The Pentagon Wants a 'TiVo' to Watch You 256
An anonymous reader writes "Danger Room, a Wired blog, today cites a study of future electronic snooping technologies from Reuters, written by the Pentagon's Defense Science Board. More than anything, it seems these outside advisers want a surveillance system that would put Big Brother to shame, and they're looking at the commercial sector to provide it. 'The ability to record terabyte and larger databases will provide an omnipresent knowledge of the present and the past that can be used to rewind battle space observations in TiVo-like fashion and to run recorded time backwards to help identify and locate even low-level enemy forces. For example, after a car bomb detonates, one would have the ability to play high-resolution data backward in time to follows the vehicle back to the source, and then use that knowledge to focus collection and gain additional information by organizing and searching through archived data.'"
Neoconned alert! (Score:5, Interesting)
Does the mindset of whoever wrote this creep you out too? It isn't about being religeous - it's about being Gods themselves and making you worship them.
Re:I for one... (Score:5, Interesting)
No more "Hooveristic" than a camera at the local Quickie Mart. An action is filmed, the data trail is followed backwards until something useful is found.
"We all know that people are unpredictable. You can't apply scientific rationale to people."
This is not about predicting them, it is about recording what is done in public space and using it to trace activities back to source.
Um, sensationalism anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
This gives a whole new meaning to 'knee jerk reaction'.
Re:Pointless. (Score:1, Interesting)
Now that will effectively stop and deter whistleblowers and insider leaks... Umm... one wonders how the system is intended to be used.
24 (Score:3, Interesting)
24 X 350 = 8400 = 8.4 GB a day
1000 cameras x 8.4 GB = 8.4 TB a day
Hmm, on second thought this seems possible.
We do it already (Score:2, Interesting)
W/o getting into a moralistic analysis, it's clear that while such monitoring is not a panacea, it would at least raise the bar for the insurgents, and increase their exposure to OPSEC fubars.
We do this already in a less-than-coordinated fashion in the US. The police regularly survey all the security camera tapes in the area of crimes, esp. murders, to try to create a gestalt of the crime scene area. Works pretty good is some cases, has bagged more than a couple of murderers and hit and run drivers.
Bon Chance.
Re:And the FDA make food eat you! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:0, Interesting)
We could grow hemp to make paper and cardboard instead of destroying rain forests, but no, that'd be too difficult.
We could introduce a host of new technologies into the automotive industry that would increase the mileage of automobiles by up to 50%, such as GEET's and better engines with fewer moving parts, but then what would happen to the ass hats making money off of the patents?
We could build a bunch of nuclear reactors to fuel energy-distribution technologies that would revolutionize the world for a fraction of the cost of the Iraq War.
We could introduce Organics recycling into urban neighborhoods, cutting the amount of garbage going into dumps by over half.
We could stop poisoning ourselves with floride, mercury, lead, aluminum and arsenic.
The entire pharmaceutical industry could decide to stop fucking everyone over and make the secrets of real whole health known. Simple cures for cancer, diabetics, and other diseases are well known to naturopaths.
And on, and on, and on.
The problem is money; we have a banking system which is designed to propagate a predatory cutthroat society.
In reality, I think the only solution is an army of 50 cal sniper rifle toting fuckers who take bad people out with extreme prejudice.
Re:The only reason I'm not scared.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, there will very likely be a system that partly works. Massive amounts of data will be collected, but processing will not be intelligent enough to translate this into real results in crime-fighting. Any data mining will result in many more false positives than actual results and waste government agents' time, which could otherwise be spent actually tracking down criminals (or terrorists.) Meanwhile, no thought will be given to privacy issues, resulting in tons of priviledged information being easily available to all the wrong people.
In a nice worst-case scenario, security failures could allow outsiders to change the govenment's record of the past.
I really do wish your remark were fully correct.
Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:2, Interesting)
I dont know if you remember, but 9/11 happened BEFORE the Iraq war. The first WTC bombing happened around a time when Israel enjoyed much less support from the US than they do now (under Clinton). And I dont know how supporting Saudi Arabia is really encouraging terrorism (maybe because we allow the Saudis to turn a blind eye towards them? Perhaps someone could explain?). And yes, while Israel is often unjustified in their use of force, to break our alliance with them because of enemy actions is nothing short of cowardly. It would show weakness to the world, and it would give the terrorists motivation, determination, and recruits, as it would be seen as a victory by the terrorists. Appeasement would only encourage them (give a terrorist a cookie and...) Either way, 9/11 did not happen because of anything you have stated.
9/11 happened because Islamic fundamentalists hate free religion. They hate our culture. They hate our very existence. And they think by fighting us they get a free pass to Paradise. The only way to stop them is to either kill them all, or adopt Sharia as our constitution, profess our faith in Allah, and elect Osama bin Laden as Shiek of the United States. Well maybe not Osama, but honestly nothing short professing our belief in Allah would appease them.
Yes Iraq was a mistake. Yes we give way too much support for Israel. And yes, being a menace may increase the anti-American attitude and does add fuel to the fire. But this fire has been burning for 1000 years since the rise of Islam, jihads, crusades, etc etc. You are a fool to think "playing nice" with them is going to put it out.
After all is said and done...IMO the easy way out is to simply kill them all. Talking things over and learning to share with fundamentalists of any flavor sounds pretty damn hard to me.
Instance not class (Score:0, Interesting)
He's criticizing this particular person, not the whole Jewish religion. (The instance not the class).
Aren't you just trying the 'criticize Israel and I'll label you as anti-semitic' argument?
Rumsfeld quote "we cannot track $2.3 trillion" (Score:1, Interesting)
Current 2008 budget for the Pentagon is $2.9 trillion a year, it represents just 1 years budget.
"hole eating up the equivalent of 1/2 of the American GDP"
USA GDP is $13 trillion, and over the 5 years that he mislaid the money it represents 5% of GDP not half.
A quote from Rumsfeld himself:
According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions," Rumsfeld admitted.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/evening
Re:The only reason I'm not scared.. (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.mediamonitors.net/khodr49.html [mediamonitors.net]
Re:Wouldn't It Be Easier Just To... (Score:4, Interesting)
It is not so much the doctors themselves I believe capable of this treachery, since doctors actually interact with the patients they'd be forcing to suffer, and few humans are capable of purposefully inflicting pain on a known victim for the sake of profit; rather, the pharmaceutical companies that have everything to gain from never-ending poor health.
When you never have to see the face of those you cause to suffer, it is easy to write off their suffering as unimportant.