Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 08.05.22 um 16:36 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 08.05.22 um 13:44 schrieb Chris:
>>>> Having watched it via Psiphon, I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>>>> have actual data protection laws. Cambridge Analytica did something similar
>>>> and got shat upon from a great height.
>>>>
>>>> The problem I see here is not that the US Government is tracking you, but
>>>> that there's effectively no restrictions in who can track you and for what
>>>> reason.
>>>
>>> Absolutely typical for the Anglo-Saxon world where governments and
>>> commercial companies are more important than the individual citizen.
>>
>> It's called "The American Way"™
>
> Applied by 5 countries not the US alone:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

That's national security intelligence data sharing. Not the same thing.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>> have actual data protection laws.
>
> I comprehended _instantly_ what the problem is.
> You still haven't.
>
> The problem, as badgolferman was kind enough to highlight with this thread,
> is for the US government, buying the data is a _loophole_ to the laws...

If companies were regulated properly there wouldn't be any loopholes.

On 2022-05-08 11:11 a.m., Chris wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-05-08 6:21 a.m., Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>>>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>>>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>>>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are you
>>>>>> wanting to make.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>>
>>> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at least
>>> process ten times as much information.
>>>
>>
>> That might be true in general...
>>
>> ...but this is about information as presented in the typical YouTube
>> video...
>>
>> ...and I can read that information faster than it's typically presented.
>
> Agree. Also there's often only a small part that's relevant. Can ctrl + F
> text which isn't possible with a yt.
>

Doing tech support work, I run into so many "how-to" videos...

....when all I need are instructions I can READ and perhaps a picture or two.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>>
>>> I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>>> have actual data protection laws.
>>
>> I comprehended _instantly_ what the problem is.
>> You still haven't.
>>
>> The problem, as badgolferman was kind enough to highlight with this thread,
>> is for the US government, buying the data is a _loophole_ to the laws...
>
> If companies were regulated properly there wouldn't be any loopholes.
>
>
>

The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional duty of
the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative Branch. In
this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a private
business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using unfettered
power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a problem with
business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its power.

Chris wrote:

>> The problem, as badgolferman was kind enough to highlight with this thread,
>> is for the US government, buying the data is a _loophole_ to the laws...
>
> If companies were regulated properly there wouldn't be any loopholes.

Agree.

I agree with any logical, sensible & rational point of view, no matter from
whom.

Either way, if the government followed the spirit of the 4th amendment, or,
if companies did, then this wouldn't be happening.

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote

| The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional duty of
| the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative Branch. In
| this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
| existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a
private
| business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using unfettered
| power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a problem with
| business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its power.
|

It's both. Government has no interest in you having privacy.
Business wants to spy to make money. Law enforcement wants
as much data as possible. Most citizens either don't care,
don't understand, or regard the spying as a service to help
them shop. Only common decency favors privacy.

The NSA has deals with all the major operators. Google
sells location data the the government for thousands
of people at a time. ("geofencing") On top of all that, the
companies get paid for sharing, with your tax dollars!
I don't know of any law they're skirting. Those laws need
to be created, as Europe is gradually doing. But Europe mainly
serves the well being of the citizenry. The US mainly serves
big business.

Am 08.05.22 um 18:43 schrieb Alan:
> On 2022-05-08 6:21 a.m., Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>
>> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at least
>> process ten times as much information.
>>
>
> That might be true in general...
>
> ...but this is about information as presented in the typical YouTube
> video...
>
> ...and I can read that information faster than it's typically presented.

That is an argument we can dicuss. That says a lot about the quality of
yt-presentations.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 19:09 schrieb Andy Burnelli:
> Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>
>>>>> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this thread.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
>>>> equipment ...
>>>
>>> How does that change anything? Stationary equipment can also be tracked.
>>
>> We are discussing tracking and movement profiling of hardware pieces
>> that are on the move. As the topic suggests. Relatively useless with
>> stationary equipment. We are not discussing tracking in the cyber space.
>
> It took 975 seconds for John Oliver to say what I said from the start.
> <https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>
> "the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches & seizures"

96% of the world population do not care about the 4th amendment.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 20:16 schrieb Chris:
> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> Applied by 5 countries not the US alone:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
>
> That's national security intelligence data sharing. Not the same thing.

That is done totally illegally as we know since 2013. No oversight and
no courts that can stop these illegitimate actions in these police states.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 20:37 schrieb badgolferman:

> The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional duty of
> the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative Branch. In
> this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
> existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a private
> business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using unfettered
> power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a problem with
> business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its power.

SIC.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

On 2022-05-08 1:23 p.m., Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 08.05.22 um 18:43 schrieb Alan:
>> On 2022-05-08 6:21 a.m., Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>>
>>> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at least
>>> process ten times as much information.
>>>
>>
>> That might be true in general...
>>
>> ...but this is about information as presented in the typical YouTube
>> video...
>>
>> ...and I can read that information faster than it's typically presented.
>
> That is an argument we can dicuss. That says a lot about the quality of
> yt-presentations.
>

Any video that needs narration is going to be slower than presenting
that same information as text.

On Sun, 08 May 2022 23:21:43 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:

> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are
>>>> you
>>>> wanting to make.
>>>
>>>
>>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>
> That is a total illusion.

No.

> Using ears and eyes together you can at least
> process ten times as much information.

The problem is that when someone is saying something on
youtube, you can read what they are saying much faster.

On 2022-05-08 1:36 p.m., Jock wrote:
> On Sun, 08 May 2022 23:21:43 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>
>> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are
>>>>> you
>>>>> wanting to make.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>
>> That is a total illusion.
>
> No.
>
>> Using ears and eyes together you can at least
>> process ten times as much information.
>
> The problem is that when someone is saying something on
> youtube, you can read what they are saying much faster.

Bingo.

On Sun, 08 May 2022 23:27:25 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:

> Am 08.05.22 um 13:44 schrieb Chris:
>> Having watched it via Psiphon, I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>> have actual data protection laws. Cambridge Analytica did something
>> similar
>> and got shat upon from a great height.
>>
>> The problem I see here is not that the US Government is tracking you,
>> but
>> that there's effectively no restrictions in who can track you and for
>> what
>> reason.
>
> Absolutely typical for the Anglo-Saxon world where governments and
> commercial companies are more important than the individual citizen.

Of course no non anglo saxon country every gets
full lists of who is staying in hotels overnight, eh ?

On Mon, 09 May 2022 04:37:13 +1000, badgolferman
<REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:

> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> Chris wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>>>> have actual data protection laws.
>>>
>>> I comprehended _instantly_ what the problem is.
>>> You still haven't.
>>>
>>> The problem, as badgolferman was kind enough to highlight with this
>>> thread,
>>> is for the US government, buying the data is a _loophole_ to the
>>> laws...
>>
>> If companies were regulated properly there wouldn't be any loopholes.
>>
>>
>>
>
> The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional duty
> of
> the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative Branch..
> In
> this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
> existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a
> private
> business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using unfettered
> power to skirt the law?

Not when they anonymise the data they buy and dont
show up wearing jackboots and demanding to know
why you didn't isolate after testing positive to covid.

> You keep trying to pass this off as a problem with
> business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its
> power.

There is no abuse in this case.

On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:10:11 +1000, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
wrote:

> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote
>
> | The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional
> duty of
> | the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative
> Branch. In
> | this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
> | existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a
> private
> | business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using
> unfettered
> | power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a problem
> with
> | business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its
> power.
> |
>
> It's both. Government has no interest in you having privacy.
> Business wants to spy to make money. Law enforcement wants
> as much data as possible. Most citizens either don't care,
> don't understand, or regard the spying as a service to help
> them shop. Only common decency favors privacy.
>
> The NSA has deals with all the major operators. Google
> sells location data the the government for thousands
> of people at a time. ("geofencing") On top of all that, the
> companies get paid for sharing, with your tax dollars!
> I don't know of any law they're skirting. Those laws need
> to be created, as Europe is gradually doing. But Europe mainly
> serves the well being of the citizenry.

> The US mainly serves
> big business.

That's bullshit with welfare alone.

On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:23:41 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:

> Am 08.05.22 um 18:43 schrieb Alan:
>> On 2022-05-08 6:21 a.m., Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>>
>>> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at least
>>> process ten times as much information.
>>>
>>
>> That might be true in general...
>>
>> ...but this is about information as presented in the typical YouTube
>> video...
>>
>> ...and I can read that information faster than it's typically presented.
>
> That is an argument we can dicuss. That says a lot about the quality of
> yt-presentations.

No, it will always take longer to speak the points being made than it
does for anyone with a decent reading speed to read the same words.

On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:25:43 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:

> Am 08.05.22 um 19:09 schrieb Andy Burnelli:
>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this
>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
>>>>> equipment ...
>>>>
>>>> How does that change anything? Stationary equipment can also be
>>>> tracked.
>>>
>>> We are discussing tracking and movement profiling of hardware pieces
>>> that are on the move. As the topic suggests. Relatively useless with
>>> stationary equipment. We are not discussing tracking in the cyber
>>> space.
>>
>> It took 975 seconds for John Oliver to say what I said from the start.
>> <https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>
>> "the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches & seizures"
>
> 96% of the world population do not care about the 4th amendment.

Where did you get that 96% number from ?

On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:30:19 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:

> Am 08.05.22 um 20:16 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Applied by 5 countries not the US alone:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
>>
>> That's national security intelligence data sharing. Not the same thing.
>
>
> That is done totally illegally as we know since 2013.

That is a lie with 4 of those countries.

> No oversight and
> no courts that can stop these illegitimate actions in these police
> states.

You wouldn't know what a real police state was if it bit you on your lard
arse.

Am 08.05.22 um 22:54 schrieb Fred:
> On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:25:43 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> 96% of the world population do not care about the 4th amendment.
>
> Where did you get that 96% number from ?

Are you seriously asking that?

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

On 2022-05-08 1:48 p.m., Jock wrote:
> On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:10:11 +1000, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
> wrote:
>
>> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote
>>
>> | The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional
>> duty of
>> | the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative
>> Branch. In
>> | this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
>> | existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a
>> private
>> | business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using
>> unfettered
>> | power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a
>> problem with
>> | business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its
>> power.
>> |
>>
>>   It's both. Government has no interest in you having privacy.
>> Business wants to spy to make money. Law enforcement wants
>> as much data as possible. Most citizens either don't care,
>> don't understand, or regard the spying as a service to help
>> them shop. Only common decency favors privacy.
>>
>>   The NSA has deals with all the major operators. Google
>> sells location data the the government for thousands
>> of people at a time. ("geofencing") On top of all that, the
>> companies get paid for sharing, with your tax dollars!
>> I don't know of any law they're skirting. Those laws need
>> to be created, as Europe is gradually doing. But Europe mainly
>> serves the well being of the citizenry.
>
>> The US mainly serves
>> big business.
>
> That's bullshit with welfare alone.

It's not bullshit.

You really want to look at the numbers.

On 2022-05-08 1:54 p.m., Fred wrote:
> On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:25:43 +1000, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>
>> Am 08.05.22 um 19:09 schrieb Andy Burnelli:
>>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this
>>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
>>>>>> equipment ...
>>>>>
>>>>> How does that change anything? Stationary equipment can also be
>>>>> tracked.
>>>>
>>>> We are discussing tracking and movement profiling of hardware pieces
>>>> that are on the move. As the topic suggests. Relatively useless with
>>>> stationary equipment. We are not discussing tracking in the cyber
>>>> space.
>>>
>>> It took 975 seconds for John Oliver to say what I said from the start.
>>>  <https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>
>>>  "the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches & seizures"
>>
>> 96% of the world population do not care about the 4th amendment.
>
> Where did you get that 96% number from ?

From the fact that the US population is about 4.35% of the world?

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> Chris wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>>>> have actual data protection laws.
>>>
>>> I comprehended _instantly_ what the problem is.
>>> You still haven't.
>>>
>>> The problem, as badgolferman was kind enough to highlight with this thread,
>>> is for the US government, buying the data is a _loophole_ to the laws...
>>
>> If companies were regulated properly there wouldn't be any loopholes.
>>
>>
>>
>
> The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional duty of
> the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative Branch. In
> this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
> existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a private
> business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using unfettered
> power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a problem with
> business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its power.

How exactly is the CDC "abusing its power"? What laws has it broken? It is
reasonable for it to investigate the effect of the pandemic and how it
affected people. No?

Jock <kdj@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:10:11 +1000, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
> wrote:
>
>> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote
>>
>> | The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional
>> duty of
>> | the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative
>> Branch. In
>> | this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
>> | existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a
>> private
>> | business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using
>> unfettered
>> | power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a problem
>> with
>> | business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its
>> power.
>> |
>>
>> It's both. Government has no interest in you having privacy.
>> Business wants to spy to make money. Law enforcement wants
>> as much data as possible. Most citizens either don't care,
>> don't understand, or regard the spying as a service to help
>> them shop. Only common decency favors privacy.
>>
>> The NSA has deals with all the major operators. Google
>> sells location data the the government for thousands
>> of people at a time. ("geofencing") On top of all that, the
>> companies get paid for sharing, with your tax dollars!
>> I don't know of any law they're skirting. Those laws need
>> to be created, as Europe is gradually doing. But Europe mainly
>> serves the well being of the citizenry.
>
>> The US mainly serves
>> big business.
>
> That's bullshit with welfare alone.

Whatever it is the US provides people it's not welfare. It's a joke.

On 2022-05-08 4:19 p.m., Chris wrote:
> Jock <kdj@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 May 2022 06:10:11 +1000, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote
>>>
>>> | The CDC falls under the Executive Branch. It is the constitutional
>>> duty of
>>> | the Executive Branch to enforce laws created by the Legislative
>>> Branch. In
>>> | this case we have an Executive Branch federal agency purposely ignoring
>>> | existing laws and regarding privacy and buying tracking data from a
>>> private
>>> | business. Doesn’t this sound like a government agency using
>>> unfettered
>>> | power to skirt the law? You keep trying to pass this off as a problem
>>> with
>>> | business but it is really a problem with the government abusing its
>>> power.
>>> |
>>>
>>> It's both. Government has no interest in you having privacy.
>>> Business wants to spy to make money. Law enforcement wants
>>> as much data as possible. Most citizens either don't care,
>>> don't understand, or regard the spying as a service to help
>>> them shop. Only common decency favors privacy.
>>>
>>> The NSA has deals with all the major operators. Google
>>> sells location data the the government for thousands
>>> of people at a time. ("geofencing") On top of all that, the
>>> companies get paid for sharing, with your tax dollars!
>>> I don't know of any law they're skirting. Those laws need
>>> to be created, as Europe is gradually doing. But Europe mainly
>>> serves the well being of the citizenry.
>>
>>> The US mainly serves
>>> big business.
>>
>> That's bullshit with welfare alone.
>
> Whatever it is the US provides people it's not welfare. It's a joke.
>

And compared to the largesse that the rich and big corporation gets,
it's a pittance.

It's just hidden in the fact that they get their largesse in the form of
not paying much in taxes.