PAES DOES NOT WANT.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3203448/NZs-cyber-spies-win-new-powers
QuoteNew cyber-monitoring measures have been quietly introduced giving police and Security Intelligence Service officers the power to monitor all aspects of someone's online life.
The measures are the largest expansion of police and SIS surveillance capabilities for decades, and mean that all mobile calls and texts, email, internet surfing and online shopping, chatting and social networking can be monitored anywhere in New Zealand.
In preparation, technicians have been installing specialist spying devices and software inside all telephone exchanges, internet companies and even fibre-optic data networks between cities and towns, providing police and spy agencies with the capability to monitor almost all communications.
...
The measures are the consequence of a law, the 2004 Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Act, which gave internet and network companies until last year to install devices allowing automated access to internet and cellphone data.
Telecom, Vodafone and TelstraClear had earlier 2005 deadlines, and new cellphone provider 2degrees installed the interception equipment before launching last year.
Official papers obtained by the Star-Times show that, despite government claims that it was done for domestic reasons, the new New Zealand spying capabilities are part of a push by United States agencies to have standardised surveillance capabilities available for their use from governments worldwide.
Oh, this is rich.
I fucking warned you.
If there was ever a time to study encryption, now is it.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 13, 2010, 06:29:59 AM
I fucking warned you.
I believed you!
Quote from: Remington on March 13, 2010, 06:37:27 AM
If there was ever a time to study encryption, now is it.
This. It's always been an interest, but I think I'm going to have to look into setting up some kind of proxy for private communications.
Work something out where they can see the message you send the bot and the message the bot sends but the two messages aren't connected.
Quote from: Remington on March 13, 2010, 06:37:27 AM
If there was ever a time to study encryption, now is it.
If there was ever a time to spam the carnivore search term list all over the internet, now is it.
Drown the bastards in information.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 13, 2010, 06:43:13 AM
Quote from: Remington on March 13, 2010, 06:37:27 AM
If there was ever a time to study encryption, now is it.
If there was ever a time to spam the carnivore search term list all over the internet, now is it.
Drown the bastards in information.
Do we have a list we can trust as accurate?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 13, 2010, 06:43:13 AM
Quote from: Remington on March 13, 2010, 06:37:27 AM
If there was ever a time to study encryption, now is it.
If there was ever a time to spam the carnivore search term list all over the internet, now is it.
Drown the bastards in information.
Cory Doctorow's Little Brother (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Brother_(Cory_Doctorow_novel)) contains lots of useful stuff like that. It's fiction, but all of the technologies in there are fully possible with today's technologies.
The nice thing about encryption is that the AES standard is available to everyone. I believe AES-128 and AES-256 are the standard for encrypting NSA top-secret information... and can be easily implemented for encrypting email/network connections.
ASIDE FROM
the scary
WHEN I THINK ABOUT
this mega version of surveillance, I can only imagine there's a better part of two secret government storehouses (in the U.S. alone!!) filled to the ceiling with digital data documenting the endless hours of high school girls' conversations about boys, clothes and "as if"
Quote from: E.O.T. on March 13, 2010, 06:55:57 AM
ASIDE FROM
the scary
WHEN I THINK ABOUT
this mega version of surveillance, I can only imagine there's a better part of two secret government storehouses (in the U.S. alone!!) filled to the ceiling with digital data documenting the endless hours of high school girls' conversations about boys, clothes and "as if"
That's the beauty of it.
It's like having a wiretap warrant on an 80s party line.
Um.
They're already building the damn place.
http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/11/01/nsa-to-store-yottabytes-of-surveillance-data-in-utah-megarepository/ (http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/11/01/nsa-to-store-yottabytes-of-surveillance-data-in-utah-megarepository/)
QuoteThere's an interesting article in the current New York Review of books (predictably, a book review) detailing the history of the National Security Agency, that shadowy power-behind-the-power to which we surrender much of our privacy. That in itself is interesting, but I found the introduction a bit shocking: the NSA is constructing a datacenter in the Utah desert that they project will be storing yottabytes of surveillance data. And what is a yottabyte? I'm glad you asked.
There are a thousand gigabytes in a terabyte, a thousand terabytes in a petabyte, a thousand petabytes in an exabyte, a thousand exabytes in a zettabyte, and a thousand zettabytes in a yottabyte. In other words, a yottabyte is 1,000,000,000,000,000GB. Are you paranoid yet?
The more salient question is, of course, what are they storing that, by some estimates, is going take up thousands of times more space than all the world's known computers combined? Don't think they're going to say; they didn't grow to their currrent level of shadowy omniscience by disclosing things like that to the public. However, speculation isn't too hard on this topic. Now more than ever, surveillance is a data game. What with millions of phones being tapped and all data duplicated, constant recording of all radio traffic, 24-hour high definition video surveillance by satellite, there's terabytes at least of data coming in every day. And who knows when you'll have to sift through August 2007's overhead footage of Baghdad for heat signatures in order to confirm some other intelligence?
This proposed data center would take up more than one million square feet of prime Utah landscape, and burn through as much electricity per day as
Salt Lake City.Honestly, I have no idea how they could even begin to organize and datamine that much data.
yottabytes :x
YATTO BYTES!!! :argh!:
I am both horrified and amused by this apparent example of governmental cunning being taken all the way to the other side, into government idiocy and waste. :lulz:
"ALL YOUR DATA ARE BELONG TO US!"
"Oh shit, all this data stored in one place is as inscrutable as having not stored any of it at all :|"
Quote from: Kai on March 13, 2010, 05:09:55 PM
yottabytes :x
Hahahah. (http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/03/hella-for-1027-in-international-system.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/advancednano+(nextbigfuture))
Quote from: Sigmatic on March 13, 2010, 11:23:19 PM
Quote from: Kai on March 13, 2010, 05:09:55 PM
yottabytes :x
Hahahah. (http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/03/hella-for-1027-in-international-system.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/advancednano+(nextbigfuture))
That would be AWESOME.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 13, 2010, 09:26:30 PM
I am both horrified and amused by this apparent example of governmental cunning being taken all the way to the other side, into government idiocy and waste. :lulz:
"ALL YOUR DATA ARE BELONG TO US!"
"Oh shit, all this data stored in one place is as inscrutable as having not stored any of it at all :|"
I love this decade. :)
Quote from: Remington on March 13, 2010, 07:01:05 AM
This proposed data center would take up more than one million square feet of prime Utah landscape, and burn through as much electricity per day as Salt Lake City.
There is no prime landscape in Utah. All the good spots got torn down to make ski slopes.
I do, however, support them building it here, preferably right under one of the dams thats expected to break when an earthquake finally comes.
Quote from: E.O.T. on March 13, 2010, 06:55:57 AMWHEN I THINK ABOUT
this mega version of surveillance, I can only imagine there's a better part of two secret government storehouses (in the U.S. alone!!) filled to the ceiling with digital data documenting the endless hours of high school girls' conversations about boys, clothes and "as if"
I've got nothing to base this on, but I don't think they care so much about
what is being said. The really juicy information is who is talking to who. If, in my imagination, I pretend to be a megalomaniac and put myself in a position of developing global communication surveillance, I would love to map how everyone interacts. Who are the individuals and groups that form major node points between cities and countries, or between institutions, etc? You could map interactions to many socioeconomic trends.
It just strikes me as a better use. Conventional camera surveillance looks for who we are and what we're doing. Not what we're talking about.
Quote from: that articleUpdate 2: A commenter points out that in the study cited, yottabytes are only one possible estimate for total storage requirements. The more realistic estimates are in the hundreds of petabytes, which is much easier for a datacenter to accommodate. That said, I’m leaving the post as it is because the speculation still stands with “only” hundreds of petabytes being stored in these datacenters. However, adjust your tinfoil hats accordingly.
Quote from: the commenter in questionThis is a misleading article. Here’s what the actual report said:
“There is a perceived notion of a “capability gap” as regards future re-
quirements for data management, with some forecasts predicting total data
requirements in excess of a Yottabyte (1024 Bytes) by 2015 if current trends
in sensor capability continue. These analyses are not credible in our view,
in that they simply posit an increasing rate of data production without un-
derstanding the associated end-user requirements.
It is of value to consider
the evolution of data storage requirements arising from data-intensive work
in scientific fields such as high energy physics or astronomy. Both these com-
munities are faced with significant storage and analysis requirements, but
by matching the specific end requirements of their respective scientific goals,
data filtering strategies have been developed, which in turn lead to more
modest estimates for both storage and bandwidth. Typical data set size es-
timates for these communities will grow exponentially to a level of 100’s of
Petabytes by 2015. ”
http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/data.pdf
as well as:
Quote from: Wikipedia on Exabyte = 10^18 bytes"All words ever spoken"
A popular expression claims that "all words ever spoken by human beings" could be stored in approximately 5 exabytes of data,[10][11][12] often citing a project at the UC Berkeley School of Information in support.[13] The 2003 University of California Berkeley report credits the estimate to the website of Caltech researcher Roy Williams, where the statement can be found as early as May 1999.[14] This statement has been criticized.[15][16] Mark Liberman calculated the storage requirements for all human speech at 42 zettabytes (42,000 exabytes, and 8,400 times the original estimate), if digitized as 16 kHz 16-bit audio, although he did "freely confess that maybe the authors [of the exabyte estimate] were thinking about text."[17]
Earlier Berkeley studies estimated that by the end of 1999, the sum of human-produced information (including all audio, video recordings and text/books) was about 12 exabytes of data.[18] The 2003 Berkeley report stated that in 2002 alone, "telephone calls worldwide on both landlines and mobile phones contained 17.3 exabytes of new information if stored in digital form" and that "it would take 9.25 exabytes of storage to hold all U.S. [telephone] calls each year."[13] International Data Corporation estimates that approximately 160 exabytes of digital information were created, captured, and replicated worldwide in 2006.[19]
and
Quote from: Wikipedia on Zettabyte = 10^21 bytesAccording to IDC, as of 2006 the total amount of digital data in existence was 0.161 zettabytes; the same paper estimates that by 2010, the rate of digital data generated worldwide will be 0.988 zettabytes per year,[5] which, according to Google's CEO Eric Schmidt was already reached in 2009.[6]
and
Quote from: Wikipedia on Yottabyte = 10^24 bytesAs of 2010, no system has yet achieved one yottabyte of storage. In fact, the combined space of all the computer hard drives in the world does not amount to even one zettabyte. According to one study, all the world's computers stored approximately 160 exabytes in 2006.[1] As of 2009 the entire internet was estimated to contain close to 500 exabytes.[2]
WHICH IMO IS COOL AS FUCK.
not "good" but COOL AS FUCK
probably somewhat similar as how guns can be COOL AS FUCK