The fight for internet privacy has focused much of its attention on government surveillance, but mass data collection is done by private companies as well—and one such firm has "centralized and weaponized" all that information for its customers, Bloomberg reports on Friday.
In fact, it has already built a profile on "every American adult," Bloombergwrites.
Capitalism is what's wrong with everything these days; the greed and disregard for planetary lifeforms know no bounds. It will collapse some day guaranteed, when's the question these days. The collapse could be have been avoided but I'm afraid it's now too late because our rulers are just too greedy. Sorry!
We just have to watch for the changes in the political environment because they could easily find the dissenters if they wish to. I'm old and don't care so much, after all I survived 37 years of the cold war knowing some idiot could end everything under the right circumstances. The youth though need to watch their backs and believe little that the govt says.
Is this not a truncated version of the article from Friday morning? I could have read more which delved into who the big playas are; one of which shocked me. When I checked back later in the evening, it ended as it does now......
Television is part of the main stream media (msm). The msm has been the pump which has marinated the population of this country for generations with the propaganda designed to 'engineer' and 'manufacture' the consent of the populous. Liberal democracies lack the 'luxury' of totalitarian states where the use of force makes it easier to get the populations 'consent'. That's why propaganda has developed to the degree it has in the 'free' countries.
In fact prior to WWll, propaganda was considered a necessity, an obligation to use on the population. The excuse was that most people weren't capable of governing themselves. This judgment came from the ruling classes who naturally deemed themselves as being quite capable of governing the masses. Such behavior is antithetical to democracy, to say the least. Their intent was to maintain the class structure that hierarchical societies use to benefit the elite, the pampered privileged while exploiting the rest of the population. Thus their real fear was that people 'could' and 'would' govern themselves and create the laws of the land that served that purpose. It was only the 'bad name' that propaganda received due to its association with the Nazis that the term 'propaganda' had to go underground. Propaganda is everywhere, but it's not officially called that anymore.
The WWll generation and just beyond, what are generally called the Baby Boomers, because of the spike in the population growth it represented, received the brunt of that propaganda. I started primary school in 1951 so I can speak about this empirically. So much of it is tied to a Cold War motif. By the end of the 1980s and into the 1990s the Cold War threat type propaganda changed, morphing into the Terrorist threat propaganda. (Actually the 'war on terrorism' started when Reagan came into office in the early 1980's and was re-introduced by the G.W Bush administration post 9-11). The younger generations are the first to be free of a contiguous half century of the old school Cold War indoctrination. The old fish hooks that snared people for half a century don't work anymore. But propaganda changes with the times.
Yet something critically important has occurred with the growing use of information technology (IT). And that is the younger generations are getting their information from IT sources and not the msm, which is the bastion of propaganda dissemination. This is virtually a revolution in itself. Of course, anyone can do that. But the Baby Boomer generations grew up with the msm, including tv. The result of this has been reflected in the 2016 presidential election cycle and particularly with the Bernie Sanders 'movement'. And this use of IT sources for acquiring information is a demographic condition that is evolving on its own. Without a conscious effort to do so. This means the present political revolution/evolution will continue to grow, and by quite natural circumstances. People like Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein and others know this. They realize that they are not shouting into the wind. The precursors for a movement, for change are there. And it merely takes opening one's eyes to see that.
First thing. Please detail to at least some degree what you're writing about. Making over simplifying phrases like “...the WWII generation sure did sell us up the river.” or “I've always thought that the prior two generations were just shitting on everyone due to capitalism, but it's cause they don't know better.” Believe me it carries all the credibility of yelling 'kill the ump'. Remember that for every perpetrator, no matter what 'generation', there are countless victims. Generalizing about an entire generation is not rational.
Capitalism is but one of the tools used throughout human history for the purpose of exploiting populations worldwide. Interesting to note that capitalism and propaganda have a long paralleled history. Interesting but not surprising.
I myself am an atheist. And while I find most religions to be a form of cult behavior, an organization just for atheists has all the characteristics of being a cult itself. Also being an atheist is not an imprimatur on being rational for anything else. Capacities in one domain don't necessarily transfer to another domain. Take the case of William Shockley, a physicist and one of the inventors of the transistor. He was also a card carrying eugenicist. But does anyone really need examples for something that's straight forward common sense?
As for the Jill Stein anti-vax 'controversy'. I've looked at various websites. Here's some of them:
Let me be frank. Every single one is a hack job. These are about as obvious establishment controlled sources as one can find. Fox News has nothing on them for pure unadulterated bias. These sites may have various opinions on 'safe' topics but on the serious issues they line up like magnets. And when you look at some of the commentaries on these sites it just strengthens my remarks that much more. There's almost zero content about the subject matter. But a tsunami of pejoratives and ad hominem barroom comments. If they tried that on the CD commentary section they would be chewed up. It's influence talking. Stein has stated what is well known and obvious. That regulatory agencies in this country are much like the rest of our government. The best results money and influence can buy. What were you reading that you couldn't see that? Money and influence have a long, long reach. No need to 'break your heart' over obvious hack propaganda. The attacks on Stein are a scaled down version of what whistleblowers are subjected to. Not the land of the free that we white folks were taught as kids. If you're not white you probably found out the truth much sooner.Yet there's no universal law that says it can't be changed.
The only reason that such invasions of our privacy are not blatantly unconstitutional is that the founders couldn't possibly have foreseen what "papers" in the 21st century would involve. The constitution gives us "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures...".
The government needs a warrant to invade our privacy, but apparently protecting our privacy from corporate snooping is less important than protecting the right of these corporations to make money.
Perhaps several new constitutional amendments: revisit the ERA, an amendment specifying freedom of and FROM religion, one declaring the NON-person hood of corporations and any other organization, one requiring the rewrite of corporate charters in every state such that maximizing share holder profit is not the charters primary focus, one to ensure the public funding ONLY of all elections. If these fixes don't work then we may need an entirely new constitutional convention.
I disagree. Capitalism is always present, even in Communist lands via a black market. What we have right now is not Capitalism as defined by Adam Smith (who established the foundation of our Capitalism system) since it has no meaningful competition at all, just Fortune-500 racketeering and cronyism. Smith's model was based on competition and a foundation of Agriculture, which we have ditched for fraudulent ponzi schemes and con-jobs with no-bid contracts turning the only employment growth coming from destructive endeavors like policing, jailing and War via sub-contractors crawling over every square inch of the Earth.
Communism is even worse, since all trust and power is put in the hands of the nanny-state, and we are actually very close to that now: I call it Corporate Communism: the belief that all power and wealth should reside with Wall Street CEO's of Ogilopilies installed by dynasty families.
A nasty GMO if there ever was one.
The only answer? Shut the whole thing down and start over. Return to our roots, our 1776 Articles of Confederation before we had an Executive Branch or even a Federal Government. We didn't always have a President in this country. It was a better way. The founding fathers, the Anti-Federalists, who demanded and got us a Bill of Rights, knew the dangers of having so many layers of government around and tried to warn us but we didn't listen.
Now we live in a hybrid corporate/state version of the KGB.
How's this Big Federal government working out for us?
Big Government tyrants are the ones who fund all this spying and covert coercion. Since totalitarian government always serves the One Percent, the Libertarian model is a much better way, imho. Relocate power back to the local level and 99 percent of our problems will go away. Reinstate the rights of the individual and the Roman Police State will evaporate, as it will do anyway if history is any guide.
I agree with you completely. Like many Americans, I was taught to shoot a gun as a small boy and trusted with the use of a deadly firearm years before being allowed to drive anything. Rural neighbors did the same, and left them laying around unlock in closets. That's how we hillbillies lived back then, and we laughed at city folks who were afraid of guns, as cars were much more dangerous as the funerals we went to attested.
Being armed with the same firearms as Redcoats abused us with, is an American tradition, and a wise one. I don't trust the government to be the only ones armed. And all of the mass shootings I know of, the government was RIGHT THERE conducting "a terrorism drill" or the FBI was supplying ideas and ordinance to the shooter/bomber.
I believe these events are a method to disarm the 330 million Americans allowed to own guns. Americans must defend the entire Bill of Rights, not just the Amendments they think are relevant today. The founder fathers were smart guys who didn't trust Kings or Presidents or standing armies, and for good reason.
Police come in with their hats in their hands when they see the NRA sticker in the window. Same with thieves. But these weapons are a defensive measure of last resort that can never be used for offense.
This actually is not new. It has been going on for something like 20 years and was pretty amply documented in Snowden's original releases.
A few moments' consideration should reveal that very nearly any data that the government holds is available to their colleagues, who work and operate with similar back doors in software, and to whom much of the work is hired out, particularly work that might eventually involve scandal.