
Meet the Private Companies Helping Cops Spy on Protesters - devx
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/meet-the-private-companies-helping-cops-spy-on-protesters-20131024
======
thex86
I was kinda expecting Palantir to be on the list. In other words, they should
have been.

I still find it amazing to see how much true 1984 is becoming. I am sure the
next phase is thought control, because "crimes" start there and have to be
prevented at all costs. Let's get inside the minds of people and put CCTVs and
audio recording devices everywhere. In tables under restaurants, in cars, in
buses, every possible place. Crime has to be prevented.

The future is scary.

~~~
jliechti1
At the same time, Huxley's Brave New World also appears to be becoming more
and more true.

 _" In regard to propaganda the early advocates of universal literacy and a
free press envisaged only two possibilities: the propaganda might be true, or
it might be false. They did not foresee what in fact has happened, above all
in our Western capitalist democracies -- the development of a vast mass
communications industry, concerned in the main neither with the true nor the
false, but with the unreal, the more or less totally irrelevant.

In a word, they failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for
distractions."_ [0]

Most people don't perceive these changes to affect them/their daily lives, so
they are not concerned with it. They don't care.

[0]: [http://www.huxley.net/bnw-revisited/](http://www.huxley.net/bnw-
revisited/)

~~~
TsiCClawOfLight
Panem et circenses... Governments never change.

 _It was Juvenal that coined this system, a mechanism of influential power
over the Roman mass. "Panem et Circensus", literally "bread and circuses", was
the formula for the well-being of the population, and thus a political
strategy. This formula offered a variety of pleasures such as: the
distribution of food, public baths, gladiators, exotic animals, chariot races,
sports competition, and theater representation. It was an efficient instrument
in the hands of the Emperors to keep the population peaceful, and at the same
time giving them the opportunity to voice themselves in these places of
performance._ [0]

[0]:[http://www.capitolium.org/eng/imperatori/circenses.htm](http://www.capitolium.org/eng/imperatori/circenses.htm)

------
danso
> _Another program, made by Bright Planet and called BlueJay, is billed in a
> brochure to law enforcement as a "Twitter crime scanner." BlueJay allows
> cops to covertly monitor accounts and hashtags; three that Bright Planet
> touts in promotional material are #gunfire, #meth, and #protest. In another
> promotional document, the company says BlueJay can "monitor large public
> events, social unrest, gang communications, and criminally predicated
> individuals," as well as "track department mentions." Bright Planet did not
> respond to a request for comment._

The firehose, which BlueJay presumably collects from, doesn't capture
geolocations that aren't already in the public data, right? So it looks like
the end of the road for criminals who tweet about their #meth lab and have let
Twitter geocode their tweets. Hopefully, that consists of the majority of
villains the police have to deal with

~~~
thex86
It's stupid. That is what it is. The industrial surveillance complex that is
being set up, do these companies really think people are that naive?

And what makes me even more sad about this is that #meth and #protest are
considered as dangerous.

~~~
res0nat0r
The Silk Road founder was caught because he was stupid.

My friend got robbed at gunpoint this week, her phone and purse were taken.
The cops found the suspect because she had Find My iPhone enabled.

Simple things often lead to catching bad guys.

~~~
tptacek
In this context, "stupid" isn't binary. It makes strategic sense for law
enforcement to invest in systems that create requirements for criminals to be
smart _all the time_ ; lots of people can avoid stupidity for short stretches,
but far fewer of them can be consistently competent over the long term.

~~~
res0nat0r
Totally agree.

------
pvnick
I actually don't have a problem with private surveillance, regardless of
purpose. As long as it's legal (!!!), it's probably more effective than what
government agencies like the NSA could do with their _more intrusive and
illegal_ methods. I would love to see the NSA domestic surveillance done away
with and then have some sort of transparent government incentive for companies
that can effectively monitor terrorists, dissent groups, disruptive
individuals, whatever, legally. Like private investigators looking into
terrorist groups. That's fine, and if the public doesn't like what those
dollars are being spent on, such as monitoring peaceful protests (and how are
police supposed to know the protestors have peaceful intentions unless they
look into them? I've seen some nasty things happen at some of the occupy
events in Zugatti park...), they can vote the guys out of office who are in
charge of designating targets. It's the complete lack of accountability that
causes problems...

~~~
DanBC
I am a lot more bothered about private companies doing surveillance than I am
about whatever NSA / GCHQ are doing.

For a long time my assumption has been that well funded government agencies
can, and do, slurp everything I type. (Even though that breaks several laws.)

That has little to no effect on me. But private companies do - they lose the
data; they're open to blackmail or corruption; they're insecure; they
inaccurate; etc.

Many more people are caused harm by Equifax listing someone else's debt
problems under their name than by the NSA doing whatever it is they do.

This post is not saying that government surveillance is acceptable, or that we
shouldn't do stuff to stop it!

~~~
hadronzoo
Except that the government has a monopoly on force. If a private company harms
you, there are often civil and potentially criminal concequences. If the
government uses your private data against you and violates your rights, who do
you turn to?

~~~
king_jester
> If a private company harms you, there are often civil and potentially
> criminal concequences.

It is really difficult to sue a company that has a team of lawyers while you
are a individual just trying to get by, esp. if said private company did
something that really disrupts your life, like wrongly foreclosing on your
home or wrongly firing you.

------
enraged_camel
This is normal, expected and working as intended. Adam Smith said it back in
1776 in his book _Wealth of Nations_ :

"“Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property,
is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of
those who have some property against those who have none at all.”

------
spiritplumber
How do you boycott these folks if they don't sell to the general public?

~~~
tokenizer
Boycotting only works effectively in a free society. If someone taxes your by
force, and hands some of that money to these companies, then short of becoming
an elected member of government, you can't do anything about it.

~~~
polymatter
You can campaign and support elected officials who promise not to do so.

Of course, in the meantime they could be targeted against you and anyone you
associate with.

~~~
tokenizer
That's still not actually doing something about it.

IMO voting is the same as praying. I mean, sure; Your ruler may decide to
grant one or more of your wishes, but you'll never know if it was them, or
simply chance.

Also, my point was regarding boycotting, and how free association and
volunteerism become ineffective when dealing with government or government
sponsored corporations. Boycotting on free market ideals, means they don't
make money if most people don't like them. This can't happen when the
operation itself if funded through tax dollars and currency controls.

