Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-16-2012, 10:50 AM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,216
Yes, Big Brother is Reading Your Email?and Soon He'll Be Reading Your Body Language, Thanks to Microsoft | AlterNet

06-18-2012, 01:23 PM   #17
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Google Sees Surge In Censorship Demands - Government - Policy & Regulation - Informationweek

QuoteQuote:
Google warns that government attempts to remove online information are increasing and that some of the governments making censorship requests are Western democracies.

U.S. authorities, for example, made 6,192 requests seeking the removal of information from Google during the second half of 2011, the company said in a report published Sunday. In the first half of 2011, the U.S. government made 757 such requests.
Double plus ungood.......
06-21-2012, 04:01 PM   #18
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,275
QuoteOriginally posted by grhazelton Quote
And if you catch one?
Take it to a taxidermist and have its head mounted.
07-25-2012, 01:45 PM   #19
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
closer???????????????

QuoteQuote:
NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. -- He saw something. He said something. And he inadvertently uncovered a secret spying operation that the New York Police Department was running outside its jurisdiction.

In June 2009, a building superintendent at an apartment complex near the Rutgers University campus opened the door to unit 1076 to conduct an inspection. Tenants had been notified of the inspection weeks ago and the notice was still stuck to the door.

He turned his key, walked in and immediately knew something was wrong. A colleague called 911.

"What's suspicious?" a New Brunswick police dispatcher asked.

"Suspicious in the sense that the apartment has about – has no furniture except two beds, has no clothing, has New York City Police Department radios," he replied.

"Really?" the dispatcher asked, her voice rising with surprise.

The caller, Salil Sheth, and his colleagues had stumbled upon one of the NYPD's biggest secrets: a safe house, a place where undercover officers working well outside the department's jurisdiction could lie low and coordinate surveillance.

Since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the NYPD, with training and guidance from the CIA, has monitored the activities of Muslims in New York and far beyond. Detectives infiltrated mosques, eavesdropped in cafes and kept tabs on Muslim student groups, including at Rutgers.

The NYPD kept files on sermons, recorded the names of political organizers in police documents, and built databases of where Muslims lived and shopped, even where they were likely to gather to watch sports. Out-of-state operations, like the one in New Brunswick, were one aspect of this larger intelligence-gathering effort.
NYPD Spying: How A 911 Caller Outed NYPD Surveillance Of Muslims In New Jersey

QuoteQuote:
POLICE ESCALATED TENSIONS

It cited numerous incidents in which it said police officers employed excessive force without sufficient provocation.
The report also said journalists covering the movement were subjected to a pattern of harassment, including the use of force, restrictions on access and arrests. In particular, it said credentialed journalists were barred from covering the overnight raid that cleared the main Occupy encampment at Manhattan's Zuccotti Park in November.
Constant police surveillance of Occupy events in some cases appears to violate legal restrictions on police monitoring of protests, known as the "Handschu Guidelines" after the landmark case that led to their creation, the report said.
The intimidation and use of force served to escalate tensions while having a chilling effect on the right to free speech and assembly, the authors concluded.
In addition to calling for an inspector general to monitor the NYPD, the report said there should be an investigation into the police response to Occupy Wall Street.
"Protesters, journalists, legal observers and lawyers interviewed for this report often voiced a lack of confidence in the mechanisms available for holding police accountable for misconduct," the report said.
NYU law Professor Sarah Knuckey, one of the two principal authors of the report, said she hoped the U.S. Justice Department would consider investigating the NYPD's conduct if the city refused to do so.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-newyork-occupy-report-idUSBRE86O1PA20120725


Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-25-2012 at 02:56 PM.
07-27-2012, 09:12 AM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
grhazelton's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jonesboro, GA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,886
We recently bought a laptop and it has a tiny camera in the bezel of the screen, for use with Skype, etc. What is to prevent the NYPD, for example, from keeping this and the microphone live at all times and thus monitoring your use of the computer and who knows what else? When will flat screen TVs and "ordinary" computer monitors incorporate similar features? Is your cell phone only for your use? Perhaps that satellite dish on your roof could transmit as well as well as receive.... Paranoia? Sometimes someone really is watching you....
07-27-2012, 10:42 AM   #21
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,275
QuoteOriginally posted by grhazelton Quote
We recently bought a laptop and it has a tiny camera in the bezel of the screen, for use with Skype, etc. What is to prevent the NYPD, for example, from keeping this and the microphone live at all times and thus monitoring your use of the computer and who knows what else? When will flat screen TVs and "ordinary" computer monitors incorporate similar features? Is your cell phone only for your use? Perhaps that satellite dish on your roof could transmit as well as well as receive.... Paranoia? Sometimes someone really is watching you....
Skype just announced that they are going to work with law enforcement and other agencies.
07-27-2012, 11:02 AM   #22
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
(Scalia)
QuoteQuote:
He believes the court was similarly wrong in barring warrantless wiretapping.

"That's simply contrary to the text of the Fourth Amendment, which never protected privacy in some broad sense," he said. "It's very specific [in barring unreasonable searches only of] persons, houses, papers and effects."
Justice Scalia Disputes Accuracy Of 'Leak' : NPR
followup for interest:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/07/25/157384080/interviewing-sc...-with-a-master

Last edited by jeffkrol; 07-27-2012 at 11:26 AM.
07-28-2012, 06:37 AM   #23
Banned




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,668
QuoteOriginally posted by grhazelton Quote
We recently bought a laptop and it has a tiny camera in the bezel of the screen, for use with Skype, etc. What is to prevent the NYPD, for example, from keeping this and the microphone live at all times and thus monitoring your use of the computer and who knows what else?

Last year a type of rental retail chain did exactly that. Using a type of program that was not completely removeable; the rental chain Aaron's had all of their laptop rental computers outfitted with this software.

Naturally the software would monitor items like rental payments, but... Would also enable a type of "remote assistance/remote desktop feature; that without letting the user know - would activate the laptops built in webcam and microphone.

Professionally speaking (actually stating) as a Microsoft Partner; this was quite an impressive little bit of software coding. Even most computer professionals would have never known it was there.

Might I also add; a similiar incident such as this was also found to have been done by a school district. It also has to make one wonder; darn why did I ever accept a computer for work purposes. Wonder if my employer is watching me now??

12-02-2012, 08:00 AM   #24
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,275
Food for thought regarding "Drones" in U.S. airspace.

Drone crashes mount at civilian airports overseas - The Washington Post
12-02-2012, 11:23 AM   #25
Banned




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,668
PC rental store accused of using webcams, keyloggers on customers | Ars Technica

And another link I cannot yet find...

During any bank robbery in america; after the fbi is notified... They rarely even bother to use the bank security cameras until trial, because... The fbi uses a type of cellular/mobile phone tower trace.

During a robbery in which most criminals aren't exactly rocket scientists - robbers even typically leave their mobile phones on themselves. Using rather simple tech to determine who was in the area and then "selectively" narrowing it down - it doesn't take long to identify most bank robbers. This exact type of techn has been used on numerous other types of crimes. It first "came to light" at about the time when O.J. was acccused of murder. Btw ironcally OJ's phone was at that ery crime scene - as calculated by that very mobile phone tower, signal triangulation, strenght, etc..
12-02-2012, 02:14 PM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
les3547's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sebastopol, California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,923
I'll buck the trend and admit that so far I have no problem with public surveillance, I even like it because my perception is that as it has been used to keep the country and citizens safe. I"ve heard of nothing yet to be worried about, but plenty of bad guys seem to have been caught or stopped.

I recognize the potential for abuse, but that isn't a necessary result. The truth is, whether or not there were laws permitting it, the connectedness of things allows for spying. If the government were intent on illegal spying, they could do it (e.g., Hoover). If the government is open about exactly what is being done, at least with laws in place and boundaries defined, things can be monitored by watchdog groups like the ACLU. I think a bigger threat is illegal spying by criminals (inside and outside the US) or corporations abusing power, which I hope our government is well-prepared for preventing.

I was relieved to see one disturbing government overreach curbed when a Chicago prosecutor started agressively trying to prosecute people who violated a 50 year old Illinois law prohibiting public taping of police:

QuoteQuote:
Illinois Police Recording Law Blocked By Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday delivered another blow to a 50-year-old anti-eavesdropping law in Illinois, choosing to let stand a lower court finding that key parts of the hotly debated law run counter to constitutional protections of free speech. In that critical lower-court ruling in May, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law – one of the toughest of its kind in the country – violates the First Amendment when used against those who record police officers doing their jobs in public.

Civil libertarians say the ability to record helps guard against police abuse. The law's proponents, however, say it protects the privacy rights of officers and civilians, as well as ensures that those wielding recording devices don't interfere with urgent police work. The Illinois Eavesdropping Act, enacted in 1961, makes it a felony for someone to produce an audio recording of a conversation unless all the parties involved agree. It sets a maximum punishment of 15 years in prison if a law enforcement officer is recorded.

As it drew the ire of civil liberties groups, state legislators endeavored to soften the law earlier this year, but those efforts stalled. The high-court's decision could prompt a renewed push to overhaul it.

. . . The Washington, D.C.-based high court didn't hear arguments or issue an opinion, but its decision to do nothing amounts to a rejection of a plea from Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez to overturn the decision by the 7th Circuit in Chicago. In their 33-page petition to the Supreme Court, prosecutors argued the 7th Circuit had ignored privacy rights and created "a novel and unprecedented First Amendment protection to ubiquitous recording devices."

"The decision (of the 7th Circuit) diminished the conversational privacy of speakers in favor of a heretofore unrecognized First Amendment right to audio record the discussions of such speakers," the petition said.

Especially in an era where recording devices can pick up conversations from far away, a lack of restraints could make civilians uneasy and make them reluctant to speak frankly to officers about criminal activity – endangering the public, the petition argued. What the prosecutor's office sought most was "legal clarification and guidance," a spokeswoman for Alvarez, Sally Daly said on Monday. She said it was disappointing the high court didn't agree to hear the case.

It stems from a 2010 lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union seeking to block Alvarez from prosecuting ACLU staff for recording police officers performing duties in public – one of the group's long-standing monitoring missions.

The ACLU of Illinois on Monday welcomed the high court's decision not to touch the lower court's ruling. "We are hopeful that we are moving closer to a day when no one in Illinois will risk prosecution when they audio record public officials performing their duties," Harvey Grossman, legal director of the ACLU of Illinois, said in a statement. "Empowering individuals and organizations in this fashion will ensure additional transparency and oversight of public officials across the state."

The case now gets kicked back to a U.S. District Court in Chicago, where the ACLU will ask a federal judge to make a temporary injunction against the law permanent. If a judge agrees, that could amount to a final death knell for the law as it's currently written.

Last edited by les3547; 12-02-2012 at 04:58 PM.
12-02-2012, 04:07 PM   #27
Pentaxian
Tom S.'s Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Michigan
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,299
QuoteOriginally posted by Rico Quote
Hey Mike Welcome to Obamanation.

Let's hope they don't arm the drones and start assassinating citizen's who don't agree with their agenda here at home too.
Just so you know, the Bush administration created the biggest leap forward on citizen surveillance with the Patriot Act. As for the drones themselves, I believe they were a program that started under Clinton, but was shelved until it was re-ignited, again under Bush. Regardless, if you don't think the government hasn't been keeping taps on us via spy planes and satellites, you are sadly mistaken. The satellite maps you see on Google are nothing compared to what the government can really do with satellites.

And none of this could take place without the consent of Congress, so if you want to start pointing fingers, go up on the Hill and start pointing them there.
12-02-2012, 09:00 PM   #28
Veteran Member
riff's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,408
QuoteOriginally posted by les3547 Quote
I"ve heard of nothing yet to be worried about
QuoteOriginally posted by les3547 Quote
If the government were intent on illegal spying, they could do it (e.g., Hoover).
So Hoover doesn't worry you, how about Watergate.
12-02-2012, 09:10 PM   #29
Senior Member
graphicgr8s's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 229
QuoteOriginally posted by les3547 Quote
I'll buck the trend and admit that so far I have no problem with public surveillance, I even like it because my perception is that as it has been used to keep the country and citizens safe. I"ve heard of nothing yet to be worried about, but plenty of bad guys seem to have been caught or stopped.
Safe? Maybe. But at what cost? As you slide toward one side you lose the other.

QuoteQuote:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Mike, why do you think they want medical records in the "cloud"?
12-02-2012, 09:44 PM   #30
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
les3547's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sebastopol, California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,923
QuoteOriginally posted by riff Quote
So Hoover doesn't worry you, how about Watergate.
No, Hoover worried me and so did Watergate but, as as you can see, laws did not stop them. Increased sophistication in surveillance is just a new kind of power, there will always be developments that make the government more powerful and provide new opportunities for abuse. And we will always be dependent on the integrity of our leaders not to take destructive advantage of that.


QuoteOriginally posted by graphicgr8s Quote
Safe? Maybe. But at what cost? As you slide toward one side you lose the other.
Nonsense. The military has troops, ordinance, etc. enough to take over Washington, why not get paranoid about that? The US has tremendous power to hurt its citizens, or to use that power to protect us. I guess we have to decide which they are more likely to do. I do know I felt a lot more worried about such things when Cheney, Rove, et al were in charge; after all, they did manipulate us (and our allies) into an illegal war. But the answer isn't to take away all central power . . . the answer is to stop electing thugs and crooks.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
drones, government
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Goes to F1 .. .. in 1984 :) fearview General Talk 2 04-28-2012 07:24 PM
Easy step-by-step test for front/back focusing? Javaslinger Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 3 01-11-2011 12:51 PM
General rule for step-up step-down rings? uchinakuri Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 06-18-2010 09:54 PM
Macro A flower - and a bit closer - a lot closer - and a crop rhermans Post Your Photos! 2 06-18-2010 03:04 AM
One step closer to chatting for Pentax folks legacyb4 General Talk 1 12-04-2008 07:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:48 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top