Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

  1. #11
    Senior Member mugaliens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

    Quote Originally Posted by astrotech View Post
    I lie. But I'm very well trusted.
    I never lie. I might smile and walk away if I don't think someone should hear the truth, but I never lie.

    I, too, am very well trusted.

    Well, at least by those who know me. There are a few assholes on the Internet... Topic for other threads than this one.
    My oath of office never expires. "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson. "I have far too long suffered fools. No longer will I tolerate the insufferable. Enjoy the vacuum." - Mugs

    PS: I scrambled my password, so no, I will not be responding. Get a clue.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,951

    Default Re: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post
    I never lie.
    That's a lie.

    And as we see some government officials, or former government officials as the case may be, consider leaks to be the impropper use. They consider the use for personal or political gain by the millions of corrupt officials who have access to be just SWAG.
    Last edited by astrotech; 06-24-2013 at 10:52 AM.
    Lies have the stench of death and defeat.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,951

    Default Re: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post
    All too often, people mistake fiction for fact, and the fiction then becomes the basis of their arguments.
    All too often fact is called fiction by the ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post
    All sources for the information I share below are found on several to many reputable Internet websites.
    Reputable? Some to many reputations are bad. Much of the info you posted is known to be wrong by any 13 year old.
    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post


    1. Computer Capability.

    A. Telephonic interception: Yes, the government really does have the capability to listen in on every local and long-distance telephone call. No, they do not do this in real-time, unless you've somehow highlighted yourself as a credible threat with the likelihood of causing serious harm in the near future.
    Once more parsing. A 13 year old can intecept telephone in real time with an earphone and a little know how. You and they claim that they don't. How do you know? Hoover bugged Kennedy. He was not a threat to anyone but Hoover and his ilk. Bugged M.L.K too and untold numbers of others. This was leaked over the years by reputable people. What threat did they pose except to the personal and political gains of some small group?
    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post

    Instead, they translate everything into a text file (think Dragon Naturally Speaking on steroids) that's a part of a database. Voice snippets are taken for potential future analysis, as well. For Phase II they have linguistic analysis programs which create various indices, such as overall threat level, how likely it is to occur in the near future, threat of bombing, threat of shooting, language, location, voice stress, anger, level of subterfuge (using code words which don't make sense in normal conversation), etc. Phase III cross-indexes the results with previous results from that number, and creates additional indices, such as whether the threat is increasing, decreasing, or changing in nature. Phase IV involves cleanup. If the threat is minimal or nonexistent, much of the data is wiped. They'll keep the indices, as they're tiny, yet provide good trend information should things change. Throughout, there's an overriding control program, which flags certain types of content, based largely on the indices, for further analysis, including, if necessary, human analysis. Even then, the vast majority of that just turns out to be people blowing off steam.
    And if they used all that to tarket the money men there would be no money men or terrorism.
    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post

    If you want to encrypt telephone conversations, see this Forbes article entitled, "Encrypt Your Phone Calls" (Encrypt Your Phone Calls - Forbes). As they claim, "Code your phone calls and all the wiretap warrants in the world won’t allow the FBI to listen in." For a practical implementation, see the Zfone project: Zfone Project Home Page
    Bullshit. The law makes it a crime to distribute any encrytion program in The U.S. without providing the U.S. government with a back door pass. The rest about various claims of means of Internet security is also BS.
    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post

    Public activity is not considered private.
    The point was, since you obviously missed it or are deliberately obscuring or misrepresnting it, what can be done by knowing about connections made in public activity can also be done by knowing about connections made in private activity. Ie interfering with legal activity and unfairly (I won't say "illegally" because nothing seems to be "illegal" to those people) profiting from it.
    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post


    As for penalties for misuse, I'm of the firm opinion that every leak from the government should be the one thing that is exempt from journalistic privilege (never revealing sources), and for good reason: It's become commonplace. The only way to stop the leaks is to criminalize them, including any cover-ups to hide the source of the leaks. The only ones with immunity should be those who pony up and say, "So and so leaked me the information." If they then turn around and print it, they should be held accountable, as well. It should be a felony, with a minimum 2-year prison term, maximum of 10, just for violating people's privacy. Those who initiated the leak should get the maximum.
    I notice you only point out leakers for penalty. Whistle blowers too? What about the millions of minor employees in the government who might be cought doing something with the info for personal or political gain? How do we catch the people who run the catching company? We don't. They may sacrifice a few minions from time to time to salve public opinion. "A few rogue I/R.S workers" ring any bells?

    No, the only way to be safe from them is not to let them do it. Sometimes the means by which the war is fought is worse than the results of fighting or even losing the war itself. In my value system this is one of those cases. One of the most bloodless wars in U.S. history, bloodless at least on the U.S. side, is resulting in some of the most savage curtailments of U.S. liberty since, and is modeled upon, the NAZIs take over of Germany.

    Now comes the inevitable "any internet discussion that goes on long enough and the NAZIs will be mentioned".

    Well any time facism is discussed NAZIs are going to be mentioned. Whether it be facist government or facist BB moderators. Some things don't change.

    By the way, not all conservatives are facist. You don't have to be facist to be conservative. And being liberal doesn't make one immune to being facist. There are plenty of facist liberals too.
    Last edited by astrotech; 06-24-2013 at 01:48 PM.
    Lies have the stench of death and defeat.

  4. #14
    Senior Member mugaliens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

    Quote Originally Posted by astrotech View Post
    That's a lie.
    I state a truth, and you, without knowing me personally at all, form your opinion as stated above. Based onwhat, exactly? Belief? Rhetoric? Something someone else said?

    Decades ago, someone said something along the lines of the problem with lying is that once you lie, you have to keep the stories straight. The more you lie the more complicated the tangled web becomes. Thus, I concluded that if I didn't want to have to worry about juggling that tangled web, must less feeling the empty pit in one's stomach one gets when one lies, my best course of action was to never lie in the first place.

    Life is complicated enough!
    Last edited by mugaliens; 06-25-2013 at 10:40 AM.
    My oath of office never expires. "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson. "I have far too long suffered fools. No longer will I tolerate the insufferable. Enjoy the vacuum." - Mugs

    PS: I scrambled my password, so no, I will not be responding. Get a clue.

  5. #15
    Senior Member mugaliens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

    Quote Originally Posted by astrotech View Post
    Much of the info you posted is known to be wrong by any 13 year old.
    Prove it. Cite the info you believe is errant, and refute it.

    What threat did they pose except to the personal and political gains of some small group?
    You seem to be under the errant impression I believe everyone in our government is on the up and up. When did you arrive at that erroneous conclusion?

    The law makes it a crime to distribute any encrytion program in The U.S. without providing the U.S. government with a back door pass.
    Any user can shut the back-doors with a simple twist or two, and it's not illegal to do so.

    The rest about various claims of means of Internet security is also BS.
    Lol, put up or shut up, rhetoric boy. If you can't back up such grandiose claims with clear examples, both I and all other users on this forum will see you as someone who makes grandiose claims without being able to back them up. At best, ignorant. At worst, stupid. If you'd prefer not to continue earning that reputation, then back up your rhetorical claims with specific examples.

    I notice you only point out leakers for penalty. Whistle blowers too?
    Why penalize whistle blowers? Unless, of course, they can't figure out how to cry "fowl" without spilling gigabytes of information all over Wikileaks. If that's the case, they're leakers hiding behind the whistleblower facade, and deserve the same punishment as leakers.

    What about the millions of minor employees in the government who might be cought doing something with the info for personal or political gain?
    Hammer them.

    How do we catch the people who run the catching company?
    Quis custodes ipsos custodiet? That's been an issue since the dawn of human government. Our (supposedly) open tricameral system is better than most in this regard, but there's certainly room for improvement.

    We don't. They may sacrifice a few minions from time to time to salve public opinion. "A few rogue I/R.S workers" ring any bells?
    You bet. For another example, Obama fired a total of four 4-star generals over Benghazi, for no other reason than the fact they were doing their sworn duty, which incidentally conflicted with Obama's agenda. I'm not 100% sure what Obama has really sworn to, but it's certainly not the Constitution.

    No, the only way to be safe from them is not to let them do it. Sometimes the means by which the war is fought is worse than the results of fighting or even losing the war itself. In my value system this is one of those cases. One of the most bloodless wars in U.S. history, bloodless at least on the U.S. side, is resulting in some of the most savage curtailments of U.S. liberty since, and is modeled upon, the NAZIs take over of Germany.
    I hear you! Much the same thing happened concurrent with Poland's execution of more than 20,000 officers, administrators, business executives, and other citizens who would have gotten in the way of socialism's takeover of Poland. I hear you. Ela Brezenski's "Freedom" Under Socialism is a wonderful, first-hand account of the "the communist hardships, tyranny, and captivity of ideological rule." The book "documents the true history of this corrupt socialist-communist system of government and discusses the already forgotten slavery, poverty, and terror that millions of people faced under communist rule."

    In the last six months here in America, we've had news anchors, members of Congress, and other radical liberals literally calling for the execution of American citizens who raise the B.S. flag when it comes to various Constitutional rights including freedom of speech, right to keep and bear arms, and freedom of religion. Those of us who stand firm on the Constitution, aren't calling for their heads on a platter, but they sure are calling for ours. I've little doubt if the anti-Constitutionalists had lived in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s they'd have thrown in with Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, and the others who wound up murdering more than 135 million people in the 20th Century.

    Now comes the inevitable "any internet discussion that goes on long enough and the NAZIs will be mentioned."
    Why not? They provided a tremendous example of how to royally screw up a country while murdering millions.

    Well any time facism is discussed NAZIs are going to be mentioned. Whether it be facist government or facist BB moderators. Some things don't change.
    Whether or not an authority is acting in a fascist manner or not is determined by their behavior under the rules. Are they acting in accordance with the rules? Are they enforcing the rules against someone who is not behaving in accordance with the rules? Doing away with rules is anarchy. There is no such animal in real life. Even anarchist groups have unwritten rules, usually with a leader and some followers. Essentially, they're small dictatorship! Ironic for a group claiming to support anarchy...

    By the way, not all conservatives are facist. You don't have to be facist to be conservative.
    Of course not. Most aren't. I'm not.

    And being liberal doesn't make one immune to being facist. There are plenty of facist liberals too.
    Here's my reasoning behind the political continuum, in postulate form:

    1. Conservatism is all about self-support. As such, it stands against tax increases and government intrusion. It supports smaller government.

    2. Liberalism is all about government programs, essentially the "freebies" which exist only so long as someone else is footing the bill. As such, it supports tax increases, particularly against the rich. It strives for bigger government.

    3. By definition, at the left of the political continuum we have massive government i.e. totalitarianism. The government runs everything, and the promise is that the good boys and girls will be rewarded with education and higher positions of responsibility. Socialism in its purest, Star Trek form never exists in reality. Instead, it becomes the promise, the lure that's dangled in front of the masses' eyes, while those in power who're doing the dangling actually wind up implementing an elitist oligarchy. The final form usually takes its name from either the figurehead (Marxism) or the ruling party (Naziism, Communism). Sometimes it goes by a political ideal (Fascism).

    4. At the right we have no government i.e. anarchy.

    5. Neither totalitarianism nor anarchy have ever worked in any human society, because their very nature is contrary to human nature itself. We abhor both disorder as well as overbearing authority. Humans have evolved to appreciate both order and freedom. Indeed, societies with a simple legal structure work well, for their are rules, and consequences when those rules are broken. Yet there's also freedom to create, to do things, whether that's building one's own home or building a business.

    6. Our Founding Fathers new all this, although back then they primarily studied the Fall of the Roman Empire and some other, lesser regimes in order to identify what went wrong, and why, before coming up with our current form of government: A Republic.

    By the way, message forums aren't republics. Regardless of what's claimed, they're dictatorships, run by their owner and chief administrator. At best they may be oligarchies run by a small group of people. Even then, however, you'll find most of the decision-making authority rests with one or two key people.

    As Our Founding Fathers experienced the woes of living under a dictatorship, they sought to implement a true government of, by, and for the people. It's predicated on one key requirement, however: Integrity. Provided most of the individuals who're elected or appointed have a high degree of integrity, the system will stand. As the overall level of integrity drops, however, it leaves room for corruption. If it continues to drop, it opens the doors for a radical departure, including from the foundation of our system of government altogether. That's where America is today, with a person in the White House who is likely not Constitutionally eligible to be acting as a President in the first place. This is really a reflection of the lack of integrity of the people themselves, though, most of who turn a blind eye to the issue rather than standing up and saying, "Hold on, here..." and taking the appropriate action in response to the corruption.
    My oath of office never expires. "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson. "I have far too long suffered fools. No longer will I tolerate the insufferable. Enjoy the vacuum." - Mugs

    PS: I scrambled my password, so no, I will not be responding. Get a clue.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,951

    Default Re: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

    Quote Originally Posted by mugaliens View Post
    I state a truth, and you, without knowing me personally at all, form your opinion as stated above. Based onwhat, exactly? Belief? Rhetoric? Something someone else said?
    See cage match section http://www.spacetimeandtheuniverse.c...-new-post.html
    Lies have the stench of death and defeat.

  7. #17
    Senior Member mugaliens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: Cybersecurity and Government Surveillence

    Quote Originally Posted by astrotech View Post
    See cage match section...
    No thanks -- I have no personal beef with anyone. I will, however, continue to do what I've done on message forums for the past 27 years, in accordance with Rule 2c:

    "Treat others with dignity and respect, whether you feel they deserve it or not. Attack the post, not the person."

    Have a nice day.
    My oath of office never expires. "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson. "I have far too long suffered fools. No longer will I tolerate the insufferable. Enjoy the vacuum." - Mugs

    PS: I scrambled my password, so no, I will not be responding. Get a clue.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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