FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Google advocates: Another thing to watch for
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> State Terror: 9/11, 7/7, CIA Fakes
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 410
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Last year i discovered an amazing 3D CAD program, sketchup, and as I design studios for people, I lapped it up. Recently the program was bought by Google and released for free. Pissed me off as I'd paid over $700 for it.

Google bought it so they could offer 3D Cad interface to Google Earth which they've done and you can now upload and download 3D cad buildings to Google Earth using Google sketchup.

All the Sketchup Pro users, like myself are desperately waiting for sketchup 6, the awaited update, but since the Google purchase, nothing. we are all getting concerned.

Google has also made Adaware as part of the google toolbar package so I assume they've bought them too.

I'll be watching with interest what happens.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://clusty.com/ seems good but i cant add it to my firefox search engine list. thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Watching Google.....

Toto wrote:
http://clusty.com/ seems good but i cant add it to my firefox search engine list. thanks

I can't seem to add any engines to the new version of Firefox. And the save bookmark in the context sensitive menu is all f**ed up. Great browser, but is this the 'new and improved' version... Beta? It automatically downloaded and installed itself (user choice), but in the process it deleted many of my settings and all the search engines I had listed. Strange.... Is it in the process of becoming a 'Google'- browser, maybe? Wink

As for Google and Firefox, I couldn't find the Google engine in Firefox' list over engines, only MSN and Yahoo... Haved they dropped this engine. Seems strange, since they still have the Google search bar and a number of other Google (developers) serevices available through "affiliated" sites and the fact that Firefox is part of their software bundle. Clusty seems good, Metacrawler I have used quite alot.

The Sketchup deal is possibly cause for concern. If they offer it for free, will new versions ever be released? I wonder if they have finacial ties to other CAD or 3D software companies like AutoCAD, Bryce, Maya, 3D Studio Max or Rhino, or that they are expanding into graphics as well Question I cried for a week when Adobe bought Macromedia, which was the final nail in the coffin as to competition between graphics sofware suits. Adobe Flash and Dreamweaver? Doesn't sound right.... Phasing out Dreamweaver in favour of GoLive, and changing the GUI on Flash to fit Adobe software? Sounds more likely... Microsoft Macintosh with iVista is probably next... Wink

As for Ad-aware...

Helsinki, January 10, 2006

Lavasoft Ad-Aware SE Personal Edition Included as Part of Google Pack
Award-winning Ad-Aware is bundled with Google's free software package

Lavasoft AB, the world leader in antispyware solutions has teamed with Google Inc. to include Ad-Aware SE Personal Edition in the Google Pack. Lavasoft is one of seven companies working with Google for the pack of free software utilities.

"Lavasoft is excited to team with Google to include its award-winning and industry-leading antispyware solution in the Google Pack," said Merja Turpeinen, Marketing & PR Coordinator at Lavasoft AB. "We are pleased to help Google deliver privacy protection to their users."

Google Pack, launched on January 6, 2006 offers free, useful software to improve the user experience online and on the desktop. Google Pack is a combination of best-in-class software selected by Google users to effectively manage information, communicate better, and surf the web faster and safer. By Google's selection of Ad-Aware SE as a preferred antispyware solution, Lavasoft's role in the community of online users is invigorated.

Lavasoft's distinct role in the community of online users

Google's selection of Ad-Aware SE as a preferred antispyware solution reinforces Lavasoft's distinct role in the community of online users. Through Ad-Aware inclusion in the Google Pack, Lavasoft affirms its commitment to serve a wider audience of Internet users by securing their privacy.

Alongside the Ad-Aware SE Personal Edition, the Google Pack includes:

Adobe Reader 7
Firefox with Google Toolbar
GalleryPlayer Wallpapers
Google Desktop
Google Earth
Google Pack Screensaver
Google Talk
Google Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Norton Anti-Virus 2005 Special Edition
Real Player

Please visit http://pack.google.com/ for additional information on the Google Pack.

For the time being they have not bought up Lavasoft as a company, but who knows. 200 million users worldwide and several awards certainly adds credibility to their software bundle.

As for general search engine privacy:
World Privacy Forum wrote:
Search Engine Privacy Tips
Updated January 31, 2006. Posted January 20, 2006.

People often view search engines as benign blank boxes to which they can pose any question they want and not suffer the consequences. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Search engines large and small typically keep logs of users' search terms, with some search engines going further and matching those terms to your computer address, your name, and other items, depending on how much information you have shared with the search engine.

Before you type your search terms into a search engine box or register for extra services at a search engine, please be aware of the potential consequences. Searches can come back to haunt you, especially if they are problematic and can be tied directly to you in some way. Here are some tips to help you enhance your Web searching privacy ranging from high protection steps to simple steps you can start to take right away, on your very next visit to a search engine.

Watch what you search for

Avoid using terms that include your full legal name attached to any information that you don't want associated with it. For example, searching for your full name and your full Social Security number (or ID card number) in a query is not optimal. If you have conducted this search, then your name and your SSN will appear together in the search string, and may be stored for a long time by the search engine.

For example, if you search for " Jane Doe 123-45-6789" at Google, the search string will look like this:

Jane Doe's name and SSN are both in the search string, so this is a search that you won't want to be conducting because it leaves behind too much information about you.

Many individuals conduct this kind of search in order to make sure that their name and SSN does not appear somewhere on the Web. It is actually a good idea to look for this information, and people have discovered security breaches using this kind of search. But it is better to conduct this search with just your name and only the last 4 digits of your SSN. This abbreviated search will retrieve the same information, and in the process you will keep your information safer.

So, before you search, think. Other people may someday see those search terms. In 2005, the U.S. Department of Justice subpoenaed Google, Yahoo, MSN, and AOL for tens of millions of users' search queries. As of this writing, all but Google have turned over some user queries in response to the government's request. [1]

Consider using an anonymizing tool or a proxy

The simplest way to disassociate yourself from your search terms is to use an anonymizing tool. There are free services available that allow you to use the Web without revealing your computer address, and there are also pay services. If you have a particularly sensitive search term you want to type in, or if you simply want to ensure that your searches are not attached to your computer's Internet address, you may want to consider using one of these services.

You may not realize it, but your computer discloses a lot of information as you traverse the Web. To see your computer or IP address and the kind of information your computer is disclosing, visit IP ID at http://ipid.shat.net. Your computer's address is just a series of numbers, but those numbers can be tied to you through a series of steps. Do you remember the RIAA lawsuits over music filesharing? The RIAA first found users' IP or computer address, then went to Internet Service Providers to find out what specific customer that address belonged to. These same steps can be applied to searches you conduct at search engines, unless you take steps to mask your computer's address.

Anonymizer.com has a free service and a pay service. https://www.anonymizer.com/

TOR Onion Router and Privoxy


TOR is a free tool you can install on your computer that, when used in combination with a tool called Privoxy, helps to mask your computer's address, among other things. It does take some technical know-how to install and maintain TOR and Privoxy, but it is not impossible for novice computer users to use. TOR can potentially make your Web surfing slow at times. However, TOR and Privoxy are a good tool set and are well worth considering. These two tools should be used together.

Anonymouse.org is an ad-based service. It is free, but there are ads. http://anonymouse.org/
Anonymouse is available in English and in German.

You can read more about proxy servers and find lists of anonymous proxies at http://www.anonymitychecker.com. If you would like to try one of the anonymous proxies on the anonymitychecker list, please be aware of one caution: do not use a proxy found on this list (or any other list) to send a password or to conduct online banking. While an anonymous proxy can shield your computer's address from search engines, unless you are sure of the source of the proxy server, then don't trust the proxy with passwords or sensitive financial data.

General Tips for Using Search Engines

These following tips are small steps that will not completely protect you from all search engine privacy issues, but they can potentially help you make incremental improvements. If you find the idea of using a proxy or an anonymizing service to be too much, then start with one or more of these tips.

Do not accept search engine cookies. If you already have some on your computer, delete them. Cookies can be used to correlate a variety of information.

Do not sign up for email at the same search engine where you regularly search. If you do so, then your email address can potentially be tied to your search terms. Whether or not a search engine does this is usually disclosed in the search engine's privacy policy.

Mix it up. Use a variety of search engines.

Again, watch what you search for. To reiterate, avoid using terms that include your full name attached to any information that you don't want associated with it. In general, unless you are using a highly reliable and proven anonymous proxy, don't type in anything that you would be embarrassed about later.

Do you get your news from a search engine? The news articles you click on may potentially be correlated to the search terms you look for at that same search engine, especially if you have been using one main computer and have been accepting cookies and not deleting them. This kind of correlation is all the more reason to use a wide variety of search engines, especially if you do not typically use anonymizing tools like Tor. You can read your news on one search engine, have your email on another, and use a handful of other separate search engines for Web research. It is not a perfect or a complete solution, but it is a start.

Varying the physical location you search from can be helpful if it is done correctly. For example, you may do some of your searching from an office, some from school, and some from home. If you vary what computers you search from and also vary the search engines you use, it makes it more difficult for one search engine to develop a complete profile of all your searching habits. The exception: if you regularly sign in to a search engine's personalized accounts (like email) from these different locations, that can act to tie all the different locations together.

If you surf using a cable modem, or a static (unchanging) Internet connection, ask your service provider to give you a new IP address. It may cost a few dollars to make the change, but changing IP addresses every once in a while can be helpful for people who primarily surf the Web from one computer in one location over a long period of time. If you have kids at home who have used the same computer for a couple of years using the same static Internet connection, this is a great tip to implement if feasible.

Be aware that your online purchases can be correlated to your search activity at some search engines. Sometimes the relationship is not obvious, so be careful of this by reading privacy policies. For example, if you purchase books at Amazon.com, think about using the generic version of the A9.com search engine (Amazon owns the A9 search engine). If you use the generic search site, Amazon.com will not tie the Amazon cookie (or your purchases) to your A9 search activities. (The generic address is http://generic.a9.com/. )


It is challenging to achieve 100 percent privacy 100 percent of the time when using search engines due to the large amount of information the search engines collect. It's better to think in terms of reaching achievable, sustainable privacy goals.

Instead of trying to remain anonymous on a search engine 100 percent of the time, aim for staying anonymous some or most of the time. You may not have time one morning to surf anonymously through TOR or Anonymouse. When that happens, aim to use a variety of search engines with cookies turned off so that at least you aren't creating an unbroken trail at one search engine. In short, find the balance that works for you, but at least work to add privacy in to your search routine in some way.

And finally, this tipsheet has not considered your personal computing hygiene. You should regularly reset and clear your Web browser history, and remove search engine searches that are stored in the browser. You can find the tools do accomplish this in the menu of your Web browser. In the Safari menu, you can choose "Reset Safari," which will specifically clear cookies and Google search entries stored in your local machine. In Firefox preferences, you can click a button to "Clear all information stored while browsing."

As you browse the Web and conduct searches, keep in mind that those search terms are not merely floating into nothingness. In reality, they are being stored somewhere, and may be stored for a long time. Working to prevent privacy problems in the here and now is preferable to trying to clean up privacy problems after the fact.

Government playing the "pornography" card....? Does anybody know how this case progressed?
NY Times wrote:
Published: January 20, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 19 - The Justice Department has asked a federal judge to compel Google, the Internet search giant, to turn over records on millions of its users' search queries as part of the government's effort to uphold an online pornography law.

Skip to next paragraph
Text: U.S. Motion Against Google Google has been refusing the request since a subpoena was first issued last August, even as three of its competitors agreed to provide information, according to court documents made public this week. Google asserts that the request is unnecessary, overly broad, would be onerous to comply with, would jeopardize its trade secrets and could expose identifying information about its users.

The dispute with Google comes as the government is moving aggressively on several fronts to obtain data on Internet activity to achieve its law enforcement goals, from domestic security to the prosecution of online crime. Under the antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot Act, for example, the Justice Department has demanded records on library patrons' Internet use.

Those efforts have encountered resistance on privacy grounds.

The government's move in the Google case, however, is different in its aims. Rather than seeking data on individuals, it says it is trying to establish a profile of Internet use that will help it defend the Child Online Protection Act, a 1998 law that would impose tough criminal penalties on individuals whose Web sites carried material deemed harmful to minors.

The law has faced repeated legal challenges. Two years ago, the Supreme Court upheld an injunction blocking its enforcement, returning the case to a district court for further examination of Internet-filtering technology that might be an alternative in achieving the law's aims.

The government's motion to compel Google's compliance was filed on Wednesday in Federal District Court in San Jose, Calif., near Google's headquarters in Mountain View. The subpoena and the government's motion were reported on Thursday by The San Jose Mercury News.

In addition to records of a week of search queries, which could amount to billions of search terms, the Google subpoena seeks a random list of a million Web addresses in its index.

Charles Miller, a spokesman for the Justice Department, said on Thursday that three Google competitors in Internet search technology - America Online, Yahoo and MSN, Microsoft's online service - had complied with subpoenas in the case.
Mr. Miller declined to say exactly how the data would be used, but according to the government's filings, it would help estimate the prevalence of material that could be deemed harmful to minors and the effectiveness of filtering software. Opponents of the pornography law contend that filtering software could protect minors effectively enough to make the law unnecessary.

The government's motion calls for Google to surrender the information within 21 days of court approval.

Although the government has modified its demands since last year, Google said Thursday that it would continue to fight. "Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and their demand for information overreaches," said Nicole Wong, Google's associate general counsel, referring to government lawyers. "We intend to resist their motion vigorously."

Philip B. Stark, a statistics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who was hired by the Justice Department to analyze search engine data in the case, said in legal documents that search engine data provided crucial insight into information on the Internet.

"Google is one of the most popular search engines," he wrote in a court document related to the case. Thus, he said, Google's databases of Web addresses and user searches "are directly relevant."

But Danny Sullivan, editor of SearchEngineWatch, an online industry newsletter, questioned the need for a subpoena. "Is this really something the government needs Google to help them with?" he said.

As for Google's rivals, MSN declined to speak directly to the case but released a statement saying it generally "works closely with law enforcement officials."

Mary Osako, a Yahoo spokeswoman, said the company complied with the subpoena "on a limited basis." And Andrew Weinstein, a spokesman for AOL, said that company gave the Justice Department a generic list of anonymous search terms from a one-day period.

Susan P. Crawford, a professor at the Cardozo School of Law in New York, said she could understand why the companies complied. "There's this real perception that if you're not with us you're against us," she said. "So the major companies will cooperate with enormously burdensome requests just to avoid future vengeance being wreaked on them" by the Justice Department.

Skip to next paragraph
Text: U.S. Motion Against Google In its brief history, Google has made "Don't be evil" an operating principle, even as it has come to endure scrutiny and criticism over its increasing inroads into a variety of businesses beyond Web searches, from advertising to mapping.

And Google and its rivals have been criticized for their business practices in China, where Google and MSN have filtered keywords like "human rights" and "democracy" out of their search-engine results. Last fall, it was revealed that Yahoo had cooperated with authorities seeking the identity of a Chinese e-mail subscriber who had distributed a government warning about protests; he is now serving a 10-year prison term.

While its court filings against the Justice Department subpoena have emphasized the burden of compliance and threat to its trade secrets, Google also pointed to a chilling effect on its customers.

"Google's acceding to the request would suggest that it is willing to reveal information about those who use its services," it said in an October letter to the Justice Department. "This is not a perception Google can accept. And one can envision scenarios where queries alone could reveal identifying information about a specific Google user, which is another outcome that Google cannot accept."

For its part, the Justice Department said the data received from Google's rivals showed that the search query information did not contain "any additional personal identifying information" and that trade secrets would be protected under procedures at the trial court.

"Google thus should have no difficulty in complying in the same way as its competitors have," the government's motion said.

Critics of the effort to subpoena Google say the immediate issue is not pornography or privacy, but whether the government has established its need for the information.

"The government's attitude, apparently, is that it's entitled to information without justification," said Aden Fine, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which has led the fight against the 1998 pornography law. "Like everyone else in litigation, they need to justify their request for information."

Even as the government has yet to put the 1998 law into effect, the pornography industry has faced a legal offensive on other fronts. Congress in recent years has increased the resources and sharpened the laws available to the Justice Department to go after makers of hard-core videos and other content.

At the same time, though, the industry is booming, recording $12.6 billion in revenue in 2005 from distribution of sexually explicit content, and from other forms of entertainment, like strip clubs. A big reason for the growth is technology, with sales from Internet distribution hitting $2.5 billion in 2005, according to testimony given to the Senate on Thursday.

American Web sites that show explicit content get as many as 60 million visitors a day, according to testimony given to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation by Paul Cambria, general counsel for the Adult Freedom Foundation, an organization that represents the interests of the pornography industry.

In fighting the 1998 law, the civil liberties union has argued that whether or not pornography is available on the Internet, the law is unconstitutional because it will limit the distribution of acceptable forms of free speech. Under the law, Web site operators face criminal charges for publishing sexually explicit material unless they have a way of verifying that viewers are over 17.

Whatever the courts ultimately decide on the pornography law at issue, however, Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia Law School, said the Google case pointed to a larger struggle for the identity of the Internet.

"Search engines are at the center of that battle, both here and in other countries," said Professor Wu. "By asserting its power over search engines, using threats of force, the government can directly affect what the Internet experience is. For while Google is fighting the subpoena, it's clear that if they lose, they will comply."

More on Google/ search engine tech in general... as part of the discussion

Hiding in Plain Sight, Google Seeks More Power

From MichaelZimmer.org
Google Joins NSA’s Other Northwest Neighbors
Posted on Wednesday, June 14th, 2006 at 9:21 am

The NY Times reports that Google has built a “computing center as big as two football fields, with twin cooling plants protruding four stories into the sky” on the Oregon-Washington border. Yahoo and Microsoft both have large processing centers about 100 miles to the north. What the Times neglects to mention is their neighbor nestled in between these remote northwest locations, the NSA Echelon Facility at Yakima, Washington. Draw your own conclusion…

Google data centers vs Microsoft infrastructure - a battle of the titans

The Google AI Starts Work on Its Ears

Are we being paranoid?

Google defintively seems to have two sides to them. Denying to cooperate with federal autorities because they are working secretly with other "autorities"?


"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is now confirmed...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm. I had no problem with bookmarking or making clusty.com my homepage in the latest Firefox.

Thanks for the reference to them.....I read their privacy page and they really did promise 'no tracking'.

The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ormond I meant adding it to the Firefox search list at the top right not the homepage. thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 1:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toto wrote:
Ormond I meant adding it to the Firefox search list at the top right not the homepage. thanks

I had the same problem.....
If you are running the latest version if Firefox, try to open Firefox in safe-mode (start menu --> Mozilla Firefox --> Firefox (safe mode), and then reset the toolbar. Backup you bookmarks first, though, just in case. It has to do with a corrupt localstore.rdf file I think. I should help. Alternatively you can install the Clusty toolbar.

For previous versions, check: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile

Hope it helps...


"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Useful Eater

Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 114
Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just a heads up, I use scroogle which uses the Google search engine but it doesn't log cookies, search term records, and the access log is deleted within 2 days.


http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm (Search Engine)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 92

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Glad someone jumped in their with scroogle.

It 'scrapes' google and like was said, deletes access logs so that even Scroogle can't put the pieces back together as to where you've been going.

The functionality of google without the spying or the Google cookie which doesn't expire until the year 2038, according to their TOS.

The link below is interesting.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1556
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is all nothing new. Here's an American Public Broadcasting program about it all from back in 1981.

Computers, Spies & Private Lives

NOVA reports on the potential danger of modern computers that gather "routine" information about our daily lives as we buy things, go to the hospital, or make donations. Computers can know more about us than our closest friends. NOVA examines how much of that personal information is readily shared with other computers.

Original broadcast date: 09/27/81
Topic: technology/computers

I remember the program very well, back then I even sent off the PBS with ten bucks to obtain the transcript from it.

At that time, there was no home internet, no public wireless phones---all we had in our homes were a land-line touch tone telephone. That was it.
The Telecommunications Privacy Act of 1934 protected us from being wiretapped by anyone, unless they'd obtained a good old fashioned Constitutionally compliant search warrant from a judge based on presentation of valid 'probable cause'. ie, there were rules.

Why would privacy have been an issue in an age when people just used one means of wire communication which was could only be tapped by law enforcement with evidence of actual crime, and US intelligence agencies and private Corpoarations had no jurisdiction over American citizens at all?

Because centralization of information on individuals was already well under way. There were social security records, birth records. School, employment, and military service records. Marriage and divorce records, court records, bank records, medical history records, etc, etc, etc.

There use to be laws that were set up so that few if any entities--public or private--were limited with regard to what records on you they were entitled to collect. A system of CHECKS AND BALANCES so fundamental to US Constitutional law.

And all the while a relentless effort of the vultures of Agencies and corporations with armies of lawyers bent on tearing down those established boundaries.

In 1982, I worked in a bank. The ATM card, (Automated Teller Machine) had just arrived. A wonderfully convenient means for an individual to do banking. Everyone wanted one.

But in a night seminar through the American Insitute of Banking, the speakers were an FBI agent and a US Treasury agent, who informed us 'insiders' of the real origin and purpose of the cards.

Back in the early '70's, the NSA assigned Rand Corporation (think tank) and MIT with the task of coming up with a means of tracking the individual movements and money transactions of as many people as they could, in a way that private citizens would voluntarily consent to being tracked.

What Rand and MIT came up with, was the ATM system and it's card. Most people are still unaware that every transaction on an ATM is a paper trail of where you were and what you were doing each time you use the card.

So who needs National ID cards?

Well, the ATM has been tracking movement for over two decades. But that was only the friendly, thin end of the wedge.
The ID cards are the Iron Fist. Once issued, one can be arrested for not having one. And it represents the culmination of what the 1981 PBS program was fearful of. ALL information on a person is now completely centralized, and available not only to government, but to any damn corporation, any time you do any 'transaction'. Even going to a doctor. Where you buy your groceries, etc. WHAT you buy.

Mentioned on the NOVA program was that the French government was already dabbling in 'smart cards'---a State issued ID card with a microchip containing access to a central computer from which all your life history could be downloaded to whatever official asked for your card. The thin edge of the wedge in that case was hospital treatment.

There was an underground organization of resistance to that in France, called "Direct Action". They were known in the late 70's and early 80's for vandalizing physical computers and computer networks in France.
They got press, but Direct Action didn't slow things down at all, and they all went to French Prison.
Well, why do you think ATT helped NSA construct it's mirror central phone network computer snooping facilities underground?
The 70's and 80's also saw a wave of the original 'hackers', who made headlines once in a while cracking into the evil central computers and crashing them. (the most famous was 'Cap'n Crunch', who may have never been apprehended). But eventually all those folks were busted--and the better of the best were recurited into the NSA. Simple enough: faced with 30 years at 'Club Fed', or a six figure job helping secure Big Brother's networks further, I don't think anyone refused.

The only way to resist any of this stuff is disconnection and refusal of any ruse to get us using and reliant upon the data collection system. Unfortunately, not enough people stuck with that when the worst of it was voluntary. With National ID cards, it's 'and offer you don't refuse'.

By the way, US Passports will essentially be a smart card, a National ID starting this August. So any Americans reading this---get your new Passport or renewal before the end of this month, July 2006, before the new chipped cards will be what you get.

The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Something else to consider...

Google seems to be well on it's way to be the perceived "good guy", that "does no harm", yet will have access to any/all information you provide them. So don't worry about these guys... go back to sleep...

Just because they say they are the "good guys", they must be!

Check out these massive information interexchanges... (If you have an account), you can drill down into the company financials, see photo's of the executives, see their income etc... (all public info), yet it shows how it can all be collected from various sources and COMPILED into a NEAT PACKAGE AUTOMATICALLY.

http://www.google.com/calendar/ Wow... with a "new" feature... now you can access your Google calendar from your PHONE (GPS Tracking enabled of course!) All tied to 1 GMail account...

Oh... It just never stops...
Get the search results most relevant to you.

Personalized Search is an improvement to Google search that orders your [our] search results based on what you've searched for in the past. You may not notice much difference at first, but as you build up your search history, your [our] personalized search results will continue to improve.

You can view your Search History on this page at any time by clicking the "Search History" link on the Google homepage.

If you don't want certain searches included in your Search History, simply click the "Pause" button on this page. Until you click "Resume," your searches won't be saved in your Search History or be used to personalize your search results.

(Emphasis added by me...)
This is another one of those... "because we give you the option (control) to turn it off, we are not tracking you..." logicals...

Side note....
Interesting Envelope with the "M"... I can't help but see a Masons apron every time I login...

Maybe I'm just looking into things a little too deep... I should just go back to sleep... why fuss over this if I've got nothing to hide? right? Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another scary (but feakishly awesome Wink ) feature...

Now, this is what is available to the public for free... think about it.

Are they watching? Absolutely.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> State Terror: 9/11, 7/7, CIA Fakes All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.