Surveillance by Govts. Here is a rough outline of the capabilities and results.

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Surveillance by Govts. Here is a rough outline of the capabilities and results.
As we become my cyborg-which we have been for some time -data will only become crucial and og critical importance to Govts everywhere and it will be all encompassing.

Date storage is cheap. Years no decades of data can, will and are stored to be used after an attack to fine tune what and why it was missed.

Read the article - only 5 pages. Privacy is a fantasy.

Evil in a Haystack - By J.M. Berger | Foreign Policy
 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
"Sign up for free" is all I get at that site. Why? Do they want my metadata? Screw you, only Obama and teh Chinese government and CSIS and all the other surveillance agencies in all the other countries get my metadata!
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
"Sign up for free" is all I get at that site. Why? Do they want my metadata? Screw you, only Obama and teh Chinese government and CSIS and all the other surveillance agencies in all the other countries get my metadata!

Well some sites want that. Create a junk email account. Ensure that the server is in Canada though.
The NY Times has it. Getting nervous over nothing.
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
The problem is that 70% of the survelliance is being performed and retained by private corporations, and not the govt(s)..........




“I’m very concerned that we have government contractors doing what are essentially governmental jobs,” Senator Dianne Feinstein, the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said last week. “Maybe we should bring some of that more in-house,” the House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, mused.

It’s a little late for that. Seventy percent of America’s intelligence budget now flows to private contractors. Going by this year’s estimated budget of about $80 billion, that makes private intelligence a $56 billion-a-year industry.

And if the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs are unlawful or unconstitutional, as many Americans (including myself) believe, does it make any difference whether the work is done by a government analyst or a private contractor?

It does. Here’s why. First, it is dangerous to have half a million people — the number of private contractors holding top-secret security clearances — peering into the lives of their fellow citizens. Contractors aren’t part of the chain of command at the N.S.A. or other agencies and aren’t subject to Congressional oversight. Officially, their only loyalty is to their company and its shareholders.

Second, with billions of dollars of government money sloshing around, and with contractors providing advice on how to spend it, conflicts of interest and corruption are inevitable. Contractors simply shouldn’t be in the business of managing large projects and providing procurement advice to intelligence agencies. Thomas A. Drake, one of the N.S.A. whistle-blowers who exposed the waste and fraud in the N.S.A.’s Trailblazer program — Mr. Hayden’s disastrous attempt to privatize the N.S.A.’s analysis of intercepted signals intelligence — estimates that the project cost taxpayers as much as $7 billion (it was canceled in 2006). Yet the contracts kept rolling in, and Mr. Hayden went on to head the C.I.A.


more

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/18/opinion/put-the-spies-back-under-one-roof.html