User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/28/2016 7:40:09 PM EDT
[#1]
So is Obama going to crucify this whistleblower to?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 12:13:35 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They don't. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: How does one store 21 petabytes of data per day? Who builds those hard drives? They don't. They don't store any of the daily traffic or they don't store all of the daily traffic? A general question... Does a computer speech recognition program count as a human reviewing the data? Does a computer pulling text data such as names and phone numbers out of an email or text message count as a human reviewing the data or would that be considered "metadata"? I know what I would be doing with the data if I had access to it; parsing all of it, extracting key data as "metadata" to permanently store, and then storing any data containing flagged words or "metadata" that connects them to other people of interest. All of that would be done without any human looking at the data. I'm just wondering if their is any official statement as to what the government is doing? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 12:17:55 AM EDT
[#3]
Good, choke on it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 1:30:38 AM EDT
[#4]
NSA never heard of the concept of garbage in-garbage out? Seen the online activities of most people under 30 to 40 in your circle of friends? Quantum Mega Super Computer isn't going to be able to tell the differences publicly know kinky sex habits of all kinds of couples online, from random asshole terrorist_01 saying the date, time, and location of a new 9/11.
I doubt the NSA really cares about stopping any attacks. These data banks just keep people on the road to government pensions. They are literally trying to monitor something that is 98.9% naked people doing weird shit, and like 1% kitten and puppy pictures, and at msot 0.1% of legit badp eople saying how they are gonna kill us. /Sigh |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 1:38:07 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, we USED to do that to defeat the Soviets. Now, we do it to spy on U.S. Citizens. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is the first I have heard about them tapping in to the undersea fiber optic cables. Way to much data, giving them way to much power. They've been tapping cables for decades. I don't remember the codename for that program, but there were USN subs tasked to the mission with all the necessary equipment. So, we USED to do that to defeat the Soviets. Now, we do it to spy on U.S. Citizens. Exactly. Nixon was kicked out of office for spying on the DNC (who probably actually deserve it!). Bush / Obama spy on every single American and.....that's OK? Fuck that shit. There needs to be some software written that constantly slips key words and phrases into all communications...you know, jihad, nuclear bomb plans, all that shit, dispersed in random ways and with enough change that it's a pita to filter out. They are drowning in data? Time to pour another bucket of water in their face. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 1:46:14 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When did it become popular to assist our enemies? 
Governments spy on their enemies. The more pertinent question, then, is "When did we citizens become the enemy?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 1:50:36 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not for long - I'm sure they are working on a way to autonomously sort all that data into something meaningful. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Analysis has always been a chokepoint. Not for long - I'm sure they are working on a way to autonomously sort all that data into something meaningful. The backlog is a result of 3 things: the ability to electronically monitor all communications, the ability to store the resultant data, and the inability to collate and interpret that data. The backlog will be solved by the introduction of a capable artificial intelligence unit. And when that happens, the resultant output must still be interpreted by a human mind. Woe to the American citizen when the NSA totally relies on AI to interpret AND ACT ON all of this data! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 1:57:24 AM EDT
[#8]
Let's send everyone we know a copy of the US Constitution. That way we'll know that the NSA has read it.
(Not an original sentiment.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 2:21:37 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They've been tapping the cables for decades. Read Blind Man's Bluff (submarine warfare during the Cold War). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
NSA is so overwhelmed with data, it's no longer effective, says whistleblower One of the agency's first whistleblowers says the NSA is taking in too much data for it to handle, which can have disastrous -- if not deadly -- consequences.
*** Binney said that an analyst today can run one simple query across the NSA's various databases, only to become immediately overloaded with information. With about four billion people -- around two-thirds of the world's population -- under the NSA and partner agencies' watchful eyes, according to his estimates, there is too much data being collected. "That's why they couldn't stop the Boston bombing, or the Paris shootings, because the data was all there," said Binney. Because the agency isn't carefully and methodically setting its tools up for smart data collection, that leaves analysts to search for a needle in a haystack. *** Binney said the NSA is today not as interested in phone records -- such as who calls whom, when, and for how long. Although the Obama administration calls the program a "critical national security tool," the agency is increasingly looking at the content of communications, as the Snowden disclosures have shown. Binney said he estimated that a "maximum" of 72 companies were participating in the bulk records collection program -- including Verizon, but said it was a drop in the ocean. He also called PRISM, the clandestine surveillance program that grabs data from nine named Silicon Valley giants, including Apple, Google, Facebook, and Microsoft, just a "minor part" of the data collection process. "The Upstream program is where the vast bulk of the information was being collected," said Binney, talking about how the NSA tapped undersea fiber optic cables. With help from its British counterparts at GCHQ, the NSA is able to "buffer" more than 21 petabytes a day. *** "They're taking away half of the constitution in secret," said Binney. "If they want to change the constitution, there's a way to do that -- and it's in the constitution." This is the first I have heard about them tapping in to the undersea fiber optic cables. Way to much data, giving them way to much power. They've been tapping the cables for decades. Read Blind Man's Bluff (submarine warfare during the Cold War). lol. you guys suck at math and physics. 
ar-jedi |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 7:42:45 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They don't store any of the daily traffic or they don't store all of the daily traffic? A general question... Does a computer speech recognition program count as a human reviewing the data? Does a computer pulling text data such as names and phone numbers out of an email or text message count as a human reviewing the data or would that be considered "metadata"? I know what I would be doing with the data if I had access to it; parsing all of it, extracting key data as "metadata" to permanently store, and then storing any data containing flagged words or "metadata" that connects them to other people of interest. All of that would be done without any human looking at the data. I'm just wondering if their is any official statement as to what the government is doing? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How does one store 21 petabytes of data per day? Who builds those hard drives? They don't. They don't store any of the daily traffic or they don't store all of the daily traffic? A general question... Does a computer speech recognition program count as a human reviewing the data? Does a computer pulling text data such as names and phone numbers out of an email or text message count as a human reviewing the data or would that be considered "metadata"? I know what I would be doing with the data if I had access to it; parsing all of it, extracting key data as "metadata" to permanently store, and then storing any data containing flagged words or "metadata" that connects them to other people of interest. All of that would be done without any human looking at the data. I'm just wondering if their is any official statement as to what the government is doing? You can't. It's not possible. And parsing or text-to-speech just adds massive processing requirements onto the silliness of pretending its possible to dump it all at wire speed onto drives. The laws of physics still say fuck off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 10:33:52 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can't. It's not possible. And parsing or text-to-speech just adds massive processing requirements onto the silliness of pretending its possible to dump it all at wire speed onto drives. The laws of physics still say fuck off. I am dictating this text to my phone. With a simple consumer electronic device and a standard cellular internet connection my voice is being turned into text in almost real-time. It is not out of the realm of possibility that an entity like the US government with an unlimited budget could not do the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 10:48:20 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am dictating this text to my phone. With a simple consumer electronic device and a standard cellular internet connection my voice is being turned into text in almost real-time. It is not out of the realm of possibility that an entity like the US government with an unlimited budget could not do the same. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You can't. It's not possible. And parsing or text-to-speech just adds massive processing requirements onto the silliness of pretending its possible to dump it all at wire speed onto drives. The laws of physics still say fuck off. I am dictating this text to my phone. With a simple consumer electronic device and a standard cellular internet connection my voice is being turned into text in almost real-time. It is not out of the realm of possibility that an entity like the US government with an unlimited budget could not do the same. "almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. You're several orders of magnitude away from "real time", and you're talking about less than sixty words, and comparing this to the idea someone can just tap the whole internet and do a speech to text conversion on it, parse it in real time, and save the bits and pieces they want. The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 10:49:29 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are we really bashing the NSA collecting on the rest of the world? Should we just turn in our tanks and airplanes too? God forbid we work to maintain a decisive advantage against our enemies. GD... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 10:57:30 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. You're several orders of magnitude away from "real time", and you're talking about less than sixty words, and comparing this to the idea someone can just tap the whole internet and do a speech to text conversion on it, parse it in real time, and save the bits and pieces they want. The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't. It's not possible. And parsing or text-to-speech just adds massive processing requirements onto the silliness of pretending its possible to dump it all at wire speed onto drives. The laws of physics still say fuck off. I am dictating this text to my phone. With a simple consumer electronic device and a standard cellular internet connection my voice is being turned into text in almost real-time. It is not out of the realm of possibility that an entity like the US government with an unlimited budget could not do the same. "almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. You're several orders of magnitude away from "real time", and you're talking about less than sixty words, and comparing this to the idea someone can just tap the whole internet and do a speech to text conversion on it, parse it in real time, and save the bits and pieces they want. The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. I'm not entirely sure why you bother with these threads. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:07:45 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. You're several orders of magnitude away from "real time", and you're talking about less than sixty words, and comparing this to the idea someone can just tap the whole internet and do a speech to text conversion on it, parse it in real time, and save the bits and pieces they want. The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't. It's not possible. And parsing or text-to-speech just adds massive processing requirements onto the silliness of pretending its possible to dump it all at wire speed onto drives. The laws of physics still say fuck off. I am dictating this text to my phone. With a simple consumer electronic device and a standard cellular internet connection my voice is being turned into text in almost real-time. It is not out of the realm of possibility that an entity like the US government with an unlimited budget could not do the same. "almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. You're several orders of magnitude away from "real time", and you're talking about less than sixty words, and comparing this to the idea someone can just tap the whole internet and do a speech to text conversion on it, parse it in real time, and save the bits and pieces they want. The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. Whatever. If I can get some grainy night time surveillance video from 1992, all I have to do is whisper " enhance" into the computer a few times and I can identify the uncle of a present-day terrorist by his dental work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:12:33 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not entirely sure why you bother with these threads. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't. It's not possible. And parsing or text-to-speech just adds massive processing requirements onto the silliness of pretending its possible to dump it all at wire speed onto drives. The laws of physics still say fuck off. I am dictating this text to my phone. With a simple consumer electronic device and a standard cellular internet connection my voice is being turned into text in almost real-time. It is not out of the realm of possibility that an entity like the US government with an unlimited budget could not do the same. "almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. You're several orders of magnitude away from "real time", and you're talking about less than sixty words, and comparing this to the idea someone can just tap the whole internet and do a speech to text conversion on it, parse it in real time, and save the bits and pieces they want. The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. I'm not entirely sure why you bother with these threads. I know I have a problem. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:13:13 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Whatever. If I can get some grainy night time surveillance video from 1992, all I have to do is whisper " enhance" into the computer a few times and I can identify the uncle of a present-day terrorist by his dental work. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You can't. It's not possible. And parsing or text-to-speech just adds massive processing requirements onto the silliness of pretending its possible to dump it all at wire speed onto drives. The laws of physics still say fuck off. I am dictating this text to my phone. With a simple consumer electronic device and a standard cellular internet connection my voice is being turned into text in almost real-time. It is not out of the realm of possibility that an entity like the US government with an unlimited budget could not do the same. "almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. You're several orders of magnitude away from "real time", and you're talking about less than sixty words, and comparing this to the idea someone can just tap the whole internet and do a speech to text conversion on it, parse it in real time, and save the bits and pieces they want. The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. Whatever. If I can get some grainy night time surveillance video from 1992, all I have to do is whisper " enhance" into the computer a few times and I can identify the uncle of a present-day terrorist by his dental work. The abject ignorance about computing power boggles my mind sometimes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:14:05 AM EDT
[#18]
The "whistle blower" is a plant. A fake. NSA asked him to "leak" this story - because it is false.
Look at how NSA and the entire USA reacted to Snowden. THAT response should tell you Snowden was the real deal (and almost everything he revealed has been confirmed). This fake "whistleblower??" No response. Because he isn't a whistleblower. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:19:50 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The "whistle blower" is a plant. A fake. NSA asked him to "leak" this story - because it is false. Look at how NSA and the entire USA reacted to Snowden. THAT response should tell you Snowden was the real deal (and almost everything he revealed has been confirmed). This fake "whistleblower??" No response. Because he isn't a whistleblower. Binney isn't fake, but he's way outdated at this point. He hasn't worked there in 15 years. The terminology in the article is vague. It says they can "buffer" 21 petabytes a day off of these cables. What exactly does that mean? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:26:05 AM EDT
[#20]
I would like to see our taxes increase so that we are giving these patriots the resources to do their job. If only two thirds of the world's population is having their communication and personal data intercepted, then there is still one third, probably terrorists, that need to be scrutinized. A significant budget increase should be able to resolve this situation, and if we are are able to contribute to through massive additional taxation, then we should really do that and stop trying to hold back this noble effort due to our own selfish greed and stingyness.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:35:23 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Imagine the political power you would wield being in control of that information. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I would venture to speculate getting real time Intel is not the goal, but to store data on everyone for later compiling for patterns of behavior and profiling. Meaning it's about control and nothing more. Imagine the political power you would wield being in control of that information. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:36:19 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Binney isn't fake, but he's way outdated at this point. He hasn't worked there in 15 years. The terminology in the article is vague. It says they can "buffer" 21 petabytes a day off of these cables. What exactly does that mean? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The "whistle blower" is a plant. A fake. NSA asked him to "leak" this story - because it is false. Look at how NSA and the entire USA reacted to Snowden. THAT response should tell you Snowden was the real deal (and almost everything he revealed has been confirmed). This fake "whistleblower??" No response. Because he isn't a whistleblower. Binney isn't fake, but he's way outdated at this point. He hasn't worked there in 15 years. The terminology in the article is vague. It says they can "buffer" 21 petabytes a day off of these cables. What exactly does that mean? A 'buffer' is where you store data till you permanently save it, or otherwise use it. The ram in your PC is a buffer between the CPU and hard drive. In this case, it would be the data they can intercept and hold till they decide to throw it away or save it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:37:10 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A 'buffer' is where you store data till you permanently save it, or otherwise use it. The ram in your PC is a buffer between the CPU and hard drive. In this case, it would be the data they can intercept and hold till they decide to throw it away or save it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The "whistle blower" is a plant. A fake. NSA asked him to "leak" this story - because it is false. Look at how NSA and the entire USA reacted to Snowden. THAT response should tell you Snowden was the real deal (and almost everything he revealed has been confirmed). This fake "whistleblower??" No response. Because he isn't a whistleblower. Binney isn't fake, but he's way outdated at this point. He hasn't worked there in 15 years. The terminology in the article is vague. It says they can "buffer" 21 petabytes a day off of these cables. What exactly does that mean? A 'buffer' is where you store data till you permanently save it, or otherwise use it. The ram in your PC is a buffer between the CPU and hard drive. In this case, it would be the data they can intercept and hold till they decide to throw it away or save it. I know what buffering is in general, I just question whether it's even the correct term to use here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:42:32 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A 'buffer' is where you store data till you permanently save it, or otherwise use it. The ram in your PC is a buffer between the CPU and hard drive. In this case, it would be the data they can intercept and hold till they decide to throw it away or save it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The "whistle blower" is a plant. A fake. NSA asked him to "leak" this story - because it is false. Look at how NSA and the entire USA reacted to Snowden. THAT response should tell you Snowden was the real deal (and almost everything he revealed has been confirmed). This fake "whistleblower??" No response. Because he isn't a whistleblower. Binney isn't fake, but he's way outdated at this point. He hasn't worked there in 15 years. The terminology in the article is vague. It says they can "buffer" 21 petabytes a day off of these cables. What exactly does that mean? A 'buffer' is where you store data till you permanently save it, or otherwise use it. The ram in your PC is a buffer between the CPU and hard drive. In this case, it would be the data they can intercept and hold till they decide to throw it away or save it. The RAM in your PC is not, in fact, a "buffer between the CPU and the hard drive". Some of it may be used for that purpose, but that is not the purpose of ram. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:43:06 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would like to see our taxes increase so that we are giving these patriots the resources to do their job. If only two thirds of the world's population is having their communication and personal data intercepted, then there is still one third, probably terrorists, that need to be scrutinized. A significant budget increase should be able to resolve this situation, and if we are are able to contribute to through massive additional taxation, then we should really do that and stop trying to hold back this noble effort due to our own selfish greed and stingyness.  No need. Given the intel they collect and analyze, if they don't have the chops to set up side businesses, investments, and strong-arm operations that pour staggering amounts of money into black budgets without oversight, any more money given to them would be a waste. Either they can do it on their own, or they've become a bloated bureaucracy of mouth-breathing incompetence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 3:48:03 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. Quote HistoryQuoted:
"almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. No. Response time from when I speak to when the words appear on the screen are well less than a second and this includes all the latency and overhead of round trip cellular data transport. This is on a cheap consumer devise you standard consumer wireless connectivity, with the horsepower of voice recognition being done so cheaply that there is no cost to me. Tell me now, how well can voice recognition be done on local data when cost is not a factor? Does the NSA really not have at least parity with Google? ETA You may be right, I may be crazy... but from the every day technology that is around us and available at almost no cost the idea of constant surveillance starts too look very possible. EATA The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. "A couple of years ago" when we see more technological changes every year than previous generations experienced in their lifetimes? Hey, if this guy is saying all this shit was happening 15 years ago then I am highly skeptical of that claim. Today? Much less skeptical. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 3:51:34 PM EDT
[#27]
haha,fuckers
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 4:18:32 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tell me now, how well can voice recognition be done on local data when cost is not a factor? Does the NSA really not have at least parity with Google? Parity with Google would be pretty shitty, if my experience with Google Voice transcription is any indicator. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 4:55:16 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"A couple of years ago" when we see more technological changes every year than previous generations experienced in their lifetimes? Hey, if this guy is saying all this shit was happening 15 years ago then I am highly skeptical of that claim. Today? Much less skeptical. first, some background might be needed. what sorts of OOK or coherent optical transmission systems have you architected, implemented, and deployed over the past 10 years? ar-jedi |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 5:13:44 PM EDT
[#30]
They don't care about stopping terrorists.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 5:22:08 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
first, some background might be needed. what sorts of OOK or coherent optical transmission systems have you architected, implemented, and deployed over the past 10 years? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"A couple of years ago" when we see more technological changes every year than previous generations experienced in their lifetimes? Hey, if this guy is saying all this shit was happening 15 years ago then I am highly skeptical of that claim. Today? Much less skeptical. first, some background might be needed. what sorts of OOK or coherent optical transmission systems have you architected, implemented, and deployed over the past 10 years? What does your question have to do with my assertion "given the voice recognition available to the public for free, it seems within the realm of possibility that the US government can track a significant amount of telecom traffic". |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 5:35:07 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More proof that a few fuckers flat out LIED to folks on arfcom over this for years. Remember that next time they post more lies. Txl I wasn't stupid enough to believe them but I remember. Oh, I remember all right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 5:47:34 PM EDT
[#33]
Solzhenitsyn studied mathematics and physics at the University of Rostov-on-Don, graduating at the beginning of World War II. He served for 4 years in the Soviet army and attained the rank of captain in the artillery. His difficulties with the authorities began on Feb. 8, 1945, when he was arrested for having written critical remarks about Joseph Stalin in a letter to a friend that was intercepted by the censors. Sentenced without a trial to 8 years of hard labor, he remained until 1953 in a number of labor camps, |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 5:49:42 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What does your question have to do with my assertion "given the voice recognition available to the public for free, it seems within the realm of possibility that the US government can track a significant amount of telecom traffic". Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"A couple of years ago" when we see more technological changes every year than previous generations experienced in their lifetimes? Hey, if this guy is saying all this shit was happening 15 years ago then I am highly skeptical of that claim. Today? Much less skeptical. first, some background might be needed. what sorts of OOK or coherent optical transmission systems have you architected, implemented, and deployed over the past 10 years? What does your question have to do with my assertion "given the voice recognition available to the public for free, it seems within the realm of possibility that the US government can track a significant amount of telecom traffic". whoops my bad -- too many windows open led to a thought multiplexing error and subsequent errant post. ar-jedi |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 5:51:59 PM EDT
[#35]
LOL
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 10:25:40 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. Response time from when I speak to when the words appear on the screen are well less than a second and this includes all the latency and overhead of round trip cellular data transport. This is on a cheap consumer devise you standard consumer wireless connectivity, with the horsepower of voice recognition being done so cheaply that there is no cost to me. Tell me now, how well can voice recognition be done on local data when cost is not a factor? Does the NSA really not have at least parity with Google? ETA You may be right, I may be crazy... but from the every day technology that is around us and available at almost no cost the idea of constant surveillance starts too look very possible. EATA "A couple of years ago" when we see more technological changes every year than previous generations experienced in their lifetimes? Hey, if this guy is saying all this shit was happening 15 years ago then I am highly skeptical of that claim. Today? Much less skeptical. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"almost real-time"?? No, it's not anywhere in the same planet as "almost real-time". You dictate into your phone, your phone uploads your voice into a server on the internet, and several seconds later it returns the text entered into your text box. No. Response time from when I speak to when the words appear on the screen are well less than a second and this includes all the latency and overhead of round trip cellular data transport. This is on a cheap consumer devise you standard consumer wireless connectivity, with the horsepower of voice recognition being done so cheaply that there is no cost to me. Tell me now, how well can voice recognition be done on local data when cost is not a factor? Does the NSA really not have at least parity with Google? ETA You may be right, I may be crazy... but from the every day technology that is around us and available at almost no cost the idea of constant surveillance starts too look very possible. EATA The idea is ludicrous. I wish I had the post saved, but ar-jedi I think it was, wrote up a really good physics based analysis of how utterly absurd this notion was a couple of years ago. "A couple of years ago" when we see more technological changes every year than previous generations experienced in their lifetimes? Hey, if this guy is saying all this shit was happening 15 years ago then I am highly skeptical of that claim. Today? Much less skeptical. You're right -- the speed data is transferred at gets faster. We multiplex more data on the line, not less. The problem gets more complex, not less. Your iphone is doing something extremely simple, and it's not looking for anything. Now separate out a hundred thousand VOIP streams and do that on every single one of them in real time (not sort of a couple of orders of magnitude away from real time like your iphone is doing it), and then process and parse all that text data to decide which conversation you need to record, but oops -- that conversation is already gone and since you don't have a petabyte of buffer nor do you have any way to write that much data that quickly into anything, you couldn't have saved it anyway. It's not possible. Go back and read Takedown by Shimomura for a look at the problem in the 1990s and realize that they couldn't even dream of the speeds we use to push data through the fiber today back then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 10:31:45 PM EDT
[#37]
Ya can't catch the bad guys when you are listening to EVERYONE!!
I figured that out with a high school education..........fukin' know it alls. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:23:04 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is my guess. It's more retrospective than prospective. The aim is not to collect information with the goal of preventing harm, but rather to build a case from stored information against targets identified by the regime. So one day they decide that you are a threat to them, and you need to go. The name goes to NSA, and soon they have your calls, your texts, your emails, your contacts and enough to get a warrant. Since everybody commits three felonies a day, assuming you're not really a "bad guy" they'll have enough to put you away in short order. I view it as our own little version of the Gestapo, but without the charm and personal warmth. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I would venture to speculate getting real time Intel is not the goal, but to store data on everyone for later compiling for patterns of behavior and profiling. Meaning it's about control and nothing more. This is my guess. It's more retrospective than prospective. The aim is not to collect information with the goal of preventing harm, but rather to build a case from stored information against targets identified by the regime. So one day they decide that you are a threat to them, and you need to go. The name goes to NSA, and soon they have your calls, your texts, your emails, your contacts and enough to get a warrant. Since everybody commits three felonies a day, assuming you're not really a "bad guy" they'll have enough to put you away in short order. I view it as our own little version of the Gestapo, but without the charm and personal warmth. 
Where do people come up with this tinfoil hat bullshit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:26:56 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
 https://youtu.be/_o2djiZOxyA
Let's say the NSA has algorithms and software to see what is trending on both a macroscopic (sociology) level and a microscopic (individual psychology) level. If you were in power, wouldn't you want to know ahead of time that the peasants are gathering their tar and feathers, and torches and pitchforks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I would venture to speculate getting real time Intel is not the goal, but to store data on everyone for later compiling for patterns of behavior and profiling. Meaning it's about control and nothing more. https://youtu.be/_o2djiZOxyA
Let's say the NSA has algorithms and software to see what is trending on both a macroscopic (sociology) level and a microscopic (individual psychology) level. If you were in power, wouldn't you want to know ahead of time that the peasants are gathering their tar and feathers, and torches and pitchforks. If they can't figure this out by watching the past 4 elections and listening to am talk radio then there's no amount of NSA analysis that's going to catch their attention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:29:36 PM EDT
[#40]
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Coast Guard (USCG) Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Border Patrol Secret Service (USSS) National Operations Center (NOC) Homeland Defense Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agent Task Force Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Fusion Center Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Secure Border Initiative (SBI) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Air Marshal Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) National Guard Red Cross United Nations (UN) Assassination Attack Domestic security Drill Exercise Cops Law enforcement Authorities Disaster assistance Disaster management DNDO (Domestic Nuclear Detection Office) National preparedness Mitigation Prevention Response Recovery Dirty bomb Domestic nuclear detection Emergency management Emergency response First responder Homeland security Maritime domain awareness (MDA) National preparedness initiative Militia Shooting Shots fired Evacuation Deaths Hostage Explosion (explosive) Police Disaster medical assistance team (DMAT) Organized crime Gangs National security State of emergency Security Breach Threat Standoff SWAT Screening Lockdown Bomb (squad or threat) Crash Looting Riot Emergency Landing Pipe bomb Incident Facility Hazmat Nuclear Chemical spill Suspicious package/device Toxic National laboratory Nuclear facility Nuclear threat Cloud Plume Radiation Radioactive Leak Biological infection (or event) Chemical Chemical burn Biological Epidemic Hazardous Hazardous material incident Industrial spill Infection Powder (white) Gas Spillover Anthrax Blister agent Chemical agent Exposure Burn Nerve agent Ricin Sarin North Korea Outbreak Contamination Exposure Virus Evacuation Bacteria Recall Ebola Food Poisoning Foot and Mouth (FMD) H5N1 Avian Flu Salmonella Small Pox Plague Human to human Human to Animal Influenza Center for Disease Control (CDC) Drug Administration (FDA) Public Health Toxic Agro Terror Tuberculosis (TB) Agriculture Listeria Symptoms Mutation Resistant Antiviral Wave Pandemic Infection Water/air borne Sick Swine Pork Strain Quarantine H1N1 Vaccine Tamiflu Norvo Virus Epidemic World Health Organization (WHO) (and components) Viral Hemorrhagic Fever E. Coli Infrastructure security Airport CIKR (Critical Infrastructure & Key Resources) AMTRAK Collapse Computer infrastructure Communications infrastructure Telecommunications Critical infrastructure National infrastructure Metro WMATA Airplane (and derivatives) Chemical fire Subway BART MARTA Port Authority NBIC (National Biosurveillance Integration Center) Transportation security Grid Power Smart Body scanner Electric Failure or outage Black out Brown out Port Dock Bridge Cancelled Delays Service disruption Power lines Drug cartel Violence Gang Drug Narcotics Cocaine Marijuana Heroin Border Mexico Cartel Southwest Juarez Sinaloa Tijuana Torreon Yuma Tucson Decapitated U.S. Consulate Consular El Paso Fort Hancock San Diego Ciudad Juarez Nogales Sonora Colombia Mara salvatrucha MS13 or MS-13 Drug war Mexican army Methamphetamine Cartel de Golfo Gulf Cartel La Familia Reynosa Nuevo Leon Narcos Narco banners (Spanish equivalents) Los Zetas Shootout Execution Gunfight Trafficking Kidnap Calderon Reyosa Bust Tamaulipas Meth Lab Drug trade Illegal immigrants Smuggling (smugglers) Matamoros Michoacana Guzman Arellano-Felix Beltran-Leyva Barrio Azteca Artistic Assassins Mexicles New Federation Terrorism Al Qaeda (all spellings) Terror Attack Iraq Afghanistan Iran Pakistan Agro Environmental terrorist Eco terrorism Conventional weapon Target Weapons grade Dirty bomb Enriched Nuclear Chemical weapon Biological weapon Ammonium nitrate Improvised explosive device IED (Improvised Explosive Device) Abu Sayyaf Hamas FARC (Armed Revolutionary Forces Colombia) IRA (Irish Republican Army) ETA (Euskadi ta Askatasuna) Basque Separatists Hezbollah Tamil Tigers PLF (Palestine Liberation Front) PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization Car bomb Jihad Taliban Weapons cache Suicide bomber Suicide attack Suspicious substance AQAP (AL Qaeda Arabian Peninsula) AQIM (Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb) TTP (Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan) Yemen Pirates Extremism Somalia Nigeria Radicals Al-Shabaab Home grown Plot Nationalist Recruitment Fundamentalism Islamist Emergency Hurricane Tornado Twister Tsunami Earthquake Tremor Flood Storm Crest Temblor Extreme weather Forest fire Brush fire Ice Stranded/Stuck Help Hail Wildfire Tsunami Warning Center Magnitude Avalanche Typhoon Shelter-in-place Disaster Snow Blizzard Sleet Mud slide or Mudslide Erosion Power outage Brown out Warning Watch Lightening Aid Relief Closure Interstate Burst Emergency Broadcast System Cyber security Botnet DDOS (dedicated denial of service) Denial of service Malware Virus Trojan Keylogger Cyber Command 2600 Spammer Phishing Rootkit Phreaking Cain and abel Brute forcing Mysql injection Cyber attack Cyber terror Hacker China Conficker Worm Scammers Social media |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:44:51 PM EDT
[#41]
There goes my run for president...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2016 11:46:21 PM EDT
[#42]
Fuck you NSA!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 12:04:29 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would venture to speculate getting real time Intel is not the goal, but to store data on everyone for later compiling for patterns of behavior and profiling. Meaning it's about control and nothing more. This. It may be ineffective for its stated purpose, but it sure as hell works for keeping the peasants in line. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 12:13:48 AM EDT
[#44]
Bomb Bomb Bomb Federal Building President
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 12:24:07 AM EDT
[#45]
Meanwhile an elaborate data breach happens over at OPM which includes SF-86 forms. Whoops.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 8:39:27 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where do people come up with this tinfoil hat bullshit? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would venture to speculate getting real time Intel is not the goal, but to store data on everyone for later compiling for patterns of behavior and profiling. Meaning it's about control and nothing more. This is my guess. It's more retrospective than prospective. The aim is not to collect information with the goal of preventing harm, but rather to build a case from stored information against targets identified by the regime. So one day they decide that you are a threat to them, and you need to go. The name goes to NSA, and soon they have your calls, your texts, your emails, your contacts and enough to get a warrant. Since everybody commits three felonies a day, assuming you're not really a "bad guy" they'll have enough to put you away in short order. I view it as our own little version of the Gestapo, but without the charm and personal warmth.
Where do people come up with this tinfoil hat bullshit? You commit three felonies a day. A Saudi student in Idaho was charged in 2003 with offering "material support" to terrorists. He had operated Web sites for a Muslim charity that focused on normal religious training, but was prosecuted on the theory that if a user followed enough links off his site, he would find violent, anti-American comments on other sites. The Internet is a series of links, so if there's liability for anything in an online chain, it would be hard to avoid prosecution. How many links from hate speech is any Arfcom conversation? Read the article. It IS tin foil, produced from governmental smoke-and-mirrors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 9:21:06 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You commit three felonies a day. How many links from hate speech is any Arfcom conversation? Read the article. It IS tin foil, produced from governmental smoke-and-mirrors. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would venture to speculate getting real time Intel is not the goal, but to store data on everyone for later compiling for patterns of behavior and profiling. Meaning it's about control and nothing more. This is my guess. It's more retrospective than prospective. The aim is not to collect information with the goal of preventing harm, but rather to build a case from stored information against targets identified by the regime. So one day they decide that you are a threat to them, and you need to go. The name goes to NSA, and soon they have your calls, your texts, your emails, your contacts and enough to get a warrant. Since everybody commits three felonies a day, assuming you're not really a "bad guy" they'll have enough to put you away in short order. I view it as our own little version of the Gestapo, but without the charm and personal warmth.
Where do people come up with this tinfoil hat bullshit? You commit three felonies a day. A Saudi student in Idaho was charged in 2003 with offering "material support" to terrorists. He had operated Web sites for a Muslim charity that focused on normal religious training, but was prosecuted on the theory that if a user followed enough links off his site, he would find violent, anti-American comments on other sites. The Internet is a series of links, so if there's liability for anything in an online chain, it would be hard to avoid prosecution. How many links from hate speech is any Arfcom conversation? Read the article. It IS tin foil, produced from governmental smoke-and-mirrors. lol, read the indictment |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 9:23:00 AM EDT
[#48]
Does anyone think the NSA will ever get reined in?
Does anyone think the federal government will ever get reined in? It will get worse-the path we are on will not change. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 9:29:00 AM EDT
[#49]
lol @ people talking about the technical impossibilities involved. I started out using PCs when 1kB RAM chips were there norm. If there's one thing I've learned about computers in the last 35 years, it's that all tech hurdles are just a matter of time and money. The gov has a lot of the former and an infinite amount of the later. Will they be able to process / analyze every single 1 and 0 on earth in 5 years? No. Will it ever happen? Probably. So human analysis is a huge choke point. So what? Hello AI!
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2016 9:40:29 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol @ people talking about the technical impossibilities involved. I started out using PCs when 1kB RAM chips were there norm. If there's one thing I've learned about computers in the last 35 years, it's that all tech hurdles are just a matter of time and money. The gov has a lot of the former and an infinite amount of the later. Will they be able to process / analyze every single 1 and 0 on earth in 5 years? No. Will it ever happen? Probably. So human analysis is a huge choke point. So what? Hello AI! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile A 23 petabyte data storage "buffer" is meaningless if your ability to process data is exceeded by the rate at which it is collected. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
