Interestingly, it will dendrogram-source-analysis will probably lead to the people who organized and instigated these riots.
Not "protests".
Riots.
And they belong in prison.
7
@Objectivist
Not that simple, a peaceful protestor or bystander within proximity of violent outbreaks
could then be tracked as a rioter for starts.......
13
If only the British had had this level of surveillance capability 250 years ago. How times would have changed.
7
LEGISLATION? Please direct us to the appropriate Congressperson or Bill that curtails surveillance? No? Then why are you complaining?
1
Turning off location won't help you if the phone is on as it still communicates with the cell phone tower. Best thing to do is stop using cell phones. Also, write your congressional representatives and tell them that privacy is extremely important and must be protected.
22
It's worse than you think. I was responsible for analyzing tracking data for a Tourism marketing firm. The idea was simple. A big problem with tourism marketing is attribution. It's very hard to measure the impact of an ad campaign. Did the person see your ad or would they show up anyway?
With GPS data, you can serve someone an ad and wait to see if they show up in your targeted tourism area. Cause and effect. The main problem at the time was cross platform use. Maybe the ad gets served on a work laptop. We wouldn't know the ad was the reason your cell phone showed up on Waponi Woo Island. We didn't see across devices.
I imagine that limitation is fixed by now. I can think of several ways to do it. The problem is they all become prohibitively expensive. Realistically, no private firm wants or needs the precision data we're capable of collecting. Only state run actors could afford that level of granularity.
That thought should make your skin crawl. The data only exist in order to sell to governments. Why would the government need to track your position to within 3 meters or less? I can't think of any good reason. Time to look into that burner phone. They aren't prohibitively expensive.
I'll give you a brief glimpse into what we're talking about. As political canvasser, I was given access to the organization's MiniVAN account. I had a map the entire state's political voting preferences on my cell phone organized by name and household. Think about that.
18
Just watch the "Handmaid's Tale" movie again, you know, the one with Natasha Richardson and Faye. And you'll see what we are rapidly turning into, with applicable technology upgrades that include sophisticated facial recognition already being deployed by those exponents of freedom, the Chinese.
6
I don't have a data plan. I use a smartphone as a dumbphone. If I want to browse, I use a desktop. Basically, I want a mobile phone with SMS text capability. Airplane mode or powering down readily disconnects me.
5
I have started leaving my phone at home, and when I take it with me, carrying it in a silver cigar case.
7
Turning off location services isn't foolproof. Not even turning your phone off completely mitigates its being used against you as a tracking device, at least not if you've already been targeted by security agencies.
The safest option is to leave your device at home.
12
Why do the authors use the future tense when talking about big data being used by political actors to make psychographic files and manipulate them. Don’t they know about Cambridge Analytica? It’s happening right now.
10
Just keep location services on your phone turned off. Not that hard folks.
2
The the iPhone pan-opticon hasn't got me yet. I keep my phone in a Faraday pouch. The phone can't send or receive signals as long as it's in the bag. In the event I need to call AAA, I can take it out of the bag. Otherwise, who needs it?
10
I knew there was a good reason that I don't often have a phone with me.
3
I was watching the NASA launch coverage yesterday. Later in the evening, they showed some highly-detailed, high-def close-up aerial photos of Cape Canaveral that had been taken from the ISS, orbiting 400 km above our unsuspecting noggins. The photos were so close up and so detailed, you'd think they had been taken from a drone.
I should think that cellphone tracking is probably the least of your worries if they've got lenses up there that can see, photograph and film you - 24/7, 365 or 366 days a year - picking your nose from low-earth orbit, no password required.
5
I have my dead son's phone and would like to get the text messages from it to see where he got the drugs that killed him. There is no way to access the information without knowing his pass code which I do not have.
Let me know if there is a way to bypass security in this case.
8
It would be nice if NYT Corp., the Washington Post and other news organizations lived up to the standards we would like to see: No tracking!
Without a secure browser, unavailable on cell phones, the Times automatically sends your usage information to more than a dozen tracking companies - longing in and reading the Times or WaPost, even if you PAY (I've got a Times home delivery sub Free wireless included, and pay Newsday for the Post Sunday weekly and directly for on-line service).
You cannot log in and read the Times without letting Google know which articles you read, and how long you spend reading each one. The NYT even uses DoubleClick, the most infamous division of the Google empire to steal data, mash it and sell it back - I think we'd pay the $1/user/month the Times probably makes selling our data for clean log-in protection that never leaves the NYT server, and which the Times uses only to make sure only those who pay get the service they're entitled to.
The Times may be the least-profitable business the Times Corp. owns - but it has a commitment. The Washington Post serves as a great tax write-off for Bezos. He can afford to lose a little more - and the rest of the hard-pressed news organizations out there should cut the number of color photos rather than give away reader data to anyone with the bucks to buy it.
28
@Eatoin Shrdlu Secure browsers are a fantasy, and lest you doubt that read the people who do nothing all day other than attempt to understand and or devise "secure" browsers. And yes, there are some honest digital security sources.
First the public is duped about cellphones, than they are duped about "secure" browsers. What's next? A direct line to Santa Claus?
4
@gking01 Which are the honest digital security sources?
@MS Start here:
https://www.wired.com/2017/12/digital-security-guide/
https://safeonline.ng/fundamentals/an-overview-of-digital-security-the-need-and-dangers/
Then do your research. Just don't hold out for anything like "secure" browsers.
3
So stop carrying a smart cell phone everywhere. I see people grasping these silly devices as if they are tethered to oxygen masks and will lose the ability to breathe if they are not holding on for dear life. I don't have one, don't need one, and don't want one. If you want to make a call during the day, carry a regular cell phone- they work just as well- you push the buttons, the phone rings, and someone does or does not answer. Problem solved. I have an old cell phone- it is off, and sits on a book case. Once a month I turn it on to see if anyone has called. Then I turn it off for another month.
20
@boji3 I personally agree, but I know lots of folks who don't have the option to distance themselves from their cellphones. Their jobs depend upon the thing.
A little bit smug, aren't you? Let me guess: you're retired, benefit from a trust fund, etc.
11
It's called freedom of speech, of association, and of assembly. Are you in favor? For yourself? For everyone?
4
The thing that is really troubling is that no matter how tech savvy you are, there is no way (short of just not having a cell phone at all) to avoid this. You can block trackers, ads, and other nefarious things on a desktop computer (even then your fingerprint via your browser is still available), but they still can identify you. You cant win. That doesn't even take into account...what if they get the data wrong. You could be denied a job for a reason you dont know and because of an error you cannot fix. I dont even think Orwell could of imagined how far this has all come.
14
And, of course, this comment - and every one of all of our comments - are tracked, yielding a composite picture of You:
Your political views
What you say about Trump
What you have said about other articles
Even those comments you have liked / recommended.
Here I am. See me. Come and get me.
Yikes.
8
@Jim
Then we can all mess with them, spout off random nonsense and then contradictions everywhere. They use misinformation on us all of the time. The beauty, though, is we can do it back.
4
@Guido S.
I suppose that sooner or later a new app will be created which, much like NordVPN or other VPN type software (that disguise your IP and location) will provide fake coordinates to the big data mining community. It is a matter of both national interest and self interest.
2
@Vector Detector Why is the default position to hope for *more* technology to solve this or that problem with technology?
I think the central point is being missed here.
2
This so darn annoying! On top of being scary.
But ... if I understand it correctly .... if I turn bluetooth off, I'm kind of invisible to trackers?
2
@c I would hope you could find another word, something bolder than "annoying."
Yes, turn off your Bluetooth. You will be tracked as soon as you turn it back on. Same location? The metadata analysis will fill in the gaps.
1
And people think I am out of step because I don't do any social media and my cell phone is a $14 phone and I buy time for $20 a month. I usually make no calls at all and tend to merely carry it in the car for emergencies. No voice mail and I don't give out the number. Why should I pay absurd sums of money for a Personal Tracking Device that by seducing people with "convenience" actually imperils their privacy? Frankly I am sick of spending time with people who are glued to their device and text and talk on the phone during business or social events. You have been brainwashed and need the NYT to point this out to you.
19
the title photo animation makes the important point visually.
it's not about your privacy, or surveillance, or any such concept. these things only matter when they are either operative or breached. the state, the corporations, they currently manage their operations and hide the breaches, so that they become public and visible, as little as possible. mostly, what you see is "personalized advertising."
no: the photo shows us in its little swarm of lights the real point: human is being transformed into a herd animal. and what a fine, obedient, complaisant herd animal it is! a herd animal driven by media and the herd dogs of the commentariat. more people, bigger herd; bigger herd, more docile herd behavior.
your smartphone selfie is like a little mirror, hung before your eyes from a collar around your neck, that keeps you trundling forward with the pleasing image of your own face. how you love that face! but the mirror hides where you are headed.
"where are we going, and what do we expect to find when we get there?" no one can answer those simple questions.
we're headed to crowds like those hong kong protesters, herded together by the rising tides of climate change, our wealth taken by the corporations and oligarchs, flashing our little lights into the dark as if they would bring our rescue.
by the time you rely on a cellphone flashlight, it's way too late.
5
AT&T users have less to worry about.
@Aristotle Sure, AT&T would never spy on it's customers: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/us/politics/att-helped-nsa-spy-on-an-array-of-internet-traffic.html
1
For once, I'm glad my carrier is not available in the wilderness areas I frequent. I use airplane mode to save the battery and take all the pictures I want. They get tagged with some location about 25 miles from where I am.
2
Real privacy is a quaint concept that died with the 20th century and the advent of the public internet in the mid-nineties. Massive data collection by both private corporations and governments has been the rule ever since 9/11/2001. Short of a massive power outage precipitated by war, terror, or natural disaster, "big brother" is here to stay.
8
This new technology whether smart phones where the state already can read your emails or follow ones mov'ts. The opportunity for abuse by the gov't is being realized. The big tech companies in this country have become behemoths with too much power that comes from their vast wealth. They have branched out in every direction taking advantage of their strategic market position to grow into other areas and push out competition. There is clearly the chance of dystopia taking shape by corporatist efforts to dominate and expand.
2
A problem with not bringing a cellphone is that organizations that organize these protests want photos of the protests to post on their websites. The photos are critical for demonstrating the number and size of protests. An additional worry is that some states have been trying to pass laws to call certain protesters terrorists such as those trying to stop fossil fuel pipelines from being built. This is really dangerous and could be expanded to more types of protests.
7
@Bob You can still use your phone to take photos when it's in airplane mode and the GPS is turned off!
1
@Bob Plenty of digital cameras still available. That way you can take pics and not be tracked by Big Brother. Just get one of the little ones under $50 with no WiFi or GPS.
4
You know what "The Company" is.
It's the Company spying on it's own people.
After the nation was attacked by foreigners, the government focused the nightmare surveillance on "We the People".
Both parties are locking down the nation after Trump was appointed.
The military "Space Force" is likely meant to create enemies to avoid an internal conflict.
Prepare to leave the nation to survive.
1
While the tracking of individuals that is made possible by cellphone technology is mildly alarming, it is not itself a threat to democracy; when hiding our tracks from our government becomes necessary, it is a clear indication that democracy is already lost.
3
Should I demonstrate or participate in a political, social, economic, rally, demonstration, gathering or anything of the sort, that is legal, I should be happy for all and sundry to know my views.
If I think strongly about something then I see no reason to hide behind the mask of anonymity.
Track me - I have nothing to hide and certainly not my views or which apples I prefer when shopping for fruit.
5
@Joshua Schwartz
It depends on what is determined to be legal. If those that are being protested against can determine the legality of the demonstration, "the nothing to hide" argument falls short. It has and is being done elsewhere and could be done here in western societies (but only for the public good).
4
@Joshua Schwartz
Your apple preference is nobody's business
3
The issue, and need for solution is not the technology.
The issue is our tendency to proscribe and prohibit more and more behavior, and seeking to criminalize all the things we do not like.
When the state arrests you, do not blame your phone. Blame all the laws, including those motivated by good intentions, that you broke while trying to express yourself and exercise your fundamental liberties.
6
With technology threatening our freedom and climate change our existence, could there be any more important reasons to vote for Democrats in 2020. By no standard are they infallible, but they get us closer to solving these issues than anyone.
10
Can’t the phones location services be turned off whilst still able to post on social media?
It seems a contest between social networking the protest and government spying for possible retribution.
1
@RjW Unfortunately, all the software UI “controls” are useless, because the phone OS (iOS or Android or whatever) can still share the location with whomever the developer of the OS wants.
We need a physical “switch” on location chips (like we have on microphones on smart devices) to make sure that we have control over it.
2
@Andrey
Cell phones can be located by triangulation from the cell access points nearest them. In urban areas with many cells, that is quite accurate even if the phone GPS receiver is disabled, although enabling GPS can improve accuracy.
4
@Andrey
Thank You and Happy Holidays!
1
I do not own a smartphone.
And Oregon is a state where DMV photos are not available to police databases.
So I am of course exempt from all of this.
6
@slangpdx
Your cell phone can be tracked effectively by triangulation from the closest cell access stations. Law enforcement officials can use a warrant to obtain it from your carrier. If you have reason to think "the authorities" are interested in your movements, leave the cell phone behind, or turn it off. If you are really concerned you might want to wrap it in aluminum foil or put it in a commercially available shield container.
Note that this is not the application generated commercial information this series is discussing, but it applies to every device connected to the national cell network.
5
@slangpdx So, your car doesn't have GPS? There are no traffic cameras in Portland? What about your key fob? Your license plates? How about the smartphones all your friends carry?
2
@Charles
Haven't owned a vehicle since 2013, that was a 1989 VW Fox, would not own any made in the last 20 years.
Yes cell phones can be triangulated to a tower, but they have to specifically try to do it, gps data is not stored because there isn't any.
1
Your phone only "betrays democracy" if it is a smartphone, which most smart people realize most of us could get along without.
But most do not, so democracy is indeed threatened.
Yet, regulation is critical, yet while a "privacy bill of rights" would be helpful, that is not the same thing as regulation.
We need to outlaw any company collecting any personal information from internet users, period. Kill the monstrous trick-addict-spy-on-and-plunder business model ASAP.
If people want to vountarily supply companies with information, that might be allowed, but only under limited conditions, strict safeguards, and with requirements that fees be paid to consumers and taxes collected to offset the social damages.
3
I have the 2018 Samsung android flagship phone. While the technology inside it and its abilities are what I dreamed about growing up.
Those dreams have turned to nightmares of Samsung and Google and a host of 3rd parties sitting on my nightstand while I sleep. Watching over every facet of my ordinary life.
5
This is a problem for our wizard hackers to solve - why do we not have phones that lay a false path, a fog or blanket of confusing static? There should be an app!
Those interested in tracking would give up if they couldn't trust the data.
10
The emphasis on phone tracking, while good, is too narrow.
Surveillance by phones, computers, ISPs, smart TVs, smart cars, etc., extends far beyond location tracking.
9
Are Faraday bags effective in blocking tracking?
2
Sadly, the European model is not that beneficial to radical systems like the US or China. We are radically corporatists, and China is radically government control by the CCP.
The EU system forced the big tech companies to admit to their scam and now we have to click accept on new cookie acceptance. It's all too much, hope not too late.
Dictatorships and budding dictatorships (that is, authoritarian governments that are trying to move in the direction of full dictatorship) have increased means in our era of technological development to increase tight-fisted control. What usually stands in the way of the authoritarian's power are the activists who are less powerful and less numerous than government personnel. The government has the money, the personnel , and the "authority" on its side. For whistleblowers or other courageous protesters to stand up and point out the government's flaws, it helps if these people can keep their identities and locations hidden. But anonymity and location--as you point out--- are becoming harder to hide. This is frightening because people like Putin, Kim, Erdogan , and even our own Trump, among several others, would like to punish protesters (and often even their families}. Democracies cannot continue to exist when an authoritarian person grabs hold of a bit of power because the little bit he/she starts with can be expanded by current technology.
5
The ultimate kick in the pants is that Americans believe corporate surveillance isn’t government surveillance.
Who do Americans think has all of the government IT contracts? The contracts go to these same private tech companies.
Who do Americans think the tech firms hire to lobby for them to get more power in government? They hire politicians.
At this point, corporate and government surveillance is a distinction without any meaningful difference. They’re all the exact same people and all the exact same companies.
19
Imagine living in a theocracy imposed by the far-right-white-nationalist-fascist republicans who support trump, and being constantly under surveillance by a "christian" Taliban.
Imagine that surveillance is intrusive enough into your private thoughts to "determine" each moment of your existence in which you question their dogma.
While most people would define such imaginings as paranoid, doesn't mean our national political policies aren't headed that direction full speed ahead, with no brakes.
15
Drug dealers, be very afraid.
3
@ohdearwhatnow
And the rest of us should feel safe in a world of (now increasingly seamless and cheap) micro-surveillance?
That is the lesson you have drawn from history?
3
@ohdearwhatnow
This, presumably, is a sly comment to the effect that if the tracking were anywhere close to as effective as the fear mongers claim, the drug dealers (and probably drug cartels) would have been taken down.
If so, the point is insightful and correct.
2
@Katonah I think you have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed. I said no such thing. Project much?
1
I find this article both vindicating and very frustrating.
Some of us started talking about this kind of privacy assault a very long time ago and got nowhere because nobody thought we had anything. The lawyers didn't see the career in it, the journalists believed, following leading lights among them that are still there, that nobody could inflict harm like a government could, and the internet luminaries constantly treated us like children because they somehow thought we didn't know that the 4th Amendment only applies to the government. That's the vindication part.
The frustrating part is in the inevitability this article portrays of some of the things journalists in New York City do on the internet or their cellphones that some us just don't. I haven't made a tacit decision that collection of my place or other information is inevitable, neither have my friends and acquaintances. We live in Silicon Valley, we were quite aware of data collection when the journalists in New York were still swooning over Google's gourmet cafeterias.
My GPS/GIS, and in fact my phone itself, is usually switched off. My internet presence is quite limited. I'm not on Facebook, or Twitter, or Instagram, or What'sApp, I've never been successfully phished. I don't post pix of myself, I turn off all sorts of things in privacy panels.
And I never miss all that junk, either.
And we really did warn you this would happen. You said we were stupid, old, and "Luddite". Now look who's talking.
8
Everybody who likes the 'realpolitik' in this pile. Everybody who doesn't. . . welcome to the margin. I'd like to ask how long I must accept things before I'm asked for a favor? Since I'm reading this now, I expect soon.
1
Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU! - for such a comprehensive piece.
3
This is an extraordinarily well-documented, thoughtful, and beautifully written series. Journalism at its best.
Citizens in a democracy have always had awesome responsibilities. The technology here described has exponentially increased the duty, but also the difficulty, to exercise them.
7
They can't track your phone if it is off or in airplane mode, unless they are able to install malware on it (and then the battery drain should arouse suspicion).
Protests will adopt technologies that make them harder to track, such as mesh networks and TOR.
2
Technology is advancing at a breathtaking speed. However, our laws and means to protect us from the abuses from those advances have not been able to keep pace.
The ability to track your location at every moment is a bonanza in the hands of a dictator or a surveillance state. We are already in an Orwellian world.
Since we cannot totally abandon all of the modern technologies and function in today's world at least we must not surrender our privacy voluntarily for a little convenience. We can turn off the GPS on our smart phones when we do not want to be tracked. We must use our judgment before jumping in to sign up or use every new gizmo that comes along.
In a democracy, the main responsibility to protect our data that is collected by corporations or even the government rests with the representatives we elect and also the government that should respect the laws and the pledge to protect our democracy. We hope our representatives are knowledgeable and up to the task.
May be the European Union makes better privacy protection rules to follow.
Boy, this takes a lot of air out of the excitement that used to come with a new phone. Mine is going to stay at home much more often or at least be "off" when it's with me.
5
@Jay I agree with you, and I am not much of a rabble-rouser. You can’t buy a new car today, however, without microphones or other surveillance options built into the automobile. Your movements, conversations — even weight gain — can be collated by your car.
Even if we draft laws, they are ineffective if Big Tech breaks them. Given the attitudes of many Silicon Valley magnates toward the privacy rights of the average American citizen, I am not optimistic. Americans never asked for this, and we don’t want it. But it’s roaring full-steam ahead with the lack of any real-world oversight.
I was re-reading the Times series on child pornography, and how it flourishes even when tech companies know where it is and who is releasing new content. There is no real drive at the DOJ to enforce the laws or spend the money dedicated to fighting it.
Tech companies today feel like a new shadow government. It’s remit today is deeply un-American.
11
I'm waiting for someone to invent an app that sends random locations as tracking info, or tracking info that says you're at home, work, or the dentist.
2
@KirkTaylor Buy anti-drone gear, it's not expensive. Then land someone else's drone and take it over. Now attach your mobile to it, and make all kinds of trips that would puzzle the NSA. Would be fun, if clogging of the surveillance systems became a hobby for many people. But then - I am afraid the surveillance business may not really know its own best - they are sweeping up all kinds of garbage and noise. They would say otherwise to get funding, but I wonder if they have watched too much science fiction? They may be very intelligent, but maybe not bright?
1
This is why I miss internet cafes. They would allow people to register cell phones more anonymously in the online signups carriers require. Even if you think you have a burner phone, it begs the question of how anonymous it is if you signed up for service on your computer. Let's bring back the privacy internet cafes can afford us. The next 'big thing' is obviously selling trackerless, cookie-free privacy apps. as every tech user is a customer. It's a billion-dollar market, as every tech user is a likely customer.
2
How far down a path of no return have we already traveled?
@Andrea
"No return" was several miles in the rearview mirror and there is no turnaround.
3
Where do all these millions of phones eventually end up? In landfills?
2
This is the surprise waiting for domestic militia and other armed insurgent groups who fantasize about overthrowing "the government" here at home. The Man knows where you bought that soda...
I appreciate this article, and I do see the problem, especially for the soon-to-be-crushed in Hong Kong. But, here at home, in real terms, does this capability amount to actionable knowledge? If I use credit cards all day, many processing machines still require my signature, no matter how illegibly rendered by the uncalibrated stylus, or whether I have attempted my true signature, or merely scribbled out of contempt. I read that the billions of "signatures" wind up in giant server-dungeons out west, stockpiled and ignored. Technically, they exist and are trackable, if they were ever needed; but practically speaking?
If I walk past a protest-in-progress and linger, did I intend to join it? Did I just photograph the historic event? Did I hang out out of curiosity? Was I trying to get someplace and saw my way blocked, and merely dawdled? All of this is moot when you are dealing with an out-of-the-closet authoritarian regime, as in China.
Here, I am counting on the rule of law (eventually) prevailing.
But if I were trying to "save Democracy"--or to overthrow it, wouldn't I use a disposable phone, or power-off, or just leave the darn thing on at home (to give plausible deniability)?
The real danger I see is the ability to load my phone (or home computer) with false calls and locations.
2
International terrorists figured this out long ago. Because most people think that they're unlikely to be on the receiving end of a targeted a drone strike, that it is somehow all okay. Thank you, NYT, for this important series.
2
Russia showed many Americans how susceptible society can be to "fake news" during the 2016 election. Technology is not always a good thing. It's not always a benevolent aspect of civilization. Will it continue to be a threat to our democracy. In one word, YES. Some percentage of society who are not a stable genius are blindly gullible.
So let's view discuss that idea futher. Namely, smart phone users don't realize its an oxymoronic descriptor. They willingly trust everything received via social media therefore they refuse to see fake news is a concern for our American democracy. These same people wear red hats proclaiming they''ll can and will make America better. Ha!
Luckily a majority of Americans learned a lesson in 2016. Fake news exists so use journalistic media outlets for honest coverage of the day's events, not social media. The others are sheeple, willing to stare into their hands believing memes, fake stories and other hogwash. That said, many of them will soon learn of the dangers should they continue offering blind trust.
Critical thinking is an essential skill. Critical thinking allows We The People to challenge political nonsense. If you do nothing else for the holidays, teach your friends and family why they must apply critical thinking in our modern times.
3
“Privacy needs to start being seen as a human right.”
I agree, and I'd like to see more of the Democrat candidates talking about this.
6
What a phenomenal, timely and intense piece from the NYT. For tech companies -trading their customers’ privacy and safely to raise revenue a few percent. How can we allow them to get away with it?
4
It says something about public concern for this critical issue that as of this writing there have been 19 comments, coming at the torrid pace of one every 45 minutes.
1
@Richard Johnston
Let's acknowledge it's a weekend duringthe holiday season. Perhaps this xcellent reportage should have been released when so many are not preoccupied?
2
I have been saying this for 10 years now: the American revolution would never have happened if the British had the powers of the internet. The Adams boys and the rest would have been rounded up long before planning anything.
Anti-fascist wars in the future will involve smart, technically-savvy individuals acting alone to attack the government. This is the only choice parties, like the republican party, will leave us.
1
Perhaps the lesson here is that sometimes the phones should be left at home.....
4
We're a nation that appears to have the memory of a flea. With the barrage of bad and dangerous news under DJT, it's admittedly difficult to keep track of breaking news, but have we already developed collective amnesia about Edward Snowden?
THIS is precisely what he was warning us about. He risked everything to send an urgent warning from inside the system because he knew that privacy was an endangered entity. He knew that real-time applications for the work being done under the NSA had potentially dire consequences for the populace. He knew the allure of convenience would be the mechanism by which millions would be seduced into using technology laden with the potential for abuse. He knew that many companies would capitalize on that convenience to lure consumers into making a habit of providing astonishing amounts of private information, information that has the potential to be exploited in innumerable ways.
He knew what he knew and risked exile to share it with us. And what have we done with that knowledge? Exactly nothing. Ignored it. Squandered it. Shrugged and moved on.
Here we are. And where is he? In another country because he had to flee a country that fears transparency and truth. Isn't it time we asked why we punish the whistle blowers rather than those exposed, and began to act on what we know?
And how freakish is it that the man named Snowden, a character in Catch 22, showed us how trapped we are in a circle of our own making? To be safe, we gave up safety.
10
Just got back from Washington DC, where I went to the Newseum, which is very unfortunately closing in just a few days. This amazing museum focuses on the First Amendment rights, including freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and the right to petition for redress. It was encouraging to see and hear so many young people talking about these rights.
I also participated in an Impeach Trump demonstration on Capitol Hill.
America is changing. I am starting to fear expressing my political views at peaceful demonstrations. I also hesitate to express my views in the comments section of the NYTimes and Washington Post. The tools of electronic surveillance can be weaponized in the wrong hands, i.e. the hands of those who want to maintain power by any means.
One of the first orders of business of any new administration should be to regulate the electronic media. There are now many entrenched interests.
I hope it's not already too late.
9
@Curiousone I have already experienced “someone” taking an interest in my comments on a Washington Post article this week. Someone else had opened my comment screen and was using my keyboard to alter my words while I was commenting.
It was creepy. I had to wonder — who is so interested in the opinions of some unremarkable mom in North Carolina?
3
@Curiousone: I imagine Stephen Miller and Brad Parscale are working on creating a list for 're-education camp' as I type these words. We who have spoken continuously against Dear Leader will be the first to be picked up. If he 'wins' again.....everything changes.
6
If the republicans want to know who would be their likely voter they can get the info from walmart where do the democrats go?
Some states outlaw wearing masks in public, anywhere. The motivation is to prevent "masked bandits"---criminals making ithemsleves hard to identify. Some of these laws were initially directed against the Klu Klux Klan.
If it bothers you, leave your cell phone at home. Or take out the battery. Or don't have one at all.
2
And people make fun of my old flip phone. Ha!
9
@D. Johnson I have a flip phone too -- so happy to not be a zombie!
5
This alone should prompt Democrats to unify to get the morally compromised traitor out of the Oval. He’d sell our data to the highest bidder without hesitating to get himself re-elected and anybody with eyes and ears who isn’t living in an alternate universe knows it. In fact, he’s probably already sold it, he and his GOP traitors. Ronna Romney, what say you?
If we intend to solve the problems of the 21st century, step one is getting 19th century lawmakers out of office.
No one mentions that the solution is not having a smart phone or at least turning one on only when truly needed. Yes, that means giving up some convenience but its not giving up anything necessary. Dumb phones are still available as well.
4
Why not leave your phone at home when you attend a demonstration?? Duh!
And why do you need a phone with you at all times anyway? For ten thousand generations humans on earth have managed without them.
If you want a communication device with you in case of an emergency, buy a burner phone using cash and stash it in your car....
4
And sooner than we think, these devices will be directly connected to your brain. You will be the broadcast.
Could we at least agree not to use "surveille" as a verb?
@GreaterMetropolitanArea
I believe it should be "surveil". Eh?
is amusing the right word to describe the fear these writers allege may arise from super surveillance? black people and poor people have been checked by the dangers of stepping out of line for a very long time. but as the possibility now arises for the Uber clas-- the horror, the horror!
4
Sometimes, I've noticed, the NYT translates an article into Chinese. This would be a good one for that.
1
Let's all turn in our Phone/Radio/Camera/Tracker/Robot Controller tomorrow and tell AT&T and Verizon where to put their towers and bills.
1
I just realized that when making a comment, earlier... my location was included!
2
It all comes back to inequality. Why should those with less have to give up valuable tools and services in order to stay free and anonymous. Our data is not taken, we give it in exchange for functionality in a demanding society – something those with more have through money, power, and privilege.
Wake up! It is 1984 all over again!
I escaped a communist Romania one night in March 1981 by crossing the Danube at Iron Gates in a dingy I carried over the mountains, crossed Yugoslavia illegal and the Alps into Austria before reaching the free world.
One must know the loss of freedom to know it. We do not recognize it until it is gone.
Freedom is attacked in many parts of the world, is assaulted, tortured. Sadly, in addition to being tracked and spied on by government and corporations, more Americans and other citizens of the world are losing their freedoms due to economic predation, at the hands of the wealthy, through bought legislation and corporate schemes. Which makes the future challenges more complex, hard to control, hard to fight. It will get far worse with the Climate Crises that we unleashed.
One thing is clear. In a society where humanism is denied and vehemently fought by the greed of jungle capitalism (opposite of Nordic type of Socialism), the government, many governments that is - owned by the powerful - will seek to curb freedoms and keep a yoke on its citizens by applying pernicious tools.
Newspeak, it is 1984 all over again!
30
@Nicholas
Good to hear from you. You seem to have been poisoned (mentally) by *none* of the systems you've encountered. That's refreshing.
3
For a day or two during and after 9/11 all air traffic over the US was stopped and all planes had to land, under the threat of being shot down, at the nearest airports . This was an epic emergency and this action had to be taken because no one knew if another hijacked aircraft was prepared to kill all aboard to destroy another vital US target.
We are at an even greater electoral threat to our democracy and it is imperative that a reckless Facebook and like companies should be shut down for a period of a month or two before the next US election. No one can, or does, trust Facebook's claim of concern and regulation and their loss of profit over this critical period is little in comparison to what others have sacrificed currently and in the past.
20
@MzF
This is also my biggest technology concern. I fear that no matter how large the turnout, we have too many foreign and domestic actors dead set on undermining the vote, either through voter suppression, voter roll purges, voter propaganda, and outright voter ballot manipulation.
And Mitch McConnell won't even support basic paper ballots as a low-tech back-up. Since he, too, apparently thinks its okay for the president to ask for foreign interference in an election, I can only assume he will be counting on that for his reelection bid as well.
21
There are a lot of coulds and maybes and mights in this article (e.g., Public dissent _could_ quickly become too risky a proposition, given that the record of one’s attendance at a rally _could_ be held against them at a later date).
But I think we all know that someone like Trump _would_ not hesitate to use this kind of technology to covertly track political enemies and to overtly discourage them from assembling in the first place.
These are scary times we are living in, and Congress seems dead set against protecting us from this and other forms of technology (like hacking voting rolls and voting machines) that put our democracy at risk.
14
Your phone can be tracked and that means you can be tracked. Yet even a police state as huge as China doesn't appear to be successful at tracking the relatively few demonstrators (compared to China's total population) in Hong Kong. Sometime the ability to amass huge amounts of data just leaves you with masses of unmanageable data. I think the fear of being tracked is overblown – it is possible, but many things that are possible never happen.
1
It's too bad that New York didn't use phone tracking and video surveillance. If it did, maybe Tessa Majors would be alive. After the murder, the NY Times reported that Morningside Park was a notorious site for armed robbery with a long list of victims. It was even speculated that a Chinese international student was robbed at knifepoint, and he wondered if the same assailants were responsible for Majors' murder. Phone tracking and video surveillance are important devices for crime prevention: not using them in wise and intelligent ways by law enforcement would be criminal negligence. No one doubts the use of surveillance in fancy shopping malls, luxurious condos, and elite universities for the safety of the community, the idea that these technologies should not be used for public parks or other places is to deny the safety and peace of mind to the rest of us. When I'm walking on the streets at the dark of the night, I'm less worried about my civil liberties and more about the thugs who choose their victims like sports and with impunity.
@UC Graduate
And the distinctions you are making about possible benefits versus detriments reinforce what the authors are saying about the need for REGULATION! and oversight.
3
@UC Graduate
Which “elite Universities” track cell phones? Or use video surveillance, beyond the presence of, say, a bank window. This is not a thing. Those nefarious elites (ie the evil educated) are not doing this. It’s corporate and governmental uses that are being debated here—How we will regulate and safeguard this so governments cannot target citizens based on smartphone data. Nothing to do with your security at a public park.
1
Follow the NYT recommended steps to protect yourself, even using moderate protection levels as I did, and you will soon find that you can not do basic searches or navigate without resetting your security preferences. I agree with those who recommend judiciously turning your phone off or leaving it behind.
18
@backfull Good point. “Outside” magazine reported that common thieves are using Bluetooth tech to determine if parked cars have cell phones or tablets stowed. If so, the car is burglarized. Use the same technique to be safe, turn off your phone or switch to airplane mode.
5
Democracy is unwieldy, inefficient, and still, far and away, the best form of government. The knowledge that you can be tracked will have a subtle but very real effect of changing and limiting your behavior. Combined with ever present video surveillance combined with facial recognition technology, a totalitarian government with unlimited financial resources will be able to so control its population sa as to make the very concept of freedom a memory.
6
Ironically, the outcry against identifying protestors is a one-sided deal.
Antifa and others who identified and 'outted' those protesting the removal of confederate monuments had no problem using surveillance to document that participation and reveal their activities to employers. In some cases it resulted in people being fired, as widely reported in the Washington Post, Huff Post amoung others. There is no difference between this and a government tracking those who protest its policies.
Now, I'm NOT defending confederate monuments or white supremacists at all, merely pointing out that this article is written from the viewpoint of protestors demonstrating against government and the danger that presents. It is important to realize this technology is ubiquitous in it's reach and, as the authors show, useable by anyone with a bit of knowledge and the desire to target individuals for disruptive or nefarious reasons.
6
@B Dawson I am all for proactive management, but the use of these new technologies in the workplace is almost as bad as the use by governments.
3
@B Dawson I fail to see the irony, and only see equivocation at work in your post, i.e., there are not "good people on both sides" of this equation. Racists are evil, and I'm all for outing them.
4
Simple: Turn off your tracking device (I mean, phone) before leaving home for any demonstration you don't want to be linked to. If you're unsure of how to get there and need a map, print one out before you leave. Turn the phone back on when you get home.
You won't need a phone while there. If you feel you need a photo of the event, download one from a newspaper taken by a professional photographer-- it'll probably be a much better one than any you could have taken.
23
@Sixofone
Excellent advice, but since so many recent phone videos have been so useful, it's possible to simply take out the sim card and still have use of the video camera function without tracking. The mere presence of a phone/camera can instill instant civility in aggressors.
9
@Sixofone Unfortunately, it's not that easy. The NSA has been able to track powered-down phones since at least 2014.
"By September 2004, a new NSA technique enabled the
agency to find cellphones even when they were turned
off. JSOC troops called this “The Find,” and it gave them
thousands of new targets, including members of a
burgeoning al-Qaeda-sponsored insurgency in Iraq,
according to members of the unit."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-growth-fueled-by-need-to-target-terrorists/2013/07/21/24c93cf4-f0b1-11e2-bed3-b9b6fe264871_story.html
5
@Sixofone
Of course there will a,time (if not already) where “they” will track when you turn your phone off coinciding with the time that a protest is about to occur.
2
Really, truly, if you are concerned about an oppressive government employing tech for nefarious purposes, what would make you trust government to obey its own regulations? Information is always power and always has been. It has been used by government for centuries to oppress because that is what governments do. Look no further than the methods government employs to breach financial privacy in order to collect ever higher taxes.
Indeed, every April 15, the government demands that we bare the most intimate details of our lives in the cause of taxation. All without so much as a peep of protest from the extreme left.
Query: which is a greater infringe of privacy? The government knowing that you attended a march, or form 1040? Personally, I’d rather the government know I regularly attend church than that it know my income and assets.
The so-called “antifacist researcher” who worries about “the danger of full exposure” could be taken more seriously if he opposed the IRS as strongly as he does AT&T.
And these same folks likely demand “single payer” and other huge governmental programs, which would provide government even greater access to the most intimate details of our lives.
There is only one solution to the horrors of oppressive government: keep it so small that it can’t become oppressive.
5
@Michael,
The real challenge is the rich hide their money offshore where governments can't tax it because banks there make it illegal to ask how much is there. Then, there are series of shell companies. The rich spin very confusing webs to hide their money.
The rest of us bare our souls to the IRS. The rich certainly don't. Corporations don't. Look at their tax rates: 11% actual; 22% by the book.
23
@Michael
> if you are concerned about an oppressive government employing tech for nefarious purposes, what would make you trust government to obey its own regulations?
Your statement above reminds me of that comical dialogue from the movie Casino:
Nicky Santoro (Joe Pesci) "Even John Nance, that's the guy who ran the skim, he knew there wasn't much you could do about it. You gotta know that a guy who helps you steal, even if you take care of him real well, I mean, he's gonna steal a little bit extra for himself. Makes sense, don't it? Right?"
1
@Michael
I don't believe you. It's impossible that all the most intimate details of your life are financial.
The rest of your post seems equally exaggerated. Fact: you don't know at all what the "antifascist researcher" thinks about the IRS, or AT&T.
1
I loved seeing the President's moving in an earlier segment, and wondered if something like that might finally spur change from Congress. The cynic in me thinks not, or worse, the ability to opt-out for the political class.
However, this whole series becomes more surreal and ironic as I read each segment. This segment in particular focuses on the danger of advertising. Yet the NY Times website itself forces us all to choke down not one or two ad platforms, but several of them.
Though the number might not be exactly the same for everyone, I show 56% of the resources loaded on this page are tracking and/or advertising. Change starts at home!!
37
@James - Use AdBlock, or another software like that. Pages are still loading, but I don't see them. I donate annually to AdBlock to help them stay in business. That said, I'd prefer to give the Times a bit more to not load ads on my page though.
7
"It is not difficult, in other words, to imagine a system of social control arising from infrastructure built for advertising"
It wasn't difficult to imagine in the 1980's, or the 1990's, or the 2000's. The only thing that seems to change is it gets more and more difficult to imagine any other system, and more and more difficult to keep that systems at arm's length from your real life.
20
@Jeff
The other thing that is not different is that, 40 years on, it still has not arrived. Most of us still can engage, openly and freely, in pretty much the same range of activities we could three or four, or five, decades back, with less chance of interference from the government.
@Jeff
You might add to your decades "The Space Merchants" from the 1950's, with its underground "consies" (conservationists).
@Thomas D. Dial
The American system of social control is probably the best the world has ever seen. It beats "bread and circuses" easily. The Soviet propaganda machine was a clunky failure by comparison. Our system is so good that most Americans don't even notice it exists. The proof that it does exist is in things like the fixed beliefs that we have nothing to learn from other countries, and that everyone can be a millionaire, and that the rugged individual is the best kind person. Meanwhile we have remarkable poverty, high child mortality, political control by money, and constant guided purchasing of often-harmful products that are advertised in every way possible by rich companies with huge budgets for propping up sales.
6
Even thought I'm an I.T. pro and understand Android better than most, I use only iPhone and iPad for my always-on portable devices. Apple's iOS is harder to "root" than Android and Apple does a much better, though not perfect, job of vetting App Store submissions to keep out malware. Apple's privacy controls and policies are better and Apple supports iPhone and iPad models for *far longer* than any Android model (up to five years). I'm also careful with the apps I download and specifically disallow location services except while in use and only for those apps that need it, like Uber or Lyft, for example.
For these reasons, I recommend iPhone/iPad only, never Android, to all my clients. iPhone too expensive? Buy lightly used and guaranteed-not-stolen iPhones on swappa.com. With such a long support tail, you can buy a two year old iPhone and it'll still have 2-3 years of iOS support remaining.
43
@Robert
Five years is not long. I expect anything I buy to last decades until it physically breaks.
I don't have a "smart phone", don't want one, and do fine without it.
5
@Jonathan Katz
How do you summon Uber or Lyft?
I wonder since I only have a flip phone.
@Bill O'Rights: You don’t. As far as I know, it’s not possible for those without a smartphone to use Uber & Lyft. You can, however, summon a traditional cab.
2
Democracy, as an experience, has moved from the practice of individual people each with an individual conscience to the absence of individuality and conscience so one can feel that one is a part of the crowd. Belonging (the censorship of the individual's voice of the conscience) replaces the laboriousness of being honest and making up of one's own mind. Surveillance is not a "threat" to democracy if it's first a foremost the experience of going along with the crowd. It weeds out those who are their own persons and keeps America safe from the chaos of individuals who use their inalienable rights to experience life in a less marketable fashion. Christmas is above all the celebration of a person who, despite all the inconveniences, chose to be his own person and not to follow the crowd. Democracy was supposed to be that too, but now belonging to the crucifying crowd has more appeal than being the loner.
9
One more reason for me to resist purchasing one of these phones.
16
If you’ve bought a house recently, you signed a bunch of forms waiving the rights that various consumer protection laws give you. If you don’t sign, you don’t get your mortgage.
This will happen with phone privacy too. To get that very useful app you will click “I agree” to whatever it presents to you, without reading it.
Structuring a new law to avoid this problem may be difficult. I have a relative who is highly vulnerable to stroke. They have an Apple Watch that tracks their location and makes a 911 call automatically, with location information. Obviously desirable, but how do you say yes to that without also inadvertently giving up everything?
8
@Charlie B
Is it not possible to pass a law invalidating all clauses that surrender legal rights? I don't expect to see that, in this "Citizens United" age, but it is possible.
1
Excellent work from these reporters and thank you NYT's. This should be #1 on everyones reading list.
As @AA shared earlier "Make Orwell Fiction Again."
A great explanation as to why the argument "I don't do anything wrong, why should I care." is so naive.
60
I have long been convinced that all of this spying upon us is sinister. However, tracking our location and movement is an age old behavior of totalitarian authority, only the methods have changed as technology "advanced".
But it confuses the issue to focus on this spying as a threat to democracy. The true threat is to our individual freedom, not to democracy. There is a negative effect upon democracy but it is tangential. Democracy is but a means of governing, it is not freedom. Democracy is the least bad means of choosing government leaders and choosing laws. It is possible, even very easy, to have democracy without having individual liberty (that is why we have the Bill of Rights which protects our freedom from our democracy).
I think it is fair to say that whenever any government, regardless whether authoritarian or democratic, engages in spying on all of its citizens as a practice, then the leaders of that government have chosen to act against our freedom. They may claim noble purpose, but that is merely excuse to conceal their real intent. Furthermore, even if some leaders who employ such spying did have some good purpose, it is inevitable that some other leaders eventually come along who have ill intent.
The unfortunate fact is that government leaders will employ all tools of spying upon us regardless whether we are democratic or authoritarian. Some governments may deny it but that is only lies to deceive the public as patriot Edward Snowden showed us.
30
@Errol
Your comment is vital with an important distinction you make between democracy and freedom.
2
@Errol But doesn't democracy require the freedom to discuss, assemble, protest, report the truth, etc? Some of this article is about the techniques of targeted advertising becoming tools of voter manipulation. How about the freedom from becoming a statistical object of political campaign analysts, data miners, and their advertising cohorts. Fortunately, having eschewed both smartphones and TV, I'm not tortured by any of it.
1
I saw a bumper sticker last night that should become the slogan and rallying cry of the new privacy protection movement: “Make Orwell fiction again.”
Every dystopian story has as a central feature the loss of privacy. And yet so many of us have already surrendered it without even a thought.
102
Unintended consequences when technology outpaces ethical standards that should be discussed. Human beings generally are not proactive, and this is an example of uncontrolled capitalism. For what? Profit at all costs.
41
@Gordon Alderink
How could it possibly be that "this is an example of uncontrolled capitalism" when this example is of behavior of a totalitarian communist regime?
I do not mean to imply that surveillance does not also occur by capitalist countries. Such surveillance does occur in EVERY country that has the resources to do it, including capitalist countries, socialist countries, and communist countries, regardless whether dictatorship or democracy or any permutations thereof.
5
@Gordon Alderink, you said, "Unintended consequences when technology outpaces ethical standards that should be discussed."
We are in the longest period of no updates to the Constitution in the nation's history, the longest period since they were started with no updates of the Geneva Conventions, the longest period since the 1880s with no updates to our immigration laws, and the longest period since the WWW came along with no update to our internet laws.
It isn't that technology is outpacing ethical standards, it's that the institutions entrusted with keeping our ethical standards up to date are falling down on the job.
3
@Gordon Alderink The authors don't make it explicit, but evident, that the surveillance and data processing capabilities of authorities are developed in the private sector for the lucrative sale to whomever can afford it, including despots. They call it a "Gold rush". The incentives of capitalism are amoral and non ethical, otherwise they become the loathed constraints on the procurement of money. If a businessman has a genius for techniques of torture that are very interesting to authorities, how would that come up for discussion until after they're discovered to be in use.
2
Is it too naive to think that someone could go to a protest without their phone?
52
@Pontifikate - Yes, but a subset want to share, while it's happening, via social media because that's how you get more supporters to show up.
8