But the problem is not when it’s accurate - the problem is when people treat it as if it were accurate. If an “algorithm says” you’re a potential terrorist, and the state treats you that way, the accuracy is entirely beside the point. The algorithm is impenetrable to everyone else, so it doesn’t matter if it’s a toad randomly hopping on a Ouija board or a superintelligent AI; you can’t refute it and it can be used to screw up your life. (Though of course it depends of the nature of the government accepting that data - some countries do outreach to would-be terrorists, offering them support to take a different life path; other countries summarily execute them…)
9 Likes
It is odd that no-one wanted to listen to Al Gore, but algorithm’s sound so convincing. Maybe if Al Gore rapped, he’d have done better.
2 Likes
Yes turn your location and GPS off while visiting NC so that you don’t accidentally get dragged into someone’s dragnet
So who should the lawsuits be crowdfunded through when those police decide to shoot someone they were pointed to by Google.
1 Like
criminals Activists.
4 Likes
And if they can’t, the legislators will create more crimes.
2 Likes
No worries. They’ll still collect the information, because if a criminal doesn’t bring their phone to the scene of a crime, then that criminal is obviously someone outside the scene of the crime. So we can safely narrow the number of suspects to “everyone”.
2 Likes
My first (and second and third) instinct is to say “police seemed to solve crimes OK without this, so how about no?” Because for me, the issue is that we’re handing the state horrific new surveillance powers for no other reason than “it’s technically possible now”.
But, some will say “what about situation X where dragnet surveillance could find a child-abducting monster or whatever?” And, as overblown as that may be, there will be some cases where I wouldn’t be prepared to argue against it. When that happens, if you have really strong privacy protections, the story will become “EVIL PINKO PRIVACY LAWS KILL CHILDREN!!1”. If you have no privacy protections, the police will read everyone’s emails to catch Freddy Krueger, and establish a precedent, and within 6 months they’ll be reading everyone’s emails to catch jaywalkers.
I think the answer is to have laws explicitly allowing dragnet surveillance, but have those laws be driven by privacy advocates. If “necessary evil” privacy invasions are going to happen – and they are – that’s how you allow it when it’s necessary, while also remembering that it’s evil. Make it so police need a real, meaningful, specific, public warrant.
2 Likes
Relax; four degrees is only a misdemeanor.
1 Like
We see this in the crowd-sourced No Fly and Gang Affiliated databases, without any special AI magic involved. Someone writes your name on a form and you are in trouble for life.
5 Likes
I’m surprised that nobody has mentioned [Carpenter Vs US] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpenter_v._United_States) The Amici curiae briefs on this one are very enlightening. Modern cell phones can provide extremely accurate tracking info. Cops have easy access to lots of past location information.
This case is waiting judgement before the US Supreme Court. It may determine if the cops need a warrant to access past cell location data. Of course, they can still get a warrant. And foolish judges may allow “general warrant” fishing expeditions.
The bare facts of the matter is, all of us who carry a cell phone create a permanent record of our movements and activities. This record will never go away. If you want any privacy, you have to ditch the cell phone, or block your cell phone’s access to the outside world. You can’t trust your cell phone to keep your privacy.
I’ve experimented with trying to create a “privacy box” that would keep my cell phone from spying on me. It is not trivial. My cell phone (Moto X4) can see and hear better than I can. It can locate via radio frequencies from FM (Megahertz) to Cell/WiFi (Gigahertz). Here is my current attempt:
You can see the effect on wireless reception as each layer goes on:
3 Likes
5 Likes
1 Like
I wonder if there is a difference between Australian bags and American bags. I tried using multiple layers of potato chip bags (Ruffles). I only got about 5db of shielding per layer. I was trying to figure out if I could shield my phone with ad-hoc materials in an emergency.
Of course, RF is really tricky and you can also get weird capacitive loading that depends on the size of the bag and the frequency of the RF.
That’s been happening for nigh on a century. The net just keeps getting wider and more effective.
1 Like
A Guy Gave up drinking Dry Martinis and got good results.
The fundamental problem with mass surveillance is it takes from the powerless and gives to the powerful. Increased mass surveillance is turbocharged by technology. Mass surveillance tends to reinforce and enable power.
Mass surveillance is a technology that disrupts our existing social expectations. It changes society in fundamental ways. Our society currently depends on the masks of politeness and social fictions. In groups we wear social masks that hide ourselves for the sake of the group. Our social fictions smooth our differences. They lubricate the interactions of polite society. Privacy allows us to cloak ourselves with polite lies and minor deceptions. Ultimately, the masks convince us that we are united in thought and action. They allow us to forgive and forget. The masks enable us to be better than we are. But surveillance strips all that away. Mass monitoring leaves us naked to power. And the modern surveillance state never forgets.
4 Likes
I talked with an RF engineer. He was very dismissive of shielding RF with stainless steel. He liked using cast aluminium or bronze. He gave me a good lead on where to find a cheap, cast aluminium box of the right size. Now, I just need to talk to a sound engineer and see what kind of insulation will dampen audio up through the entire range of the cell phone mic’s.
For now, I think if you are trying to shield a phone with ad-hoc answers, you need to think “massive overkill”.
1 Like
If I was trying a refrigerator as a Faraday Cage, I’d try the GE Canada 1950s unplugged fridge in the basement, built in the solid-as-fuck post-war style of the day. (Some day I’m going to get a load monitoring tool and compare it to the supposedly energy efficient modern kitchen one that runs its fan and makes strange noises all the time.)
1 Like
