NSA Intercepted Webcam Images Of Millions Of Yahoo Users

GCHQ in the title, no one gives a shit, who is GCHQ?
NSA in the title, everyone flocks to circlejerk
 
ou're now really trying to get benefit of the doubt that out of two million invaded accounts, that not a single one of them is included erroneously, either intentionally or by mistake?
Click to expand...

It's pretty easy to do, you start by only sampling foreign traffic, you know, Foreign intelligence Service. IP's from other countries.

Tell me guys, why is it that all the articles now seem to be about Britain not the NSA?
Why do that articles have no information that actual shows US Persons are being targeted, instead it's just a few slides that show some previously unmentioned tactic with incomplete records as proof and the door left open for the gullible to make their assumptions?

At what point will you at least consider questioning the story being laid out before you?

There is nothing about this story that shows the NSA has violated any US Citizen's rights.
 
lcpiper said:
It's pretty easy to do, you start by only sampling foreign traffic, you know, Foreign intelligence Service. IP's from other countries.

Tell me guys, why is it that all the articles now seem to be about Britain not the NSA?
Why do that articles have no information that actual shows US Persons are being targeted, instead it's just a few slides that show some previously unmentioned tactic with incomplete records as proof and the door left open for the gullible to make their assumptions?

At what point will you at least consider questioning the story being laid out before you?

There is nothing about this story that shows the NSA has violated any US Citizen's rights.
Click to expand...

I noticed that with the youtube link above.

The anchor says stuff about xbox while they're showing a document which doesn't say anything about the xbox at at all. :wtf:

What we REALLLLLY need is a website which simply lays out all the facts. Have you heard of something like this?
 
What we REALLLLLY need is a website which simply lays out all the facts. Have you heard of something like this?
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I know, Healthcare.Gov right? :D



Oh in not really related news, it's time for my company to recompete for our contract and our sub is leaving our team to compete against us for the prime. It's cool tho, it's competition right.

The funny part is the company that we are going to partner with who will take these guys' place. It's CSC, the same company that did the healthcare.gov website :rolleyes:

I am already working on my resume, it's going to get renewed use soon.
 
Chockomonkey, I wish I had a news source I trusted but I don't think that's how the news game is played anymore.

I listen to two radio stations on the way to work depending on my mood. One plays contemporary rock, a man has to stay in touch. The other is for when I feel like being informed, so I turn on some talk radio here, Rush and Hannity, those guys. I know there biased but at least they say a few things I agree with, they make some of the right noises anyway.

But after over a year of listening to these guys I am pretty sure they are not speaking in order to inform me. They are trying to scare me, to keep me scared. I say this because all the advertising is the kind that capitalizes on scared people;
Buy Gold
Buy Emergency Food
Buy Gold
Buy LifeLock
Buy Silver
Buy a freakin' Bomb Shelter
Buy Gold AND Silver

They don't give a shit about the truth or any of the rest, they just want to sell their fear and their shit.
 
chockomonkey said:
I noticed that with the youtube link above.

The anchor says stuff about xbox while they're showing a document which doesn't say anything about the xbox at at all. :wtf:

What we REALLLLLY need is a website which simply lays out all the facts. Have you heard of something like this?
Click to expand...

The problem with laying everything out for all of the public to see is that is defeats the purpose of a clandestine operation. I don't know if you recall, but in the early/mid 90's there was a big story about $2K hammers and $500 toilet seats and such. What was really happening there wasn't fleecing of the government, it was paying for clandestine projects that people didn't want to have on the books. If you have them on the books, people find out about them defeating the purpose. When these avenues dried up, (again, not defending anything here), the intelligence industry as a whole took a pretty big hit. People could see the writing on the wall and jumped ship to projects with better future prospects for continued employment. Now, for better or worse, there is like a court to preside over these agencies.
 
Time2Kill said:
And people wonder why I don't want a Kinect in my family room.....
Click to expand...

That's a pretty valid point. I often hear of various friends, random people I meet in real life that are gamers and others complaining of the xbox one's always-on Xbox Kinect sensor and their thoughts have having a web-camera effectively in their living room...or rather every living room of many homes that can recognize people, track how many people are in a room, their emotional states, etc was 'creepy' and 'the government might be watching!'.

Back when I first heard, that concept that 'Oh no, this will be used by the governments to invade our home and track us... I thought..haha, yeah right'. Then a story like this comes out and I can't help but think ... uhh. What a strange world when the conspiracy theory nutcases have a better touch on reality than yourself.
 
lcpiper said:
Chockomonkey, I wish I had a news source I trusted but I don't think that's how the news game is played anymore.
Click to expand...

But see that's exactly my point. There isn't one.

Why hasn't one started up?

My guess is that people actually don't want one. They want to be told how to think, and actually doing research on topics and getting the facts is just too much work.

So the outcome of such a site could be two-fold:

1. No one gives a shit, and the site tanks.
2. The site actually condenses the facts in such a way that make it easy to digest, and the power shift away from the current media outlets begins.

It's just odd to me that NO ONE has started up a fact-based news site without bias. Or maybe they have and they don't catch any steam.
 
Back when I first heard, that concept that 'Oh no, this will be used by the governments to invade our home and track us... I thought..haha, yeah right'. Then a story like this comes out and I can't help but think ... uhh. What a strange world when the conspiracy theory nutcases have a better touch on reality than yourself.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. There is a difference though in the way you are perceiving this and the reality. You seem to have this idea like they snoop and look for things that aren't right, like they might catch you being a bad boy. Cops might do something like that, but not Intelligence people, that's just not how they do business.

Intelligence people are focused on threats and there are more then enough threats out there to keep them busy without having to snoop around to find more. For the most part they know who these threats are. As an example, they know who the last Commander of the Russian 5th Shock Army was, they have investigated all the likely replacements, and are patiently waiting on who the next one will actually be. You see what I mean, they already know who they are now, who they are likely to be soon, and they already have their ways of keeping up with what they are doing each day. Now if one of these guys does some videoconferencing over yahoo then I suppose this is a way they will find out when and who with, and maybe what about, but it's because they have a known target that they are actively watching, not because they stumbled across his yahoo Account by random searches. They know him and it's a deliberate exploit of any service he uses that they are able to poke their way into. And like I said, they have more then enough bad guys to watch in the world, they don't need to randomly poke around looking for new ones, they will find most of them by watching the ones they already know about.
 
chockomonkey said:
But see that's exactly my point. There isn't one.

Why hasn't one started up?

My guess is that people actually don't want one. They want to be told how to think, and actually doing research on topics and getting the facts is just too much work.

So the outcome of such a site could be two-fold:

1. No one gives a shit, and the site tanks.
2. The site actually condenses the facts in such a way that make it easy to digest, and the power shift away from the current media outlets begins.

It's just odd to me that NO ONE has started up a fact-based news site without bias. Or maybe they have and they don't catch any steam.
Click to expand...

The real trick is you have to read past the bias to the news. Like was already stated, all news nowadays is geared for consumption akin to entertainment.

I don't think a completely un-biased news website or company is possible because as human beings we are all inherently biased. Even with the best of intentions, stories are always written on some bias. It's inevitable and human, so as consumers of news we have to use our own biases to see the story's bias... it's all just a futile exercise really.

I choose to get my information (not news) from as many sources as possible then form my own opinion (again with my own preconceived biases... ;) )

The only way to unbias all the news would be to have all the humanity taken out of news coverage, which won't be done until the machines take over.
 
ut see that's exactly my point. There isn't one.
Click to expand...

Riight, no you are right, but it's because that isn't what sells. See my example above. Fear sells some things but no one ever sold a bomb shelter with feel good broadcasting.

Another example, Jan Brewer, she just vetoed that bill that people said would allow businesses to discriminate against gays. Now the bill didn't actually say that, it's just that the bill supported religious protection and we all know religion is the great enemy of but pirates the world over, therefor, this bill must be anti-gay.

Regardless, Jan Brewer vetoed it and as far as the news is concerned, it's already forgotten because there is no reason left to fear it. It can't sell anything anymore so it's forgotten. But we know that the AZ Senate could, however unlikely, over ride Her veto.
 
The only way to unbias all the news would be to have all the humanity taken out of news coverage, which won't be done until the machines take over.
Click to expand...

Not really, I used to write totally unbiased reports for a living. They were Intelligence Reports and they were completely without bias because they were only the facts and nothing but the facts, no commentary, no supposition, no back ground. We saw this guy here or that guys was talking on the radio to this guy and said "xxx xxx xx". Like our man Friday, "The facts Maam, just the facts."

Now that is reporting, then there comes analysis and that is different, it's like the old days in the media, you had reporting and you had commentary and they were different and not run concurrently. You got one or the other, not both mixed together. Maybe we don't have time for that today, maybe my attention span is no longer good enough for that. Whatever, the end result is, I don't trust these news media people at all, I put them in the same boat as the politicians themselves cause I figure that is who really pays their salary.
 
lcpiper said:
It's pretty easy to do, you start by only sampling foreign traffic, you know, Foreign intelligence Service. IP's from other countries.

Tell me guys, why is it that all the articles now seem to be about Britain not the NSA?
Why do that articles have no information that actual shows US Persons are being targeted, instead it's just a few slides that show some previously unmentioned tactic with incomplete records as proof and the door left open for the gullible to make their assumptions?

At what point will you at least consider questioning the story being laid out before you?

There is nothing about this story that shows the NSA has violated any US Citizen's rights.
Click to expand...

Because they're all the same? The "abc's" change but, that's about it.

Documents leaked by Snowden in 2013 revealed that the FVEY have been intentionally spying on one another's citizens and sharing the collected information with each other in order to circumvent restrictive domestic regulations on spying.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
 
mavrocket said:
I don't think a completely un-biased news website or company is possible because as human beings we are all inherently biased. Even with the best of intentions, stories are always written on some bias. It's inevitable and human, so as consumers of news we have to use our own biases to see the story's bias... it's all just a futile exercise really.
Click to expand...

Yeap. I just did some searching, and there are quite a few news outlets which tout themselves as 'unbiased' or 'fact-driven'. The problem with these still is that you have a whole article written by one person, with very few references or facts given. It's basically the same exact shit you'd find anywhere else except they are calling it a different name.


lcpiper said:
Riight, no you are right, but it's because that isn't what sells. See my example above. Fear sells some things but no one ever sold a bomb shelter with feel good broadcasting.

Another example, Jan Brewer, she just vetoed that bill that people said would allow businesses to discriminate against gays. Now the bill didn't actually say that, it's just that the bill supported religious protection and we all know religion is the great enemy of but pirates the world over, therefor, this bill must be anti-gay.

Regardless, Jan Brewer vetoed it and as far as the news is concerned, it's already forgotten because there is no reason left to fear it. It can't sell anything anymore so it's forgotten. But we know that the AZ Senate could, however unlikely, over ride Her veto.
Click to expand...

Yea, it really makes me sad. If there was a real news site, it'd probably tank.
 
It should be:

<Topic of Discussion>

Here's what this person said: "..." <link>

Here's the opposing side's views on this: "..." <link>

Here's the spin CNN put on it: "..." <link>

Here's the spin Fox put on it: "..." <link>

etc

Okay, time to stop dreaming and get back to work!
 
Hmm, the media vs government intelligence agencies, sad to see such a fight. I know they both have my best interests at heart :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top