5 ms·

Thanks for posting the rebuttal to the article I wrote over at SHTFplan. While I won't disagree with your assessment that "nobody cares," it's become increasing

Thanks for posting the rebuttal to the article I wrote over at SHTFplan. While I won't disagree with your assessment that "nobody cares," it's become increasingly clear that all digitally processed data is being fused into complex 'social network' like databases. The Fusion centers mentioned in the article do just this. They aggregate data looking for flags. No, there isn't a person sitting around listening specifically to your phone calls, or specifically monitoring your internet traffic or emails... It's all plugged into digital monitoring systems. You really don't matter.... until you're flagged. We can play this game all day long, but the fact of the matter is that systems like this do exist. Operation Echelon, as I pointed out in this article, is designed for this specific purpose and has been used extensively in over 15 countries in Europe in the 1990's, and has likely expanded by now. This is verifiable and confirmed by the US and British governments - just look it up - don't be scared. Computers ARE listening to your conversations utilizing speech recognition technology. And if you happen to say a keyword, or string of keywords, the conversation is flagged and dispatched for human analysis. This is FACT, not tin foil stuff. With regards to cell phones and the comment from "fredu golon" here in your rebuttal, again, this is not science fiction. This is CONFIRMED by the FBI as early as 2006. It's called "Roving Bug" technology and it is active in most every cell phone that comes to market: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html . While the 'camera' side of this is unconfirmed, it's obvious that the technology is possible and likely in use right now. Likewise is the technology possible to monitor microphones and cameras on your home PC... It's as simple as accessing your network. While I certainly don't know how to do it. And you don't know how to do it. Are you really of the thought that top-level intelligence agencies do not have this capability? And if they do, how long before the technology is integrated with monitoring systems so that computers can, at the push of a button, listen to entire networks of users having conversations at home? My view is that the purpose Fusion networks and centers is exactly this over the long-term. I have no paranoia or delusions about what's going on here, and I realize I am but a speck of dust on a beach of billions of digitally-connected internet and cell phone users. The point here was not to necessarily suggest the YOU, specifically, are being monitored, but that the system as a whole has the capabilities to do so and is actively doing it right now. Call it tin foil, that's fine. But the evidence, some of which was cited above, simply cannot be denied. Thanks. Mac Slavo www.SHTFplan.com

orthecreedence 16y ago
Thanks for your reply. While I don't deny the existence of flagging of voice and text communications (this has been a well-known fact for years), my point was not "no, they aren't watching." My point was "yes, they are watching...but who cares??" If you have something you want to hide from the government (or other organization), encrypt it. Also, even having access to my home network (which is firewalled once by my router, and again by my computer) there is still no way to just "flip the switch" and monitor my webcam. I would have to a. have a port available PUBLICLY through both firewalls that allowed someone to connect and view a live stream of my cam (which would require streaming software running in the background, AKA I'd have to purposefully turn it on) or b. have a trojan installed unbeknownst to me that somehow figures out, in every model of laptop, how to turn on the camera but disable the "camera is on" hardware light, connect to a remote server (without the operating system knowing about it (not bloody likely)) and send a stream of everything happening. There would have to be a standard API implemented by all PC/camera manufacturers that allows this trojan to do this, which has also been kept entirely secret (impossible, if more than one organization is involved) and also the trojan would have to be installed on all computers and ignored by all virus scan software. The trojan would also have the ability to open a hidden connection that the operating system would allow but not report as an active connection. Like I said previously, this is ridiculous. Perhaps this could MAYBE happen in Windows/Mac (good luck keeping this secret), but not an open-source OS like linux. So yes, maybe you don't know how to do it, but I do...and I'm telling you that I would have to purposefully allow it to happen. Please don't spread misinformation just because you think it may be possible or because you saw it in a movie. Also, note that at no point did I call you paranoid or mention a tinfoil hat. I simply stated my disagreement to your main points, which you have still not argued against: 1. You are on public networks here. Your computer is connected to the largest public network in the world...consider it a free for all. Your cell phone transmits information using radio waves...meaning anybody (anybody) can listen in. 2. Nobody cares what you are doing or saying. You'd have to actually be planning some sort of attack to become any sort of priority on a keyword monitoring system. Which brings us to 3. If you really do want to hide something -- from the government, from corporations, from anyone -- you have to encrypt it if you are going to send it over public channels. Airwaves are public, the internet is public. Don't expect free privacy.

orthecreedence 16y ago

Thanks for your reply. While I don't deny the existence of flagging of voice and text communications (this has been a well-known fact for years), my point was not "no, they aren't watching." My point was "yes, they are watching...but who cares??" If you have something you want to hide from the government (or other organization), encrypt it. Also, even having access to my home network (which is firewalled once by my router, and again by my computer) there is still no way to just "flip the switch" and monitor my webcam. I would have to a. have a port available PUBLICLY through both firewalls that allowed someone to connect and view a live stream of my cam (which would require streaming software running in the background, AKA I'd have to purposefully turn it on) or b. have a trojan installed unbeknownst to me that somehow figures out, in every model of laptop, how to turn on the camera but disable the "camera is on" hardware light, connect to a remote server (without the operating system knowing about it (not bloody likely)) and send a stream of everything happening. There would have to be a standard API implemented by all PC/camera manufacturers that allows this trojan to do this, which has also been kept entirely secret (impossible, if more than one organization is involved) and also the trojan would have to be installed on all computers and ignored by all virus scan software. The trojan would also have the ability to open a hidden connection that the operating system would allow but not report as an active connection. Like I said previously, this is ridiculous. Perhaps this could MAYBE happen in Windows/Mac (good luck keeping this secret), but not an open-source OS like linux. So yes, maybe you don't know how to do it, but I do...and I'm telling you that I would have to purposefully allow it to happen. Please don't spread misinformation just because you think it may be possible or because you saw it in a movie. Also, note that at no point did I call you paranoid or mention a tinfoil hat. I simply stated my disagreement to your main points, which you have still not argued against: 1. You are on public networks here. Your computer is connected to the largest public network in the world...consider it a free for all. Your cell phone transmits information using radio waves...meaning anybody (anybody) can listen in. 2. Nobody cares what you are doing or saying. You'd have to actually be planning some sort of attack to become any sort of priority on a keyword monitoring system. Which brings us to 3. If you really do want to hide something -- from the government, from corporations, from anyone -- you have to encrypt it if you are going to send it over public channels. Airwaves are public, the internet is public. Don't expect free privacy.