Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- masssurveillance [2014/01/14 10:13] – references anonymous
+++ masssurveillance [2014/01/31 21:50] – 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
   * One could use the data for rating people by threat-potential using AI that analyse the data. (Note that machines don't "understand" context (or for example irony) as humans do nor is such usually unambiguous). Being rated high can have very real consequences such as personalized extended surveillance, being denied access to various parts of society, random searches etc. For instance the German sociologist Andrej Holm was subject to months of personalized surveillance (having people listen directly to all his phone calls etc) and conviction because he googled terms ("gentrification") that previously occurred in a letter of a terrorist organization ((https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrej_Holm#Ermittlungsverfahren_wegen_Verdachts_der_Mitgliedschaft_in_einer_terroristischen_Vereinigung)). The ADVISE project ((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADVISE)) seems to be an attempt of implementing this.
-  * One of the most important problems (that is especially emerging from the one above) is the constraint of people's decisions that inevitable follows if they know they're being watched or susceptible to being watched and their actions being recorded. This breeds conformity, adhering to norms and constrains the freedom people ought to have by privacy ((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect)). (Also note that the gradual establishment of adhering to specific informal norms makes those norms prone to becoming formal laws. Especially as the eavesdroppers feel their enormous power "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely".)
+  * One of the most important problems (that is especially emerging from the one above) is the constraint of people's decisions that inevitable follows if they know they're being watched or susceptible to being watched and their actions being recorded. This breeds conformity, adhering to norms and constrains the freedom people ought to have by privacy ((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect)). (Also note that the gradual establishment of adhering to specific informal norms makes those norms prone to becoming formal laws. Especially as the eavesdroppers feel their enormous power "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely".)
   * Also the data could get into the wrong hands - ie one of the ~35000 employees ((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency)) (especially private contractors as Snowden was ((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Booz_Allen_Hamilton#PRISM_media_disclosures))) could for example sell data for money/private benefits or abuse it because of (ie extremist) ideology. Well besides of the abuse that is already occurring such as "Loveint" ((http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10263880/NSA-employees-spied-on-their-lovers-using-eavesdropping-programme.html)).
@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
   * The main problem however is that they have data (most of their online activities including posts on 4chan for example) on every internet-user ((http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data)) that they could use for blackmailing or character assassination (ie for retrospective justification). That's of course leaving out that they are already spying on users' porn habits for exactly this purpose already ((http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/26/nsa-porn-muslims_n_4346128.html)). Having sensitive data on every internet-user equals immense power which according to Snowden is what they're actually after (("These Programs Were Never About Terrorism: They’re About Economic Spying, Social Control, and Diplomatic Manipulation. They’re About Power" ~Snowden in letter to the people of brazil: http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/world/2013/12/1386296-an-open-letter-to-the-people-of-brazil.shtml)).
-----