Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37
  1. #1
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    "Your curtilage may be your castle, but 'open fields' are open game for law-enforcement and surveillance technology. Whether 'No Trespassing' signs are present or not, your private property is public for the law, with or without a warrant. What the police cannot do, their cameras can — without warrant or court oversight. An article at CNET recounts a case involving the DEA, a federal judge, and two defendants (since charged) who were subjected to video surveillance on private property without a warrant. Presumably, the 4th Amendment suffers an obscure form of agoraphobia further elucidated in the article."

  2. #2
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    How Telecoms Sell Your Private Info to the Highest Bidder

    Have you ever lost your mobile phone and been able to find it through your wireless company’s GPS tracking service? Or have you signed up for a family locator program to check on where your kids are through their phones? If so, you’ve voluntarily entered the world of telco tracking. Unfortunately, these are but the most innocent tracking programs that wireless companies like AT&T and Verizon are engaged in.


    Every seven seconds or so, one’s wireless company tracks your position vis-à-vis the nearest cell tower, determining not only your location but how long your call lasts. What a phone company does with this data, let alone with all the other information it gathers, remains the company’s secret.


    Earlier this year, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) revealed that, in 2011, state and local law enforcement agencies had received approximately 1.3 million records from the nation’s wireless carriers. A wireless customer’s personal information provided to law enforcement en ies is fairly comprehensive. It includes geo-locational or GPS data, 911 call responses, text message content, billing records, wiretaps, “ping” location and what are known as cell tower “dumps” (i.e., a carrier provides all the phones numbers of cell users that connect with a discrete tower during a discrete period of time). [3]


    Equally insidious, these same wireless providers are aggressively collecting and reselling your usage data. The most widely used method is through a special GPS geo-location program offered by Carrier IQ known as CIQ.

    "Data is the new oil," declared Bill Diggins, a Verizon Wireless exec in charge of the telco’s latest data aggregation program, Precision Marketing Insights (PMI). Verizon, along with Sprint, introduced its initial device tracking service in 2007.


    But PMI goes further. According to Diggins: "We're able to analyze what people are viewing on their handsets.” He offered the following example: “If you're at an MLB game, we can tell if you're viewing ESPN, we can tell if you're viewing MLB, we can tell what social networking sites you're activating, if you're sending out mobile usage content that's user-generated on video."


    Other wireless executives share Diggins' enthusiasm for data collection. Sprint company spokesperson Stephanie Vinge Walsh champions the power of the telecos: “We think it’s a benefit to receive ads targeting your interests rather than ads which may not be relevant.”


    Verizon’s PMI program allows it to collect user data from devices running on either an Android or an Apple OS (operating system). According to Verizon, the data collected includes what products and services a consumer is using (e.g., device type, calling features and usage patterns), what apps are on the device and GPS location. In addition, it collects a host of demographic and psychographic information “such as gender, age range, sports fan, frequent diner, or pet owner."


    Further, the company acknowledges that all the collected information can be combined into "aggregated and marketing reports." In turn, these reports can be sold to third-party en ies like data aggregators and direct marketing firms. However, it insists: "We may combine this information in a manner that does not personally identify you." Some reports indicated that Verizon provides a customer’s home address to third parties.


    Diggins identified the company’s long-term goal as insinuating itself into a customer’s mobile wallet. “So we’re able to identify what that customer likes not by filling out forms but by actually analyzing what they do on a day to day basis and serve them with products we know they like because we’ve seen they’ve downloaded and purchased products like that.”


    Pulling the curtain further aside, Diggins reveals the underlying rationale of Verizon’s data collection effort: “We’re doing this on a one-to-one basis even though we’re marketing on an aggregate anonymous because we’re able to just view everything they [users] do.”


    Not to be undone, AT&T actively collects user data. It introduced its FamilyMap program to track the location of any cell phone on AT&T's network in 2009. On its AdWorks site, AT&T promotes its capabilities to "reach customized audience segments based on anonymous and aggregate demographics."


    AT&T insists it doesn’t sell personal data to third parties. Rather, it offers "[third parties] products and services, packages, discounts and promotions from the AT&T companies, such as High Speed DSL Internet access, wireless service and U-verse TV services, which may be different from the types of services you already purchase.”


    AT&T provides “location information” to Sense Networks, a company analyzing mobile location data for advertising. One of its products, CitySense, highlights local nightspots to customers based on cellphone usage.


    "Because cell phones have become so ubiquitous,” notes Ramón Cáceres, a researcher at AT&T's labs in Florham Park, NJ, “mining the data they generate can really revolutionize the study of human behavior."

    http://www.alternet.org/print/civil-...highest-bidder

    If the govt does it, OUTRAGE!

    If the sacred, beloved, pinnacle-of-human-civilization corporations do it, YAWN!

  3. #3
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Simple.

    Don't buy a cell phone.

  4. #4
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    Simple.

    Don't buy a cell phone.
    What kind of answer is this for a supposed "libertarian"?

    "Hey, if you don't want the government tracking you on your cell phone, don't buy a cell phone!"

  5. #5
    Still Hates Small Ball Spurminator's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Post Count
    37,751
    Simple.

    Don't buy a cell phone.



    Yeah and if you don't want the Government or companies intruding on your home, don't buy a house. Really, if you're anything more than a total nomad, you're getting what you deserve. FREEDOM! AMERICA!

  6. #6
    Veteran
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    8,957
    Where are the Obama lovers? I want to see them defend their guy on this .

  7. #7
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    What kind of answer is this for a supposed "libertarian"?

    "Hey, if you don't want the government tracking you on your cell phone, don't buy a cell phone!"
    If someone is going to believe the speculation here, then why not give a silly answer?

    Corporations are full of "peanut counters." Need I say more?

  8. #8
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    If someone is going to believe the speculation here, then why not give a silly answer?

    Corporations are full of "peanut counters." Need I say more?
    As the article I posted said, "data is the new oil". Beancounters love the money from selling data.

  9. #9
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    "Your curtilage may be your castle, but 'open fields' are open game for law-enforcement and surveillance technology. Whether 'No Trespassing' signs are present or not, your private property is public for the law, with or without a warrant. What the police cannot do, their cameras can — without warrant or court oversight. An article at CNET recounts a case involving the DEA, a federal judge, and two defendants (since charged) who were subjected to video surveillance on private property without a warrant. Presumably, the 4th Amendment suffers an obscure form of agoraphobia further elucidated in the article."
    Hmmm.

    If a police cruiser is driving by your front yard, and sees you committing a crime, even with a "no trespassing" sign, do they then need a warrant to arrest you?

    How would this be then different than a camera? Does the law only get to be enforced within the physical proximity of a law enforcement official?

    tricky issue.

  10. #10
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    Where are the Obama lovers? I want to see them defend their guy on this .
    What is there to defend?

    For that matter what attack is there to make?

    Or are you here to ring doorbells and run away?

  11. #11
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Where are the Obama lovers? I want to see them defend their guy on this .
    How is Barry responsible for whatever privacy violatons the UCA commits? the UCA is mostly untouchable since the UCA owns the govt.

  12. #12
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    Hmmm.

    If a police cruiser is driving by your front yard, and sees you committing a crime, even with a "no trespassing" sign, do they then need a warrant to arrest you?

    How would this be then different than a camera? Does the law only get to be enforced within the physical proximity of a law enforcement official?

    tricky issue.
    I would argue that, yes, the law enforcement official does make it a different matter. By using an actual person, you're ensuring that only cases that are likely to be resolved are being monitored. If you allow full-time monitoring of a large number of homes, you'll waste time/data in most cases by spreading the net too far. That's the problem with most of the DHS data collecting... it's so wide that it wastes resources tracing down unlikely leads.

  13. #13
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    If someone is going to believe the speculation here, then why not give a silly answer?

    Corporations are full of "peanut counters." Need I say more?

    What "speculation" is there to believe? The gov't has repeatedly requested for, and received, private data from telecomms and other industries. To imagine it won't happen in the future is to put blinders on.

  14. #14
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    What "speculation" is there to believe? The gov't has repeatedly requested for, and received, private data from telecomms and other industries. To imagine it won't happen in the future is to put blinders on.
    Yes. You have a problem with the disclosure you sign saying they have a right to disclose to 3rd parties? My problem is when the 3rd parties are advertisers.

  15. #15
    Veteran
    My Team
    Denver Nuggets
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Post Count
    12,134
    How is Barry responsible for whatever privacy violatons the UCA commits? the UCA is mostly untouchable since the UCA owns the govt.
    Same reason he's responsible for oil prices.....he's not.....but everyone needs to be pissed at someone.

  16. #16
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    They have to request it. They don't monitor it. They can get phone records before from land lines, they can get credit card information, real estate information, etc. etc. etc.

  17. #17
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    Yes. You have a problem with the disclosure you sign saying they have a right to disclose to 3rd parties? My problem is when the 3rd parties are advertisers.
    So you don't mind when the 3rd party is the US gov't, but when it is instead advertisers. WC the libertarian!

  18. #18
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    So you don't mind when the 3rd party is the US gov't, but when it is instead advertisers. WC the libertarian!
    It still comes via a request. You think law enforcement is going to waste time requesting on people for no reason?

  19. #19
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    It still comes via a request. You think law enforcement is going to waste time requesting on people for no reason?
    Uhm... yes? Heck, just general mistakes alone over the past ten years have led to the wrong people being put on no-fly lists, the wrong people having their privacy invaded, etc etc. Even this Petraeus scandal brings up a good point over just how much power the FBI has.

    Oh, and those "requests" aren't very vigorously checked. I don't recall the exact numbers, but there were very few dismissals (less than a hundred) over the thousand-plus requests for information under the NSA letters.

  20. #20
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,886
    LE bureaucracies get vast bona fides from WC, pissants like you and me, none.

  21. #21
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536


    Police to End Pros ution and Drugs With Creepy New Spy Mobile

    http://www.alternet.org/police-end-p...new-spy-mobile


  22. #22
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,886
    that's funny to you? explains a lot.

  23. #23
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    that's funny to you? explains a lot.
    yes, it's

    pros ution and drugs are UNSTOPPABLE, but the stupid police keep on chasing it.

  24. #24
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Yes, the FBI and CIA can read your email. Here's how

    http://www.zdnet.com/yes-the-fbi-and...19/?s_cid=e539

  25. #25
    Veteran
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    8,957
    Obama koolaid drinkers, defend your guy on basically giving himself uncons utional and illegal powers when it comes to surveillance. Step up. You blasted Bush for this but you have no problem with Barry doing this. This is a in' joke. Obama lovers bashed the out of Bush 24/7 for the war in Iraq yet they blindly support his love for drones. Hypocrites!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •