News

The Reefuge · Jun 20, 2012

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/19/julian-assange-wikileaks-asylum-ecuador

Lies and more lies. A person allows the truth to get out, and they do everything they can to destroy him. Please share this news article.

Thanks.

K&J Aquatics · Jun 20, 2012

You want to talk censorship? Take a look at what Google get's asked by the world's Governments......

K&J Aquatics · Jun 20, 2012

And just to follow up on where world Governments are law enforcement agencies could be heading...

Facebook

With the worlds biggest social media company now having facial recognition tech & a another photo sharing website, we don't need to be micro chipped, they know where we are, what we are doing & god help the rev head's who post their exploits to Facebook.

MichelleShocked · Jun 20, 2012

:eek:(

chimaera · Jun 20, 2012

I don't really get the issue here?

MTG · Jun 20, 2012

chimaera said:
I don't really get the issue here?

censorship and control of the internet

aussieant32 · Jun 20, 2012

but didn't wiki leaks also release information on spies in other countries resulting in them being executed? Or was that not true?

chimaera · Jun 20, 2012

Well TR's article was about Assange, who is currently avoiding trial for rape charges. Whatever his fear of being tried for wikileaks is, he can't just avoid that like he is beyond the law.

The Google article about censorship is a shame, but at least they are open about it and don't just do whatever asked. And I am sure there are as many requests from companies and individuals as governments.

The Facebook/Face.com thing confused me though - how is facial recognition going to help the government track me? I don't get this fear of using Facebook or posting photos for the world to see.

Sarg · Jun 20, 2012

chimaera said:
Well TR's article was about Assange, who is currently avoiding trial for rape charges. Whatever his fear of being tried for wikileaks is, he can't just avoid that like he is beyond the law.

Given the women have stated that there was no rape they were being cohersed by the police (wether that is true or not) the fear I think is that the rape charges will fail but then the US will put in an extradition order for him to face charges in America for all the documents that he has put up on wikileaks. I believe the us and Sweden have good extradition terms or something like that.

DavidS · Jun 20, 2012

chimaera said:
W
The Facebook/Face.com thing confused me though - how is facial recognition going to help the government track me? I don't get this fear of using Facebook or posting photos for the world to see.

Easily. Ever gone out to lunch and had someone tag you as being there with them? Bugger, all of Facebook knows you're at that Chinese restaurant 30 minutes from home (well, if you didn't lock down your profile properly). Some cameras embed GPS location data into photos now. Facial recognition determines who you are, the exif data contains geo data telling them where you were when the photo was taken, so even if your friends aren't tagging you and telling the world you're not home,( ya know, incase a crim has been e-stalking you so they know when they can break in and steal your tv), the photo you just took of yourself to share with your friends has just made it possible for someone to find out exactly where you are, all on a system that is known to retain your data even after *you* delete it.

A more suitable question would be why does it matter? Of course, if you're of the belief that a government doesn't have the right to know where you are all the time, and that it definitely does not have the right to know who you're out with, when and how often, then maybe it matters to you. Maybe it matters that they have access to a whole lot of information that they can use against you at any time they like that without context could as easily make you appear to be guilty of something that you didn't do. Maybe it matters to you that certain governments might share and save data on you without your knowledge and use it to make decisions that will affect you in ways that you're not aware of. All just thoughts really.

In a so called democratic country we seem to trust our government. If you were in China, you might really not want to be so easily identifiable; your political opinions might be the kind of things that could cause you to be due for a very long sleep if the government found out. As so called democratic governments push to censor people - particularly if they are making political statements, at what point do these governments cross the line away from true democracy? The fact that it's becoming clear that governments are trying to exert power over the internet is precisely the reason why we need to do as much as we can to restrict their power. Restricting their access to information is a pretty major part of this. Ask a politically active person from a communist country how democratic we really are. The answer is likely to be interesting.

'vspec' · Jun 21, 2012

K&J Aquatics said:
And just to follow up on where world Governments are law enforcement agencies could be heading...

Facebook

With the worlds biggest social media company now having facial recognition tech & a another photo sharing website, we don't need to be micro chipped, they know where we are, what we are doing & god help the rev head's who post their exploits to Facebook.

I've said it previously, global profiling on a scale we have never seen before!!

I found it somewhat strange for his asylum country choice, however its the states he is ducking as well, so from that perspective, I would have thought Venezuela would have been a better $%^# you gesture. Ether way, if he doesn't disappear by choice and is left alone, its life he can enjoy moving forward.
I'm still left wondering at what cost though, there is a strategic value for sure.

Nice policy of the australian government though ~ creating space with a stick was a nice touch! :confused:
Heaven for bid we step out of line and do the right thing for once!!

'vspec' · Jun 21, 2012

Democracy is the worlds biggest paradoxal joke ~ It fits in between Perception and Illusion in the dictionary

chimaera · Jun 21, 2012

Sarg said:
Given the women have stated that there was no rape they were being cohersed by the police (wether that is true or not) the fear I think is that the rape charges will fail but then the US will put in an extradition order for him to face charges in America for all the documents that he has put up on wikileaks. I believe the us and Sweden have good extradition terms or something like that.

Yep that is the case, but this guy is not beyond the law. Whether the US are doing hte right thing in wanting to prosecute him or not, the law is the law.

DavidS said:
Easily. Ever gone out to lunch and had someone tag you as being there with them? Bugger, all of Facebook knows you're at that Chinese restaurant 30 minutes from home (well, if you didn't lock down your profile properly). Some cameras embed GPS location data into photos now. Facial recognition determines who you are, the exif data contains geo data telling them where you were when the photo was taken, so even if your friends aren't tagging you and telling the world you're not home,( ya know, incase a crim has been e-stalking you so they know when they can break in and steal your tv), the photo you just took of yourself to share with your friends has just made it possible for someone to find out exactly where you are, all on a system that is known to retain your data even after *you* delete it.

Yep, I do that regularly. Don't care. I'm guessing you don't use Foursquare either?

DavidS said:
A more suitable question would be why does it matter? Of course, if you're of the belief that a government doesn't have the right to know where you are all the time, and that it definitely does not have the right to know who you're out with, when and how often, then maybe it matters to you. Maybe it matters that they have access to a whole lot of information that they can use against you at any time they like that without context could as easily make you appear to be guilty of something that you didn't do. Maybe it matters to you that certain governments might share and save data on you without your knowledge and use it to make decisions that will affect you in ways that you're not aware of. All just thoughts really.

Still don't care, and I strongly doubt the Australian government really cares that DavidS just had a coffee in the Melbourne CBD with two friends called Pat and Sally. Unless you are engaging in criminal activity, why would you worry about them 'using the data against you'?

DavidS · Jun 21, 2012

chimaera said:
Still don't care, and I strongly doubt the Australian government really cares that DavidS just had a coffee in the Melbourne CBD with two friends called Pat and Sally. Unless you are engaging in criminal activity, why would you worry about them 'using the data against you'?

One of the few remaining privledges that we do at least have is the ability to decide whether or not you do infact care.
Personally, if I was having coffee with Pat and Sally in the Melbourne CBD, I'd like the choice of who happens to know where I am, and with who. At least if the government wants to know that, they're going to have to put some real resources into finding out instead of just using computers. It's not about criminal activity. I'd like a choice who knows - being forced into letting any government know that much about me sounds a lot more like a communistic government than a democratic one. It's about choice. It's about control. The more we give them, the less we have. The more they have, the more they take.
It's easy to think that because you're not doing anything wrong that you have nothing to fear. That's precisely how these so called democratic governments want you to think. Ask a Chinese journalist about having little privacy and fear about everything they write. The more control you give a government, the more the line blurs at the edge of democracy.

chimaera · Jun 21, 2012

But you do have a choice ... don't use Facebook while having coffee. Or to be even more sure, leave your phone at home or put it on airplane mode while out. Then ask Pat and Sally to the the same, and you're secure - no one will ever know (or care) where you are.

ps - not being intentionally argumentative, this is a discussion I have with friends sometimes ... but often feels like arguing about religion, neither party is ever going to convince the other =0)

DavidS · Jun 21, 2012

chimaera said:
But you do have a choice ... don't use Facebook while having coffee. Or to be even more sure, leave your phone at home or put it on airplane mode while out. Then ask Pat and Sally to the the same, and you're secure - no one will ever know (or care) where you are.

ps - not being intentionally argumentative, this is a discussion I have with friends sometimes ... but often feels like arguing about religion, neither party is ever going to convince the other =0)

But you have a choice now. But what about when someone else posts a pic with you in the background, and its facial recognition works out who you are? That kinda sucks. I don't mind being in the background of someone elses pics, but doesn't mean I want them to know who I am :P

This one is a lot easier to argue than religion. This one is about having a choice while you have the right to have a choice, because the wrong choice could lead to you loosing the right to having a choice. The choice to have some control over the governments we elect to do what we need them to as opposed to what they want to do; more so the case now when the choices of leaders are an imbicile called our PM, and a bigger imbicile that leads the opposition. It's all choices. And our rights to have them :)

The Reefuge · Jun 21, 2012

chimaera said:
I don't really get the issue here?

Hi chimaera,

The issue here is that the only reason he is facing rape charges, is because the governments need a way to get him. There was no rape, plain and simple. The man fights for peoples freedom by allowing them to know the truth. Should he go to Sweden, the US will then have the power to extradite to the USA to face their charges. Because of the charges they want to charge him with, he faces the death penalty under US law. All this because he allowed people to have the option to read the truth.

Laws are laws, but when a law prevents you from spreading truth it needs to be broken.

Thanks.

chimaera · Jun 21, 2012

The Reefuge said:
There was no rape, plain and simple.

There is no way you can categorically state that fact. Only a court of law can decide whether that is the case, as per the law.

I have no issues with Assange per se (even though I think he is a bit of an ass), or Wikileaks. I am all for freedom of speech and spreading the truth.

DavidS · Jun 21, 2012

chimaera said:
There is no way you can categorically state that fact. Only a court of law can decide whether that is the case, as per the law.

Actually, a court of law will decide whether or not it believes based upon evidence provided to it if there was a rape. This is not definitive, only a matter of likelihood based upon testimony of witnesses who may or may not have actually been there, and whether or not a jury believes this testimony.
If a court determination concludes that he is guilty, it doesn't mean he did it. It only means they believe based upon the evidence provided by the prosecution that they believe he did it. A decision does not equate to fact, it's just a considered probability.

And laws.. well, even when they are "right" does not make them right. Plenty of innocent people have wound up in prisons. A few innocent people have wound up on death row. Most are probably guilty. Some are maybe guilty, and a few are innocent despite what the evidence against them says. In Julian's case, the rape case is nothing more than noise. His accusers have even claimed it was a lie and the claims were made under duress. The bigger picture is putting him into a US court to stand for the crimes they wish to charge him for. For him, that's possibly a sentence of death in pursuit of the truth.

Perhaps the rape did happen. Perhaps it's just a fabricated story to ensure that non-US friendly countries might at least extradict him to Sweden to answer for a fabrication. Either way, if he appears in a Swedish court, it's pretty likely he'll wind up in the US.. and pretty unlikely he'll return from there. Unless it's in a pine box.

MichelleShocked · Jun 21, 2012

[quote="DavidS, post: 49865, member: 42". Some cameras embed GPS location data into photos now..[/quote]

Mobile phones have been using that technology for a while now - my iphone could embed the location of where the photo was taken.
About 12 months ago, there was outrage over a phone app distrustful parents (and spouses) were downloading onto their "loved" one's phone. The app was basically a tracker that allowed the user to see on their own phone or computer exactly where their victim was at any time of the day and night.
One woman in the US was stalked/harassed for 2 yrs by a man who was using this technology - though i have to admit, I also wondered why she didn't twig that it was her PHONE that was the culprit and just dispose of it. If the people who (supposedly) love you, can use this technology on you, what technology has the govt got up its sleeve?
Another phone i owned had a wall-paper that was a map of the area you were currently in. As you changed location, it did too. It occurred to me that such a wallpaper could be handy on a person's phone if they were abducted but otherwise, it doesn't have much else use.
I mean, if you don't know where you are at any given time, you probably need a minder :(