ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL ABOARDDDDD!
The Brainiac Train is Boarding Now for Truth.
With Stops at Opinion, BS, Bias, Lie, Don't Know, ObfuscateVille SheeplesVille and Who Cares. And The Village of etcetcetc.
ALL ABOARD!
Bound For IT IT There There SomeWhere Where

Sorry BEN this isn't your train.

ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL ABOARDDDDD!

The Brainiac Train is Boarding Now for Truth.

With Stops at Opinion, BS, Bias, Lie, Don't Know, ObfuscateVille SheeplesVille and Who Cares. And The Village of etcetcetc.

ALL ABOARD!

Bound For IT IT There There SomeWhere Where

opinion yes , b/s then prove it is , Bias how you get that my news comes from all over the world not just one country that is not Bias . Lie again prove what i'm saying is a lie , Don't know well I think i'm informed better that most , ObfuscateVille is that even a word ,Sheeplesville not a word but i'm not a kiwi and that's whom you can say that to , who cares not me , Village of etcetcetc make cents mate or is your vocabulary limited to words that are not even words

A closed mind is a dangerous thing and a sign of stupidity .

---

If, as you say, Al Jezeera is Islamic, then it's not news.

I prefer to think of Al Jezeera as an alternate news network, with different biases, yet still not worthy of factual assimilation.
Like a good stew news tastes better the next day, and like a good cheese ripens to the truth with age.

Yes I gree with you Al Jazeera is a little Bias but still good new program . What channel isn't a little Bias in there reporting I just get pissed when they have a commentator come on and say crap as a so called insider

---

If you've never watched Bill Maher, John Stewart, or Stephen Colbert then you could be in for a treat.
All have a satirical view of current affairs that really hits home.
It may not be your cup of tea. If so then more's the pity.

If you've never watched Bill Maher, John Stewart, or Stephen Colbert then you could be in for a treat.
All have a satirical view of current affairs that really hits home.
It may not be your cup of tea. If so then more's the pity.

I don't mind a good laugh if I get Foxtell or Optus (only 2 pay tv providers over here where I am )i'll give it a go

Who's that one on Fox is that Bill ?

---

If, as you say, Al Jezeera is Islamic, then it's not news.

I prefer to think of Al Jezeera as an alternate news network, with different biases, yet still not worthy of factual assimilation.
Like a good stew news tastes better the next day, and like a good cheese ripens to the truth with age.

Yes I gree with you Al Jazeera is a little Bias but still good new program . What channel isn't a little Bias in there reporting I just get pissed when they have a commentator come on and say crap as a so called insider

Well, balance it out with some CCTV and VOA. Just for a hoot read some Pravda.

<ed>Most news today is written by AP and they are biased. Try and find the same story on UPI and Reuters to get a complete picture. Then go see how bad the networks spin it with opinion.

---

Who's that one on Fox is that Bill ?

You must be thinking of Bill O'Reilly on Fox.
To see Oreilly and Stewart go at it you soon realize that what passes for news is reilly just meant to be entertainment.

Who's that one on Fox is that Bill ?

You must be thinking of Bill O'Reilly on Fox.
To see Oreilly and Stewart go at it you soon realize that what passes for news is reilly just meant to be entertainment.

AH ok that's him O'Reilly seen him a few time he's ok but not on a new program the iddots don't get it and take him serious but I will watch the others if I get a chance

---

It just seems to me that many posters here are getting paranoid about all this security and personal data business. Is it because of the principle of your "rights" or is it more closer to home?

I would say that no posters here are being paranoid.
I have nothing worth hiding, unless it's where my pot is stashed, and no reason to be fearful.
The tact you take in your argument does offend me and others.

or is it more closer to home?

You insinuate that people who protest unwarranted scrutiny are hiding something.
Good Luck in your Orwellian Utopia.

It just seems to me that many posters here are getting paranoid about all this security and personal data business. Is it because of the principle of your "rights" or is it more closer to home?

The stated reason the government can grab this data is that the companies collect it in their normal course of business. Well, since that data shows every download every person has made in their lifetime ... How long before the RIAA and MPAA use the very same legal maneuver to get their hands on the data? Just who hasn't downloaded something? Is it paranoia? It is about rights? Is it a realization everyone has done something sometime, even if they aren't today? Is it that the government shouldn't know what kind of birth control you and your wife are using? Or don't you realize just how pervasive this data collection is?

---

I think I will just rest my case and let the rest of you get on with it. I'm clearly wasting my time here, and I have better things to do.

Clearly the culture you are from, you have an expectation the queen is permitted to go through your dirty laundry. That is why we aren't colonies any more.

---

WOW +1

---

I think I will just rest my case and let the rest of you get on with it. I'm clearly wasting my time here, and I have better things to do.

Yep, Sying On YOur Neighbors and Reporting Them for Grass 1mm over max height, a piece of trash screwn about, or paint flaking on window frame, OR WORSE.

Bound For IT IT THere There SomeWhere Where

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Governments have been trying to spy on their citizens for as long as there have been governments.

The IT revolution just makes it very very easy. In the days of analogue phones someone had to actually go into the exchange and connect the black box. Now if you have an internet connection, you can be bugged, observed, emails intercepted. It is much too late to try and stop this.

Any government can say "No we don't do that" while having whole departments doing just that.

To be fair with over 3 BILLION phone calls PER DAY in the US (that's over 34,000 per second) Unless you are worth watching you will probably slip through the net.

However you never know.

Oh PS Emails per day 294 billion means more than 2.8 million emails are sent every second. Even a computer will have difficulty keeping up with that.

---

I agree with Bernie on the fact it probably to late to stop . As I know those data Centres you think are data centres are a front so is Verizon . People walk passed the one in new York everyday and don't even realise it's there . Even if you protest or bring in laws , change the constitution it won't work . As I said they tap the optical fibre before the info gets to the servers and that's because it technically hasn't entered the country yet so is not subject to the law .

All we can hope is that there is so much data that no computer system will be able to handle it and that is what it looks like is happening otherwise the terrorists would not have been able to do what they keep doing .

Just hope they can't get "Quantum Entanglement" to work in communication and the Quantum computers don't get to powerful for a while . At least till i'm dead then I won't care heheheheeh

I spose I have the option of going bush you guys don't have that . I'd like to see them find me in the outback heheheheheehe

---

Clearly the culture you are from, you have an expectation the queen is permitted to go through your dirty laundry. That is why we aren't colonies any more.

Firstly, although traditionally it is called Her Majesties Government, and effectively does things in her name, she has nothing to do wit it on a personal basis, that she devolves to the Prime Minister and the Government. In the case of GCHQ it reports to the Foreign Secretary, and any UK phone taps have to be authorised by the Home Secrerary. As Bernie points out, it would be impossible to monitor every call, email, and internet use 24/7, and of course it doesn't happen.

Don't be so sure about it. Amazing what they have done with speech recognition software.

The security services choose the people that they believe they need to monitor, and specifically target them. While it is technically possible to carry out surveilance on anyone, anywhere, at any time, the sheer volume of data would make it impractical to apply that to everyone.

I'm so glad you have better protections than the Fourth and Fifth Amendment and that no secret court overrules them. Unless of course you simply have misplaced trust.

---

I'm so glad you have better protections than the Fourth and Fifth Amendment and that no secret court overrules them. Unless of course you simply have misplaced trust.

More than likely misplaced trust.....

UK Secret Courts to go-ahead

Open up Secret Courts Demands Justice Minister

Secret Courts in control of £2 billion fortune

---

Wiki is not very good as a source Chris. Wiki is frequently riddled with errors and outdated information.
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1144105?uid=3739560&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21102086964223

You may also wish to read the Declaration of Independence. Pay attention to the list of things.

OBW, you should say where quotes come from.
[ quote = [ url = http:// source . com ] Source [ / url ] ] Quoted stuff [ / quote ]

---

Amazing what they have done with speech recognition software.

It is technically possible to scan emails for "key words" and it is also possible to monitor voice messages for them as well. These techniques have been available for some time in cases where people are being positively monitored. I doubt the security services have the computing power at their disposal to automatically monitor everything in real time 24/7.

And just how many GPU's do you think it takes? Computing power has dramatically exploded of late and the cycles needed to recognize a word have fallen. I harbor no false belief that they can't do it in essentially real time due to a lack of computing power. In any case give a few years of Moore's Law and even you will have to admit they are able.

OBW, if I were a spy agency and had a few super clusters at my disposal, I would not be in the habit of sending out press releases about how much processing power I have. I would want the enemy to continue to think his crypto keys are long enough.

---

BTW isn't the stated purpose of all this data collection to have near real time access to prevent attacks? Silly to think they are getting the data and can't sift through it real time.

Phone Burn-126 turns on around 8:15 in Croydon. For the last four years once a week it turns on about 8:15 and turns off about 8:45 and has no other activity. At 8:30 Burn-126 gets an incoming call from Burn-789 in the Swat Valley. This is the first time Burn-789 has been seen anywhere. The conversation is in Farsi.

Burn-126: May peace by upon you.

Burn-789: May peace by upon you.
Verification TANGO CHARLIE 5 6 9 ABLE ZULU
Authenticate.

Burn-126: Verification GOLF ROMEO ECHO 0 3

Burn-789: Message reads: 11 06 14 25 Mohammed rides the camel.

Burn-126: Peace be upon him.

Phones hang up and are turned off.

This is what your computers are looking for and they have to sort through it in near real time if you expect to stop Mohammed from riding the camel on 11-06 at 14:25!

So your computer at this point knows it has a first connection between a call from Swat to Croydon. It has a strange pattern of use of one of the phones and zero information about the other. It knows the call was short. And you hope the voice recognition found the words "verification" "authenticate" and "message" in the call and something that might be a date and time. You pray it was enough to flag the call to be listened to by a real live human.

So now you need to track every other phone that was anywhere near Burn-126 when it made the call, and whenever it has been turned on hoping that will lead you to the caller. You might want to know if any of those phones that were close by ever spoke in Farsi. If so, you have some voice prints to run. A real smart operative finds a close by phone that frequently gets turned off within 30 seconds of Burn-126. Your first break. Unfortunately it is a pre-paid phone so you still don't know who it belongs to. You take a look at the records and find it made calls to a half dozen numbers it never called before starting a couple minutes after the end of your suspect call. All of numbers called went to phones with strange usage patterns resembling Burn-126. These were all domestic calls so you need a warrant to listen to them, even your computer, but you do have them recorded in your archives. It also has been active with an ordinary domestic usage pattern which you hope will lead you to your terrorist leader.


Silly to think they are collecting this and can't sort it near real time.

---