The FBI Is Tracking Our Faces in Secret, and We’re Suing

They probably meant "&kd=-1"

Take a look at the parameter list in the linked page. There's no "fd" in there.

You’re right. One can’t assure that won’t happen unless you can ensure that every outgoing packet hasn’t been tampered with inside your computer. But that problem can also be tackled as part of a solution to reduce risk but not eliminate it.

How about simply using a new style of webcam that uses a physical shutter when active? Any reason I can’t go on amazon and buy one? Are these illegal?

Sadly you’d want analog push button switch on mics only. Latch as well ok if done securely.

You could jump through tons of hoops to minimize risk for the above but given the complexity of a typical computer, most won’t have a chance as you noted.

If you whitelisted all your activity and took the other precautions noted (and if you have clean hygiene) then it would be much more difficult for your strong adversary as your nation state would need to own your box remotely. And it is possible to defend against that sort of thing. Yes if you just have indiscriminate traffic coming and going, defense becomes astronomically more difficult.

This.

One topic I use to get people thinking more about implications is speeding.

Right now, in most places, there is balance. One can speed, and have reasons that are not to be judged at the moment, and there is some chance of it being detected and a ticket written.

Could just be simple error too. Glance down at speedo, see +15 over, think "oops", and correct with no real worries. Happens all the time.

Now, think about that android phone. Google actually knows when speeding happened, where, and all that. So far, the only action I have seen is Google alerting me to speed traps and a request for me to confirm they are still there.

But, where will that lead?

Does my insurer get that data? Can they get it? Should they get it?

Etc...

Then return to that balance bit.

Say one gets a ticket. With, what I call old world balance in play, the general response is to just be a bit more careful and avoid future tickets. Simple, easy, reasonable.

Now, with all that data collected, a ticket could be just the beginning. A review of your last year of driving reveals chronic behavior! To get past the ticket, monitoring is needed, your car may be required to limit speed to the legal limit at all times, and on it goes!

Same scenario, same person, but two very different outcomes and perceptions! Should there be. Why?

Or, say one is not popular politically, or got sucked into some sort of investigation just by poor timing and proximity, or maybe an unfortunate surname similarity.

What could happen?

One morning you get up to find your license to drive has been revoked and you owe a ton of fines. That happens despite never even being pulled over for years, or ever. Maybe it happens at random, like a drug test too.

One day, boom. Your life is forever different, because data.

All of us are extremely likely to be guilty enough to see the worst max penalty allowed for in the law too.

True right now, today for me, you, everyone we know who drives.

What should happen? Why? What public good does it serve?

These are questions of balance. All of that mass data hoovering going on in pretty much all aspects of our lives is not balanced at all. The human factors we are accustomed to do not exist. The watchers are perfect. Or near perfect enough to be a concern.

The first time Google prompted me about a speed trap, I thought, "spiffy" and saw it as a nice help / value add to Maps.

Then later down the road I thought about where it can all lead. Nowhere good without some new rules, and even with those, trust is difficult.

Frankly, I want to put my phone in a faraday cage after thinking about it all. People vary in their responses, but I can say this line of discussion can often get them thinking about these matters and it is all pretty easy to talk about.

People, even those with light knowledge of these things, can picture their own driving, the phone, and potential outcomes.

> Imagine it works perfectly, and a three-letter agency with practically zero oversight, transparency, or accountability is collecting an accurate history of every single thing you do--everywhere you go, who you talk to, what you say to them, what content you consume and create, what emotions you feel, detailed biometric profiles, and so on. Are you ok with that?

A few years ago I met someone, they asked what I did, I said computer software.

Their first response: "Oh, I hope there's no more of those Snowdens out there!"

So I wouldn't assume everyone is opposed to law enforcement mass surveillence.

We have to give them reasons to be opposed to it.

Unless using javascript to track people interested in this type of material is a goal of theirs or others with access to the site's source.