Meanwhile, this example is still rumbling along:



Street View: Google given 35 days to delete wi-fi data

Google has been given 35 days to delete any remaining data it "mistakenly collected" while taking pictures for its Street View service, or face criminal proceedings.

But the UK Information Commissioner's Office did not impose a fine.

Its investigation into Google reopened last year after further revelations about the data taken from wi-fi networks.

During that inquiry, additional discs containing private data were found. ...

... "This episode is worryingly close to severely undermining this principle and setting a precedent that companies can collect data illegally and not face any action if they promise to delete it later on," he said. ...

... "Is our privacy somehow less worthy of protection?"




All in the coercive world that we are making for ourselves,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Google can't have what is freely offered up to the world, but the NSA can collect anything it wants. Oh wait. The NSA just has it own antennas just like Google.

---

my understanding of the collection is that its the phone number and who/where it called and the length of the call.

Apparently, only 300 or so callers/emailers have been monitored over the length of the data collection.

Yes 300 thats 0.000001% of the US population being monitored. Seems pretty specific to me and quite limited even.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

my understanding of the collection is that its the phone number and who/where it called and the length of the call.

Apparently, only 300 or so callers/emailers have been monitored over the length of the data collection.

Yes 300 thats 0.000001% of the US population being monitored. Seems pretty specific to me and quite limited even.

100% of calls are collected and poured over by computer eye balls.

300 or so individuals have been subjected to human eyeballs continuously for Y years.

Is this what you were trying to say? Or is your understanding of the collection different?

And why is Yahoo saying it got over 10,000 individual requests in the first six months of the year, if your number is only 300?

---

The Utah data center supposedly will be able to store five zettabytes of data.
At the current global internet bandwidth it would take ~10 years to fill it up.

I can buy a terabyte of data storage for $100.
Five zettabytes of data storage would cost me 100+++ Billion dollars.
All technological innovation is being subsumed by the preeminent super-powers.
Me thinks that IBM is as much of a collaborator as Google, Apple, Intel, Arm, etc, etc.
When Governments and Corporations unite to subvert the intent of the People, the People are Fracked.

no that is correct. 300 were weeded out and actually looked at more closely. Otherwise there were no actual people physically looking or listening to emails or phone conversations.

I do have a problem with them keeping any of that data longer than a few months though. However they may have a need to relook at something later and may need it. Who knows, maybe knowing to much is a bad thing.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

no that is correct. 300 were weeded out and actually looked at more closely. Otherwise there were no actual people physically looking or listening to emails or phone conversations.

I do have a problem with them keeping any of that data longer than a few months though. However they may have a need to relook at something later and may need it. Who knows, maybe knowing to much is a bad thing.

Okay. I think you missed part of my point. The 300 were looked at continously from the start of the program to today. Many more have been looked at for shorter periods. Most I'm sure were quickly sorted as false positives. And you would want the computer to give a fair number of those. Because you don't ever want a false negative.

I agree, the storage of this data long term is extremely wrong. Even the data the Census Bureau keeps is subject to more privacy restrictions. This is the part of the program that needs a lot more transparent regulation.

I'm sure they would love to have data all the way back to your birth and before if you even do something. But in reality, does this data serve any real purpose other than to put at ease the minds of the investigators? It isn't going to be of any use in a prosecution. Are they expecting twenty year old data to uncover a sleeper cell with a plot?

---

and even with all that data we still had 2 rogue warriors blow up IEDs at the Boston Marathon

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

and even with all that data we still had 2 rogue warriors blow up IEDs at the Boston Marathon

2 Functioning Losers.
Can you say "acceptable loses".
Planning for the next "Data Store" is ongoing.

having not had my life taken or legs blown off I am uncertain as to what is acceptable in this instance. I do know that had they made a few more bombs or done it at a busier time we'd be having a bigger discussion

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

and even with all that data we still had 2 rogue warriors blow up IEDs at the Boston Marathon

2 Functioning Losers.
Can you say "acceptable loses".
Planning for the next "Data Store" is ongoing.

I strongly object to this statement....no loss of life is "acceptable" when attacked by terrorists...ever.

---

having not had my life taken or legs blown off I am uncertain as to what is acceptable in this instance. I do know that had they made a few more bombs or done it at a busier time we'd be having a bigger discussion

They would be happy to be remembered as "2 rogue Warriors".
Not until you can accept that acts of terror are a sign of mental illness devoid of any rational, cultural, or religious imperative will we find peace.

and even with all that data we still had 2 rogue warriors blow up IEDs at the Boston Marathon

2 Functioning Losers.
Can you say "acceptable loses".
Planning for the next "Data Store" is ongoing.

I strongly object to this statement....no loss of life is "acceptable" when attacked by terrorists...ever.

Nah Blurf your objections are but a whimper.
4,486 U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2012.
654,965 excess deaths.... Lancet.
1,033,000 deaths as a result of the conflict.

2,012 U.S. military casualties in the war in Afghanistan and additional 118 fatalities in the broader Operation Enduring Freedom outside Afghanistan.
Civilian casualties are almost impossible to ascertain.

Americans are both familiar and comfortable with "Acceptable Loses".

I fear this is going to get lost in this thread right now.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/new-leaks-british-intels-direct-from-fiber-taps-worse-than-the-us/

Welcome to the world of data sharing.

---

I think it hilarious that in a world, predominantly monotheistic, where "God" not only knows everything you do, but also everything you think, that people fear the recording of man by man.
As we tumble towards the inevitable singularity predicted by Kurzweil, and sci-fi writers, all the data bases in the world will become an archive, a history of our collective story.
I would not change it!

Americans are both familiar and comfortable with "Acceptable Loses".

To most Americans casualties of war and terror are a statistic.
Those, for whom it's an undeniable horror, bear the suffering so that Americans can live in ignorance.

To most Americans casualties of war and terror are a statistic.
Those, for whom it's an undeniable horror, bear the suffering so that Americans can live in ignorance.

That's your opinion.

---

To most Americans casualties of war and terror are a statistic.
Those, for whom it's an undeniable horror, bear the suffering so that Americans can live in ignorance.

That's your opinion.

You're absolutely right.

Opinion...
In general, an opinion is a fact about matters commonly considered to be non-subjective, i.e. it is based on that which is less than absolutely certain, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts........ Wikipedia.

All non-subjective, as it is for 99% of Americans.
For 1% of Americans it's not opinion but hard cold horror.
I'm truly sorry.

not only knows everything you do, but also everything you think, that people fear the recording of man by man.

In the Comfort Of My Mom's Basement, all alone, I can Scream Out to GOD: You GOD are a MO FOin', Piece of Shat, Lower than Pond Scum Ginger. And GOD will Do Nothing. All Is Calm.

If Man Heard Me(Recorded or Face to Face) say The Above, I Would Face Dire Consequences. Especially IfN I am a Well Known Chef or Comedian, not a Lonely Alone Mom's Basement Dweller.

So, We Fear Man. Oh How We Fear Man.

Got Lawsuit? Got Jail Time? Got Revenge? Got Shunned? Got Banished? Got It?

Bound For IT IT

---

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

I think it hilarious that in a world, predominantly monotheistic, where "God" not only knows everything you do, but also everything you think, that people fear the recording of man by man.

God doesn't play your thoughts back in a star chamber.

<ed>Or does that mean deep down they know God doesn't exist? (for another thread)

---