General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Surveillance State and DU - There is No Connection There.
Every once in a while, someone posts a worried-sounding thread about surveillance by our federal government of online communications and messaging. For some reason, people seem to believe that there is some enormous office somewhere that is full of people running down leads gleaned by a supercomputer that is filtering everything posted on the Internet.
There is such an office, and there are such supercomputers, no doubt, but given the sheer amount of new information posted daily on the Internet in all of its complexity, there are Boolean filters discarding almost everything found by those supercomputers, even if it contains keywords of interest to the government. The reason for that is that there simply are not enough human resources available to actually look at and investigate every person who has posted something mean about the government. The numbers make that completely impossible.
So, somewhere in the algorithms used by the NSA or whatever other organization is involved in peeking in on the Internet, there is the equivalent of this pseudocode Boolean operator:
IF messagesource = democraticunderground.com THEN DISCARD
DUers aren't that interesting, really. We aren't out there with guns and bombs and plots to overthrow anything. The DU TOS prohibits most postings that directly involve any sort of seditious actions. We mostly post one thing or another from some other source on the Internet and then engage in discussions of whatever is posted. We're just not dangerous, we DUers.
Now, there are some really, really ugly websites out there, with some truly threatening postings on them. Some of us have seen them, and they're not places like freerepublic.com or most of the usual places where people post ugly things and vague threats. There are plenty of websites we're not looking at or that we don't even know about for the supercomputer to lurk on. DU is not even close to being of interest.
Truly. We can go wherever we want on the Internet, read whatever we wish and post about it here without any concern that Agent Mike is somewhere spending his days poring over our collective output. It's simply not that interesting. Nobody's worried about DUers and what they think, because we pose no risk to anyone.
Simple logic will inform anyone that what is written above is true. There are simply not the human resources numerous enough to bother with the relatively innocent stuff posted on DU. It is simply not that important.
As you can see in my signature line, this post is nothing more than my opinion. Take it for what you think it is worth.
Evasporque
(2,133 posts)MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Hekate
(90,779 posts)I'm disappointed. All this time I've had a crush on Agent Mike.
olddots
(10,237 posts)the squirrel is eating my nuts
We must be stopped !!!!!
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)History provides ample evidence that a HUGE amount of investigative resources have been used to spy on non-violent, political entities. Recent examples include the OWS movement, anti-war protestors and protestors at the GOP convention.
Cheers!
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Carry on.
But, OWS announces what it's planning to do pretty openly. Not a lot of secrecy there. Then it does what it announces.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)I just think that there is plenty of evidence that our govt. has wasted a great deal of money spying on open, non-violent orgs.
olddots
(10,237 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)That goes for any site, and for any communication no matter how private.
And there's really no guarantee that can be written into law to prevent them from doing it. Bush showed that.
In any event, private sector abuse of privacy is a bigger concern to me--both from corporate giants--Google and Facebook et al--as well as from malware/hackers/cybercriminals.
There are a lot more people interested in my credit cards and bank accounts than there are in my political opinions.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)are of much greater interest than what you post on DU.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Turns out a very high percentage of hackers are also sexual predators.
Hekate
(90,779 posts)$$$$$$$$$$$$
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)I didn't notice the time when I wrote it, and I have to do some stuff. I am not abandoning it, but will make replies when I return.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Last edited Mon Mar 11, 2013, 07:36 PM - Edit history (1)
Really.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The NSA apparatus has the tools to correlate our posts with our tweets with our facebook profiles (and that of our friends) and our google searches and our library records and our email and our downloads and our phone calls.
They do this for the purposes of connecting the dots.
It's not that a keyword search of our DU posts will get us into trouble, because the forum is pretty carefully moderated in that sense. It's the general pattern that TBTB observes.
The average DU'er probably doesn't have anything to worry about. What percentage of the citizenry should have a legitimate worry before it should be worthy of discussion? 1%? 10%? 30%?
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)whatever you wish.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)I thought you wanted to talk about the subject. My bad.
Kurovski
(34,655 posts)We are ancillary to said tasks.
Is this your online diary, MM?
closeupready
(29,503 posts)and liberals to marches and demonstrations, but as I've said before, this site is quite tame.
Rex
(65,616 posts)DU has an Agent Mike. He is here for a reason and it is not to post commentary about Hugo Chavez. TIA is here and now and actually years old.
Just like at DU...you take your chances when you post on the WWW.
Same rule applies.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)I have no time to explain it to you right now other than to say you are way off base in your assumptions.
Simple logic will inform anyone who has any real knowledge of data mining what what you wrote is wildly inaccurate.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)Thanks, though.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)I suggest it's a rather poor clue. It's led your analysis far afield from the basis of the underlying technology.
The methodology you imply in your strawman is likely the least efficient approach possible to solving the problem. It's far more productive to archive everything you can get through your pipes and play the Kevin Bacon game across the corpus.
In the end though no one needs to archive DU, it's all on the google man. There are many, many data stacks out there in the world being actively mined. Most are private.
mokawanis
(4,451 posts)Data mining collects vast amounts of information, and stores it away in massive archives. 99.999% of it will never be used, but it's available to any high-level agency that wants it.
Blanks
(4,835 posts)Whether that's how data mining works or not. It isn't that I think it's ok for the government to spy on us, but if there's an agent Mike and he's reading all my stuff; finally the government has started hiring. I hope he has good wages and benefits.
Whatever days mining they have going on; if it shuts down these scary ass sovereign citizens. It's probably worth it.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Our intelligence people are so fucking clueless that they probably infiltrated the Columbia Record Club.
Seriously... they are always snooping on anything with the slightest hint of being left of Dick Cheney.
And they are much likelier to give political message boards greater scrutiny, not less.
That doesn't mean the typical DUer has anything to worry about, of course.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)The average DUer has no worries.
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)why don't they let us know who the goddamned sockpuppets are so we can 86 'em and THEY can get back to doing their jobs....
Like trolling DU....??
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)-Agent Mike
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Yea, sure.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)The government has no interest in who reads/clicks on the WikiLeaks bit torrents that have been posted on this site.
Really.
Barack Obama loves you, that's why he voted to give retroactive immunity to the telecoms that illegally spied on Americans.
MineralMan
(146,325 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Use you own discernment. Everyone.