Search the Community

Great video about search engines increasingly showing only a part of the internet:

- This was first reported below in 2019 - The companies involved appear to have walked back the push temporarily because of the Pandemic - The Startups pushing this are Israeli, Australian, Silicon Valley and Scandinavian (the usual countries who don't give a shit about PRIVACY) - The tech involves continuous data-analysis of what is happening inside peoples' cars, including targeting advertising based on what the system sees and hears, such as what the kids in the backseat are watching or playing on their smartphones - It is likely that insurance companies will PUSH THIS TECH AGAIN AS SOON AS PEOPLE ARE COMFORTABLE AGAIN https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tech-ces-monitoring/move-aside-backseat-driver-new-tech-at-ces-monitors-you-inside-car-idUSKCN1P219H This week at CES, the international consumer electronics show in Las Vegas, a host of startup companies will demonstrate to global automakers how the sensor technology that watches and analyzes drivers, passengers and objects in cars will mean enhanced safety in the short-term, and revenue opportunities in the future. Whether by generating alerts about drowsiness, unfastened seat belts or wallets left in the backseat, the emerging technology aims not only to cut back on distracted driving and other undesirable behavior, but eventually help automakers and ride-hailing companies make money from data generated inside the vehicle. In-car sensor technology is deemed critical to the full deployment of self-driving cars, which analysts say is still likely years away in the United States. Right now, self-driving cars are still mainly at the testing stage. The more sophisticated in-car monitoring also could respond to concerns that technology that automates some – but not all – driving tasks could lead motorists to stop paying attention and not be ready to retake control should the situation demand it. When self-driving cars gain broad acceptance, the monitoring cameras and the artificial-intelligence software behind them will likely be used to help create a more customized ride for the passengers. Right now, however, such cameras are being used mainly to enhance safety, not unlike a helpful backseat driver. Interior-facing cameras inside the car are still a novelty, currently found only in the 2018 Cadillac GM.N CT6. Audi VOWG_p.DE and Tesla Inc TSLA.O have developed systems but they are not currently activated. Mazda 7261.T, Subaru 9778.T and electric vehicle start-up Byton are introducing cars for 2019 whose cameras measure driver inattention. Startup Nauto's camera and AI-based tech is used by commercial fleets. Data from the cameras is analyzed with image recognition software to determine whether a driver is looking at his cellphone or the dashboard, turned away, or getting sleepy, to cite a few examples. Companies such as Israel's Guardian Optical Technologies and eyeSight Technologies, Silicon Valley's Eyeris Technologies Inc, Sweden's Smart Eye AB SEYE.ST, Australia's Seeing Machines Ltd M2Z.L, and Vayyar Imaging Ltd, another Israeli company using radar instead of vision, are crowding the space. Many have already signed undisclosed deals for production year 2020 and beyond.

They are covertly scanning EVERYTHING, including photos TEXTED over their phones: https://news.yahoo.com/dad-took-photos-naked-toddler-142928196.html "The nurse said to send photos so the doctor could review them in advance," the New York Times reports, decribing how an ordeal began in February of 2021 for a software engineer named Mark who had a sick son:Mark's wife grabbed her husband's phone and texted a few high-quality close-ups of their son's groin area to her iPhone so she could upload them to the health care provider's messaging system. In one, Mark's hand was visible, helping to better display the swelling. Mark and his wife gave no thought to the tech giants that made this quick capture and exchange of digital data possible, or what those giants might think of the images. With help from the photos, the doctor diagnosed the issue and prescribed antibiotics, which quickly cleared it up.... Two days after taking the photos of his son, Mark's phone made a blooping notification noise: His account had been disabled because of "harmful content" that was "a severe violation of Google's policies and might be illegal." A "learn more" link led to a list of possible reasons, including "child sexual abuse & exploitation...." He filled out a form requesting a review of Google's decision, explaining his son's infection. At the same time, he discovered the domino effect of Google's rejection. Not only did he lose emails, contact information for friends and former colleagues, and documentation of his son's first years of life, his Google Fi account shut down, meaning he had to get a new phone number with another carrier. Without access to his old phone number and email address, he couldn't get the security codes he needed to sign in to other internet accounts, locking him out of much of his digital life.... A few days after Mark filed the appeal, Google responded that it would not reinstate the account, with no further explanation. Mark didn't know it, but Google's review team had also flagged a video he made and the San Francisco Police Department had already started to investigate him.... In December 2021, Mark received a manila envelope in the mail from the San Francisco Police Department. It contained a letter informing him that he had been investigated as well as copies of the search warrants served on Google and his internet service provider. An investigator, whose contact information was provided, had asked for everything in Mark's Google account: his internet searches, his location history, his messages and any document, photo and video he'd stored with the company. The search, related to "child exploitation videos," had taken place in February, within a week of his taking the photos of his son. Mark called the investigator, Nicholas Hillard, who said the case was closed. Mr. Hillard had tried to get in touch with Mark but his phone number and email address hadn't worked.... Mark appealed his case to Google again, providing the police report, but to no avail.... A Google spokeswoman said the company stands by its decisions... "The day after Mark's troubles started, the same scenario was playing out in Texas," the Times notes, quoting a technologist at the EFF who speculates other people experiencing the same thing may not want to publicize it. "There could be tens, hundreds, thousands more of these." Reached for a comment on the incident, Google told the newspaper that "Child sexual abuse material is abhorrent and we're committed to preventing the spread of it on our platforms."

Excellent, detailed and truthful 10 minute presentation by someone who has 30 years of experience in developing Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality technologies:

Scary shit... https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-05-10/report-immigration-officials-spying-on-majority-of-americans https://americandragnet.org/ Formed in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, ICE was given sweeping powers to fight terrorism and enforce immigration law. Since then, the agency has collected data on hundreds of millions of Americans largely without much oversight or accountability, often crossing legal and ethical lines to amass people’s personal information to weave a vast surveillance system, according to the Georgetown report. Among other findings, the report documents that ICE has driver’s license data for 3 in 4 adults living in the U.S.; has scanned at least 1 in 3 of all adults’ driver’s licenses with face recognition technology; can track the movement of vehicles in cities that are home to nearly 3 in 4 adults; and can locate 3 in 4 adults through their utility records. In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill in 2020 that promised to protect utility customer data from exposure to federal immigration officials. But ICE officials found a way around the law, purchasing access to hundreds of millions of Americans’ utility records provided by data brokers Thomson Reuters and Equifax. When state officials discovered that the agency was using a state system to view driver’s license information, legislators passed Assembly Bill 1747 in 2019, which prohibits ICE from gaining access to the system for civil immigration enforcement purposes. But ICE found a way around this too. The Georgetown report suggests that ICE may have accessed driver’s license data collected by California DMV through LexisNexis Risk Solutions, a data broker. Documents show that the California DMV directly sells its data to LexisNexis. Since March 2021, ICE has contracted with LexisNexis to access driver records.

Countries signing trade agreements with each other have started to include a sneaky paragraph 'guaranteeing that signatories on both sides block user access to Pirate and IP/Copyright infringing websites at ISP level'. Translation: 'You will no longer be able to BROWSE TO ANY SITE WE DO NOT LIKE'. https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-site-blocking-is-making-its-way-into-free-trade-agreements-220508/ The blocking approach was still relatively controversial at the start of the last decade but it’s increasingly being normalized. Dozens of countries have legal or procedural options to request blockades today. Australia and the UK are among the countries that have robust site-blocking legislation in place. ISPs in both countries are required to prevent subscribers from accessing thousands of domain names, with more being added every few months.

WE HAVE DARK SECRETS AND DON'T LIKE THEM DISCUSSED ON THE INTERNET: https://reclaimthenet.org/60-countries-sign-declaration-misinformation/ The daft declaration as PDF: https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/declaration-for-the-future-for-the-internet.pdf The United States (US) and 60 partner countries, including the United Kingdom (UK), Canada, Australia, and members of the European Union (EU), have signed a sweeping “Declaration for the Future of the Internet” which commits to bolstering “resilience to disinformation and misinformation” and somehow upholding free speech rights while also censoring “harmful” content. The White House framed the declaration as something that supports freedom and privacy by focusing on its commitments to protect human rights, the free flow of information, and privacy. The EU put out similar talking points and claimed that those who signed the declaration support a future internet that’s open, free, global, interoperable, reliable, and secure. However, the commitments in the declaration are vague and often conflicting. For example, the declaration makes multiple commitments to upholding freedom of expression yet also commits to bolstering “resilience to disinformation and misinformation.” It also contains the seemingly contradictory commitment of ensuring “the right to freedom of expression” is protected when governments and platforms censor content that they deem to be harmful. Furthermore, many of the governments that signed this declaration are currently pushing sweeping online censorship laws or openly supporting online censorship. For example, just a few days ago, the Biden administration called for private companies to censor online “misinformation” – the latest of many similar calls. The EU also recently passed its Digital Services Act (DSA) which contains requirements to censor “hate speech” and “misinformation.” Some government officials, including Canadian Minister of Innovation, Science, and Industry François-Philippe Champagne and UK Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS) Secretary of State Nadine Dorries, even mentioned their country’s online censorship laws during the live launch of this Declaration for the Future of the Internet. “The vision outlined in this declaration aligns very well with the many initiatives we are working on here in Canada, including our Digital Charter,” Champagne said. Canada’s Digital Charter was launched in 2019 and threatens platforms with “meaningful financial consequences” if they fail to fight online “hate” and “disinformation.” “I am enormously encouraged to see online safety is a key principle of that declaration,” Dorries said. “As the UK’s Digital Secretary, doing more to protect people online is one of my main priorities – and last month, I was proud to introduce a groundbreaking Online Safety Bill to the UK Parliament that will make the internet safer for everyone.” The UK’s Online Safety Bill will give the government sweeping censorship powers, censor some “legal but harmful” content, and criminalize “harmful” and “false” communications. Like the commitments to freedom of expression, the declaration’s commitments to privacy are also being made by governments that engage in or allow mass surveillance. For example, the EU is allowing the linking of face recognition databases to create a mega surveillance system. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) recently boosted its social media surveillance technology. And the outgoing London Metropolitan police commissioner recently congratulated herself on extending the surveillance state. While the current signatories of this declaration are governments, the White House plans to work with “the private sector, international organizations, the technical community, academia and civil society, and other relevant stakeholders worldwide to promote, foster, and achieve” the “shared vision” of this Declaration for the Future of the Internet. Big Tech companies such as Facebook and Google have already welcomed this declaration. “It’s great to see countries coming together today to launch the Declaration for the Future of the Internet (DFI),” Google’s Vice President, Government Affairs & Public Policy, Karan Bhatia, wrote in a blog post. “We are committed to partnering with governments and civil society through the Declaration to disrupt disinformation campaigns and foreign malign activity, while ensuring people around the world are able to access trustworthy information.” Google and its video-sharing platform YouTube have used the term misinformation to justify the mass censorship of content. Additionally, Bhatia’s commitment to ensuring access to “trustworthy information” echoes YouTube’s commitment to boosting “authoritative sources” – a practice that creates a huge disparity between mainstream media outlets and independent creators and results in mainstream media outlets being artificially boosted by as much as 20x. “This Declaration is an important signal from some of the world’s leading democracies,” Nick Clegg, the President of Global Affairs at Facebook’s parent company Meta, tweeted. “The only way to preserve and enhance the best of the open internet, prevent it from fragmenting further and protect human rights in the digital space is by working together.” While Clegg’s statement focuses on the open internet and protecting human rights, Meta also mass censors content on its platforms and plans to continue this censorship in its metaverse. And despite the declaration’s commitment to privacy, both Google and Meta’s businesses rely heavily on surveilling users to serve targeted ads. The current list of countries that have endorsed this Declaration for the Future of the Internet includes Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, the European Commission, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, North Macedonia, Palau, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom, the United States, Ukraine, and Uruguay. The declaration isn’t legally binding but is intended to be used as a “reference for public policy makers, as well as citizens, businesses, and civil society organizations.” The signatories also intend to translate its principles into “concrete policies and actions; and, work together to promote this vision globally.”

Bill G. does it again...

Digital Passports for everybody! (i.e. no more online Anonymity) No more Extreme views! (i.e. everybody please shut up onlinr) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2020%3A825%3AFIN

Apple has BANNED the Parler app from its app store - after giving Parler "24 hours to remove all content which endangers public safety" Amazon AWS is suspending Parler's web hosting service Parler will likely be offline for a week or more, CEO says "We'll have to rebuild the service from scratch" https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/johnpaczkowski/amazon-parler-aws