Partnership between Facebook and police could make planning protests impossible

[Wilikon]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

[1715393705]

1715393705

[1715393705]

1715393705

[1715393705]

1715393705

[1715393705]

1715393705

[pedrog]

This is bad business for Facebook.

[Mike Christ]

This is bad business for Facebook.

Facebook is bad business.

[winnate]

Welp, this is the end boys.

[PrintMule]

I thought that twitter is the main tool of fast coordination?

I don't have a twiiter or facebook account myself, and I still cannot understand how people tolerate the way facebook changed things.

[cryptasm]

It's crazy that people still use Facefuck/Twatter, plenty of alternatives to the CIA/NSA/GCHQ database:

http://pump.io/
https://diasporafoundation.org/
https://www.gnu.org/software/social/
http://movim.eu/

[Wilikon]

It's crazy that people still use Facefuck/Twatter, plenty of alternatives to the CIA/NSA/GCHQ database:

http://pump.io/
https://diasporafoundation.org/
https://www.gnu.org/software/social/
http://movim.eu/

It's the beginning of the end for Facebook and others and the start of an amazing opportunity for the built-up of tools that no one can control or stop. Some coding genius should see this as great news.

[Shallow]

This is hardly news. Facebooks sell all the data they get to 3rd party corporations/institutions

[darkmule]

Well, I guess just like nobody ever protested anything before Facebook existed, we'll have to go back to those days of no protesting, because it certainly isn't possible to organize any way other than through some corporate behemoth.

[Lethn]

HAHAHAHHHHH!! They really don't know what people are capable of on the internet do they? If they can't even block people from using piratebay then they sure as hell aren't going to stop them from organising a protest online.

"Oh no, I've been blocked from facebook! Guess I'd better switch on my VPN now then"

[Spendulus]

HAHAHAHHHHH!! They really don't know what people are capable of on the internet do they? If they can't even block people from using piratebay then they sure as hell aren't going to stop them from organising a protest online.

"Oh no, I've been blocked from facebook! Guess I'd better switch on my VPN now then"

Hiding in plain sight is an ancient art.

Look up the origins of "cockney slang".

[Wilikon]

It's crazy that people still use Facefuck/Twatter, plenty of alternatives to the CIA/NSA/GCHQ database:

http://pump.io/
https://diasporafoundation.org/
https://www.gnu.org/software/social/
http://movim.eu/

Thank you for all those links. I only remember reading about diaspora a while back.

[Wilikon]

http://freebeacon.com/government-mining-social-media-for-information-on-health-behavior/

The National Library of Medicine (NLM) is “mining” Facebook and Twitter to improve its social media footprint and to assess how Tweets can be used as “change-agents” for health behaviors.

The NLM, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), will have software installed on government computers that will store data from social media as part of a $30,000 project announced last week.

“The National Library of Medicine is the world’s largest biomedical library and makes its stored information available online at no charge to consumers, health professionals, and biomedical scientists through a diverse suite of resources,” the agency said in a contract posted on Oct. 23. “Evaluating how its databases and other resources are utilized is an important component of continuing quality improvement and has long been an on-going program of NLM management through a potpourri of monitoring tools.”

“The world-wide explosion in the use of social media provides a unique opportunity for sampling sentiment and use patterns of NLM’s ‘customers’ and for comparing NLM to other sources of health-related information,” the agency said.

“By examining relevant tweets and other comments,” the contract said, “NLM will gain insights to extent of use, context for which information was sought, and effects of various health-related announcements and events on usage patterns.”

Specifically, NLM will look at the “value of tweets and other messages as teaching tools and change-agents for health-relevant behavior.”

“The overarching objective of these studies is to obtain a richer understanding of how consumers, clinicians, researchers actually look for the health-related information they seek, and what they do with what they find,” NLM said in a response to frequently asked questions about the project.

OhMyGov Inc., a media company that specializes in the promotion of government agencies, will be paid $30,660 to monitor social media for NLM for one year.

The company will install software on computers at NLM headquarters in Bethesda, Md. to “maintain a comprehensive ‘universe’ of social media data.” Government bureaucrats will be trained on the software so they can search the database for health-related content.

“Content from Twitter, Facebook, blogs, news sites, discussion boards, video and image sharing sites will be maintained by the Contractor and kept up-to-date in a timely manner and made available for query by Government,” the contract said.

When asked by a vendor if they are interested in storing the data for “historical analysis,” NLM said “Yes.”

The project will also track NLM’s impact on social media in comparison to its “competitors,” which they define as Google, Mayo Clinic, and WebMD.

“Demographic characteristics” of Facebook and Twitter posts will be noted “to the extent permitted by privacy regulations.” NLM said they are interested in the location, number of followers, and academic degrees held by users.

The contractor OhMyGov Inc. is partially funded by the National Science Foundation, and a member of President Obama’s “Startup America Initiative,” a public-private partnership designed to spur entrepreneurship.

“The OhMyGov Media Monitoring and Policy Analysis system is the first and only business intelligence software completely politically focused,” according to the company’s website. “It provides real-time data mining, analysis, and visual analytics to uncover patterns in message uptake and critical insights into how issues are being characterized by Congress as well as the media, public, and key stakeholders.”

[tkbx]

"Facebook isn't an option? How else are we supposed to communicate‽"

This is what happens when you rely too much on one thing.

[tkbx]

Also

[Lethn]

Yeah that's exactly how people talk to me when I point out how shitty DRM is, I'm feeling extremely smug after the adobe hack.

[PrintMule]

Yeah that's exactly how people talk to me when I point out how shitty DRM is, I'm feeling extremely smug after the adobe hack.

withouth drm there would be much LESS software around

[Nik1ab]

Who the fuck uses Facebook?  This is just stupid...

[Lethn]

Yeah that's exactly how people talk to me when I point out how shitty DRM is, I'm feeling extremely smug after the adobe hack.

withouth drm there would be much LESS software around

I'm not even sure what you mean by that.

Also, I use Facebook, but of course my information is all fake, I think that's what most people are doing.

[just_me]

The parents of the so-called creator of facebook, are doctors. I read that somewhere.

Facebook was a pain in the azz in the first place, and never would have gotten anywhere if it had been up to me.

I saw no reason at all to go magnify that website all over the internet, as so many people have done.

In fact, the site is basically useless.

I hope facebook goes to hell.

I wonder about people just going and giving all that money to zuckerberg at the ipo....

And facebook ipo was a flop. They sucked in investors who all lost money.

It is easy for anyone to create a website like facebook, but not all of us

have the backing of the Jewish media money machine, as Zuckerberg had.

[Vod]

It is easy for anyone to create a website like facebook, but not all of us

So why don't you create one, instead of the piece of shit website you have now?

[Ecurb123]

This is bad business for Facebook.

Facebook is bad business.

the truth, I'm about ready to pretty much stop using that site.

[Wilikon]

This is bad business for Facebook.

Facebook is bad business.

the truth, I'm about ready to pretty much stop using that site.

sometimes the best way to be invisible is to be right in the middle of things.

[beetcoin]

facebook is a dumb social networking site. i'm beginning to think that it exists to make people dumber and dumber. every day i see people checking out each others pages to see what they had for lunch, or stupid chatter about inane subjects. it makes me feel more and more cynical about human society.

and to make things worse, facebook just sits there collecting all of his data on people.. people who give it willingly because they want to be popular or snoop on their friends.

[PrintMule]

facebook is a dumb social networking site. i'm beginning to think that it exists to make people dumber and dumber. every day i see people checking out each others pages to see what they had for lunch, or stupid chatter about inane subjects. it makes me feel more and more cynical about human society.

and to make things worse, facebook just sits there collecting all of his data on people.. people who give it willingly because they want to be popular or snoop on their friends.

For me the worst thing is that some sites required you to have facebook login, like some games give you extra stuff for liking their page. Also some people or groups of people do not have a site, only a facebook group to promote them.

I can only show them a midle finger, but my abstinence from facebook changes nothing. I would love o see it rot away, investors looking away from it.

Also with google+ raping youtube recently... ffffuuuuuuuuu!

Fuck this social media bullshit!

[Lethn]

Fuck this social media bullshit!

It is actually becoming pretty irritating the way people are trying to shove 'social' networking down my throat when a lot of the time the reason you go on a computer is exactly to avoid people ffs, stuff like rockstar social club and steam etc. is something I don't get particularly as well because a lot of singleplayer games are now pestering you to go and pester other friends while they're playing, I always turn off the social features now because it just means you end up getting spammed while you're playing.

[PrintMule]

Fuck this social media bullshit!

It is actually becoming pretty irritating the way people are trying to shove 'social' networking down my throat when a lot of the time the reason you go on a computer is exactly to avoid people ffs, stuff like rockstar social club and steam etc. is something I don't get particularly as well because a lot of singleplayer games are now pestering you to go and pester other friends while they're playing, I always turn off the social features now because it just means you end up getting spammed while you're playing.

South Park had a great episode on this. You have 0 friends

I hear you about singleplayer and other games, it's annoying as hell, and every company has to have it's own version of instant messaging and voice messaging and other stuff. uPlay from Ubisoft, that other turd system which is needed to play battlefield from EA and so on.
Steam is kinda ok I guess, they are well established in that field, but I hate it and rarely install it (once a year for less than a month)

[ajax3592]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

They already have shared all the account details with capitalists in USA in exchange for multi-million $$.
Tie-up with police is not a big thing for them

[hlynur]

funnily there was a facebook thread on OT board some days ago.
i don't like quoting myself, but this time it's fitting and i don't have to rewrite my post (sorry for my narcissim)

never been on facebook and never will be.

i don't get it how people voluntarily share their personal info/habits with a private company solely concentrated on profit maximization while ranting on observation policies by authorities.
facebook is the perfect way to centralise a big chunk of web's userbase and hand it to the highest bidder on a silver platter (no matter if its marketing analysts or authorities)

i see bigger social networks as an attempt to disrupt free speech in the web and squeeze users into a small, well-observed and analyzed drawer system.
What was one big purpose of religion again....control of the masses....this is the same thing in action in the virtual world.

next step would be control of the information channels flowing into that network.


exaggerating here but how would it feel sharing the affection of cancer in such a network to your loved ones and suddenly getting advertising for expensive treatments and funeral services.
 
There's no sense in providing big companies with useful marketing data free of charge.
instead facebook should pay users for registration.

don't get me wrong, facebook probably helped a lot during the arab spring to connect and rally the masses, but in the future western authorities know exactly where to put the thumbscrews when facing uprisings by society.
The ongoing observation of these networks makes it very easy to see early disruptive developments and take measures against escalation.

Like every technological development, there's always two sides.

[Lauda]

Not sure why you are even discussing this.
Stop using facebook already.

[C10H15N]

You do not use Facebook, Facebook uses you.

You may think you are the user, you are actually the product.

[Lauda]

You do not use Facebook, Facebook uses you.

You may think you are the user, you are actually the product.

Couldn't have said it better.

[Taras]

Also

That was me in 2003.

[cdtc]

This is the real reason why facebook was created in the first
place so the government and its agencies could spy on us.
They want to take our liberty by taking control of every aspect of our lives.

[Mike Christ]

This is the real reason why facebook was created in the first
place so the government and its agencies could spy on us.

This doesn't seem likely; I believe the opportunity presented itself only after people started giving up private info on a public site, and then there was an idea for abuse.  Everything about Facebook is still voluntary, so nobody but folks who choose to use it are to blame if their private info gets out.

Aren't social websites like that just creepy tho?  Surely people have better things to do in their free time, but apparently not

[cdtc]

This is the real reason why facebook was created in the first
place so the government and its agencies could spy on us.

This doesn't seem likely; I believe the opportunity presented itself only after people started giving up private info on a public site, and then there was an idea for abuse.  Everything about Facebook is still voluntary, so nobody but folks who choose to use it are to blame if their private info gets out.

Aren't social websites like that just creepy tho?  Surely people have better things to do in their free time, but apparently not

Maybe you are  partially right, but this is a great opportunity for them to test the public and see how are
they gonna react about giving their personal info and losing their privacy and by that you lose part of your freedom.
Which is very beneficial to them, because less freedom means more control and that's what they essentially want.
Sorry if I am little unclear but english is not my first language.

[Mike Christ]

This is the real reason why facebook was created in the first
place so the government and its agencies could spy on us.

This doesn't seem likely; I believe the opportunity presented itself only after people started giving up private info on a public site, and then there was an idea for abuse.  Everything about Facebook is still voluntary, so nobody but folks who choose to use it are to blame if their private info gets out.

Aren't social websites like that just creepy tho?  Surely people have better things to do in their free time, but apparently not

Maybe you are  partially right, but this is a great opportunity for them to test the public and see how are
they gonna react about giving their personal info and losing their privacy and by that you lose part of your freedom.
Which is very beneficial to them, because less freedom means more control and that's what they essentially want.
Sorry if I am little unclear but english is not my first language.

Yes, I believe you're right; much of what is happening today is a test to see how much can be gotten away with.  For example, the horrendous failures of Obamacare doesn't have people rioting in the street; people seem to be upset but they're going to take the 100$ fee or the loss of their initial health care plans, but they're not bothered enough to take action.  If the state can get away with what's happening with the NSA, what's happening with healthcare butchery, what's happening with provoking endless war, without the people who fund all of this to happen getting up in arms about it, which they haven't been, then we're going to continue to inch toward totalitarianism.  Right now they're making private agreements to impose harsh censorship and penalties for Internet usage, and they will get away with it knowing nobody is going to do anything about it.

For example, if I stole from you $50 and you didn't stop me or tell anyone, I'll continue to take from you, since there are no negative repercussions for my actions.  It's the same concept, just on a grander scale.

[cdtc]

I completely agree with all you have sad,
their plan of action is to kill peoples will to protest by taking
small steps toward their real goal to achieve complete control over people like you see in those
many dystopian movies. Because if they take drastic measures people are gonna
react but if they implement their goals step by step people are not gonna
react, they are gonna say, hey maybe a 100$ is not that much so why I would react.
That is pretty much it whats going on.
And to avoid total loss of freedom people
are gonna have to wake up  and raise their level of consciousness and oppress  the
current global trend that is slowly making us modern slaves.

[Mike Christ]

I completely agree with all you have sad,
their plan of action is to kill peoples will to protest by taking
small steps toward their real goal to achieve complete control over people like you see in those
many dystopian movies. Because if they take drastic measures people are gonna
react but if they implement their goals step by step people are not gonna
react, they are gonna say, hey maybe a 100$ is not that much so why I would react.
That is pretty much it whats going on.
And to avoid total loss of freedom people
are gonna have to wake up  and raise their level of consciousness and oppress  the
current global trend that is slowly making us modern slaves.

I'm afraid we already are debt slaves; however I believe you are correct, the only way to reverse this process, if it can be reversed (I only say this because it has never happened with history's past empires), is in attempts to make people realize the gravity of the situation we're in and how it can be stopped; accept no amount of hypocrisy, spread the virtue of rationalism, let no one shut you up, and remain prudent.

Keep fighting the good fight

[cdtc]

I am glad to see that there are more people who are
able to see whats really going on.
I will, because if the cause is good you should never stop fighting.

[Lauda]

This is the real reason why facebook was created in the first
place so the government and its agencies could spy on us.

This doesn't seem likely; I believe the opportunity presented itself only after people started giving up private info on a public site, and then there was an idea for abuse.  Everything about Facebook is still voluntary, so nobody but folks who choose to use it are to blame if their private info gets out.

Aren't social websites like that just creepy tho?  Surely people have better things to do in their free time, but apparently not

No? Look at the friend finder function. You're pretty much giving them access to your whole email with it.

[meeh]

Yet another reason to start grouping for planning such on a non-corporate platform (facebook, twitter, google+, etc). Preferably decentralized and encrypted system. Sadly I don't think it exist in a form that it's easy for non-tech people to use it.

[chowderman]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

I support this, monitor and track those anarchist hipster morons, then arrest every one of them, put them in prison where they belong.

[jojo69]

yeah, because we were utterly incapable of planning protests before facecrack

 

[meeh]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

I support this, monitor and track those anarchist hipster morons, then arrest every one of them, put them in prison where they belong.

[chowderman]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

I support this, monitor and track those anarchist hipster morons, then arrest every one of them, put them in prison where they belong.

Same stupid image he posted before

Oh its right...just teenage anarchist meatsticks don't understand it..."meeerrrr we're sticking to the man! Merrrr yeah!"

[meeh]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

I support this, monitor and track those anarchist hipster morons, then arrest every one of them, put them in prison where they belong.

Same stupid image he posted before

Oh its right...just teenage anarchist meatsticks don't understand it..."meeerrrr we're sticking to the man! Merrrr yeah!"

Ah, you with all the assumptions again. Go somewhere else with your conspiracy theories. I'm still wating your reply if you haven't forgot.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=272505.msg3592230#msg3592230

[chowderman]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

I support this, monitor and track those anarchist hipster morons, then arrest every one of them, put them in prison where they belong.

Same stupid image he posted before

Oh its right...just teenage anarchist meatsticks don't understand it..."meeerrrr we're sticking to the man! Merrrr yeah!"

Ah, you with all the assumptions again. Go somewhere else with your conspiracy theories. I'm still wating your reply if you haven't forgot.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=272505.msg3592230#msg3592230

Yall aren't one to talk about assumptions, the gov is doing this to us, trying to take this away from me, preventing me from being free...well if you're going to break the law, hell fucking yeah!  There is no conspiracy about it, stop acting like a moron. Its all the anarchist fools thinking up their crazy theories how they think the government is hurting them...I am just calling you on it.

[Mike Christ]

Yall aren't one to talk about assumptions, the gov is doing this to us, trying to take this away from me, preventing me from being free...well if you're going to break the law, hell fucking yeah!  There is no conspiracy about it, stop acting like a moron. Its all the anarchist fools thinking up their crazy theories how they think the government is hurting them...I am just calling you on it.

It has nothing to do with conspiracies or "acting like a moron"; it's nothing more than a desire to decentralize lawmakers so the state no longer becomes necessary.  I don't want to stick it to the man.  I don't want to break the law.  I have nothing against government.  All I'm seeking is a society intelligent enough to get along without resorting to violence.

The popular depiction of the anarchist being some teenage fuckwit sporting a green Mohawk, face full of metal and being a general nuisance to everyone around him is no more accurate than every programmer being a WoW-crazed fatty neckbeard living in his mother's basement.  I realize popular media makes this seem true but I assure you they're both pleasant people.

[chowderman]

Yall aren't one to talk about assumptions, the gov is doing this to us, trying to take this away from me, preventing me from being free...well if you're going to break the law, hell fucking yeah!  There is no conspiracy about it, stop acting like a moron. Its all the anarchist fools thinking up their crazy theories how they think the government is hurting them...I am just calling you on it.

It has nothing to do with conspiracies or "acting like a moron"; it's nothing more than a desire to decentralize lawmakers so the state no longer becomes necessary.  I don't want to stick it to the man.  I don't want to break the law.  I have nothing against government.  All I'm seeking is a society intelligent enough to get along without resorting to violence.

The popular depiction of the anarchist being some teenage fuckwit sporting a green Mohawk, face full of metal and being a general nuisance to everyone around him is no more accurate than every programmer being a WoW-crazed fatty neckbeard living in his mother's basement.  I realize popular media makes this seem true but I assure you they're both pleasant people.

I can certainly go along with your ideals, its fair, honest, and overall what society should be like. Although human nature doesn't often allow such situations, people are evil, greedy and will not hesitate to devour others in order to further their own gain, or their own pleasure. Humanity is not ready for such an advanced society to be 'stateless.' Thats why we have laws in place, legislature and law enforcement to take those not able to live within society away. Sadly as countries grow, the laws grow more complex and standards set in the past may get overlooked in order to police new frontiers of those not fit for society.

[Mike Christ]

I can certainly go along with your ideals, its fair, honest, and overall what society should be like. Although human nature doesn't often allow such situations, people are evil, greedy and will not hesitate to devour others in order to further their own gain, or their own pleasure. Humanity is not ready for such an advanced society to be 'stateless.' Thats why we have laws in place, legislature and law enforcement to take those not able to live within society away. Sadly as countries grow, the laws grow more complex and standards set in the past may get overlooked in order to police new frontiers of those not fit for society.

I agree with you; precisely because humanity is not mature enough to handle anarchism, we rely on the state in order to survive together.  Anarchism would never work if it suddenly occurred now, as it would always devolve back into the state system, e.g. Somalia.  However, I do believe we can work towards this goal through steady improvements in the educational system (here's a good video about it) and slow but steady progress in how parents raise their children, to impart peace and integrity.  Though I'm certain I won't live to see this moment, I don't believe we should discard the notion as impossible, and instead work towards liberation, not away; those who agree with the state system are, of course, thinking about the right now, and I'm very grateful for it, but I can't accept this as the final destination of mankind, the notion of "this is as good as it's going to get", and so I do believe a plan would be beneficial to us; nobody wants another society like WWII Germany, I'm certain, and yet if we aren't positive about our goals for a better world, we seem to always push away from it, toward a completely dominant state, which is what I truly fear.

[meeh]

I agree with you; precisely because humanity is not mature enough to handle anarchism, we rely on the state in order to survive together.  Anarchism would never work if it suddenly occurred now, as it would always devolve back into the state system, e.g. Somalia.

You're completly right here, and I agree Mike Christ. But chowderman seems to have a BIG problem to understand the difference between anarchy and rebellion/protestion against some laws. I can't recall it's beeing mentioned anything about anarchism from the side wihch chowderman apparently is not on, but he still throws blames about anarchism and criminals and more.

That's why I don't agree with him. He sweeps everyone under one comb. Because you don't agree with one or two rules, it does not magicaly make you an anarchist that will remove the government and let the ciminals rule. We still need police and stuff for fuck sake, people are still killing and raping people, and unfortunaly they will probably a long time in the future.

[Mike Christ]

I agree with you; precisely because humanity is not mature enough to handle anarchism, we rely on the state in order to survive together.  Anarchism would never work if it suddenly occurred now, as it would always devolve back into the state system, e.g. Somalia.

You're completly right here, and I agree Mike Christ. But chowderman seems to have a BIG problem to understand the difference between anarchy and rebellion/protestion against some laws. I can't recall it's beeing mentioned anything about anarchism from the side wihch chowderman apparently is not on, but he still throws blames about anarchism and criminals and more.

That's why I don't agree with him. He sweeps everyone under one comb. Because you don't agree with one or two rules, it does not magicaly make you an anarchist that will remove the government and let the ciminals rule. We still need police and stuff for fuck sake, people are still killing and raping people, and unfortunaly they will probably a long time in the future.

Yes, you're right, and I understand your frustration; all we can really do is state our case in a way we would understand before we started believing in anarchism.  It wasn't that long ago that I thought anarchists were crazy people myself I think it wasn't until the beginning of this year that I'd been introduced to the viewpoint...  What really draws me to it is how rational anarchists are, and eventually I couldn't call myself rational while fighting them with irrational logic.  I believe it was a gun debate that finally broke me; I tried to make the case that banning guns was a good thing, but after I was explained why it wasn't, I had to roll with what made more sense.

Anyhow, I believe the best approach is to leave anarchism out of the equation, but to instead push for rationalism; find a break in someone's logic and pull the thread, show them why you believe the things that you do, state your intentions, have patience.  Anarchism evolves naturally from secular rationalism; the more rational a society is, the less dependence they have on the state.  Since the state loses all its power if nobody believes in it, it's not a matter of political preference, but a matter of understanding why it's better to have a foundation of reason and ethics; everything flows naturally from these philosophies.

[meeh]

Yes, you're right, and I understand your frustration; all we can really do is state our case in a way we would understand before we started believing in anarchism.  It wasn't that long ago that I thought anarchists were crazy people myself I think it wasn't until the beginning of this year that I'd been introduced to the viewpoint...  What really draws me to it is how rational anarchists are, and eventually I couldn't call myself rational while fighting them with irrational logic.  I believe it was a gun debate that finally broke me; I tried to make the case that banning guns was a good thing, but after I was explained why it wasn't, I had to roll with what made more sense.

Anyhow, I believe the best approach is to leave anarchism out of the equation, but to instead push for rationalism; find a break in someone's logic and pull the thread, show them why you believe the things that you do, state your intentions, have patience.  Anarchism evolves naturally from secular rationalism; the more rational a society is, the less dependence they have on the state.  Since the state loses all its power if nobody believes in it, it's not a matter of political preference, but a matter of understanding why it's better to have a foundation of reason and ethics; everything flows naturally from these philosophies.

Seems like we have had some of the same experiences and agree with you

+1

[TheButterZone]

I agree with you; precisely because humanity is not mature enough to handle anarchism, we rely on the state in order to survive together.  Anarchism would never work if it suddenly occurred now, as it would always devolve back into the state system, e.g. Somalia.

You're completly right here, and I agree Mike Christ. But chowderman seems to have a BIG problem to understand the difference between anarchy and rebellion/protestion against some laws. I can't recall it's beeing mentioned anything about anarchism from the side wihch chowderman apparently is not on, but he still throws blames about anarchism and criminals and more.

That's why I don't agree with him. He sweeps everyone under one comb. Because you don't agree with one or two rules, it does not magicaly make you an anarchist that will remove the government and let the ciminals rule. We still need police and stuff for fuck sake, people are still killing and raping people, and unfortunaly they will probably a long time in the future.

Police are effectively no deterrent to murder, rape, and all other crimes. However, because they enforce the human rights violations called "gun control", they are a deterrent to peaceful people being able to defend themselves, which actually deters crime. Unfortunately totalitarians will never go quietly into the night, so people will continue to kill, rape, and otherwise victimize the legally disarmed and defenseless, with effective impunity.

[darkmule]

Police are effectively no deterrent to murder, rape, and all other crimes. However, because they enforce the human rights violations called "gun control", they are a deterrent to peaceful people being able to defend themselves, which actually deters crime. Unfortunately totalitarians will never go quietly into the night, so people will continue to kill, rape, and otherwise victimize the legally disarmed and defenseless, with effective impunity.

This is, of course, why the United States, the only civilized nation with no gun control, is a perfect paradise of peace and harmony and nobody is in prison here.  The Scandinavian countries, full of gun control, are the most violent hellholes in the world.  You can barely get off a plane in Stockholm without being dragged to the street and ripped to pieces by ravening hordes of violent criminals.

I'm proud to be Amurrican where muh freedumb.

[Mike Christ]

Police are effectively no deterrent to murder, rape, and all other crimes. However, because they enforce the human rights violations called "gun control", they are a deterrent to peaceful people being able to defend themselves, which actually deters crime. Unfortunately totalitarians will never go quietly into the night, so people will continue to kill, rape, and otherwise victimize the legally disarmed and defenseless, with effective impunity.

This is, of course, why the United States, the only civilized nation with no gun control, is a perfect paradise of peace and harmony and nobody is in prison here.  The Scandinavian countries, full of gun control, are the most violent hellholes in the world.  You can barely get off a plane in Stockholm without being dragged to the street and ripped to pieces by ravening hordes of violent criminals.

I'm proud to be Amurrican where muh freedumb.

Where are you from that you believe America has no gun control?

[TheButterZone]

Police are effectively no deterrent to murder, rape, and all other crimes. However, because they enforce the human rights violations called "gun control", they are a deterrent to peaceful people being able to defend themselves, which actually deters crime. Unfortunately totalitarians will never go quietly into the night, so people will continue to kill, rape, and otherwise victimize the legally disarmed and defenseless, with effective impunity.

This is, of course, why the United States, the only civilized nation with no gun control, is a perfect paradise of peace and harmony and nobody is in prison here.  The Scandinavian countries, full of gun control, are the most violent hellholes in the world.  You can barely get off a plane in Stockholm without being dragged to the street and ripped to pieces by ravening hordes of violent criminals.

I'm proud to be Amurrican where muh freedumb.

Where are you from that you believe America has no gun control?

Yep, absolute BS. Plenty of innocent people, mostly non-caucasians, have suffered punishment for the "crime" of being able to defend ourselves against aggressors (violating "gun control") in America.

[mateo]

This link is foxnews safe... 

http://rt.com/usa/facebook-police-social-lipp-743/

A partnership between police departments and social media sites discussed at a convention in Philadelphia this week could allow law enforcement to keep anything deemed criminal off the Internet—and even stop people from organizing protests.

A high-ranking official from the Chicago Police Department told attendees at a law enforcement conference on Monday that his agency has been working with a security chief at Facebook to block certain users from the site “if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content,” reports Kenneth Lipp, an independent journalist who attended the lecture.

Lipp reported throughout the week from the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, and now says that a speaker during one of the presentations suggested that a relationship exists between law enforcement and social media that that could be considered a form of censorship.

According to Lipp, the unnamed CPD officer said specifically that his agency was working with Facebook to block users’ by their individual account, IP address or device, such as a cell phone or computer.

God, I'm so glad I'm not living in the US. Their government is out of control and the people there don't seem to be doing anything about it.

[mateo]

Police are effectively no deterrent to murder, rape, and all other crimes. However, because they enforce the human rights violations called "gun control", they are a deterrent to peaceful people being able to defend themselves, which actually deters crime. Unfortunately totalitarians will never go quietly into the night, so people will continue to kill, rape, and otherwise victimize the legally disarmed and defenseless, with effective impunity.

This is, of course, why the United States, the only civilized nation with no gun control, is a perfect paradise of peace and harmony and nobody is in prison here.  The Scandinavian countries, full of gun control, are the most violent hellholes in the world.  You can barely get off a plane in Stockholm without being dragged to the street and ripped to pieces by ravening hordes of violent criminals.

I'm proud to be Amurrican where muh freedumb.

Anecdotal examples. Russians have stricter gun control and a lot less guns than Sweden, but their murder rates are more than double compared to the US and 10 times compared to Sweden's. I'm not saying that gun control is good or bad, but a more thoughtful discussion must be had on the issue, than just pointing on the map and saying: "Hey look, this country has tough gun control and low crime rates, hence gun control = low crime rates".

This thing that some American liberals believe that Europe is almost free of violence due to gun control is largely a myth.

[Lauda]

Stay away from such things and you should be fine.

[Wilikon]

Everybody loves their favorite gun control puppets. They don't even believe you need a gun for self-defense from another human being, strangely enough if you are a female being attacked. Yet defending yourself with a flu shot is fine. Using radiation against cancer is fine. What is the difference but scale? From the social unit to the microscopic unit, self-defense is the same. Maybe I am the only one seeing it that way.

What was I talking about? Oh yeah: Facebook and total police control.

[Mike Christ]

What was I talking about? Oh yeah: Facebook and total police control.

Yeah, facebook sucks.  Lets boycott it

[darkmule]

Anecdotal examples. Russians have stricter gun control and a lot less guns than Sweden, but their murder rates are more than double compared to the US and 10 times compared to Sweden's. I'm not saying that gun control is good or bad, but a more thoughtful discussion must be had on the issue, than just pointing on the map and saying: "Hey look, this country has tough gun control and low crime rates, hence gun control = low crime rates".

There's what's on the books and what actually happens.  If you read Russia's Constitution during the Soviet era, it contained most of the same freedom of speech and other civil liberties guarantees as the U.S. Constitution.  But it was just on paper.  None of those rights actually existed in practice.  By contrast, as flawed as the U.S. system is, you can go into a court and argue that a law violates the First Amendment, or Second Amendment for that matter, and if you can convince a court of that, the law gets struck down.

Also, re the OP, the story seems more than a bit overblown.

No, the Cops Aren’t Banning Protesters From Facebook

It should come as no surprise that police departments monitor social media. After all, as a speaker revealed during a panel at last week’s International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, roughly 96 percent of law enforcement agencies utilize social media, and more than 86 percent for “investigative purposes.”

At least, that’s according to Kenneth Lipp, the Philadelphia-based investigative journalist at the center of what Chicago Police Department Lt. Steven Sesso calls a “headache.”

Since the IACP conference’s closing, Lipp has been posting photos and videos from the event’s panels and showroom floor, along with blog posts highlighting the available police swag and attending heavy-hitters. It was essentially a who’s who of modern law enforcement, the massive conference having filled every bit of the PA Convention Center’s 679,000 square feet for a solid five days.

The headache to which Lt. Sesso refers, though, comes not from any helicopters or armored personnel carriers that were for sale, but a statement from an unnamed, unscheduled speaker from the Chicago Police Department indicating an apparent relationship between the agency and social media giant Facebook. According to Lipp’s original blog post, the nature of that relationship—allegedly built through Facebook’s chief security officer, Joe Sullivan—was to “block users’ from the site by account [person], IP, and device … if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content.” Additionally, Sullivan was listed as a speaker for that same panel.

tl;dr the police can read Facebook.  Just like anyone else can.  And they can click the "report" button.

Just like anyone else can.

[Wilikon]

Anecdotal examples. Russians have stricter gun control and a lot less guns than Sweden, but their murder rates are more than double compared to the US and 10 times compared to Sweden's. I'm not saying that gun control is good or bad, but a more thoughtful discussion must be had on the issue, than just pointing on the map and saying: "Hey look, this country has tough gun control and low crime rates, hence gun control = low crime rates".

There's what's on the books and what actually happens.  If you read Russia's Constitution during the Soviet era, it contained most of the same freedom of speech and other civil liberties guarantees as the U.S. Constitution.  But it was just on paper.  None of those rights actually existed in practice.  By contrast, as flawed as the U.S. system is, you can go into a court and argue that a law violates the First Amendment, or Second Amendment for that matter, and if you can convince a court of that, the law gets struck down.

Also, re the OP, the story seems more than a bit overblown.

No, the Cops Aren’t Banning Protesters From Facebook

It should come as no surprise that police departments monitor social media. After all, as a speaker revealed during a panel at last week’s International Association of Chiefs of Police conference, roughly 96 percent of law enforcement agencies utilize social media, and more than 86 percent for “investigative purposes.”

At least, that’s according to Kenneth Lipp, the Philadelphia-based investigative journalist at the center of what Chicago Police Department Lt. Steven Sesso calls a “headache.”

Since the IACP conference’s closing, Lipp has been posting photos and videos from the event’s panels and showroom floor, along with blog posts highlighting the available police swag and attending heavy-hitters. It was essentially a who’s who of modern law enforcement, the massive conference having filled every bit of the PA Convention Center’s 679,000 square feet for a solid five days.

The headache to which Lt. Sesso refers, though, comes not from any helicopters or armored personnel carriers that were for sale, but a statement from an unnamed, unscheduled speaker from the Chicago Police Department indicating an apparent relationship between the agency and social media giant Facebook. According to Lipp’s original blog post, the nature of that relationship—allegedly built through Facebook’s chief security officer, Joe Sullivan—was to “block users’ from the site by account [person], IP, and device … if it is determined they have posted what is deemed criminal content.” Additionally, Sullivan was listed as a speaker for that same panel.

tl;dr the police can read Facebook.  Just like anyone else can.  And they can click the "report" button.

Just like anyone else can.

I agree that sensationalism sales papers, online clicks and thread baits. It was meant for people here to  still be aware of their privacy and property and create a conversation, back and forth...

...Until you will be forced to have a facebook account linked to your bitcoin wallet and THEN... DUN!  DUN! DUUUNN!!!!!!!

[Wilikon]

http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/25/15-of-employees-are-required-to-use-personal-social-accounts-for-work-survey/

We’re about a third of the way done with our 9-question survey on social media at work, and the preliminary results are both fascinating and disturbing.

For example, 17 percent of our anonymous respondents so far told us they are required to use their personal social media accounts to post about work and their company. (A further 27 percent are not required but are strongly encouraged to do so.)

For these folks, the line between personal and private online lives has blurred to invisibility. As one of these respondents noted, “I have to be very careful about everything I say to my friends as I conduct business activities over the same accounts. My Facebook has become a more interactive version of my LinkedIn profile, with only the blandest conversations with my friends.

“My friends don’t understand why I am reluctant to use this channel to talk, and it’s hard to get them to sign in to Skype every time I want to chat.”

Another employee told us, “I feel the personal and work identities have largely blurred in the past several years. That being said, I am moderately concerned about privacy, security, and surveillance.”

But not everyone’s overly concerned about how their private accounts and data are being handled. As a third respondent said, “It’s good to have a transparent life, provided nobody uses the data from these social networks to pester people for buying their services or products.”

(Unfortunately, that’s precisely what the data is used for in the most innocuous cases.)

For this minority group, the most-required network for company use is Facebook, followed by Twitter.

These respondents are also — surprise, surprise — more likely to feel their privacy is being violated by their employers.

[satosh007]

It's crazy that people still use Facefuck/Twatter, plenty of alternatives to the CIA/NSA/GCHQ database:

http://pump.io/
https://diasporafoundation.org/
https://www.gnu.org/software/social/
http://movim.eu/

always check https://prism-break.org/ for good ways to protect your privacy.
that said people will continue to use F.B. & T for mass spread of the word.

[darkmule]

The last sentence is a gem:

"95.9 percent of law enforcement agencies use social media, 86.1 percent for investigative purposes," Lipp quoted from the head of the social media group for the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

That's because the police don't publicly broadcast their intentions on Facebook.

Gotta love the Suspiciously Specific Percentages cited by this whoever-it-is.

Is it really a surprise or even wrong, though, that the police are as capable of reading shit you post in public as your next door neighbor is?

Seriously.  How shocking!  How dare the police look at posts of you boasting about your crimes!

[DeboraMeeks]

Facebook is annoying in term of privacy and customer satisfaction,they just change things without giving you prior notices if you like it or not,there ads are annoying and a complete invasion of privacy since they use your likes/shows/groups etc...

[hieroglyph]

people should already have been aware that facebook is profiling its users for a reason.  This just seems like the next logical step in a plan to get everyone profiled and databased as a from of control if not worse but that is just my opinion. 

[niothor]

I see a new website coming op.
ProtestBook.


Which is actually available:
ProtestBook.com is for sale (Protest Book). Click here to buy ProtestBook.com for $1,895.