resurrecting this topic, deleted by OP request, to preserve replies
I am concerned about the combination of zero concept of private data ownership in USA, and the way this can be combined with big data and machine learning technology to provide behavioral targeting to advertisers in an unregulated media environment. It’s an open call for all manner of propaganda.
So, at minimum, we need to regulate political advertising in social networks. But if we got ambitious we could look to some nascent European notions of personal/private data ownership.
I mention the Europeans because they’re the only governments with a bit of progressive policy on the subject. But some Americans such as Doc Searls and American institutions such as MIT, are providing some leadership in this area as well.
When I worked for a stockbroker in ‘95 (whole other thread about how preposterous the Yahoo and Netscape IPOs look to us at the time) he was pushing Trimble navigation stock. At the time it was fairly uncontroversial to express privacy concerns around the potential for ubiquitous GPS usage. My, how far we’ve come.
Not that it won’t inevitably broken, but I’m ordering an AMD server for just this reason after the IPMI vulnerability surfaced.
I also think it’s funny how industry wants it both ways. They file software parents to protect ‘their’ information but tend to harvest everyone else’s.
BRB, filling a patent on any database structure that includes my personal information.
Also, note that the CIA failed to disclose dozens of vulnerabilities with vendors to ensure that the population remained vulnerable.
Imagine if the firepower of the NSA/CIA was oriented towards keeping us safe. They’d be releasing a lot of open source code and they’d be contributing bug fixes to many open source projects. They’d be enhancing the state of the art of ubiquitous encryption, and they’d be releasing enabling technology for keeping private/personal data private and safe.
I’d happily pay taxes for that. (as opposed to unhappily paying taxes for what we’ve got)
They gave us OpenBSD and SELinux so they can ostensibly say that they have done so.
Good point. Just saying, imagine if that was their entire mission.
I’ve no knowledge of the tech you guys are talking about, but this is an interesting article about the future for personal data in China, or at least it was to me.
Ignore the Victoria’s Secret click bait way in to the story, the stuff about Seasame Credit and the AI strategy is pretty relevant.
Wow, thanks for posting this. Learning a lot. If the powers that be aren’t advocating for my right to privacy, I need to do it myself…
protonmail has a massive discount today. head over and support a great service. https://protonmail.com
You can access someone’s voice mail this way, with many VM systems. Just spoof yourself to appear as if you are your target, calling their own VM from their own phone. Often this bypasses any password or PIN requirement.
What do the CIA and/or NSA have to do with OpenBSD? There was a controversy a few years ago where the FBI may have snuck some backdoors into their crypto code, but afaik OpenBSD is built entirely by volunteers.
Developed with DARPA funding, so yeah not those agencies, but US defense.
Edit: I actually don’t know when they got the funding or whether they spent any of it. It was wrong to have characterized the situation as I did.
Vigorously denied (of course).
OpenBSD had DARPA funding for a specific open source security project, I believe around the same time that SELinux was being funded. But DARPA or any other government agency were never the primary funders or drivers of OpenBSD development as a whole, so your earlier comment “They gave us OpenBSD and SELinux so they can ostensibly say that they have done so.” is not really accurate.