Well, first, I don’t think it’s ignorant to think we can’t stop it. I’m not convinced we can’t just because it’s common….
You can’t stop it because people want it. They don’t like “government” doing it, but they are all for “free” services in exchange for data. People love Google. People love Pandora. People love Facebook.
As they say, the market is what the market is. The market is willing to exchange private data for these services. I’m just advocating for the ability to break the “all or nothing” cost of these services and let’s start spending our data wisely.
I think my opinions on ‘surveillance’ has evolved over the last few months.
I no longer think it’s possible to fight the implementation of surveillance, data mining, cctv, etc. I think that these forces are beyond fighting, they are already in place. From cameras at the liquor store to GPS data on your phone to meta data captured by cookies in a search engine or your favorite online store all the way down to the NSA and the evils that they participate in.
Everyone is monitoring you, at various degrees and for various purposes. You’re not going to convince them to stop. Not at this point. It’s ignorant to think we can.
What we can do, however, is concentrate our efforts on building defenses. If you can’t destroy the enemy, learn how to isolate them. We can use encryption, shield ourselves and our information, learn who is collecting what and limit it to only what we want to share.
Our information is a currency. Websites and apps exchange goods and services with us for the right to collect that data, yet we never really have control over how much we pay them and with what information.
I’ve read that our private data is worth about $500 worth of revenue a year to Google. Why not have the ability to opt out and pay Google? Or partially pay with a mixture of money and data (bitcoin and data, for you crypto-anarchists). Wouldn’t that be ideal?
Depending on how you view the world, society has either already won or lost the war for surveillance. Perhaps we can get something in return during the peace negotiations.
If companies and people are going to collect your private data and you’re willing to give your private data, let’s start by putting a price on things and selling what we want to be public and shielding what we don’t want to be public.
Your information would essentially be money in the bank. You can set prices on different levels or amounts of information. You can choose to pay a certain price for an item or turn it down. But you will always know what information you’re giving out to what site.
For example, you log into Gmail with your Info Account and Gmail requests a payment of your last month of shopping history (or an equal value worth of data). You can either agree or turn it down, but you always know what information they want and what information they will have.
If this already exists, point me in the right direction, if not, let’s build it.
How hard can it be to develop the first human-based currency?
We’re 1 month away from 2014, why the hell don’t computers have Autocomplete functions yet? I’m looking at you, programmers.
Android people need to hurry up and realize that 99% of people who have iPhones and laugh at Android users don’t know shit about technology.
So don’t even bother telling them about all the extra capabilities Android has like Tasker, customizable notification bars, apps you can actually remove from your damn phone, APKs, or whatever because it goes straight over their heads. If it’s not a default feature on an Apple device, it’s too confusing for them to understand.
You’re talking to a group of people who think Apple invented flat design with iOS 7. So yeah, don’t waste your time.
The genius of Apple is that they have a sleek, easy, universal phone that anyone from a 2 year old (yes, 2 year olds!) to a 100 year old can pick up and use.
That doesn’t give them the ability to have the most feature filled device but it allows them to blanket the planet with phones.
I just don’t like when people tell me that the iPhone is a more capable device, because it’s not.
And yes, you’re right on look, feel. The phone looks and feels great. It’s small, especially in my big hands (I actually struggle with the small screen/keyboard) but it feels better than any Samsung device.
Side note: I have a Samsung Note II, and iPhone 4 and a Blackberry.
My negativity towards Apple is more frustration. They could build a better phone but they choose not to. They have the resources and brain power to do so, instead they are just hoarding cash and letting other companies steal the market.
A specter is haunting the modern world, the specter of crypto anarchy.
Computer technology is on the verge of providing the ability for individuals and groups to communicate and interact with each other in a totally anonymous manner. Two persons may exchange messages, conduct business, and negotiate electronic contracts without ever knowing the True Name, or legal identity, of the other. Interactions over networks will be untraceable, via extensive re- routing of encrypted packets and tamper-proof boxes which implement cryptographic protocols with nearly perfect assurance against any tampering. Reputations will be of central importance, far more important in dealings than even the credit ratings of today. These developments will alter completely the nature of government regulation, the ability to tax and control economic interactions, the ability to keep information secret, and will even alter the nature of trust and reputation.
The technology for this revolution—and it surely will be both a social and economic revolution—has existed in theory for the past decade. The methods are based upon public-key encryption, zero-knowledge interactive proof systems, and various software protocols for interaction, authentication, and verification. The focus has until now been on academic conferences in Europe and the U.S., conferences monitored closely by the National Security Agency. But only recently have computer networks and personal computers attained sufficient speed to make the ideas practically realizable. And the next ten years will bring enough additional speed to make the ideas economically feasible and essentially unstoppable. High-speed networks, ISDN, tamper-proof boxes, smart cards, satellites, Ku-band transmitters, multi-MIPS personal computers, and encryption chips now under development will be some of the enabling technologies.
The State will of course try to slow or halt the spread of this technology, citing national security concerns, use of the technology by drug dealers and tax evaders, and fears of societal disintegration. Many of these concerns will be valid; crypto anarchy will allow national secrets to be trade freely and will allow illicit and stolen materials to be traded. An anonymous computerized market will even make possible abhorrent markets for assassinations and extortion. Various criminal and foreign elements will be active users of CryptoNet. But this will not halt the spread of crypto anarchy.
Just as the technology of printing altered and reduced the power of medieval guilds and the social power structure, so too will cryptologic methods fundamentally alter the nature of corporations and of government interference in economic transactions. Combined with emerging information markets, crypto anarchy will create a liquid market for any and all material which can be put into words and pictures. And just as a seemingly minor invention like barbed wire made possible the fencing-off of vast ranches and farms, thus altering forever the concepts of land and property rights in the frontier West, so too will the seemingly minor discovery out of an arcane branch of mathematics come to be the wire clippers which dismantle the barbed wire around intellectual property.
Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!— Timothy C. May - The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto - c. 1988 (!!!)