How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance • Hacker News Board

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#21

Post by JetSpiegel » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 7:43 PM UTC

MichaelCrawford wrote: post #4

handinmouth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How would you feel were someone to follow you around everywhere you went? On the Web, this happens already (try a browser add-on such as RequestPolicy which will show you the numerous sites that track you all over the Web - often 20 or more per page).

That I find particularly creepy, so I blackhole many of the analytics servers with my /etc/hosts: 127.0.0.1 hosted-pixel.com 127.0.0.1 cdn.hosted-pixel.com When web bugs first appeared, there was a huge public outcry. Now that they call it "analytics" or "big data" everyone seems cool with it. However I can't block everything with hosts; some of the tracking scripts come from the same hosts as I actually use. I'm pla…

You can use Policeman

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/policeman/

Or on Github for a more bleeding-edge version

https://github.com/futpib/policeman/releases

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#22

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 7:45 PM UTC

rimantas wrote: post #12

pgeorgi wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an attempt to help you find out where you stand on the issue (that is, I don't expect a response): 80% of sexual abuse of minors happens within existing social contexts, that is "family and friends". It would be useful to place cameras in every single private room and have them be automatically monitored and the live feed passed to some on-staff LEO when software considers anything suspect. Are you at peace with t…

This is not an extreme example. What is extreme is looking at the world from the law enforcement perspective. Why not just lock everybody in the prison already, perfect conditions for surveillance and control.

[deleted]

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#23

Post by gatehouse » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 7:48 PM UTC

jamesbrownuhh wrote: post #8

Very interesting article. I've been thinking about this more often recently (perhaps it's watching the 31C3 talks that do it) and I find that I'm becoming increasingly conflicted over the whole issue of surveillance. On one level, my gut instinct is "mass surveillance of innocent people is wrong"... But the moment I think of it from the law enforcement point of view, I realise how desperately I'd want that bulk data…

Cameras are cheap, networking is cheap and processing is cheap. The government is just the first mover, but there are many other parties that have the ability to build this kind of thing even just based on current technology.

Imagine if UPS placed cameras giving a 360 degree view on all of their vehicles, ran it through license place recognition to give a database of observations each having plate number, time, and location, and then allowed lookups or algorithms to be run for a price or subscription fee.

Any company with a large network of vehicles could do this, or it could be done less effectively but more cheaply with cameras on property. It would be easy to pool the data or sell it to anyone. In some ways it is similar to doing large scale face recognition, except it is much easier with current technology.

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#24

Post by mahyarm » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 7:56 PM UTC

conductor wrote: post #9

Tracking and surveillance is everywhere. Mobile phones: location tracking (they keep the cell IDs your phone is connecting to, with a time-stamp), texts, calls meta-data, calls audio. CCTV: ANPR, face recognition Internet: everything Payments: everything except cash (I'm surprised cash is still legal) The list goes on.. Public transport, hotels reservations, etc.

Cash still covers too many edge cases that electronic devices cannot to be illegal. Also remember less developed countries.

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#25

Post by funkyy » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 8:01 PM UTC

pgeorgi wrote: post #11

jamesbrownuhh wrote: post #8

Very interesting article. I've been thinking about this more often recently (perhaps it's watching the 31C3 talks that do it) and I find that I'm becoming increasingly conflicted over the whole issue of surveillance. On one level, my gut instinct is "mass surveillance of innocent people is wrong"... But the moment I think of it from the law enforcement point of view, I realise how desperately I'd want that bulk data…

In an attempt to help you find out where you stand on the issue (that is, I don't expect a response): 80% of sexual abuse of minors happens within existing social contexts, that is "family and friends". It would be useful to place cameras in every single private room and have them be automatically monitored and the live feed passed to some on-staff LEO when software considers anything suspect. Are you at peace with t…

Most of the issues could be fixed by proper social education. Proper and mandatory.

Like mandatory schooling, starting at school level, going through to public/national mandatory TV time. Lets say 10 minutes a day in public/national TV in prime time. Where 5 could be spent on science and teaching and another 5 on social schooling. Quick facts and information.

And not something like in Europe right now, where everyone is possible predator. Just proper education created by top specialists, not direct blaming and scaring, but using psychological tricks to make people understand what is wrong and where to look for help. There are countries that figured this out, where violence is not tolerated, like Sweden, Norway...

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#26

Post by pgeorgi » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 8:01 PM UTC

rimantas wrote: post #12

pgeorgi wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an attempt to help you find out where you stand on the issue (that is, I don't expect a response): 80% of sexual abuse of minors happens within existing social contexts, that is "family and friends". It would be useful to place cameras in every single private room and have them be automatically monitored and the live feed passed to some on-staff LEO when software considers anything suspect. Are you at peace with t…

This is not an extreme example. What is extreme is looking at the world from the law enforcement perspective. Why not just lock everybody in the prison already, perfect conditions for surveillance and control.

It is an extreme example in that everything more intense (at least of the scenarios that I can come up with) requires a qualitative shift, such as depriving people of additional basic freedoms (eg by locking them away), not merely a quantitative like moving cameras closer to home.

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#27

Post by singold » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 8:06 PM UTC

MichaelCrawford wrote: post #4

handinmouth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How would you feel were someone to follow you around everywhere you went? On the Web, this happens already (try a browser add-on such as RequestPolicy which will show you the numerous sites that track you all over the Web - often 20 or more per page).

That I find particularly creepy, so I blackhole many of the analytics servers with my /etc/hosts: 127.0.0.1 hosted-pixel.com 127.0.0.1 cdn.hosted-pixel.com When web bugs first appeared, there was a huge public outcry. Now that they call it "analytics" or "big data" everyone seems cool with it. However I can't block everything with hosts; some of the tracking scripts come from the same hosts as I actually use. I'm pla…

Maybe EFF's Privacy Badger could help? I use it and like it, you can unblock individual scripts on a per page basis.

https://www.eff.org/privacybadger

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#28

Post by asuffield » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 8:11 PM UTC

MichaelCrawford wrote: post #4

handinmouth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How would you feel were someone to follow you around everywhere you went? On the Web, this happens already (try a browser add-on such as RequestPolicy which will show you the numerous sites that track you all over the Web - often 20 or more per page).

That I find particularly creepy, so I blackhole many of the analytics servers with my /etc/hosts: 127.0.0.1 hosted-pixel.com 127.0.0.1 cdn.hosted-pixel.com When web bugs first appeared, there was a huge public outcry. Now that they call it "analytics" or "big data" everyone seems cool with it. However I can't block everything with hosts; some of the tracking scripts come from the same hosts as I actually use. I'm pla…

> Now that they call it "analytics" or "big data" everyone seems cool with it.

It generates massive value that everybody benefits from. People appreciate that.

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#29

Post by Osmoticat » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 8:14 PM UTC

jamesbrownuhh wrote: post #8

Very interesting article. I've been thinking about this more often recently (perhaps it's watching the 31C3 talks that do it) and I find that I'm becoming increasingly conflicted over the whole issue of surveillance. On one level, my gut instinct is "mass surveillance of innocent people is wrong"... But the moment I think of it from the law enforcement point of view, I realise how desperately I'd want that bulk data…

Mass surveillance has negligible impact on crime rates.

The UK is one of the most surveilled nations on earth, yet has one of the highest crime rates in western Europe.

If you want to truly impact crime rates, then put resources into fixing social problems.

Re: How Britain Exported Next-Generation Surveillance

#30

Post by Theodores » Sun, Jan 04, 2015, 8:15 PM UTC

MichaelCrawford wrote: post #2

Well that clinches my decision. I've been getting around on public transit for quite a long time, but have been thinking of getting a car. Now I've decided not to. I'm a generally law-abiding citizen, but I simply do not wish to be tracked. How would you feel were someone to follow you around everywhere you went? Even if they kept their distance, never spoke to you our overtly harmed you in any way, it would be very…

You need a bicycle.

Then you can ride the exact same route every day at exactly the same time wearing the same high visibility clothing that you wear every day, decorated 'Christmas tree' style in flashing lights. Just to make things easier for those that might track you, cruise along at 10-20 miles per hour, obeying the Highway Code every inch of the way.

Ah, but what about the mobile phone? You don't need that turned on whilst cycling. In fact, if you are used to babysitting the battery it makes sense to turn it off just for practicality reasons.

Ah, but what about the CCTV? Look at the route options, there is bound to be a park or canal tow path to take and, as well as a nice car-free ride you get to expose yourself to far fewer CCTV operators, although total CCTV absence is unlikely. Even then though, options are pretty good. You might take that 'winter warmer' coat off part way through your route. Or that bright yellow jacket is kind of ubiquitous, 'hard to spot' amongst the hordes of other cyclists with the same jacket. You can also legitimately completely cover your face with mask, sunglasses and helmet.

Even listening for a cyclist is not exactly easy, particularly if you don't let that tell-tell freewheel announce your presence (keep pedalling).

In not one film in the entire history of Hollywood has the bad guy/good guy evaded getting caught due to the simple tactic of riding a bicycle at a leisurely pace. So there just isn't even the group-think out there to suspect the cyclist.

Nobody expects the cyclist!