Partnership between Facebook and police could make planning protests impossible

[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.

[1715423572]

1715423572

[1715423572]

1715423572

[1715423572]

1715423572

[1715423572]

1715423572

[1715423572]

1715423572

[1715423572]

1715423572

[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.