Running Naked through the Internet category archive
The EFF looks at the roundly debunked movie, 2000 Mules, and points out that, in addition to its outright lies and–er–dubious conclusions, the film highlights the invasive nature of our private enterprise surveillance society. Here’s a bit from the EFF’s article; follow the link for much more.
Putting aside the logical flaws of TTV’s (True the Vote, the organization behind the movie–ed.) voter fraud claims, the very fact that they were able to buy this much personal location data on hundreds of thousands of people’s lives, over a span of many months leading to election day, is appalling. But this is the data broker business model working as intended: by vacuuming up geolocation data from thousands of smartphone apps, data brokers package and sell huge quantities of highly revealing location data to anyone willing to buy it. And TTV is hardly the only customer: the U.S. military, federal agencies, and federal law enforcement are all customers to geolocation data brokers. Recently, one data broker was even found selling the location data of people seeking reproductive healthcare, which soon could provide states with draconian anti-abortion legislation new digital evidence to identify and prosecute people who seek or provide abortion.
And the irony! Even as persons were fretting about the “surveillance state,” those same persons failed to notice that private enterprise was assembling a corporate surveillance monster beyond anything George Orwell ever imagined. Heck, they turned a blind eye to it even as they happily agreed to those unread internet “terms of service” agreements that made it possible.
Mangy comments at the Youtube page:
Kevin McCarthy said Trump was responsible for the January 6th insurrection, then he said Trump was in no way responsible for the insurrection, then he said there was no insurrection, then he said he was misquoted when he actually said Trump was responsible for a mid-course correction, then he said Donald was responsible for a major erection. Later, Kevin claimed he said none of those things, but he loved Trump like a brother and would even love him like Stormy Daniels if it meant he’d be Speaker of the House some day.
Kevin clearly is an opportunistic eel with no guiding principles or moral compass. Mangy thought Kevin needed a song to sing, since making statements that are self-contradictory is a bad look for him. By singing about his relationship with Trump, Kevin will engage a wider audience and prepare for a time when he is dumped from the U.S. House of Representatives and hoping for a big break on the has-been-celebrity version of America’s Got Limited Talent.
This is a must-listen if you use the internet (Oh! You’re here already!). If you can’t listen to it now, bookmark it and come back, or watch it at Chron.com.
Via Chron.com, which has more.
I normally configure my browsers to “delete all cookies” on exit and, if the setting is available, “reject third party cookies. And I won’t use Google Chrome on a bet.
And, on those rare times I visit the Zuckerborg, I do so only in a private window.
Bruce Schneier reports:
He goes on to opine that Apple doesn’t seem to have thought this whole Air Tag through.
Follow the link for more.
The Las Vegas Sun editorial board considers a speech at a recent right-wing gathering and concludes:
Follow the link for their reasoning.
One more time, “social” media isn’t and the internet is a public place.
And no one’s watching the watchers, not even the persons paid to watch the watchers.
The question is, “Can you keep it secret?”
Frances Coleman points out that, at least as regards “social” media, your privacy is indeed in jeopardy.
David Neiwert explains. A snippet:
A recent study demonstrates that YouTube’s recommendations—which send users to videos the algorithm believes the viewer will like—are in fact promoting videos that violates (sic) the company’s content policies, including hate speech and disinformation. In many cases, the platform is recommending content that has little or no relation to the video that was watched previously. And the company has made clear it has no intention of changing things.
Follow the link for the full story.
January 6 Capitol rioters are deleting their “social” media posts.
And it’s not working. Here’s a bit from the AP report.
Erasing digital content isn’t as easy as deleting content from phones, removing social media posts or shutting down accounts. Investigators have been able to retrieve the digital content by requesting it from social media companies, even after accounts are shut down.
Posts made on Facebook, Instagram and other social media platforms are recoverable for a certain period of time, and authorities routinely ask those companies to preserve the records until they get court orders to view the posts, said Adam Scott Wandt, a public policy professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice who trains law enforcement on cyber-based investigations.
Authorities also have other avenues for investigating whether someone has tried to delete evidence.
Note the use of the phrase, “delete evidence.”
Bruce Schneier reports that TikTok has changed its terms of service to include a provision that it may now collect biometric data.
One more time, “social” media isn’t.
At Psychology Today Blogs, Sebastian Ocklenburg explores how “fear of missing out,” often referred to as FOMO, sucks people into “social” media and keeps them there. A nugget:
The results show that FOMO and social media use, as well as problems due to social media use, are linked. Since this was a correlative study, no clear statement regarding whether or not FOMO causes social media use can be made.
On the one hand, it could be assumed that people with high FOMO check the social media feeds of their friends and family to not miss out on what happens in their lives.
On the other hand, the association could also go the other way around. If someone constantly checks the social media feeds of other people, they may develop FOMO because they see other people doing all these awesome things all the time. That these pictures often look better than the actual experience was is often ignored.
From time to time, I have heard Bob Cesca suggest on his podcast, when discussing some particularly egregious “social” media mischief, that “we are not ready for the internet.”
Now comes psychologist Glenn Geher to say much the same thing, using the slightly more scholarly term of “evolutionary mismatch.” Here’s a bit from his article (emphasis added):
The human mind evolved under conditions that are, in many ways, quite different from the conditions that so many of us find ourselves in today. During the lion’s share of evolutionary history, human communication was exclusively of the face-to-face variety. Remote forms of human communication did not come on the scene until well after agriculture emerged about 10,000 years ago. In terms of organic evolutionary processes, 10,000 years is a blink of an eye. We, you and I, right now, have minds that evolved for ancestral, face-to-face communication.
Our minds did not evolved for large-scale remote communication. In fact, when people communicate with others who have their identities partly or fully concealed, as is so often the case with remote communication, a very general pattern emerges: People behave badly.
Methinks he has a point.