Privacy, Government, Surveillance, and You.

Which is great for recognizable leaders who voluntarily make themselves visible and recognizable. Most people aren't, and anonymous people on the internet can already point to more than a few such leaders that they rally behind.

Again, no advantage to removing anonymity for everyone.

If nobody is willing to get shot for what they believe in, then they might as well not believe in it in the first place for all the change it's going to bring about. This:

is absolutely correct. If you're talking about the kinds of regime such as North Korea, no amount of anonymous whispers will ever be enough. People have to be willing to get shot, willing to go to jail, willing to fight and to be fought, to bring about such a change. North Korea will never change without revolution, and revolution will never happen until its people are prepared to bleed for it. Until then, all anonymous reveals of North Korea's craziness does is tell the rest of the world, guess what, they be crazy. Which, we knew that. Is anyone planning on doing something about it? Leaks of the NSA tell us the NSA be spyin' on folk. We knew that. Who's going to do something about it?

Words can bring about great change, but only when they are attached to someone. If you are in a position where even words attached to a person could never bring about change, then your only remaining recourse is the tip of a sword. Either of these are preferable to complaining on the internet in the hopes that someone, somewhere, will care enough to start the movement and/or revolution that the complainer is unwilling to.

Anonymity has no place in a social movement.

edited 10th Oct '14 9:31:29 AM by TobiasDrake

You don't hear a lot about people who changed nothing while showing their face. While others can show their face after they succeed. So from a historical pov, we have a little selection bias.

In that context, maybe something interesting you might not know:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose
As soon as their anonymity ended, they died - without achieving anything.

edited 10th Oct '14 6:19:29 PM by Uchuujinsan

Also consider the internet shutdown to spread about SOPA/PIPA, which was for all purposes anonymous (let's face it, you'd be able to name like two people from Wikipedia, if that), and accomplished its goal spectacularly.

Something to consider: In the run-up to the Tahrir Squre Protest (which eventually brought down the government) one critical source of dissent and organization was the Facebook page "We Are All Khaled Said". It was eventually revealed that the organizer of the site was Wael Ghonim, but up until the time of his arrest, and not until after the occupation of the square, his identity was a carefully held secret.

Millions of voiceprints quietly being harvested

The right to privacy in a big data world: When properly understood, privacy rules essential, experts say

• sigh*
  http://www.insidebayarea.com/breaking-news/ci_26793090/warrant-chp-officer-says-stealing-nude-photos-from
  I guess no one is surprised that again, personal data with no legal relevance gets abused.

No surprise there. I just hope this will be a good counter argument to those police defending police searching suspects phones and other devices is on arrest.

Even if they have a Warrant?

Well I'd like to say 'no of course not', but apparently only something like 5% of search warrant applications are ever rejected by the courts. So either they have been rubber stamping them or the police force is so professional and efficient that they hardly ever request them without just cause. Which considering the recent events I know which scenario I consider most likely.

Regardless of that, we should certainly stop police committing warrantless searches on suspects and be prepared to throw the book at offices that do. Not mater how much faith you have in the police force you can't tell me voyeuristic illegal privacy invasions is a necessary part of the job.

It certainly should depend on the nature of the violation that the person has been arrested for. Being a suspected drug-gang kingpin is one thing, getting caught drunk driving is something else.

Being a suspected drug-gang kingpin is something that an officer would be able to obtain a warranty for.

Judge Rules Suspect Can Be Required To Unlock Phone With Fingerprint

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gives people the right to avoid self-incrimination. That includes divulging secret passwords, Judge Steven C. Frucci ruled. But providing fingerprints and other biometric information is considered outside the protection of the Fifth Amendment, the judge said.

Welp. Well at least I needed don't need another reason to be against using biometrics for log in purposes.

fingerprint ID sound good on paper, but all you're doing is trading in your pass word I Ds for a single pass word you can't change, delete, hide, share or -if need be- 'forget' when being compelled.

Well, he's right in that it isn't a Fifth Amendment violation. It's warrantable data, and you can be just as compelled to yield it as to yield to any other warranted search.

But yes, it's not really any more secure than a password, and is capable of quietly uploading your biometric data if anyone deems it profitable. For now it all appears to be stored locally, but given a choice between security and profit we've already seen what most businesses will eventually choose.

edited 1st Nov '14 9:53:48 AM by Pykrete

Facebook has URL for users running Tor-enabled browsers

GCHQ's Robert Hannigan says tech firms 'in denial' on extremism

Thanks, Facebook.

While it's true that radical Jihadis use the web to recruit, train, and so forth, it's exceptionally easy to track down people who put up and use such sites...

...provided you have a warrant. So perhaps his real beef is with the British judicial system?

Maybe. It's also that most of the companies he needs to work with directly are not within his jurisdiction — they're American firms, and GCHQ is British.

The Brits and the Yanks have legal arrangements whereby each side can get a search conducted by the other, if they have just cause.

Nintendo wants to monitor your sleep...so they can help improve it.

Um...well...this is a new one. I got nothing.

"Nintendo has unveiled new details about its "QOL" platform, which stands for "quality of life" and includes a line of health-focused devices. The first will be a bedside sensor that tracks your sleep, sends the data up to the cloud for analysis, and produces suggestions to help you get more rest."

"I need to wake up now!"

"I'm sorry, Dave, but I cant let you do that..."

Well, I never bought Nintendo products after my Game Boy Color, and I'm glad I did, then.

Sounds very Japanese. It's probably on the market there at the moment.

Polandball comic I found that feels very relevant to this thread.◊