Upon browsing a few of these threads tonight, I've realized there is no worse reading than a bunch of tech enthusiasts armchairing about geopolitics. I'm out!
But JSON doesn't support comments which are pretty nice in a config file. You can do the ugly comment as property stuff, or strip them out, but you're getting away from the One True Format.
Uber drivers aren't invisible. It wouldn't take much effort to use the app to flag one down, note the license plate, and give them a nice little talking to. I doubt many part-timers would stick with it if they thought there was a chance for trouble.
If you're ever in Mountain View and walk by the Google campus around 4-4:30p, you can witness the vast network of Google buses picking up their colonist cargo ready for dispersal throughout the Bay Area. It's not just one or two buses, the road is literally backed up with them, each with a little LCD display to let you know what town or neighborhood they're going to. It really is a sight to behold. I can understand why locals view them as an invading army.
So I'm waiting behind a soon-to-be (or not-so-soon) leaving car and some other jerk with an app pulls up and claims it's his spot because he "paid" for it? And I'm supposed to recognize this transaction and carry on? Yeah, right. Fuck both these guys, he'll have to pay me 20 bucks not to break his taillight.
And now thanks to Mr. Greenwald's reporting, citizens & elected officials, policy wonks & pundits, scholars & laymen alike, can all discuss actual facts instead of relying on grkvit's assumptions about how government spy programs operate.
You are correct, I've misunderstood this program and perhaps the parent post I was responding to. Oh well, can't win 'em all. This is in addition to the PRISM programs we've already seen.
> Google had no knowledge of NSA's physical compromise of their data centers.
How do you know this is the case? In the diagram submitted within the article, the box highlighted with the smiley face is labeled "GFE" for Google Front-End [1], which means it's a Google controlled server. It seems more plausible to me that the NSA compromised this target with a FISA court order rather than hacking it. And if that is true, then someone at Google did know about it, they just weren't willing to discuss it because of a legal threat.
HIPAA is no joke. Even if this company is technically in the clear, being associated with a controversy like this is enough to keep doctors from using the service. Makes me wonder if they had any domain knowledge at all or just a "Yelp for doctors" pitch and some mumbo-jumbo about big data revolutionizing healthcare.
Regarding the mainstream news cycle and from a PR perspective, you want bad news to come out late Friday to minimize exposure. The typical audience is ready for the weekend and paying less attention. Also staff journalists tend to be off which leaves a weekend crew to man the ship---they're less experienced and have fewer resources available. Since you're likely not going to be pressed for a comment until Monday, the extra days might mean the public outrage subsides by then, or another news story becomes more important.
A lot of bad news comes out late Friday, government reports, financials, etc. It's obvious that the Washington Post was sitting on this particular story and decided to post it only after today's Guardian reports. WaPo has done it quite a lot since the leaks came out, either they aren't particularly interested in breaking these stories, or they're abiding by an earlier deal with Snowden since they wouldn't agree to his release timeline.
Then does not saying racist things automatically make you not-racist? Or is there other criteria we need to apply before hanging the label? For example, do they believe the words coming out of their own mouth? What about someone with Tourette's? I'm not trying to fall in a philosophical hole, but I believe that racism is a conscious choice at some level and mental illness is not.
I noticed on my last trip that the TSA, at all airports involved, were more pushy this time about herding me through the machines, using similar words. I guess there was a new policy memo sent out.
And what happens when these videos are leaked to the press, or some hair-brained politico wants to post them up on his mugshot website.
Accountability is great, but so is innocent until proven guilty. Hopefully systems will be put in place to curb abuse, but I doubt it.
Sure, it's the belief that the rulers can create a rational society through technical means, and it's been the dominant idea of the past century. And time after time, their pet theories of the day are undermined by the unintended consequences of meeting reality.
Anyone who watches government in action understands quite well how laws are twisted and turned to meet objectives. It only matters what is explicit, and there is no mention anywhere in the Constitution about "privacy". If this is a value that we Americans wish to continue, then it needs to be codified. Any government action begins with words and the interpretation of said words.
The reciprocal, my Internet company will spy on my users in exchange for a government contract, wouldn't be called leverage, it'd be called corruption.
Any leadership on the Intelligence Committee will back these programs to the bitter end---they set it up, it's their judgement under scrutiny, and they have the most to lose politically and historically.
Be careful what you wish for, Google is now one of the biggest spenders in Washington [1], $18.2 million on lobbying in 2012. Needless to say, big business in the tech sector will have plenty of say in the future (if that was ever a worry), but, as always, civil liberties will continually need to be fought for.
The issue has been making it's way toward the mainstream despite the security establishment doing their best to keep it on the fringe. The leadership has the most to lose---their reputation for establishing an un-American system. The tide is turning though, and it's important to get representatives voting on the record. With continued public outcry, if this thing is really put to a vote, the numbers will swell in opposition because politicians, if anything, are ego driven, and no one wants to be on the wrong side of history.
Snowden used lavabit.com, which is located in the US (and probably being scrutinized a bit more than usual these days).
I think it's more important to diversify services than to insist on airtight alternatives. My mail is not terribly exciting, but when combined with the rest of my searches, visited webpages [1], chats, news reading habits, social network connections, and phone location, all housed under Google's roof, it seems like I'm making it easier to piece together my life [2]. At least make it a little difficult by having to go to separate companies with court orders.
[1] And web developers contribute to the surveillance by installing analytics code.
[2] That of course is the Google AI wet dream, moar data.
As the US is the only country to actually use a nuclear weapon against another, the long-view of the empire's historical narrative would be interesting to see.
I haven't followed the Dropbox conference, but have they made any statement in regards to the whole PRISM "Dropbox coming soon" claim or anything else about user privacy?