Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Your Rights Online

EU Funding "Orwellian" Artificial Intelligence Snooping System 181

Posted by timothy
from the why-does-this-bother-you? dept.
leonbenjamin writes "Britain's Telegraph reports on a five-year research programme, called Project Indect, which aims to develop computer programmes which act as 'agents' to monitor and process information from web sites, discussion forums, file servers, peer-to-peer networks and even individual computers. Its main objectives include the 'automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence.' Shami Chakrabarti, head of the UK's Liberty human-rights NGO, said: 'Profiling whole populations instead of monitoring individual suspects is a sinister step in any society. ... It's dangerous enough at national level, but on a Europe-wide scale the idea becomes positively chilling.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Funding "Orwellian" Artificial Intelligence Snooping System

Comments Filter:
  • by fataugie (89032) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:01PM (#29505947) Homepage

    CARNIVORE anyone?

    • by jgtg32a (1173373) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:10PM (#29506053)
      CARNIVORE turned out to be a bit underwhelming once details of what it actually was came out
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore_(software) [wikipedia.org]
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by megamerican (1073936)
    • I've been trying to tell you this for years, and NOW you care? (see sig)

      You have to remember that this is the government we're talking about here. There's so much infighting and beaurocracy that by the time they find out what's going to happen, CNN is already showing the footage on a 24/7 loop.

    • by RobotRunAmok (595286) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:55PM (#29506633)

      ...because you know their State Police will have really cool uniforms. They'll be, like, all shiny medals and epaulets and swagger sticks and motorcycle sidecars and they'll put their surveillance cams in hovering dirigibles and what not, all trim ex-military guys. If I'm going to be cracked across the back of the neck for not showing my papers, I want to be cracked by a guy with some style. Obama goons will be all business casual, in new, pressed, grandma jeans and open-collar shirts and sneakers, driving around in non-descript cars, all mouth-breathing ex-IRS guys.

      Yup, it's European Fascism for me, for sure.

      • by Chris Burke (6130)

        Well if you like style in your fascism -- and your sense of style is synonymous with "blindingly gaudy" -- then you need look no further than our neighbor to the south.

        Brown Shirts? Black Shirts? Bah! GOLD [wikipedia.org] Shirts is where it's at!

        Mexican Fascism -- because dystopia doesn't have to look dark and depressing.

      • by kalirion (728907)

        They'll be, like, all shiny medals and epaulets and swagger sticks

        Can we shorten the latter to "swasticks".

  • Next up: thought police.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Icegryphon (715550)
      Easy way to stop them, Just think about 2 girls 1 cup or BME pain olympics.
      That would make anyone cringe unless you are the scum of the world.
      Expecting a -1 very soon.
      • by ultranova (717540)

        Easy way to stop them, Just think about 2 girls 1 cup or BME pain olympics. That would make anyone cringe unless you are the scum of the world.

        Therefore, anyone who'd voluntarily think of them must be the scum of the world and very likely deserving of arrest.

    • If there's one thing I've learned from the media over the last seven or eight years, it's that Europeans are enlightened, scientific, wine-enjoying lovers of freedom compared to us dumb hicks in the states. They would never do something like this. - AJ
    • by AmiMoJo (196126)

      We have those already. There is a crime of "inciting racial hatred" here in the UK. Essentially, if you say something and someone decides you might "incite" someone to hate a person based on race, you can be arrested and prosecuted.

  • by Locke2005 (849178) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:06PM (#29505999)
    A lot of the comments on here seem to come from an entity that has not yet achieved true sentience...
  • Abnormal behavior (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Romancer (19668) <`moc.roodshtaed' `ta' `recnamor'> on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:06PM (#29506009) Journal

    "Abnormal behavior"... You know, like disagreeing with the government about what the definition of that may be.

    • Re:Abnormal behavior (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Jurily (900488) <jurily@gm a i l.com> on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:24PM (#29506253)

      "Abnormal behavior"... You know, like disagreeing with the government about what the definition of that may be.

      Not to mention this is the EU we're talking about: a place with 23 different official languages. With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal".

      Non-EU example: In the Netherlands, the Gay Pride is a cultural event. In Serbia, protesters beat the shit out of them. In Moscow, the police did. Which one of these is normal, and to whom?

      • because no one is unhappy enough with Government to protest it.

        Face it, those in power are loathe to give it up or admit abuse, it is far easier through the use of courts and the press to label those who do disagree as having mental issues, whether it is anger or the expected and currently in vogue "racism".

        I thought eight years under Bush were bad with fear mongering, but the new gang has improved on it. The sad part is, both sides of the Atlantic seem adept at adapting the very worse privacy rights viola

        • The US is getting Britain's camera system and you get our Intellectual rights system... who came up with this new one?

          Pick something the US and the Brits can agree on... Blame the French.

        • Teabaggers are abnormal: Any guy who would slap another guy with his balls is strange, and in violation of Rule #1: "Protect your nuts."
      • Your example is flawed.

        The Netherlands clearly illustrates what is *normal* for EU countries. Or did you forget that the Netherlands *is* a member of the EU?

        Serbia and Russia are both Slavic non-EU countries with a bit of anti-gay attitudes in general.

        • by Jurily (900488)

          The Netherlands clearly illustrates what is *normal* for EU countries.

          Is Hungary [bbc.co.uk] EU enough for you? Also note that there is a significant difference between being anti-gay and being anti-parade. Most people I know don't care one bit what hole you want to shove it in, but they get pissed when you force them to think about it and block main roads in a city with heavy traffic problems.

          Different countries have different cultures, and that's not a bad thing. You just need to stop judging everyone on Earth based on your society.

          • Juri, I'm not American, I'm from Norway.

            Heck, I have Russian ancestors and I've have been back to St. Petersburg to explore them. I have also been to Serbia and Hungary. In fact I have traveled all of Europe and parts of Asia.

            Magyarorszag is a bad example. The far right movement you linked to is extremist, you have your own in Russia too. The people of Hungary are very liberal compared with large groups of Russians and Serbs. I know people from both cultures. I have friends in Hungary too, not just in Buda

            • Re:Absurd Reasoning (Score:4, Interesting)

              by Jurily (900488) <jurily@gm a i l.com> on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @09:30PM (#29510891)

              And are you serious? People don't get that upset about traffic problems!

              You clearly never lived in Budapest.

              And who is forcing them to watch it? Your claims are absurd! I don't want to see gay people dance, and I haven't because I DON'T go to the parade in Oslo!

              You're still judging out of context. For you, it's gay people dancing, and if you don't go, you don't really need to acknowledge their existence. Here, it instantly became a political event, with pressure from the liberals to push it through and threats from the far-right. It was all over the news for four days straight. You went to work and people talked about it. You went to the pub and people talked about it. There was literally no way you could avoid the topic without retreating from society until the hype is over.

              It's also a question of external cultural influence. Ever heard the phrase "Hungarians celebrate crying"? There are no Hungarian holidays where we dance around on the street. We have no reason for it: from 1526 to 1989 our country has been either torn apart or under occupation. Our national holidays are about failed revolutions, failed fights for our freedom, and the execution of our leaders. Any public celebration that involves dancing around is basically a slap in the face to those of us who value our cultural identity.

              I don't expect you to understand it, but please, try to look at the context before jumping to conclusions.

      • With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal"

        Or, everything will be, and tagged for later review.

      • by AmiMoJo (196126)

        Answer: All three.

        It's not about spotting people about to commit a crime, it's about knowing what everyone is doing all the time. The police like to know when people are holding any kind of event, and in fact you are already supposed to inform the police of any planned protests and get approval for them.

      • by kalirion (728907)

        Not to mention this is the EU we're talking about: a place with 23 different official languages. With this kind of diversity, there's probably nothing that can be classified as "abnormal".

        Nothing ... or everything?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by mcgrew (92797) *

      Its main objectives include the 'automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence.

      Shit, if it ever runs across any of my slashdot journals I'll be in deep trouble. I guess I'd better not visit Britain!

  • by foobsr (693224) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:08PM (#29506035) Homepage Journal
    ... to be integrated in the infrastructure needed when resources become scarce indeed and the gap between the 'haves' and 'have-nots' needs very careful attention to ensure that 'violence' does not spill over in the 'wrong' direction.

    CC.
    • by b4upoo (166390)

      Violence may very well be on the increase as technology eliminates more and more jobs. Add to that the flooding of coastal areas that will create all kinds of economic havoc as well as too much pressure from rising world populations and we may be in for a hell trip.

  • All your base... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NCamero (35481) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:09PM (#29506039) Homepage Journal

    Ignorance is strength,
    War is peace,
    Freedom is slavery.

    All your base are belong to us.

  • Agent Smith
  • by End Program (963207) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:24PM (#29506257)

    A five-year research programme, called Project Indect, aims to develop computer programmes which act as "agents" to monitor and process information from web sites, discussion forums, file servers, peer-to-peer networks and even individual computers

    Fantastic, so after you are done rounding up all the teenagers posting with attitude and skinheads, how is this system going to help find competent threats?

    Sure this will foil your low level moronic so called terrorist that happens to be down on his luck and just wants a group to blame for his own problems in life. However, I do not see this system giving any insight to groups that are smart enough to not say things on open systems or that are completely offline.

    • by badfish99 (826052) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:36PM (#29506389)

      Fantastic, so after you are done rounding up all the teenagers posting with attitude and skinheads, how is this system going to help find competent threats?

      There was a case here a few days ago, where some teenagers who wrote in their diaries some fantasy story about blowing up their school were arrested and held in jail for some months and then tried as terrorists. Luckily they got a jury trial: the jury acquitted them straight away, and then took the trouble to wait outside the court to congratulate them on their release.

      The next step for the authorities will have to be to abolish jury trials for terrorist offenses.

      • by Shakrai (717556)

        The next step for the authorities will have to be to abolish jury trials for terrorist offenses.

        Half the people around here think that would be a great idea. They bemoan all of the pitfalls of the jury system but fail to see the problems with the alternative that allows the government to strip you of your freedom without the consent of your fellow citizens.

        • by Kiuas (1084567)

          allows the government to strip you of your freedom without the consent of your fellow citizens.

          Erm. Why is the "consent" of your fellow citizens needed? Laws - in any democratic country - are crafted by people who have been democratically selected to represent the people. If someone breaks these laws he/she deserves a punishment. However, wether or not he indeed commited the crime he is acused of is not a matter of oppinion. Why should it be open for a vote? There either is or is not enough evidence to condemn the man, and people who have been given the proper training in lgeal issues (ie. judges and

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Stuarticus (1205322)
        This is something that has been discussed here (UK) due to the fact that the public shouldn't get to know the details of how much the government knows about other terrorists or the extent of their investigations. All very disturbing.
    • Exactly. Why do you think Bin Laden only uses face to face communications? Only the extremely stupid or lazy will be caught using this. And once again, the problem with gathering intelligence isn't a lack of information, the problem is determining which pieces of information are actually credible, and which are not.
  • I'm not always under electronic surveillance, but when I am, I drink Dos Equis.

    Stay thirsty my friends.

  • by Xaedalus (1192463) <Xaedalys@[ ]oo.com ['yah' in gap]> on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:28PM (#29506305)

    This is the single biggest threat to our freedom as individuals: the desire of the state to form a broad security apparatus, in order to protect itself from lawsuits filed by aggrieved citizens.

    I don't believe there's some super-secret cabal out to restrict our freedoms and turn us all into mindless meme-spouting "Citizens" living in a modern-day panopticon. What this is, is the result of an ill-informed populace, fearful of terrorists, criminals, and anything/everything that could possibly disrupt their lives demanding that their leadership Do Something . So the government is placed in the impossible position of trying to predict potential future attacks/assaults/cataclysms, because a clear majority of its constituents has told it that this is necessary. And when they fail, the survivors/aggrieved parties file lawsuits because clearly the government has failed in its duties to predict and prevent bad things from happening to its people.

    So now we have entities like the TSA in the US, which exists solely as a giant resource-sucking time waster of a stop-gap prevention against class action lawsuits against the government in case another 9/11 type attack occurs. That is all it is: an insurance policy the government has taken out against the possible threat of legal action from its citizens should the unthinkable occurs. We all know that the TSA isn't going to stop terrorists - it's so the government can say "See, we did everything we could to prevent it and it still happened". And in this case, I'm going to step into the blame game and blame US, not the government. I have Karma to burn, so here goes: the vast majority of us citizens, regardless of country, want security and safety - NOT freedom. We want to know that when we get into our cars and go to work, we are insulated from the random elements of chaos that make up the world we live in. And when that protective bubble gets popped, we get angry because by God/FSM/Entropy/Satan, we want our security! And so we sue our government because 'THEY' should have been able to stop it with all their resources and manpower. And our government finds itself having to establish all these 'safeguards' simply so we can regain some measure of belief in the illusion of security we demand the government provide us.

    I'm no libertarian, but this is one case in which I agree with their ethos: leave us the hell alone and don't build a nanny/father state to protect us. Yes, it's scary to live in a world in which anything could happen, but the alternative to me is unthinkable: some faceless entity doing everything it can to remove risk from my life and give me the illusion of control/safety, because most of my fellow citizens want that. I'd rather face up to my limitations and fallacies on my own, thank-you-very-much; I don't need my issues with needing control to be enabled.

    So before we go into another round of 'how much blame can we heap on the government', let's think for a moment that the government is nothing more than a reflection of its people, and their values.

    • So before we go into another round of 'how much blame can we heap on the government', let's think for a moment that the government is nothing more than a reflection of a very noisy and ill-informed subset of the politicians, and their values.

      Fixed that for ya.

      • Who do you think elected said very noisy and ill-informed subset of the politicians? It wasn't a bunch of thoughtful, sober, rational individual citizens who acted in concert to promote harmonious civil discourse, now was it?
        • Who do you think elected said very noisy and ill-informed subset of the politicians? It wasn't a bunch of thoughtful, sober, rational individual citizens who acted in concert to promote harmonious civil discourse, now was it?

          Oh, it's even better than that, once the appropriate NGO's get the right sanctions and treaties passed in the UN you won't even have to worry about such quaint things like constitutional rights, since our life time appointed SCOTUS justices will look at how other(possibly less democrat

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mayko (1630637)
      I agree with everything you said.

      I'd like to add that this reminds me of the problem prisoners have when they are finally released after a long prison stay. Often times they cannot handle the freedom and lack of structure in the real world. Unfortunately the vast majority of humans essentially feel the same way.

      Freedom is scary, and dangerous. People can't deal with that.
    • Bravo! This was so well-written, yet general enough to be a response to most of these "security-first" news articles that I had to google around to see if it was just copy-pasta. Glad to say this appears to original. Well said, sir.
      • by Xaedalus (1192463)
        Thank you! I'm happy to report that this was one of the few useful emanations to erupt from the sewers of my psyche today.
    • by GrifterCC (673360)
      I agree with your overall point, but the United States is immune from lawsuits by its citizens unless it waives that immunity. It has done so, to a limited extent, via the Federal Tort Claims Act, found at 28 U.S.C. 1346(b). The Wikipedia article is a decent summary.

      The next time you read "tort reform" FUD about how Everyone In America is abusing civil litigation and Plaintiffs' Attorneys Like Myself Are Abetting Them, consider the source. P.S. The source is liability-insurance companies.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by sincewhen (640526)
      Yes, but don't you think that this unhealthy focus on protecting everyone from anything which can be labelled terrorism, and spending billions in the process, is just the military industrial complex finding its feet again after being blindsided by the end on the cold war?
      • by Xaedalus (1192463)
        No, I believe that the military/industrial complex exists because there's a very large portion of our citizenry who believe in having a powerful military to defend our interests, and find the concepts and ideas of warfare glorious. And I'm not talking about politicians or people in power here: I'm talking about the 20 year veteran of the military who served in the Army and can rattle off tank specifications from memory, and has a subscription to Soldier of Fortune and the AUSA magazine. Or the rural conserv
        • The military industrial complex is sustained by the government. The support of the populace is not required. Just ask any third world dictator. I personally have mixed feelings about it. We subsidize it, which is bad, but it's one of the few high margin products we have left, and it's responsible for a lot of the research in this country...if we could just stop having these expensive product demonstration roadshows in the middle east I think it would be a net benefit, if a rather immoral one.
          • by Xaedalus (1192463)
            That's a good way of looking at it. I don't agree much with your first sentence... but I'm pretty sure you could pull out proof to support your stance. However, you make a very good point about the margin and the research. I'll have to consider this.
    • by smoker2 (750216)

      I don't believe there's some super-secret cabal out to restrict our freedoms and turn us all into mindless meme-spouting "Citizens" living in a modern-day panopticon. What this is, is the result of an ill-informed populace, fearful of terrorists, criminals, and anything/everything that could possibly disrupt their lives demanding that their leadership Do Something . So the government is placed in the impossible position of trying to predict potential future attacks/assaults/cataclysms, because a clear majo

  • by Proteus (1926) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:30PM (#29506335) Homepage Journal

    At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

    In fact, I'm willing to bet the European hacker community will take steps to ensure that such a thing happens. As soon as it does, there will be all sorts of running about to cripple the system to the point that it's inert, but oddly still very expensive.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by R2.0 (532027)

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

      In fact, I'm willing to bet the European hacker community will take steps to ensure that such a thing happens. As soon as it does, there will be all sorts of running about to cripple the system to the point that it's inert, but oddly still very expensive.

      You mean like when Teddy Kennedy, a US Senator, was put on the no-fly list in the US? The only t

      • by Proteus (1926)
        Analogies to the no-fly list are flawed: the no-fly list is a policy maintained by people. What's at issue here is an automated "behavioral detection" system. When "foolproof" systems make a lot of noise on prominent people, those systems are "put under review", which basically results in crippling them to the point of uselessness to the tune of millions of dollars (or GBP, in this case).

        However, even if I accept your analogy, the Kennedy fiasco did start down the path of neutering the no-fly list to the

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by R2.0 (532027)

          "When "foolproof" systems make a lot of noise on prominent people, those systems are "put under review", which basically results in crippling them to the point of uselessness to the tune of millions of dollars (or GBP, in this case). "

          You missed my point entirely. When prominent people get fingered by an automated system, they are not going to "put it under review" or cripple it - they simply get the maintainers of the system to slip in an exception list and a conditional that says "If one of these people'

    • by petes_PoV (912422)

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such,

      Makes no difference, they'll just get a tap on thw wrist, resign for a little while and then, when all the fuss has died down (a year or two later) be brought back into government.

      For example the british attorney general has just been found guilty of employing an illegal immigrant - contrary to a law that she wrote. So far there's little pressure on her to resign (even though she's been found guilty and paid a £5000 fine).

    • by sorak (246725)

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

      In fact, I'm willing to bet the European hacker community will take steps to ensure that such a thing happens. As soon as it does, there will be all sorts of running about to cripple the system to the point that it's inert, but oddly still very expensive.

      As for the "flagged as a terrorist" thing, that's why we have exceptions. The unfortunate part is that, instead of looking at the exception and saying "Holy crap, what would have happened to this guy, if he had been a nobody", we just make an exception, and sweep the entire issue under the rug.

    • by dkf (304284)

      At some point, some government official will either be exposed to be pervert or some such, or will be wrongfully and horribly flagged as some sort of terrorist.

      On the brighter side, with this extensive a surveillance system we'll finally be able to start to track down and enumerate all the women that Silvio Berlusconi has been cheating on his wife with. (Though to be fair, a good approximation would be to start with the full collection of phone books for Italy...)

  • Remember. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by arhhook (995275) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:33PM (#29506367)

    Remember, remember the Fifth of November,
    The Gunpowder Treason and Plot,
    I know of no reason
    Why the Gunpowder Treason
    Should ever be forgot.
    Guy Fawkes, Guy Fawkes, t'was his intent
    To blow up the King and Parli'ment.
    Three-score barrels of powder below
    To prove old England's overthrow;
    By God's providence he was catch'd (or by God's mercy*)
    With a dark lantern and burning match.
    Holloa boys, holloa boys, let the bells ring. (Holla*)
    Holloa boys, holloa boys, God save the King!

    • by mcgrew (92797) *

      Remember
      Is a place from long ago
      Remember
      Filled with everything you know
      UURP
      excuse me

      -Harry Nielson, Son of Schmilson

  • Guys, guys, guys. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by NoYob (1630681)
    All of us or at least most of us are in IT or have been. We all know that software, especially on this scale, never works as designed. Add to the fact that *snicker* it's operated by a Government, it will not fly.

    This is what will happen: millions of Pounds Euros, or Dollars will be spent on proof of concept, maybe even some code and who knows, a delivered system. One way or another, it will turn into a complete failure and abandoned or drastically scaled down.

    This is Government and their contractors who w

  • by TrentTheThief (118302) on Tuesday September 22, 2009 @01:37PM (#29506413)

    How long will it take until Europe realizes that they aren't "One" country with one set of beliefs and standards and just get on with life? Will Europe now be reduced to an East German-like existence? Will one-half of the populace spy and inform on the other half? When will they begin collecting "scent" samples of all the population? Or will they choose DNA this time? Decisions, decisions.

    Listen, it's time to give big government the bum's rush to the garbage tip. The sooner governments are beaten back down, the sooner normal people will be able to get on with their lives without fearing being sent to prison or being fined and taxed into penury.

    • by polar red (215081)

      big government the bum's rush to the garbage tip.

      given that of the 100 biggest economies, 51 are corporations, what about big corporations ?

    • Actually, no European feels "European" first, or thinks it's one country, only Americans seem to think Europe is a country!

      The EU is also not synonymous with Europe, it only counts 27 out of 49 countries in Europe as members. You have to be clueless to claim Europeans think of themselves as Europeans, EU citizens or citizens of one country.

      We actually like our "big" governments, they keep things working and safe. If you don't believe me my European country has barely noticed the so called "financial crisis"

      • by MaWeiTao (908546)

        Perhaps your European country has barely noticed economic problems but my family, which live primarily in Portugal and France are constantly complaining. The government is always screwing them over and ignores the will of the people, job market sucks, they're taxed too heavily but the benefits they receive in return are crap and are constantly being trimmed back.

        Two examples specifically about healthcare since that's the big thing currently being argued: One of my uncles in France got private health insuran

        • by M-RES (653754)

          ...specifically about healthcare since that's the big thing currently being argued: One of my uncles in France got private health insurance because the government wasn't covering what he needed, in fact, they seem to be moving towards privatization like we currently have in the US.

          I agree, we have the same problem in the UK these days. The NHS isn't covering everything we need because it seems to be moving towards privatisation (aka 'healthcare for the rich') like you have in the US. Before this shabby stat

      • I don't imagine that the average person does think of there being "European." But that is what EU is going to change as you all are forced to follow rules and regulations and laws set forth by the EU.

        The EU sounded like a nice idea in the beginning, but seems to have turned into an ogre when no one was watching it.

  • ---BEGIN PGP---
    fioweurhtwporeughapewoirtq[iortgegert34530t8
    ---END PGP---

    System response: Operator, this person is using encryption.

    As usual, money well spent by the corrupt idiots in the EUSSR.

    • More reasonably:

      System response: Operator, this person is using encryption without a licensed key per the Friendly Government Big Brother Act of 2010, Section VI, Paragraph 5. Please allocate manual surveillance of subject. Expected to be armed and dangerous.
    • by M-RES (653754)

      ---BEGIN PGP--- fioweurhtwporeughapewoirtq[iortgegert34530t8 ---END PGP---

      System response: Operator, this person is using encryption.

      As usual, money well spent by the corrupt idiots in the EUSASR.

      There, fixed that for you ;)

  • from the summary:

    computer programmes which act as 'agents' to monitor and process information.... Its main objectives include the 'automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence

    That's already been done before [youtube.com].

  • The information they are crawling is public information. Maybe this is not as bad as it sounds. If it was a project on hacking into a computer then pulling the information off it then I would get worried. The internet was not designed for privacy and confidentiality. Anything you transmit can be intercepted and dissected so you should have provisions to handle that, like encryption. I wonder the benefit of this though as people hiding anything would attempt to avoid detection. I also wonder how enforcement
    • The scary thing is how much public information is just out there. Even if you try your hardest to stay "off the grid", keep all of your usernames at each site you go to different/fake, and use encryption as much as possible, how do you know that they're not correlating that information indirectly? Case in point: Facebook. People are 100% happy to throw their entire lives out there for public consumption, but how much of other people's lives do they include? For example, I know that even though I do not
  • Excerpt (Score:2, Informative)

    by Eddy Luten (1166889)
    For those who do not feel comfortable going to the Project INDECT site [indect-project.eu] here's an excerpt:

    Project Description

    Intelligent information system supporting observation, searching and detection for security of citizens in urban environment.

    The main objectives of the INDECT project are:

    • to develop a platform for: the registration and exchange of operational data, acquisition of multimedia content, intelligent processing of all information and automatic detection of threats and recognition of abnormal behavio
  • Project 2501 a.k.a The Puppet Master. I for one, welcome our Ghost hacking overloads.
  • The original poster has no clue what this really means. Having such a project funded by the FP7 Framework Programme is the only sure way to discredit the whole idea. Have you ever heard of an FP6 or FP7 funded project that produced anything useful?

  • This is just one more piece of the scientific tyranny being built all around us on a global scale.

    Verichip, PLDs, RFID enabled passports, wholesale monitoring of all electronic communications, corporate media propagandists shaping public opinion using advances in sociology and psychology, government takeover of education in order to indoctrinate unsuspecting youth, big pharma and the plethora of psychoactive drugs being pushed on everyone from cradle to grave, replacement of human soldiers with soulless mac

  • As soon as this thing finds /b/, it'll explode. Problem solved.

  • "...computer programmes which act as 'agents' to monitor and process information" I know I've seen this before somewhere [wikipedia.org]...
  • by master_p (608214) on Wednesday September 23, 2009 @05:51AM (#29513273)

    These systems are not for catching the bad guys. They may occasionally be caught, but the main purpose of these surveillance systems is to scare the masses so as that the masses do not overthrow the governments.

    Remember 1789? the elite were caught and hanged in Bastille by the people...that's what terrifies the elite...that we, the common folks, might realize one day our power and the level of fraud(*) the elite has committed against us and retaliate the hard way, i.e. invade their homes, take them out and hang them in Trafalgar square...

    (*)20% of the population owns 80% of wealth.

  • In the real world, nobody can amass the hardware, software and expertise to do this kind of thing. Even the much vaunted NSA does little more than scan widely for keywords and narrowly for specific individuals or small groups of individuals. They also don't do any investigating. All such systems suffer from exactly the same limitation, false positives. The false positives overwhelm the investigative resources.

    The only people to successfully implement a robust and lasting system for monitoring and c

It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do. -- Jerome Klapka Jerome

Working...