "this looks like a bunch of bullshit". Forward to 2000, the trilateral commission's influence on finance and politics is a proven fact, and now we're looking at more groups like the Bilderbergers etc and people are saying "this looks like a bunch of bullshit" all over again.
  
  We should string the tech company executives up alongside the politicians and bureaucrats. And when the revolution comes, apologists will also be up against the wall.
  Sadly, when the next revolution comes, we will all be against the wall, because it will be due to massive collapse.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Grammar by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-10 23:59 · Score: 0

in the wake of reports that all-your-data-belong-to-the-NSA rings

That should be "all your datum are belong to NSA"
should be how Americans helped the NSA by Gothmolly · 2013-11-11 00:07 · Score: 2

Everyone wanted free Internet, free search engines, free Webmail, free coupons, free 5% off clubs, free 1-click shopping.... what did people think was going on there?

--
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
1. Re:should be how Americans helped the NSA by AHuxley · 2013-11-11 00:35 · Score: 1
  
  Loss leader and branding was the story told. That until the CPU, GPU, RAM, storage, bandwidth was 'usable' at the consumer end. It was better to build the brand at the server end - to be ready in 1-5-10 years and their newer interactive PC's.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
2. Re:should be how Americans helped the NSA by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  I've posted it elsewhere, but I'll repeat it - I don't care about Google, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, and Microsoft (through Bing and Hotmail) tracking for the purposes of ad revenue. That's their complete business model. I get what I paid for.
  
  I'm angry at Bank of America, Mastercard, Visa, Comcast, Verizon, Sprint, AT&T, Costco, Sam's Club, Amazon.com, Best Buy, CVS Pharmacy, Riteaid Pharmacy, etc... they profit directly through financial transactions with me, but they still collect every scrap of data their tentacles can reach to sell anyway. I could host my own email server and do all of my searches for information in a library or with a phone book, and there would still be a dozen companies that can probably tell you where I drove yesterday, what I bought, and who I communicated with.
3. Re:should be how Americans helped the NSA by recharged95 · 2013-11-11 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  Heck, Facebook easily saw that "opportunity" and wrapped it in a nice exclusivity wrapper to make you feel important.
  And 75% of the population eat it up. In wholesale....
  I guess democratic gov't does reflect the people it governs. No news here folks.
  As I have said before, information doesn't want to be free, it wants to be exploited. 'Free' (as in beer) and 'private' are just aspects of exploitation folks.
CORPORATE AMERICA by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 00:17 · Score: 0

http://www.amazon.com/Corporate-America-Boston/dp/B00006LI3R/
has all you need to know about Corporate America. The stories I could tell.
How Silicon Valley Helped China... by tommeke100 · 2013-11-11 00:24 · Score: 1

Oh, come on.
Plenty of these companies already worked together with China behind the great firewall or other countries that required a tight all encompassing security/censoring framework.
It's just the quirks of doing business in a country, your home country included.
That's the convenient viewpoint by argStyopa · 2013-11-11 00:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

...perhaps I could correct this a little:
"'U.S. citizens have passively accepted weak privacy rules that let companies collect massive amounts of personal data. The strategy enabled the companies to work their way into every corner of consumers' lives ..."
I keep hearing about the "US govt" this and "companies" that.
The fact is that the whole 'privacy' thing is comparable to the cigarette issue for the last 50 years....NOBODY believed cigarettes were in any way good for you, and by the late 1960s pretty much everyone recognized that they were quite harmful (regardless of what the cigarette companies insisted).
In short, the consumers willfully participated and knew (when they bothered to think about it) that companies were collecting massive amounts of data with every transaction, using (without complaint) their social security number as an id#, etc.
When I've got a friend or three complaining about companies/government gathering private data, they're usually paying for their meal with a credit card.

--
-Styopa
Even Firefox by hebertrich · 2013-11-11 00:46 · Score: 1

I mean , the browsers allow all the tracking etc .. Once the people doing the browsers are done selling us , maybe we'll have a break.
Browsers have to be made not to allow the snooping. They are not made that way , they are made to support snooping.They are made to help advertisers take all they want from our machines.
Time to fork and abandon browsers that do not make the efforts to protect us l
1. Re:Even Firefox by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-11 02:53 · Score: 2
  
  The Mozilla Foundation, which makes Firefox, gets most of its funding through hundred million dollar grants from Google. Google gets most of its money from advertising.
  
  That's why Firefox browser (and of course, the Chrome browser) will never take any serious steps to block user tracking. If Mozilla ever got serious about user privacy, the next grant from Google would never arrive and Firefox development and bug fixes would slow to a trickle.
  
  If any browser vendor would put real investment into blocking user tracking, it's probably Microsoft. Cutting ad revenue would hurt Google more than it hurts Microsoft, so Microsoft would love to move in that direction. But of course Microsoft makes proprietary software, so as soon as any grand plan to modify Internet Explorer to enhance user privacy actually worked, the NSA would probably just order Microsoft to insert a backdoor into the browser and track all user activity through that.
Re:Like we didn't know by hebertrich · 2013-11-11 00:50 · Score: 1

Quite a bit too late since the NSA already publishes ( and for a number of years ) their own security enhanced hardened linux.
Opt-in matters by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 00:53 · Score: 0

When those companies collect that information it's opt-in, we are aware of the information being collected and we can choose to use the competing service if we want to. Also there's plenty of people worried about the privacy concerns around Facebook, but as always convenience is the great motivator.
Also the government has much potential to abuse this information, put people on no-fly list, arrest them, put them in jail, torture them, put them in a secret jail without due process. They promise to only use it against terrorists, and maybe pedophiles (because that justifies having the tech). But we've seen how the US government treats wistleblowers, Bradly Manning will most likely serve a 35 year sentence. So if this information is somehow abused, who will help out?
Love by shimul1990 · 2013-11-11 01:17 · Score: 0

Love has many dimensions & forms but it is very much sole related in all forms.
Re:OT COMPLAINT by MysteriousPreacher · 2013-11-11 01:18 · Score: 1

Are you blocking some or all Javascript, or are you using a slightly esoteric browser? Adds are disabled just for me.

--
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Re:Like we didn't know by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 01:23 · Score: 1

For various definitions of "enhanced."
No threat to companies: we've forgotten already by fygment · 2013-11-11 01:58 · Score: 3, Insightful

Few people really 'got' what was going on; some people remain unaware; and most really don't care.
Companies will lie, politicians will lie, and the people will pretend to believe them and carry on.

--
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
You have native means (hosts) by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 02:42 · Score: 0

Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization):
---
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 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
(Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)
Summary:
---
A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4127345&cid=44701775
B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3985079&cid=44310431 w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,
C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).
---
* "A fool makes things bigger + more complex: It takes a touch of genius & a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." - Einstein
(Addons are more complex + slowup browsers in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see))
---
** "Less is more" = GOOD engineering!
(Vs. slowing down SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE in addons which slow them down more: I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts - A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)
APK
P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"
...apk
Re:Like we didn't know by NatasRevol · 2013-11-11 02:46 · Score: 1

*their own security* enhanced.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
economic future threatened? I think not by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 02:53 · Score: 0

Oh sure.. people are going to give up all their wireless and internet enabled devices and AT&T, Comcast, etc. are going to see their business base plummet.
No, what will happen is people will whine and complain, there will be some laws and regulations passed that have little real effect, and we'll move on.
Most people don't realize that the ONLY information service which has a prohibition on distributing your usage records to anyone willing to pay for them is Cable TV. And that is essentially a fluke, prompted by a notorious incident back when two-way cable TV was a lot smaller and more diverse in terms of providers, so they didn't mount a significant political campaign against it. Today, the same event (disclosing a political candidates viewing records) might prompt some outcry, but would never wind up with a legislative fix.
This is not just about surveillance by gmuslera · 2013-11-11 03:28 · Score: 3, Insightful

This is also about attacking; hacking, intrusion, modifying systems, sabotaging hardware, etc. Is not a passive "i want to know this", but an active/aggresive "i will plant a backdoor/rootkit to be able to do there whatever i want", including hitting you as a person, as a country, or as a trusted media that reach enough/certain people/companies.
We already knwo they planted backdoors on Tor users and Slashdot and LinkedIn users, and with Silicon Valley cooperation, probably they will be bundled in a lot more software/hardware/services. Time to stop playing boiling frog.
Dude by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 03:55 · Score: 0

Nobody was OK with it except the companies. You're just a victim of marketing.
so as hte economic embargo on the usa gains weight by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 04:02 · Score: 0

ya all lies , keep pushing until the nsa is reigned in large
Re: Like we didn't know by jd2112 · 2013-11-11 04:04 · Score: 1

'enhanced' as in ideally they can hack it but no one else can.

--
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
Re:OT COMPLAINT by Virtucon · 2013-11-11 04:06 · Score: 1

Ads are a pain but I use Ghostery and DoNotTrackMe which takes care of most of the crap.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
This works on ads & FAR more... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 05:10 · Score: 0

For more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4430673&cid=45390909
* Enjoy (it's a 100% 'freebie' - that works on what you have issue with + FAR more)...
(With LESS "added complexity/room for breakdown" browser addons introduce - especially crippled by default OR advertiser owned ones).
APK
P.S.=> The hosts file output's MULTI-PLATFORM (works on ANY OS + webbrowser/email OR hardware, think smartphones like ANDROID for instance, etc.-et al) via custom hosts files, & works on ANY web-bound app, BSD based IP stack, OS, or hardware using those there is that's 'current/mainstream' under the sun, with current data is from 12 reliable + reputable sources in the security community (e.g. - malwarebytes' hpHosts, MVPS org. & 10 others like them, absolutely current) - period!
... apk
All your data... by fisted · 2013-11-11 05:22 · Score: 1

all-your-data-are-belong-to-the-NSA
FTFY

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
1. Re:All your data... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 05:33 · Score: 0
  
  Not quite.
  all-your-datum-are-belong-to-NSA
Following orders by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 08:44 · Score: 0

I find it strange that "following orders" is supposedly not a valid defence.
In a time of war, what is the alternative to following orders? It is court martial, possibly a neckshot, in any case a de facto suicide! How then can someone judge a person for following orders in such a time, when the alternative is self-destruction?
Re:OT COMPLAINT by SleazyRidr · 2013-11-11 08:52 · Score: 1

It does that to me sometimes. I just uncheck it, then check it again, with a couple of refreshes thrown in where appropriate and it goes back to normal.

--
Is 1563649 a prime number?
How'd "eatin yer words" taste by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 10:03 · Score: 0

After ya played yerself (for apk) today http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4422297&cid=45389951 ? "Inquiring minds want to know".
You call them iPads by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 10:04 · Score: 0

We call them ourPads
Yours
The NSA and GCHQ
SSL by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-11 11:39 · Score: 0

SSL is a good example: tag any self-signed certificates with a scary warning. This is useless. The malware creators are making enough money that they can afford a valid certificate, the rest of us (hobby developers et al) cannot. I have also seen users that just "click through" the errors because they were told to do this at other workplaces. This makes the whole "trusted ca" business model, which is what it is ($$$), worthless as far as security.
Re:OT COMPLAINT by TapeCutter · 2013-11-11 11:41 · Score: 1

My browser is pretty much an "out of the box" IE10 install with minimal plugins. I don't use an ad blockers, I grew up reading newspapers and magazines, my eyes automatically ignore all but the most intrusive ads. However I was intrigued by your claim so I clicked "Disable ads" and (for me) the ads obediently disappeared.

So the problem is very likely something to do with your environment. If you want them to have a look at it then post the details of the problem and your environment to "feedback" - email link in the footer at the bottom of this page.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I have no idea by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-13 07:44 · Score: 0

Get it outta yer ass. It's not polite to talk with your mouth full http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4422297&cid=45389951 though!