Showing posts with label Big Brother. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Brother. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 04, 2012

We Need a Social Network Declaration of Independence

No.  Really.  We do.

In 'Part I' of this series (We Need a Social Network Constitution: http://evilchickenscratch.blogspot.com/2012/03/we-need-social-network-constitution.html) we looked at the concept how our technology has outpaced our laws & ethics.  In this blog I will give some recent examples of this concept and offer a few, humble suggestions for participating in the Social Media arena.  You don’t have to swing a dead external hard drive too far to find stories concerning personal information in Social Media these days and such stories will only become more intense in the future.  That being said, I only pass this along for your edification and awareness.  You may already know this information, Gentle Reader and, if so, feel free to sit this one out.  Now, if you are concerned over things such as personal information, how that information can be used, and what your rights are here now in the United States of the 21st century please read on. 


Now please don’t get me wrong.  I love Facebook.  It has become integral.  Social networking is how things are and will continue to be done.  Believe it.  The data and information that is mined is priceless.  It is not just people who want to sell you something who are taking notice of your likes and dislikes these days.  “Social Network Forensics” is a burgeoning field and the federal government is paying very close attention in the name of security.  Here is an article by Todd Piett on “How Law Enforcement Uses Social Media for Forensic Investigation”: http://mashable.com/2012/02/13/social-media-forensics/.  Piett writes, “Of course, as with every technology employed by law enforcement, concerns about “Big Brother” inevitably arise. What is the expectation of privacy around social media? If I tweet “Jack deserves to get a beating for that one,” is that an admission of guilt? What if I only direct message someone as a joke but they retweet it to a broader audience and it incites action? What if I only post it on Facebook for my friends?”  The simple truth of the matter is if you put it out there ~ it’s out there.

Then there are employers who fire employees who refuse to give them their Facebook password: http://www.themarysue.com/michigan-teachers-aide-fired-over-facebook/.  There are also cases where potential employees were asked to give over their Facebook passwords before being hired (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/job-seekers-getting-asked-facebook-080920368.html).  To it’s credit, Facebook has not been taking such threats to it’s very existence lightly and is considering suing employers who demand job applicants passwords: http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/03/facebook-says-it-may-sue-employers-who-demand-job-applicants-passwords.ars.  From Jon Brodkin’s ars technica’s article, “As a user, you shouldn’t be forced to share your private information and communications just to get a job," Facebook said. "And as the friend of a user, you shouldn’t have to worry that your private information or communications will be revealed to someone you don’t know and didn’t intend to share with just because that user is looking for a job. That’s why we’ve made it a violation of Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities to share or solicit a Facebook password.”

John Brownlee from Cult of Mac wrote an interesting piece about privacy, “This Creepy App Isn’t Just Stalking Women Without Their Knowledge, It’s a Wake-Up Call About Facebook Privacy”.  It can be found right here: http://www.cultofmac.com/157641/this-creepy-app-isnt-just-stalking-women-without-their-knowledge-its-a-wake-up-call-about-facebook-privacy/.  In the article, Mr. Brownlee very clearly illustrates the importance of privacy settings by showing an app that scrapes Facebook & Foursquare for information.  The following is from his article…

“Okay, so here’s Zoe. Most of her information is visible, so I now know her full name. I can see at a glance that she’s single, that she is 24, that she went to Stoneham High School and Bunker Hill Community College, that she likes to travel, that her favorite book is Gone With The Wind and her favorite musician is Tori Amos, and that she’s a liberal. I can see the names of her family and friends. I can see her birthday.”

“All of that is visible on Facebook?” one of the other girls in our group asked.

“More, depending on how your privacy settings are configured! For example, I can also look at Zoe’s pictures.”

I tapped on the photo album, and a collection of hundreds of publicly visible photos loaded up. I quickly browsed them.

“Okay, so it looks like Zoe is my kind of girl. From her photo albums, I can see that she likes to party, and given the number of guys she takes photos with at bars and clubs at night, I can deduce that she’s frisky when she’s drunk, and her favorite drink is a frosty margarita. She appears to have recently been in Rome. Also, since her photo album contains pictures she took at the beach, I now know what Zoe looks like in a bikini… which, as it happens, is pretty damn good.”

My girlfriend scowled at me. I assured her Zoe in a bikini was no comparison, and moved on.

“So now I know everything to know about Zoe. I know where she is. I know what she looks like, both clothed and mostly disrobed. I know her full name, her parents’ full names, her brother’s full name. I know what she likes to drink. I know where she went to school. I know what she likes and dislikes. All I need to do now is go down to the Independent, ask her if she remembers me from Stoneham High, ask her how her brother Mike is doing, buy her a frosty margarita, and start waxing eloquently about that beautiful summer I spent in Roma.”

The App has been effectively killed by Foursquare.  However, Mr. Brownlee also points out, “…Girls Around Me wasn’t actually doing anything wrong. Sure, on the surface, it looks like a hook-up app like Grindr for potential stalkers and date rapists, but all that Girls Around Me is really doing is using public APIs from Google Maps, Facebook and Foursquare and mashing them all up together, so you could see who had checked-in at locations in your area, and learn more about them. Moreover, the girls (and men!) shown in Girls Around Me all had the power to opt out of this information being visible to strangers, but whether out of ignorance, apathy or laziness, they had all neglected to do so. This was all public information. Nothing Girls Around Me does violates any of Apple’s policies.”  Mr. Brownlee makes the point that he works in the technology field and that he always assumed that people knew that the information that they put out into the wild, so to speak, was public information.  And that is frat boy stuff.  What happens when the government takes note of who you are, what you do and whom you follow?  

In an op-ed from Amy Gagran that ran on CNN entitled, “ACLU: Most Police Track Phones’ Locations Without Warrants” (http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/03/tech/mobile/police-phone-tracking-gahran/index.html), Ms. Gagran makes the case that such behavior is not so much the exception to the rule but is fast becoming the norm.  That’s not only cell phone calls but all the texts and emails too.  Ms. Gagran writes, “But don't the police need a warrant for that? It varies by state, but carriers generally say they require a court order to release this data. Regardless of these requirements, however, "Only a tiny minority reported consistently obtaining a warrant and demonstrating probable cause to do so," said the ACLU.

Not surprisingly, the ACLU disapproves of this practice.

"The government should have to obtain a warrant based upon probable cause before tracking cell phones. That is what is necessary to protect Americans' privacy, and it is also what is required under the Constitution," states the ACLU on its site.

The ACLU is right.  This is now constitutional law we are discussing.  It is widely accepted that we live in a Post 911 world and that security takes precedence over rights that we used to take completely and utterly for granted.  I, for one, believe this to be a frightening practice that pushes us a hair’s breadth away from utter tyranny.  A place where the common communication of citizens is monitored for any danger that you may be to the state and concepts like privacy and dignity are luxuries that we have lost along the way to our glorious future.  Who could pull off such a feat – the monitoring of not only a country but also the whole of the internet worldwide?  Where would one build such a complex?  Well, apparently the NSA could in the desert of Utah.

The cover story in April 2012’s WIRED magazine is by James Bamford, whom I’m pretty sure is currently on several people’s ‘watch lists’, entitled, “The NSA is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)”.  You can read Mr. Bamford’s article here: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1 and I encourage you to do so.  So how much memory would be needed that could monitor and save Google searches, cell phone calls, texts, tweets, and pictures from the family vacation that were put on Facebook?  Have you ever heard of a yottabyte?   Mr. Bamford writes, “…as a 2007 Department of Defense report puts it, the Pentagon is attempting to expand its worldwide communications network, known as the Global Information Grid, to handle yottabyte (1024 bytes) of data. (A yottabyte is a septillion bytes—so large that no one has yet coined a term for the next higher magnitude.)

It needs that capacity because, according to a recent report by Cisco, global Internet traffic will quadruple from 2010 to 2015, reaching 966 exabytes per year. (A million exabytes equal a yottabyte.) In terms of scale, Eric Schmidt, Google’s former CEO, once estimated that the total of all human knowledge created from the dawn of man to 2003 totaled 5 exabytes. And the data flow shows no sign of slowing. In 2011 more than 2 billion of the world’s 6.9 billion people were connected to the Internet. By 2015, market research firm IDC estimates, there will be 2.7 billion users. Thus, the NSA’s need for a 1-million-square-foot data storehouse. Should the agency ever fill the Utah center with a yottabyte of information, it would be equal to about 500 quintillion (500,000,000,000,000,000,000) pages of text.

The data stored in Bluffdale will naturally go far beyond the world’s billions of public web pages. The NSA is more interested in the so-called invisible web, also known as the deep web or deepnet—data beyond the reach of the public. This includes password-protected data, US and foreign government communications, and noncommercial file-sharing between trusted peers. “The deep web contains government reports, databases, and other sources of information of high value to DOD and the intelligence community,” according to a 2010 Defense Science Board report. “Alternative tools are needed to find and index data in the deep web … Stealing the classified secrets of a potential adversary is where the [intelligence] community is most comfortable.” With its new Utah Data Center, the NSA will at last have the technical capability to store, and rummage through, all those stolen secrets. The question, of course, is how the agency defines who is, and who is not, “a potential adversary.”
 
Pogo is quoted as saying, “Yes son, we have met the enemy and it is us.”  Mr. Bamford provides a link to my favorite second brain, Wikipedia, concerning totalitarianism, “Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.  Totalitarian regimes stay in political power through an all-encompassing propaganda campaign, which is disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that is often marked by political repression, personality cultism, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of speech, mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror.” 

Heavy stuff, n'est-ce pas?  Now please don’t get me wrong here.  I am proud and blessed to be a citizen of this country.  Further, I am thankful to those not only on the front-lines protecting my freedoms but also to those behind the scenes (perhaps even in Utah) who are doing the same.  One of those freedoms is the freedom of speech.  I would hope that writing a blog such as this would not put yours truly onto a ‘watch list’ or label me as, “a potential adversary”.  This being said, no one should be above the law.  We are not a totalitarian regime, we are a democracy and we should act like one.

No.  Really.  We should.


THIS section should really be ‘Part III’ but I am growing weary of my own slacktivist rantings; so now, as promised, a word about Facebook that I mentioned way back in the beginning of this particular blog entry.  I said I would offer some humble suggestions for participating in the Social Media arena.  Please take the following with a grain of salt.  Facebook is, at the end of the day, is driven by the individual user.  The way you run your Facebook is completely and utterly up to you.  My simple guidelines are as follows: 

Social Media is NOT my diary.

Words still mean things.  Actions do too.

Don’t be stupid… or at the very least, TRY not to be stupid.

Never feed the trolls.

Treat others, as I would want to be treated.

There you go.  That’s it.  These are my guidelines.  Yours may be completely different and that’s ok too.  That’s why they make different flavors of ice cream.  As we have already established, Facebook is user driven and that’s how I drive. 

I love Facebook.  Is it intrusive and do they sell my demographic information to data aggregators?  Sure they do but information is the new currency and if you want to participate in the Social Media arena then you must be aware of the consequences.  Before I post I try to remind myself that whatever I put out there, is out there.  We have already established this.  Facebook; however, can take on a life of its own if you don’t understand a few key things.  Bilbo Baggins was onto something when he said, “I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.” 

Just for the sake of discussion, for instance, suppose I start to annoy you.  You don’t like what I am saying, the silly way that I say it, or you are sick of seeing my pictures fill up your Facebook experience.  If such is the case you have a few options open to you, (don’t feel bad, I know how annoying I can be).  First, I would recommend that you familiarize yourself with this: http://mashable.com/2011/02/07/facebook-privacy-guide/.  It will show you how to exclude me from your feed.  If that doesn’t shut me up to your liking you can simply un-friend me.  It’s ok; we’ll always have Paris.  I know this flies in the face of any perceptions of narcissism on the branch of Social Media known as Facebook but why would I wish to torture you any longer?  Go now; know that I will carry your memory with me wherever I go & that you have carved out a special place in my heart.  You see, on Facebook, I am not there to entertain you ~ I’m there to entertain me and to communicate with those I wish to communicate with on my own terms.  If all that is too much or too little, too bad. 

Just look at how empowered we all are now!

Who da thunk?




...Now where do I go to get a yottabyte of memory?



Saturday, March 10, 2012

We Need a Social Network Constitution

No.  Really.  We do.

We live in an age where our tools have lapped our personal freedom laws and ethics a dozen fold.  A world where data aggregators; those we let in (Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin) and those we don’t (who use cookies & copies of our emails), record every keystroke that you type, every search you do and every YouTube video you watch.  Someone, somewhere is taking note.  This is not ‘tinfoil-hat’ territory here; this is real and it is ubiquitous.  A friend of mine posted a link on Facebook and the story caught my eye. 

Submitted for your approval, Gentle Reader, I humbly present to you a podcast from WHYY’s, “Radio Times with Marty Moss-Coane”.  She interviews a Social network and privacy expert, Lori Andrews, who is, after discovering what she is about, one of my heroes.  WHYY’s splash page for the interview states, “Social networking sites have the ability to put us in touch with old friends, help us meet our soul-mates and even topple governments, but they are also blurring the lines between our public and private selves leaving us vulnerable to invasions of our privacy.  Social network and privacy expert LORI ANDREWS says that as we work, chat, shop and date online, many of us are unknowingly opening ourselves up to surveillance from employers, schools, lawyers, the police, and even advertisers. In her recent book, "I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did,” she exposes the widespread misuse of our personal online data and proposes a “Social Network Constitution” to govern our online lives.”

It’s a great interview and I could not recommend it higher.  Before you click over to listen grab a cup of coffee and make yourself comfy since the interview is about 50 minutes long.  It is worth your time

Got your coffee?  Good.  Now click here: http://whyy.org/cms/radiotimes/2012/03/09/lori-andrews-on-social-networks-privacy/.  I’m looking forward to reading Ms. Andrews’s book.

We seek out new ways of connecting and communicating with people.  Social Media is a new frontier and the rules that were written at noon change by mid-afternoon.  Yet again our principals are being put to the test.  The founding fathers had no inclination as to the scope of personal freedom as applied to the internet.  Still, those truths still must be self-evident.  Social Media is a tool and how that tool is used – our behavior and motivation when using it, defines us.  Information is the new currency, let there be no doubt.  The “Facebook Nation” as Ms. Andrews coined it has a population that if it had boarders would be the third largest nation in the world.  Facebook has its own currency.  Who has your information?  Anyone who wants it, that’s who.  The data aggregators (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_aggregators) collect the data and sell it.  Mark Zuckerberg created a billion dollar social network around the concept.  Information is not only currency but it’s also power.  There are entities out there that wish to exploit this information and, yet again, we must ask just who watches the watchmen?  Of course that is a question that we should be asking even if there was no such thing as the net.  Democracy is about free speech.  We should still value that.  Just as we wouldn’t allow cameras to watch our every move in the privacy of our own home, governments, schools, the police, and yes, even advertisers should not be able to do the same via our home computers.  You may have allowed Zynga access to your information so that you could play “Mafia Wars” but did you know that they sold that information to a data aggregate who sold it to the Republican Party?  Now the GOP knows everything about you that Facebook does.  Everything.  The legal system has not yet caught up with new and emerging technologies and/or applying the principles that have held our country together for the last 235 + years to them.  It will happen but by the time that it does will it be too late?

I stand behind Ms. Andrews Social Network Constitution’s preamble, “We the People of the Facebook Nation…”  

I hope I'm not alone.



NOTE: This humble blog is the first in a two part series.  Next up, “We Need a Social Network Declaration of Independence

Sunday, February 21, 2010

The Reach of Project Natal


“So have you seen the Natal?” friend Number One asked.

“Nope.” I said, “Although it sounds familiar.”

“WHAT!” said friend Number Two. “You have GOT to see the trailers.”

“Trailers?” I asked.

“YOU haven’t seen the trailers?” said friend Number One. “You’ve got to see the trailers.”

“Yes,” said friend Number Two, “You’ve got to see the trailers.”

So I saw the trailers. You should see the trailers too. I will give the links in a few moments but prepare yourselves, Gentle Readers, although what you are about to see is for a “video game system” what you are truly about to see is the future. Really. I don’t shill for Microsoft / X-box (although if you are out there Microsoft / X-box, I wouldn’t mind shilling for you… forgive me. I digress). I do not have any stake other than sharing with you what I believe is the dawn of a new era in computer electronic human interface.

The first trailer is cute it shows some of the possibilities of this interface with gaming and with social networking. It can be found here: http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/projectnatal/.

The second trailer hints at what could become something so much… more. It can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYPh6qo03gA.

With facial, body and voice recognition Project Natal changes the playing field. A few years ago when the Nintendo Wii came out Sony and Microsoft had been spending their time developing systems with graphics reproduction processors and digital sound – which are important things IF you are a gamer. Nintendo, on the other hand, invested in revolution. With their wireless motion controllers and nun chucks they made it possible for even non-gamers to play video games. It was a simple idea that shook the whole industry and made Nintendo the lead dog of the video game console dog team. Your grandmother may not want to be on your “Call of Duty” strike team but she absolutely loves to bowl with you on the Wii. And just why is that? It is because it is accessible. It is familiar. Nintendo did not have to have the best processing because they had the best interface. That was a historic step. Initially the other companies called the Wii a fad (just like 30 years ago people called video games ‘a fad’). But year after year with the Wii at the top of the heap the other companies decided to develop their own Wii type interfaces. Sony practically copied the Wii Remote (which has not been released yet) and Microsoft developed the Natal. The difference between the two is that the Sony controller is a retread and the Natal is the forward motion of not only gaming but of computer interfacing itself. It surpasses the Wii and, for lack of a better phrase, is the next step in whatever the future may hold.

Enter the X-box Natal. With the Natal now your X-box knows who you are. It recognizes you. It knows the sound of your voice. It tailors itself to fit your needs. This opens up gaming, storytelling and participatory theater to a completely new level. Don’t believe me? Here is some guy named Spielberg to give his two cents concerning the Natal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_3X8TY32f0.

Now let’s consider the future. Can you imagine what the first social interactions or Facebook / Natal interfaces would be? Hundreds of millions of people out there all with their own avatars ready, willing and able to communicate in ways not even dreamed of with a mouse and a keyboard. How about the Windows Natal Browser? I kid you not; this is the shape of things to come. One does not have to be The Amazing Kreskin to see what the future may be here – what it will be here. Can you imagine what a Natal Enabled Classroom would look like? How about Natal Enabled medical records or business presentations? A Natal PowerPoint is not beyond the realm of possibility – it is the same company.

With all of the benefits that such an interface would deliver what concerns me are some of the potential detriments. There will be people who are going to get so enraptured with all the virtual worlds inside the Natal that the real one would fade in comparison. There will be those who like there lives more inside the Natal than on the outside. There are friends inside there. They understand. They cater to one’s needs, wants and desires. Sure they are relating to programs within an electronic construct but if the shoe fits… For these souls Natal Anonymous chapters would open up. I can already hear the empty talking heads on the morning news programs – “Technology, how much is too much?” The answer to that lies only in the boundaries of human imagination. The simple fact of the matter is once the genie is out of the bottle the world has moved on. There is no going back – nor should there be. However; for every step forward, throughout history mind you, there are those who are willing and able to take three steps back. There were people who said that horseless carriages would never last; that man would never fly. There were those who said that man would never walk on the moon. There were some who said average everyday people would never need anything like a personal computer. There were those who said video games were just a fad. You get the idea. This technology is here and it will be here to stay. Users will have to adapt and the Natal makes adaptation such an easy feat. Those that don't will be left behind.

“If this is the real deal, what about addiction?”

In the grand scale bell curve of progress you will find on either side of that curve people who will utilize a new technology (or anything for that matter) too much or too little. If you like cars or motorcycles you are a “Gear Head”. If you like computers and what makes them run you are a “Tech Head”. If you like either of these pastimes too much and it monopolizes your time where you are constantly thinking about (insert addiction here) then you may have a problem (of course you may also have a clear career path too). For the vast majority on this future bell curve it will be a tool; a new way to communicate. And just as with anything there will be those who are better at new technologies than others and there will be those who will eternally have their digital clocks blinking 12:00 AM.

As for having an addiction? “My name is Evil Chicken and I have (or will have) a Natal problem.” There. I’ve said it. I’ve taken the first step to recovery.

We have looked at the good and the bad of the Natal; now let’s look at the ugly. Facial and Voice recognition, tens of millions of users worldwide – each with their own personal identification and profiles that they update themselves? All cataloged in one place! Right now, I kid you not, there are think tanks and organizations (governmental and otherwise) filled with people wringing their hands and stroking their pencil thin mustaches who are overcome with joy with frenzied looks in their eyes at the prospect of having all of that information at their fingertips. The information that they have is yours. Big Brother now is no longer just watching you. No. Now he is playing volleyball with you in your living room. He is able to sit in on each and every video chat that you have with your cousin in Seattle or your wife back home in Jersey or your doctor’s office. He is able to see what sites you go to and what you buy online. Whatever the camera’s eye sees or the electronic ear hears someone, somewhere can see it too. Money may make the world go round but information? Information is power. Power is the drug that fuels the engines of despotism, tyranny and repression.

“Oh come on, Evil Chicken. You are being paranoid. That could never happen.”

No? Not to sound too much like a conspiracy theorist please consider the case of the school in Lower Merion Township in Pennsylvania and how they were activating the web cams on student’s computers to “track missing laptops”. Read ‘em and weep: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/02/school-district-halts-webcam-surveillance/.

This is only a small abuse of power. I am not even going to discuss the HUGE abuses of power that the big fish could perpetrate in this equation. Do a search on Google and the NSA who have been recently working together. I am going to hazard a guess and say that Google will be one or the options for search engines on future models of the Natal. “Don’t be evil” was nice while it lasted – however long that was. Now imagine that it is your turn to be reviewed or audited as for your habits of what you do online or, in the near future, on the Natal Network. We voluntarily give out so much of our information and our personal freedoms so willingly all in the names of entertainment and security. Perhaps it will be something as "innocuous" as selling your demographic info to advertising agencies? Perhaps the monitoring will be chalked up to "national security" or "finding terrorists". Whatever the case YOU will be watched. You will be told it is for your own good. Only history will hold the answer to if the clandestine monitoring / spying was worth the price of identity.

Please forgive me… "Who watches the watchmen" is only a part of this equation. This is still about the Natal, which has the power of becoming an amazing new tool for the ages. As with any tool it is only as good as the craftsman who is using it. The same can be said for the craftsman’s intentions. Whether you believe Microsoft can deliver on the Natal or not it will be in stores for Christmas 2010.

I’ll be camping out for one. I believe that for the future the Good will be worth the Bad and that the Ugly have always been with us – they just have better tools now.

I’ll see you in line.