Aug 13

Ask a rightie about public health, education and welfare and they’ll wax lyrical about the threat to their freedom. Yet ask them about the military, subsidised spying corporations and subsidised banks and all they see is paragons of virtue.

The growing cost of spooks and the needs of companies providing these services and others like prisons to grow has seen their costs rise but not the need for such services. Obstensibly this was about the need to stop people self harming with drugs and latterly to prevent small cells of lunatics committing terror acts.

Yet what threatens their freedom? An infrastructure that allows instant access to their private correspondence to some operator who for all they know is a sexual predator, paedophile or the person they cut up this morning.

Even their unproven nightmare of welfare dependency is a dependency not some insidious Booz Allen looking for new things to monitor. It costs assuming that these people would be fit for a job that was open to them. However it costs less than pushing those people into a criminal underclass. It costs less than letting banks break the law. Indeed it costs less than paying for massive growing armies of outsourced and unregulated spooks well beyond the requirements of tracking a few hundred relevant al Quada.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

Aug 11

The idea that mass surveillance of the internet at vast cost and examining almost everything that is not piped movies* and other streams has anything to do with terrorism is clearly wrong.

The conceit is that this is a discussion of Freedom v Security. Yet law enforcement is more danger to the average American in America. Bee stings are. It’s unclear how this surveillance of Americans and allies helps and if there was even one example anyone think this most pragmatic of Administrations would not leak it? It leaked it could track al Quaeda communications last week** which would appear to be stupid to warn them!

There is no security issue here. The UK/US have more than enough laws to spy on the right people with minimal change in security. This is not about security but the rights of venal weak politicians to keep feeding parasitic corporations like BAE Systems, Booz Allen and General Dynamics and be fed back.

Worst for me is the idea that collecting vast troves of data will ever be helpful. Reliance on Big Data and phishing will make processes and procedures predictable – less better quality data wins every time.

The only discussion here is Freedom v Corporate Parasites’ Profits. It’s obvious who the Cameron Govt, GOP, ‘Crats et al favour and it’s the former.

* The Obama Administration’s claim of 1.6% of traffic laughable given what traffic is. Seriously anyone who considers the Administration anything but malevolent and mendacious can only be because it’s stupid, incompetent and knows less than Guardian readers.

** Shows how absurd and vengeful for being shown as a stooge for Big Weapons and NSA The Obama Administration is. An Administration that leaks classified and damaging top secret documents like they’re coupons for free fries claims telling people what is being done against them is spying for the enemy. As the chief spokesperson said “We don’t read your emails” again 2 providers of encrypted email closed down as the Jackboots of the NSA closed in. Again The Administration thinks it is talking to who? Morons?

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,