UK slipping further into Orwellian totalitarian destopic big brother nightmare

If you are not alarmed and outraged by the recent news coming out of the UK in it's crack down on civil liberties then you need your head checked. Just this week the UK Government has announced it will back a Big Brother approach to pulling a 'sickie' at work:

Lie detectors could soon be used to deter workers from pulling sickies, after trials of the technology were backed by the government last week.The controversial Voice Risk Analysis (VRA) system, which can tell when a person is lying on the phone about being too ill to work, has already been trialed successfully in a number of pilot projects within the benefits system.

That certainly takes the fun out of the sick note phone call. I suppose the simple solution is to email or text message your duvet day notifications.

There are also fears of 'Orwellian dystopia' as councils, police and fire chiefs agree to share sensitive private information:

A campaign group today expressed fears of an "Orwellian dystopia" after councils, police and fire chiefs signed the first information-sharing agreement of its kind in the UK. The Dorset Over-Arching Information Sharing Protocol allows data to be passed faster and easier between the county's public sector bodies including the police, fire service, education chiefs, social workers and housing staff.

It is the first generic agreement of its kind in the country and was signed by bosses from six district and borough councils, the two unitary authorities of Bournemouth and Poole, Dorset County Council, Dorset Police and Dorset Fire and Rescue Service on May 8.

If that isn't enough for you Police in London are now using Airport-style scanners on London streets in their efforts to curb nife crime:

A surge in violent knife crimes has prompted London police to introduce a new program that will rely on mobile, airport-style scanners and hand-held metal detectors for use against people suspected of carrying concealed weapons.

A similar scheme was introduced in the northern city of Liverpool last year.The new program, called Blunt 2, started this week in one borough and should be in place in all 32 London boroughs within the next few months, said a Metropolitan Police spokesman, who asked not to be identified in line with police rules.

Are these developments going to make you feel safer?

Powered by ScribeFire.

London Olympics terror threat used to vastly increase surveillance powers

The threat of terrorism at the 2012 London Olympics is being hyped up in order to justify a vast increase in the surveillance powers of the British state.

According to a memo leaked to the Daily Telegraph, Home Office officials are planning to expand the police DNA database to identify suspects and use greater powers to track individuals through advanced closed circuit television (CCTV) technology and the Oyster card used by millions of people on London’s bus and rail network.

The memo discusses different means the government could use to persuade the British public to accept these measures. It asks, “To what extent should the expectation of liberty be eroded by legitimate intrusions in the interests of security of the wider public?” and concludes, “Increasing [public] support could be possible through the piloting of certain approaches in high-profile ways such as the London Olympics.”[...]

Powered by ScribeFire.

"Odd" news site slaps back at lawsuit

By Egan Orion: Monday, 05 May 2008, 3:41 AM - The inquirer

IN OUR QUEST for IT news to interest you, our readers, we often trawl some of the more obscure nooks and crannies of the web, so you don't have to do so.

One of the websites we visit because it's a veritable magnet for odd technology news is Signs of the Times, so we couldn't help but notice when it was sued for Internet defamation. The INQUIRER takes a rather keen interest when other news sites are sued for libel, for reasons that might be obvious to our readers.

In February, Eric Pepin of Beaverton, Oregon and his company, Higher Balance Institute, filed an Internet defamation lawsuit against the California non-profit organisation Quantum Future Group, which operates the Signs of the Times news and analysis website, and Laura Knight-Jadczyk, who resides in France and is the chief webmistress of Signs of the Times.
Pepin's complaint (pdf) alleged that comments that appeared on the Signs of the Times reader forum were libelous, and it sought damages of $4.47 million.

Signs of the Times has only a relatively small readership, but it's a loyal group. When the website was sued it appealed for donations to cover its legal defence costs. Within just a few weeks its readers donated £65,000 (about $128,000).
On Saturday, Signs of the Times announced through its attorneys that on April 25 it filed motions challenging Pepin's lawsuit in US District Court in Portland, Oregon. In a statement, defendant Quantum Future Group (QFG) said it asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit and further asked to recover its attorneys fees.

In its legal briefs, QFG cited Oregon's anti-SLAPP ("Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation") statute to claim that its statements about New-Age "guru" Pepin and Higher Balance Institute (HBI) are constitutionally protected speech.
Under the anti-SLAPP law, QFG argues, if the plaintiffs cannot show that they will probably prevail on the merits, the lawsuit must be dismissed before QFG and other defendants have to incur high attorneys fees to defend themselves.

QFG contends that Pepin and HBI can't show they will probably prevail on the merits because, "Without exception, the statements are all constitutionally protected expressions of opinion rather than verifiable assertions of fact."

Since the statements to which Pepin and HBI object are opinions, QFG argues, "HBI cannot meet its burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the statements are false, let alone that Defendants knew that they were false or had serious doubts as to their truth."
Signs of the Times reader forum comments that Pepin and HBI alleged were defamatory included some posts questioning Pepin's meditative techniques and commenting on Pepin's 2007 trial on multiple alleged sexual offences involving his behaviour with a 17-year old follower.
"These are exactly the sort of statements that the First Amendment and recent statutes protect as free speech," said QFG attorney Stephen Kaus. "People are entitled to believe in gurus such as Pepin and buy their books and courses for hundreds of dollars or more, but people are also entitled to point out their view that the techniques of telepathy and development of a sixth eye promoted by Pepin are nonsense."

QFG maintains that the forum comments were opinions in reaction to matters of fact reported by mainstream news sources, including The Oregonian, a daily newspaper published in Portland, Oregon, and the Associated Press, and are therefore protected by both the US Constitution and the Oregon Constitution.

An article in The Oregonian reported on Pepin's 2007 court trial on charges of sexual misconduct with a minor. Pepin was acquitted because the judge did not believe that the state's allegations had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Washington County Circuit Court Judge Steven L. Price reportedly said it was "'probable that the conduct alleged in all counts occurred,' but [that] he wasn't convinced beyond a reasonable doubt." According to The Oregonian, Judge Price "called the leader of a metaphysical Internet sales company manipulative and controlling and his testimony unbelievable, even as he acquitted him... of charges that he had sex with an underage boy."
Signs of the Times readers pointed out on its forum that being found "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" is not the same thing as being found " innocent of all charges."

QFG's motion also argues that, under the US Communications Decency Act of 1996, Signs of the Times, as the operator of an Internet forum, is not liable for third-party comments posted on its website. It also questions the Oregon based federal court's jurisdiction over QFG, a California non-profit organisation with its primary place of business in France.

QFG attorney Walter Hansell stated in an earlier press release, "HBI's lawsuit is a frontal assault on free speech, and on the free global flow of information and opinion on the Internet. It is a blunt force attack on the discussion of sincere opinions among people sharing common interests."
Following QFG's April 25th motions filing, Hansell said, "The intent of this suit by HBI is to stifle free speech, but luckily the anti-SLAPP statute allows us to nip the matter in the bud before the cost is out of hand."

Hopefully the court will order Pepin to pay the attorneys fees incurred by QFG and Signs of the Times to defend themselves as well.
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/05/04/odd-news-site-slaps-back

Powered by ScribeFire.

Wash your hands - the future's in your hands

Powered by ScribeFire.

Internet Free Speech Under Threat! Eric Pepin - Higher Balance Institute Sue SOTT for 4.47 Million Over SOTT Forum Comments!

Internet Free Speech Under Threat! Eric Pepin - Higher Balance Institute Sue SOTT for 4.47 Million Over SOTT Forum Comments!

Yesterday, as I was working on finishing up the next installment of
the Comet Series of Articles, FedEx delivered a packet of mail from our
corporate registered agent in the U.S. It was "Complaint and Demand for
Jury Trial" filed in the State of Oregon by Eric Pepin's Higher Balance
Institute, LLC. The reason? A discussion on the SOTT Forum that begins HERE.

Well, that was entertaining enough when you think about the fact
that the discussion that he objects to was centered on several
newspaper articles that describe his close calls with the legal system
in Oregon over charges of sex abuse.

The legal document I received is 10 pages long so I'm just going to
summarize it here. If you want to read the whole thing (it's hilarious
beyond belief!) go HERE for the pdf.

Human ID Chips Get Under My Skin

The technology is available, but the potential for misuse is almost limitless. Our columnist takes you through the dangers of this futuristic process
Editor's note: This is the second in a series of perspectives on implantable microchips. The first appeared on Jan. 30.

While it's easy to reject the notion of placing little ID chips inside humans as an ominous Orwellian invasion of individual rights, I suspect it's inevitable that in my lifetime we will all have some kind of computerized implants. My problem is not with the technology, known as chipping, or with the companies that sell it. My concern stems from my lack of trust in institutions and lack of belief that the technology will be forever restricted to beneficial, socially acceptable uses.

Chipping involves implanting a transponder chip below the skin for identification purposes. VeriChip (CHIP), the one company that has gained FDA clearance to perform this procedure, has emerged as the process's leading advocate. The implant procedure itself is simple and mostly painless, accomplished in a doctor's office in a matter of seconds.

Generally speaking, the only data stored on the chip is a 16-digit ID number that cross-references to a record in VeriChip's database. Nevertheless the chip raises a number of troubling concerns:
Health. Before diving into privacy and security concerns, it is worth noting recent reports indicate implanted chips may have caused tumors in small lab animals, and therefore may be equally dangerous for humans. I am not qualified to express an opinion on the subject other than to note the FDA has approved the device as safe. Evidence to the contrary will probably take years to accumulate, and at that point, a debate would be useless to those already afflicted.

Privacy. Advocates of chipping often downplay privacy and security worries by stressing the chips merely contain a number rather than any actual personal information. However, that may be dangerous enough. A centralized numeric database storing information on a significant number of Americans begins to look a lot like a national ID card. But unlike an ID card safely stowed in a wallet, the numbers on these chips can potentially be read wirelessly by someone standing near you with an inexpensive handheld reader. Legislative attempts to establish a national ID, such as the REAL ID Act, have proven to be highly controversial. It would be a shame to have human chipping effectively short-circuit that debate and create a de facto national identification system.

Hacking and Misuse. I trust VeriChip, I guess. At least I have no reason not to trust them. But what about someone hacking into their databases? (Please don't tell me their security is absolutely foolproof - thanks to all the credit-card system breaches, we all know better.) All it would take is a careless employee to accidentally expose everyone's numbers to an ill-intentioned hacker. Since you can't reprogram chips already implanted, would we all need to have them physically swapped out whenever VeriChip's database was compromised? I also suspect it wouldn't be too hard to execute "man-in-the-middle" attacks that snag an individual's chip number for malicious use.

Consent. The leading candidates proposed for the initial rounds of chipping are people who are either unwilling or unable to give informed consent. While there have been a few actual instances of mandatory chipping - the Attorney General of Mexico forced his staff to get implants to gain access to a sensitive document room - most uses remain theoretical. For example, VeriChip has advocated chipping Alzheimer's patients as a way to help families find those sufferers who get lost.

Scott Silverman, VeriChip's chairman, has proposed mandatory chipping of guest workers and immigrants. A hospital in Ontario plans to implant the chips in babies, and the U.S. Army is mulling a requirement for enlisted personnel.

The elderly, immigrants, babies, low-ranking soldiers...these are not exactly the most powerful segments of U.S. society. Compare this to new technologies such as laser eye surgery and non-invasive heart procedures, where the wealthy and powerful typically benefit well before the lower rungs of the social ladder. I am inherently distrustful of technologies that start deployment at the bottom of the power pyramid.

Unintended Consequences. Once implanted, these chips, and the associated network of chip readers deployed to work with them, will be around for a long time. Let's give VeriChip, participating hospitals, and government agencies the benefit of the doubt about being ethical and well-intentioned organizations. But who knows which agencies might be given access to the database down the road as part of new policy initiatives. Congressmen are notorious for passing legislation requiring the government to exploit existing databases for new endeavors, such as targeting deadbeat dads or delinquent student loan holders through the IRS tax refund system.

I can think of countless initiatives that could be launched to make use of a sufficiently large group of chipped people: a universal college student ID system; chip readers in cars that would block drivers with unpaid parking tickets from using their vehicles; tracking people with a history of emotional disturbances; court-ordered chipping tied to domestic restraining orders; government monitoring of people found to have a high-risk profile through computer profiling; outfitting firearms with a radio-frequency identification (RFID) reader and requiring gun owners to be chipped to fire their weapon (like existing thumbprint locks).

Once a sufficient number of humans have had chips implanted, for whatever the reason, all bets on containing the technology are off. A responsible debate on human chipping would consider the extreme scenario - widespread mandatory implants - and not just focus on the initial "socially acceptable" proposals that target specific populations such as Alzheimer's patients, children, or convicts on work release programs.

Reduced Expectations. Although there is no guarantee of privacy written explicitly into the Constitution, a century of court rulings has carved out some tenuous protections for Americans, most of which are based on the concept of "expectation of privacy." A widely deployed system of human ID chips might very well erode that expectation, weakening everyone's shield against privacy intrusions.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2008/tc20080211_165324.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Killing Game: How the US Army uses video games to train killer American children

For young men, first-person shooters are the hottest computer games around. That's why the Army spent $10 million developing its own. But there's a catch. Big Brother gets to watch you play.

©Larry Dalton

Clan warfare: LANatomas guns down members of a Seattle clan during a round of league play. Carson Loane, foreground, patrols the left flank while clan leader Jeff Muramoto, center, calls out strategies to his squad.

For gamers, the attraction of online play is obvious. In the cyberworld, you're not hunting down slow computer-generated Nazis. You're matching wits with real humans (sometimes real Germans), which somehow makes a kill all the more satisfying.

Moreover, computer graphics and sound have evolved to the point that it is easy to think you're in a tangible world. Your immediate surroundings vanish. Crickets chirp, bushes rustle, bullets whiz by your head and shower you with chips of concrete. Shell casings clatter to the floor. Mortars crump in the distance, and grenades send up gouts of rock and dirt. It's a loud, bloody, violent and altogether alarming world. Yet it is oddly exhilarating.

"I have to laugh when someone says, 'Oh, the people playing these games know it's not real,' " said Dr. Peter Vorberer, a clinical psychologist and head of the University of Southern California's computer game research group. "Of course they think it's real! That's why people play them for hours and hours. They're designed to make you believe it's real. Games are probably the purest example yet of the Internet melding with reality."

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/148541-The-Killing-Game-How-the-US-Army-uses-video-games-to-train-killer-American-children

Powered by ScribeFire.