"It was my world, but it was a very limited world. You can see and hear it, but you can't touch the internet. It's a world devoid of empathy - and that shows on Twitter, and the mob mentality against politicians and public figures. There is no empathy.
So it was my world, and it was a very cynical world and I became a very cynical person."
You think you're so cool here on the internet talking about all your guns. Maybe you even spout some "anti-guvment" talk in a chat room thinking that you are safe and sound.
GUESS AGAIN!
You are aware that it was the Military, not Al Gore, who developed the internet. At one time, it was called DARPANET or ARPANET.
You'd kind think that people like NSA and GCHQ might have an "in" on how to track people on it.
But, I've been wanting to write a piece about CCTV and how that is probably a far more effective method of stopping crime than a bunch of idiots carrying handguns. And not all those CCTV units belong to "THE STATE".
No, if you want to come to my house, you will walk past at least 3 CCTV cameras before the one that will send your image to a remote server that is focused on MY DOOR.
And NONE of them belong to the Guvment.
But what got me to write this is something from Naomi Wolf in the Guardian:
A software
engineer in my Facebook community wrote recently about his outrage that
when he visited Disneyland, and went on a ride, the theme park offered
him the photo of himself and his girlfriend to buy – with his credit
card information already linked to it. He noted that he had never
entered his name or information into anything at the theme park, or
indicated that he wanted a photo, or alerted the humans at the ride to
who he and his girlfriend were – so, he said, based on his professional
experience, the system had to be using facial recognition technology. He
had never signed an agreement allowing them to do so, and he declared
that this use was illegal. He also claimed that Disney had recently
shared data from facial-recognition technology with the United States military.
Yes, I know: it sounds like a paranoid rant.
Except that it turned out to be true. News21, supported by the Carnegie and Knight foundations,
reports that Disney sites are indeed controlled by face-recognition
technology, that the military is interested in the technology, and that
the face-recognition contractor, Identix, has contracts with the US
government – for technology that identifies individuals in a crowd.
Fast
forward: after the Occupy crackdowns, I noted that odd-looking CCTVs
had started to appear, attached to lampposts, in public venues in
Manhattan where the small but unbowed remnants of Occupy congregated:
there was one in Union Square, right in front of their encampment. I reported here
on my experience of witnessing a white van marked "Indiana Energy" that
was lifting workers up to the lampposts all around Union Square, and
installing a type of camera. When I asked the workers what was happening
– and why an Indiana company was dealing with New York City civic infrastructure, which would certainly raise questions – I was told: "I'm a contractor. Talk to ConEd."
I
then noticed, some months later, that these bizarre camera/lights had
been installed not only all around Union Square but also around
Washington Square Park. I posted a photo I took of them, and asked:
"What is this?" Commentators who had lived in China said that they were
the same camera/streetlight combinations that are mounted around public
places in China. These are enabled for facial recognition technology,
which allows police to watch video that is tagged to individuals, in
real time. When too many people congregate, they can be dispersed and
intimidated simply by the risk of being identified – before dissent can
coalesce. (Another of my Facebook commentators said that such lamppost
cameras had been installed in Michigan, and that they barked "Obey", at
pedestrians. This, too, sounded highly implausible – until this week in
Richmond, British Columbia, near the Vancouver airport, when I was
startled as the lamppost in the intersection started talking to me – in
this case, instructing me on how to cross (as though I were blind or
partially sighted).
The funny bit to me is that you lot are complaining up and down about your "gunz" and "statism"; one the other hand, here is a serious bit of intrusion on your privacy, yet you lot are SILENT.
Is it because it's not coming from the "State", but private enterprise?
Or is it because your masters haven't told you that you need to say anything about it?
I'm hearing you sing:
We are poor little lambs Who have lost our way. Baa! Baa! Baa! We are little black sheep Who have gone astray. Baa! Baa! Baa!
