PRISM - GCHQ/NSA, Who Gives a Flying F**K?

(C) BLOGDOTTHOUGHTPICKDOTCOM

So, the news has been full this weekend that apparently the NSA in America has been spying on it's citizens through a computer programme called PRISM and have been accessing people's GOOGLE, FACEBOOK and other social media sites, although the owners of all these companies have denied, well they would wouldn't they, giving access to their sites to the Agency; other than what they would normally do as required by law or warrant. So, that's in the US, but what about here in the UK?

(C) INKCINTDOTCOM

Well, most of us on social media are signed up to all these sites and I can't think of one that is actually British, so therefore, we are, by default, signing on to our social media sites through our American cousins in Silicon Valley or Seattle or in some non descriptive nuclear bomb proof shelter in the desert somewhere. 

(C) CARTOONSBYCELESTEDOTBLOGSPOTDOTCOM

Now I don't know about you but have you looked at my twitter string or Facebook page or indeed my blog page, it's full of personal crap. My emails are normally me ranting to some service provider, usually a utility company and if not ranting they are full of boring mundane shit that no one wants to, or should want to read, although me and my Internet thingy BFF were messaging each other the other day about shotguns, in-laws from hell and setting up landmines around the approach to the house with sensors programmed for a specific person! I made a joke on one of the messages informing the security services that we were only joking, well one of us was, but I ain't telling you which one.

(C) TOONPOOLDOTCOM

My point is, that even if GCHQ or the NSA were to look at that particular string I am fairly confident that I wouldn't have the SAS or anyone else storming the house or the office with stun grenades and gas, flinging me to the floor and cuffing me with plastic ties., (but if you do can you bare in mind I have a sore tummy after recent abdominal surgery that no gives a F**k about unlike Prince bloody Blundermouth Philip oh, and I have cancer, so be gentle on me if you do storm the place) No, I think they would look and say "Look, we've got a couple here talking about shotguns and land mines, and killing someone." Then they would hopefully look at our Internet history and emails and blogs and see that we are normal every day people who rant and rave occasionally about Big Brother our completely and utterly useless politicians, who should in fact be monitored for criminal activities on a daily and 24 hour basis, and decide that we are harmless venters who jokingly talk about serious stuff, including the Mother-in-Law, Politicians and the unfair System that Joe pubLic lives in from time to time, and THEN leave us completely and utterly alone in our own little worlds. 

Sure, I would be worried if it was an 1984 or Fahrenheit 451 type society and as much as some of our dictators, sorry I mean Prime Ministers and Presidents or J Edgar Hoover, would like to have seen most of the population locked up and the keys thrown away on most of the population, for what they said, did or wrote, we aren't quite there yet, I don't think. 

Off course the argument will then be put forward, yes Tom and therein lies the problem with allowing them to snoop on us now and to gather, collect and save this information on us from our private and personal (well as much as Facebook, twitter, google and blogging are our private little worlds and only those we allow to see it can see it, yeah right) Internet accounts and come the day when The Man does decide to really grind us into the ground, they'll have the information that 'we gave them'! 

Now look at your own Internet footprint, is it as boring and mundane as mine, are you really worried that Big Brother is looking at what you're looking at, or what you are saying through the various mediums, nope probably not. So why are all those folk screaming about the infringement of civil liberties then? As I understand it these men and women who are sitting in their little dark cubicles are looking for key words or phrases that could lead them to find terrorists who are intent on KILLING US. 

If that's the case, and I also realise that many will say that I am being a naive Buffoon and I don't understand the implications, well maybe. But, I do understand that if terrorists, killers, or even everyday criminals, including politicians, and lets not forget paedophiles can be stopped from carrying out these activities then I really don't give a fig how much of my Internet traffic the security services look at.  It does not, that I know off, restrict my liberty or my thinking in my everyday life. 

The only other comment I have on this is the Political one, where politicians, both from the Conservatives and Lib Dems, the parties in power here in the UK, and from Labour, who are hitting the airwaves and being quoted in the press, that this is a 'snoop to far' and are demanding questions be answered on this matter. This just takes party politics too far, again, as they would be the first ones or should be, to tell the other political parties too shut the F**k up, as they would if they were in power. Come on, Is it Me, or are these people just to dumb to be in positions of power?

And finally, I opened up my GMail inbox today to be confronted with this:

"2 people spied on you) - Safe*************** - Free tool that shows you who's spying on you."

Paranoia, really does take over the world at times and my only gripe is that no matter how rude I am to Facebook and Google and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all, they still insist on putting F*****g adverts on my F*****g timelines and web pages, now if the libertarians really want to help, help me to get these folks to stop putting F*****g adverts on my mail and timeline pages

 

Twitter, Apps and iTunes

This morning I awoke to a tweet from a friend asking me, "Is that the tune from Oliver?"

I did think that Ian had sent me a question that he had intended for someone else, but no, it was for me as the 'conversation' on twitter appeared and 'I' had tweeted twice, earlier this morning, that I 'liked' two particular songs on iTunes.

Now I do have an iTunes account and recently I clicked on the 'ping' mode to tweet about a song that I had listened to and did personally want to share....

Now we have all seen the apps where we have to click to authorise on Twitter and it does say that they can post tweets for you and I have to say that I am fairly uncomfortable with that, and normally then click cancel,  If I have something to say, I'll say it, and I certainly don't want anyone or indeed any organisation large or small saying things that I may not agree with, in my name without me knowing. And, I wouldn't know, as it is very rare for me to click on 'my' tweets to check what I have said previously. And so, if Ian hadn't asked me the question, I would have been oblivious to 'my tweets'.

Now it may seem like a small insignificant thing to be getting my knickers in a twist over, after all, they have only said that, 'I liked a couple of tunes' and even although I had never heard these I probably would like them, but they are not in my collection and I have never listened to them on iTunes either fully or in review.  

So, they made an assumption and they lied.  It may only be a small, white lie, but they lied....

Now, what if iTunes and Apple suddenly started tweeting in my name about other things; 

Tom Stronach prefers reading books purchased from iTunes to Amazon
Tom Stronach doesn't believe that the US case against APPLE and Book Publishers in relation to book price fixing is warranted

You see where this is going, Apple and others whom you allow to tweet in your name could basically tweet anything they wanted, all in your name........

Oh, and I prefer, at the moment Amazon and Kindle and have never purchased a book from iTunes, and on the other, if they have and are found guilty, the law, hopefully will sort it out..

But the message to iTunes and Apple and any other App creator out there is: 

DON'T USE MY NAME TO PROMOTE YOUR SALES /CAUSE OR COMPANY 

By the way, the one singer I did tweet about through iTunes was the utterly gorgeous velvet voiced Jazz Songstress:

Georgia Mancio you can visit her web site here and have a taste 

Do you get Abused or Bullied on Twitter?

If you are not a 'celebrity' you will probably answer no, to that question, unless of course you've got someone who is going out of their way  to be horrible and mean to you for some inexplicable reason !

I have only been abused once, completely out of the blue and unexpectedly, by someone who did not even follow me.  It was last year, some football manager had committed suicide and it seemed that that was all the British TV and press could talk about and of course every other tweet was on about it as well.  I, in my naivety, posted a tweet asking who was this guy as I had never heard of him.  Not totally unsurprising really, as I do not follow football as a matter of course and I didn't / don't watch football shows on telly, so I genuinely had no idea who he was and all I asked was, "Who was (insert name of choice cos I can't even remember who it was) he?"

Suddenly I get a tweet popping up in ,my timeline with the dead guys name hash tagged from some loony and all it said was, "Arsehole get a fucking life" I think there was a comma and an exclamation mark missing from the comment, but then I suppose grammar and punctuation were never high on a bully's list of learning skills while attending the local educational establishment for wayward inbred dickheads....

So, what did I do? Well, if memory serves, I totally ignored it and blocked the guy so that he would not be able to send any more tweets on to my timeline. I did think about sending a witty riposte, but then I thought there was probably no point to that because even with my limited formal educational skills and abilities, anything with more than a few syllables would probably just have confused the poor chap, so,  I simply blocked it and have given no more thought to it, until now.

The reason I mention it is this. While sitting having my coffee before leaving for work this morning I was watching BBC Breakfast and there was an item on bullying on Twitter and they had two studio guests, one Lizzie Cundy and Dr Chris Brauer, the former complaining of twitter abuse and the latter, I think to give a different perspective on it (although if you are able to access the clip he did not make a very good job of that), so see the clip here.

Anyway, Lizzie Cundy's gripe is that apparently as a celebrity (and I have to point out I have never heard of her, but again I am not a big celebrity follower either but she does make the point that she was brought up in a footballing family  don't know what that means, but if you know me, the word footballing probably explains why I have never heard of her) says that she has had some really bad personal attacks on her through twitter and that she thinks it should be monitored!

I also discover that other celebrities have also suffered from personal attacks on twitter and some have thought about giving up their accounts to protect themselves from these attacks....

Come on people, we know that every one inhabiting this big bad planet is not nice.  There are some idiots out there, idiots who go through life being complete and utter dick heads.  Idiots who can barely string a complete sentence together that makes any sense to anyone else but themselves and who through their own twisted reasoning think that it is cool to bait people, whether it is celebrities they are doing it to or their so called friends or acquaintances or in my case, a complete stranger.

But the thing about twitter, and Facebook is that YOU have the ability to get rid of these people.  OK, you can't get rid of them completely.  They are still there, still signed on and still posting the crap that they post. But, you, the attacked, the offended don't need to see it, worry about it or respond to it..... all you need do is block it, report it for spam, spam doesn't necessarily mean they are trying to sell you something or point you to porn, it means abusiveness or bully as well .  And you can do all that and get rid of them.  And if you are a celebrity and you don't want to see this spiteful rubbish, I suppose, and I am only thinking as I type here, but you probably have an agent or  a publicist or both.  Speak to them, speak to the police.  I'm sure your agent or publicist can set up a system whereby the offending tweeter can be monitored, without you seeing them and if the cyber bully is tweeting untruths about you and or your family, you can always instruct your lawyers to take the appropriate action against them.  I am all for free speech but there does come a point, where you at least have to be accountable to answer for what you say if it is malicious or untrue, don't you think?

But, and finally, if you are being pestered on Twitter or Facebook ... use the BLOCK button people, it's so easy to do.....

Should Virtual Suicide Be Outlawed? | Future Crimes | Big Think

Should Virtual Suicide Be Outlawed? | Future Crimes | Big Think

Interesting article by the Blog Big Think on virtual suicide.  Not something I have considered, virtual or otherwise.  Although I have said to Ishbel on many an occasion as we have watched programmes or read articles about people who are terminally ill, or who have had an accident and they become incapable of looking after themselves, that that situation for me would be intolerable and that I would just want to die either by having medical care withdrawn or having the plug pulled on life support.

But what was more interesting for me in this article was the sub content that Facebook were trying to bully, through a legal letter, Moddr who are  offering people the software to carry out their virtual suicide and destroy all links with the social network sites they are signed into.

  The virtual suicide machine launches a series of scripts which Moddr.Net has created which log into various social networking sites and deletes all network contacts.  In addition, the script blocks further access to the account by changing the prior password and by not providing the new login credentials to the individual committing virtual suicide.

Why then are Facebook so exercised about this programme, well in the words of one executive;

  a Facebook executive noted his vision was for everybody on earth to have a Facebook account. 

As the author of the Big Think  Blog goes on to say;

Consider the implications.  In effect, Facebook will become the default global citizen database.  Those that did not participate would become non-existent in the eyes of the world, an act akin to committing “social suicide” as one researcher in the UK has commented.  Advocates and frequent users of Web 2.0 have even commented that they would not trust somebody who did not have a Facebook account.

The article goes on to inform us that incitement to commit suicide in the real world, in many countries, is an offence and I can understand the reasons for that.  For example, I suppose, where you have someone in a family who holds the purse strings, but for whatever reason has become mentally impaired and rather than kill him or her and run the risk of being caught and sent down for murder, people could be tempted to Chinese whisper that person into killing themselves.  Again there is clearly a risk of being caught, but much lesser than if you were to carry out an actual murder. So, it is right and proper that incitement to suicide should be an offence in a socially aware society.

But, is it really right that a company like Facebook threatens a company with dire legal consequences, for providing software to people who might otherwise want to get out of their social networks and with the contacts therein but may not have the willpower to actually do it, without the push.  Maybe people like that do exist, and it may be that it could be argued if they are in that position with their 'on-line self and or avatar' then they could be as vulnerable in the real world.  But I do not think that Facebook are doing it with any sense of social or moral  superiority, do you?

I have a confession here, I confess I do not know why sites like Facebook and Twitter or Linkedin seem to be worth as much as they are quoted to be.  They are free to join and they don't charge you once you are a member.  I am a spectacle wearer and apparently I am going deaf, my super hero alter ego tag is Mr Fat, but other than all that I think I am in fairly good condition, but don't ask me to undertake a medical as it may dispel my own belief in my own well being; and that wouldn't be good.  But the point is and I have just checked my Facebook, Twitter and Pushnote pages and I really don't see any adverts aimed at me or anyone else for that matter.  So why are these companies worth so much. Did I just read this week that some Russian oligarch had just invested $300 million dollars in Twitter? Why?

So if Facebook already has 850 million users world wide, why does it matter if a couple of hundred thousand commit mass 'virtual suicide' to rid themselves of their on-line persona.

I know that many are critical of it. I have been in the past and I am sure I will be again in the future.  Maybe I am one of those people who might be vulnerable to be pushed into this 'virtual suicide' as it was pressure (gentle as it was) from my peers in the form of my wife and youngest daughter, Jennifer, that 'pushed' me into opening  a Facebook account.  I also confess here that I am not a habitual user of it.  Rather I am a tweeter and while I have tweeted in excess of 2000 tweets a high proportion of them are re-tweets from people I follow who have infinitely more interesting things to say than I have. Or, they are links to Blogs like Big Think or a young chap Callum Jones who is also a blogger and much more eloquent and erudite than I and usually has interesting things to say, even although he is still just a 'spotty' kid(!) who still has to find life in all its glory. And it is my tweets that form the bulk of my posts on Facebook as I discovered that these forums can be linked.

So, is there an underlying threat to us all from Facebook that they will go to these lengths and threats against this company who are giving people the means to clear social media from their lives and to get back to the real world? Have Facebook and Twitter got secret plans to suddenly charge us all a monthly fee to be part of the 'virtual world' and therefore anything that is going to allow us to opt out must be met with a battery of high priced and high profile litigators?

Or is it that we put so much information on these sites that they 'sell that information' to third parties who can then target us through other mediums to purchase their goods and services and is that where these companies are making their money, I have no idea what the reasons are, but it all seems more than a little odd.

Finally, The question was should Virtual Suicide be Outlawed? Answer: I have no idea, but lean towards No. but what do you think?

Best Wishes