Google eats babies
This is a first for me. Here’s the transcript of a chat I just had with an old business contact. Edited to remove the irrelevant bits, and to protect the clueless:
XXX: you probably don’t know this, but google is a big part of the govt plan to monitor people, and google’s in the world’s best position to do that. my favorite is google’s idea to remotely activate the microphone on people’s pc’s and record everything that happens while their pc is on
me: so it’s obviously useless for me to point out that you might be wrong, since I don’t know what’s going on
me: instead, I’m going to nicely ask you to share whatever you’re smoking :)
XXX: that is public information, so whatever
me: conspiracy theories don’t exactly qualify as “public info”, you know :)
XXX: oh fuck off. i really cannot handle that kind of insult to my intelligence.
XXX: get educated about things before you insult someone who has done some research
me: and you are in a better position to know than somebody who works at google, why exactly?
XXX: obviously you haven’t even bothered to spend 5 minutes googling it for yourself, so stop wasting my time.
(XXX has changed status to: Busy)
me: you can tell well founded arguments when the other person gets rude and aggressive instead of presenting arguments… but whatever
me: have a nice day too
XXX: facts are not something you debate. you verify facts to be true or false. you haven’t bothered to check the facts, have you? presenting arguments is done when there is an opinion to be argued. do you understand the difference between opinions to be debated and facts to be verified? now, really, don’t waste more of my time.
XXX: and you’re who started the aggressiveness and rudeness by implying that i’m some kind of dope smoking conspiracy nut.
Since Mr. Paler wants to take this public, I (XXX) spent 5 minutes and found the following links:
Google developing eavesdropping software
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/03/google_eavesdropping_software/
“The Register reports that Google plans to use PC microphones to collect statistics on a user’s environment. Peter Norvig, who directs research at Google, told Technology Review that this software would start to show up in Google software ’sooner rather than later’. The software collects short sound clips and removes background noise. Google then targets its ads based on the statistics collected. With the current level of online privacy, this new level of invasion would seem to have frightening possibilities.”
Google’s tv eavesdropping plan
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2006/06/googles-tv-eavesdropping-plan.html
Google to Use PC Microphones to Listen In?
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/03/2148216
Google Listens … Literally
http://www.spywareinfo.com/newsletter/archives/2006/sep6.php#openmic
Government, Industry To Use Computer Microphones To Spy On 150 Million Americans – Invasive surveillance and advertising obliterates even Minority Report style technology
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/060906spyon.htm
Cool but evil: Will Google use your computer’s microphone to spy on you?
http://digg.com/security/Cool_but_evil_Will_Google_use_your_computer_s_microphone_to_spy_on_you
Googling Your TV – Prototype software from Google Research could listen to your TV
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17354
There are hundreds of other news and research articles documenting the kinds of privacy abuses that Google is now famous for, including reports that certain gov’t agencies, you can guess which ones, were early investors in Google and continue to maintain close contacts with the company in order to use Google to spy on innocent Americans. Of course these gov’t agencies are only looking out for our best interest and supremely trustworthly and since we haven’t done anything wrong, why should we mind bending over while they stick their glove inside to look around? Nothing wrong with that, is there?
Next time, google it before you insult someone or call them a conspiracy nut.
So that thing is working? Wow, I want to see it, I want to see it. First of all, I don’t see where google is forcing this down your throat, and second: I have to see this working. It’s quite interesting, if you ask me, and if it works it will be great.
Now, if whatever government is planning to do this with google, couldn’t it work with Microsoft, for example, who actually supplies your OS? I mean, it’s funny that the governments should talk with some software producer to create something that people would install voluntarily and THEN use it against them?
Gosh, it’s like the government asking you nicely to buy shackles and emprison yourself at home.
@Dorin: I don’t know about the project (and if I did, I wouldn’t be allowed to talk about it in here), but looking through the links that XXX kindly posted, it’s something like this: “The idea is to grab a 12-millisecond sample of audio and transform it into a 32-bit “fingerprint” using an algorithm on the client side, then send the fingerprint to a server that compares it against a database of fingerprints from known television audio”. Sounds reasonably easy to implement (and already present in quite a few smartphones – in the “buy music” functionality)
Edit: I found the actual Google paper describing the technology – from a quick glance it seems that it’s more involved than just a simple fingerprint. Baby-eating plans, obviously!
@XXX: I’ll just say this, for a self-professed “rough-humored american” (paraphrasing here, I can’t be bothered to dig up the chat log from a couple years ago where you said that), you sure are easily offended. I’ll leave it on my readers to decide whether you are a conspiracy nut or not.
Conspiracy Theorists
By Jolly Roger
slicingthroats@yahoo.com
1-8-5
Everyone has heard, and has probably used the term “conspiracy theorist,” and the fact of the term being in common use, also indicates that we generally agree on what it means. I saw a movie by that name, and the title character was a raving lunatic who kept his food in thermoses with combination locks to reduce his chances of being poisoned by imaginary enemies.
Regardless of how the stupid movie turned out, what’s important here is the common perception people have of someone to whom that label is applied, and just as important, is who it is that applies the label. The common perception is that someone who is labeled a “conspiracy theorist” is suffering from some type of psychological disorder, and that label is usually applied to people by our government, and our news media. The next thing to consider, is that the label is applied to anyone who questions our government’s version of events in any matter. Doesn’t it logically follow that the media are teaching us to assume that anyone who questions the government is insane? When that label is applied to a person, doesn’t it become easy to dismiss everything they say without even hearing it? How convenient for them.
I think the label first became widely used to slander people who questioned the details surrounding the JFK assassination, and forty years later, there aren’t too many thinking people who still believe the Warren Commission’s “lone gunman” explanation. That explanation is doubted by everyone who has taken the time to look into the details, and believed only by people who refuse to.
Which is “theory” and which is fact? In the absence of a full confession, this can only be decided by a preponderance of evidence, and it would be silly to come to a conclusion on any matter without looking at all the evidence available. This is only common sense, just as it is safe to assume some degree of guilt or complicity on the part of anyone who lies about an event, or tries to hide, plant, or destroy any type of evidence.
Conspiracy theories arise from evidence. After the government releases an explanation of a particular event, a conspiracy theory is only born because evidence exists to disprove their explanation, or at least call it into question. There’s nothing insane about it, unless you define sanity as believing whatever the government tells you. In light of the fact that our government lies to us regularly, I would define believing everything they tell you as utter stupidity.
In July of 1996, flight 800 exploded over Long Island. Shortly after their terrorist explanation failed scrutiny, our government then explained the event by claiming that a faulty electrical system caused a spark that ignited a fuel tank, and the people who doubted this explanation were quickly labeled “conspiracy theorists.” More than a hundred witnesses saw a missile travel from the ground up to the plane just prior to its explosion, but rather than being treated as eyewitnesses to an event, they were labeled “conspiracy theorists,” which label allowed all subsequent investigation to ignore the strongest evidence in the matter.
Our “investigative” news agencies decided to accept and disseminate the official story, and they helped us forget the U.S. naval station nearby, the fact that missiles were regularly test fired there, and naturally, they paid no heed to more than a hundred “conspiracy theorists” who saw the plane get blown out of the sky by a missile. I believe that the U.S. Navy accidentally shot down flight 800, and that’s my belief because it’s the most sensible explanation that can be drawn from the available evidence. I’m not theorizing about conspiracies, but there are conflicting explanations of the event, and if the Navy did accidentally blow a passenger plane out of the sky, who would have a motive to lie about it? The U.S. government, or a hundred witnesses?
Then of course, there were the “crazy conspiracy theories” arising from the bombing of the Alfred Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City. In that matter, audio tapes and witnesses agree that there were two explosions, the first of which occurred inside the building between eight and ten seconds before the truck bomb exploded. Explosive experts agree that Timothy McVeigh’s fertilizer bomb could not have destroyed the building, and the FBI’s counter terrorism chief, and members of BATF lied about their whereabouts during and prior to the catastrophe. The evening news decided not to tell you any of this, and they will label anyone who tries to a “paranoid conspiracy theorist.” In light of the evidence, we would be complete fools if a conspiracy theory didn’t exist.
There were no conspiracy theories arising from the explosion of flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and there were no conspiracy theories arising from the work of the uni-bomber, so the newly invented psycho-babble that tries to explain the malady of conspiracy theorists, also needs to explain why millions of conspiracy theorists all decided not to theorize about those events. There is no psychological malady. There was simply no evidence to indicate a conspiracy.
The real question is not why people theorize about conspiracies, but why people choose to believe the government’s version of events when it’s obvious that they’re lying. One reason is that most people never see the evidence because our “news” industry hides it, and another reason is that the same news industry will quickly associate anyone who questions the government with the people who see Elvis, Bigfoot, and UFO’s.
But sadly, I think the main reason people choose to believe the government’s version of events despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is because it’s easier, and safer. If you ignore most of the evidence, and accept as plausible whatever ridiculous explanation the T.V. provides, your life remains simple, and you get to sit on your ass and watch more T.V. If on the other hand, you pluck your head from that same ass and realize you’ve been lied to, as a citizen in a democratic society, you’re instantly burdened with being responsible for doing something about it. Every citizen of the United States has a civic duty to participate in their government, and keep themselves informed of its actions, or government “of the people, by the people, and for the people” isn’t possible. You were warned that “eternal vigilance is the price of freedom, ” but you chose to ignore your government, and believe whatever they told you, and because of this, Americans have lost their freedom. Although presidents and senators are public servants, unlike the dog catcher and mailman, they wield a lot of power over people’s lives, and that’s why they have to be watched, and scrutinized.
Statistical analysts from UCLA and Rutgers University believe that John Kerry won the 2004 presidential election by an estimated 1.3 million votes, and despite the fact that these learned scholars are probably the most qualified people alive to forward such an opinion, our news madia dismisses this as “conspiracy theory.” George W. Bush lost the 2000 election, and he lost the 2004 election, but he’s occupying the White House, shredding our constitution, and stealing our wealth and freedom in a “war on terror” that’s as fraudulent as his presidency because many Americans are too stupid to see it, too lazy to do anything about it, or both.
I’m sorry if I sound angry, but the fact of the matter is that I am angry. While you were staring into the television like an idiot, our freedom, wealth, and constitutional protections have been stolen from us, and because you’re stupid enough to believe the manure being shoveled by our government, you’ve allowed them to commit bigger and more heinous crimes. Because you were too lazy to research their nonsensical economic policies, and see them for the scams that they are, we’ll all soon be living in poverty. And because you’re so lazy, apathetic, and easily lied to, millions have died for the profits of a few. I have every right to be angry, and only a fool wouldn’t be.
Only a small portion of my anger is reserved for the government of the United States, because they only did what can be expected of any government. They grabbed money, power and control where it was easy to do so. Most of my anger is directed toward my fellow American citizens, because they allowed it to happen by believing whatever they’re told, and not doing what’s expected of them. Patriotism in America does not mean waving the flag in blind loyalty to the government. As an American citizen, you have a civic duty to question your government, and hold them accountable for their actions, not use the flag as a blindfold. The American people have been duped once again, and it doesn’t seem like it’s a difficult thing to accomplish.
America’s latest “conspiracy nuts” are better known as the 9-11 truth movement. The news media are doing their usual job of slandering them with their usual childish name calling, but for more than three years, they have refused to show you the documented fact, scientific data, expert testimony, photographic evidence, or the credible eyewitness accounts that prove U.S. government complicity in the events of September, 11, 2001. If this were just a “crazy conspiracy theory,” I don’t think people in our government would have worked so hard to destroy, hide, and lie about the evidence. The White House tried to derail every investigation into the matter. If we had an honest government, we wouldn’t have conspiracy theories. We would have honest investigations, and fair trials, but these things are disappearing from America.
There are disturbing facts regarding the events of September 11 that every American needs to be aware of , but naturally, none of it will be on T.V. I’ve met a lot of people in the 9-11 truth movement, and I can assure you that none of them are crazy, paranoid, or even “conspiracy theorists.” One generalization I can make about them is that they all seem to be very intelligent. Maybe the smartest thing you could do would be to start listening to them. The Arabs don’t “hate your freedom.” The White House hates your freedom, because it’s the only thing that stands between them, and unlimited power. – Jolly Roger
“Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Freedom” – Thomas Jefferson
911truth.org 911review.org 911review.com physics911.org wtc7.net
Anything written by “Jolly Roger” is the property of the American Resistance Movement, and the author hereby grants permission to anyone who so desires to post, print, copy, or distribute this letter as they see fit, and in fact, the author encourages you to do so.
I like Google, but it does tend to collect more information about me and the life i live than i’d want it to. But hey so far it works out and Google is very nice to me most of the time. Saying any government is behind Googles intell-gathering is BS however, succesfull commerce is way more powerfull.
XXX you say silly things, and now so do i by actually taking the effort to mention the obvious. Oh and trash that milk you left in the refrigiator since thursday.