Samsung out of their freaking minds?

[Catfish]

The new Samsung TVs:

"In addition, Samsung may collect and your device may capture voice commands and associated texts so that we can provide you with Voice Recognition features and evaluate and improve the features.

Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition."


What ?! So that i get advertisements tailored on me like with Freakin' Google ? Or use it for whatever you see fit ?
GCHQ and NSA are amateurs, against this!
The only difference to Orwell and is, that private companies do what the political class did, in "1984".


According to retired Gen. David Petraeus, former head of the CIA, Internet-enabled “smart” devices can be exploited to reveal a wealth of personal data. “Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvester,” he reportedly told a venture capital firm in 2012. “We’ll spy on you through your dishwasher,” read one headline. Indeed, as the “Internet of Things” matures, household appliances and physical objects will become more networked. Your ceiling lights, thermostat and washing machine — even your socks — may be wired to interact online. The FBI will not have to bug your living room; you will do it yourself.


Thanks Samsung, i was close to buy a TV from you, but this plan has now and forever changed.
:down::nope::nope::shifty:

[Eichhörnchen]

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.608020730791792191&pid=15.1&P=0

[Catfish]

^ Well at least this device did not record what you said...
Surveillance methods are much wose now.

Did you know that the house were Orwell lived, is "secured" by ten cameras recording anyone who comes near? Because, by GCHQ and MIx logic anyone who pays a visit to this house, is suspicious. London is the most surveyed location on earth.

[Skybird]

You reap as you sow. People let things slide, do not care, want to party, do not believe warnings, don't mind supporting aberration in favour of prefering imminent shortsighted desire - they will get what they deserve.

Our freedom does not stumble over big evil mountains, but innocent tiny rocks.

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur. - The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived.

I have read Catfish's likely German source text just minutes ago, too, in there they also illustrate some remarkable foul excuses and attempted distractions by Samsung. No doubt that they will get away with it - and if not this time then in their next attempt.

The time is close when people will be suspicious when they refuse to have smartphones active all time, interactive household devices spying on them all the time, and all their personal doings and actions being done digitally so that they can n be automatically traced and recorded. After 9/11 it became known that if you had no debts on your banking account, this automatically could put you onto a terror suspect list for further investigation, because ordinary citizens today are expected to live on tic and to have debts. Next big thing coming will be digital payment exclusively, so that even buying a pack of chewing gum gets reported to the finance ministry - they will sell this as "taxing equality" (where it is just a perfecting of robbery).

We will end like in that old story by Ray Bradbury, where a citizen does a harmless walk in the evening in the empty streets around the block, while all others are in their living rooms staring at the TVs, and a robot police car stops and ask what he is doing, and he says he is just doing a walk, and the robot asks why, and he says something, and then gets arrested, loaded in, and shuttled away. A perfectly safe and secure, peaceful evening. Only underhanded bastards like me who have something to hide could see anything wicked in this.

[Oberon]

Did you know that the house were Orwell lived, is "secured" by ten cameras recording anyone who comes near? Because, by GCHQ and MIx logic anyone who pays a visit to this house, is suspicious. London is the most surveyed location on earth.

Not really. There are CCTV cameras nearby, but they're not all for the house. A couple are probably at the house for security purposes, but most are in the streets nearby, and a good deal of them are private cameras installed by shop and house-owners. They can be quite useful, people have a habit of throwing stuff in your garden or vandalising it after a drunken night out, the camera will catch their identity for submission to the police. Or even something as simple as wanting to see who is at the door before you open it can be done through having a camera with a wide angle coverage of your front garden/door.
In 2011, a report published the number of publically owned CCTV cameras at around 33,433 (with another 115,000 on public transport, these are useful for catching abuse of staff or assaults on members of the public, or even just the last known footage of someone before they go missing) and the number of privately owned CCTVs at 1.7 million. That means it's not GCHQ surveilling Britains (although I dare say that they have a fair number of cameras or access to them) but Britains surveilling other Britains.
Is this because people don't think the police can keep them safe? Not really, although that's a question that many will ask, but it's extra evidence to secure a case against someone in a criminal court, it's another reason why dashcams are becoming popular in the UK, if someone tries to insurance scam you by crashing into you, the dashcam footage will be valid and vital evidence in court. Likewise police cameras on their patrol cars produce evidence of criminal actions such as speeding or dangerous driving.

Oh...and this picture?

http://www.meervrijheid.nl/files/algemeen3/george_orwell_cctv.jpg

Fake.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/for-the-last-time-there-isnt-a-cctv-outside-george-orwells-o#.vv6OZb5XXk

[Eichhörnchen]

^ Well at least this device did not record what you said...

That's what you think...:O:

[Skybird]

Also note that Snowden documents revealed an NSA program that tries to infiltrate EVERY computer device everywhere and making it potentially accessible by the NSA and its vasalls at any time they desire. The aim is to m ake the digtal surviellance complete, total and unescapable everywhere, all the time, regarding every individual.

Also note that American laws demand the total and unconditional cooperation of any company with demands raised to them by intel services, namely the NSA. They are also legally obliged to hide this fact from customers to not alarm them over their enforced cooperation with NSA et al. The penalties in case of violation were reported to be draconic, and absolutely disproportional.

This is policestate rising, plain and simple. Comes handy for the self-declared elites to stay in control once we start to fall apart openly due to spiralling debts and economic collapse. Compare to the introduction of price and wages control in Germany 1936 to the sudden increase in suppressive police surveillance of civil society from that time on. The increased fiscal repression (and its rattail of down-spiralling economic consequences) was only possible to sustain by establishing parallel to it a repressive regime to control and prevent resistence, and to fight alternative markets mechanisms and black markets.

We have been there, the modern present is not that new at all. People just laugh, do not believe it, think it is exaggerated. Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur

[Betonov]

London is the most surveyed location on earth.

I don't know, CCTV in public areas, not bothered by it. As long as it doesn't record my home.

And the Samsung issue. Sickening :nope:

[Jimbuna]

I don't know, CCTV in public areas, not bothered by it. As long as it doesn't record my home.

And the Samsung issue. Sickening :nope:

Same here :yep:

[Onkel Neal]

The new Samsung TVs:

"In addition, Samsung may collect and your device may capture voice commands and associated texts so that we can provide you with Voice Recognition features and evaluate and improve the features.

Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition."


What ?! So that i get advertisements tailored on me like with Freakin' Google ? Or use it for whatever you see fit ?
GCHQ and NSA are amateurs, against this!
The only difference to Orwell and is, that private companies do what the political class did, in "1984".




Thanks Samsung, i was close to buy a TV from you, but this plan has now and forever changed.
:down::nope::nope::shifty:

Wow, yeah, that's too much completely. Some people will allow it, but I don't want anything to do with it.

I've already switched to LG, they have really good products, and the "little guy" is always my favorite. :)

[Oberon]

The NSA is coming for us all


Then tell me, Skybird, how are governments to protect themselves and their populace from domestic cyber terrorism? Turn off the internet?
The genie is out of the bottle, the internet has been free and unregulated unlike any other form of media for a while now simply because governments did not see it coming and have spent the last two decades scrambling to catch up.
Of course we're going to be under surveillence, we've been under surveillence for decades, centuries even, all that's changed is the ease in which it is done.
Let's face it, how would you know if the house across the road from you actually contained a police task-force watching your every move? That car that parked up at the end of the street, how do you know it's not plain clothes police officers watching you? When you pick up the telephone to ring someone, how do you know that your message is private? When you send mail, how do you know it's not been intercepted, opened, read and resealed again?
Simple answer, you don't, you never have done and you never will.
It's there, it's always been there, and it's not going to go away.
You can run around in circles trying to escape it, but short of moving into the middle of Africa and living in a mud hut, you'll never succeed.

[u crank]

I wonder if in the near future a necessity in any home or apt. would be a sort of safe room for private and safe conversation. Kind of like 'the cone of silence'.:D

Of course for the truly paranoid you would have to be prepared to scan, strip and cavity search any one going in with you.:O:

[Rockstar]

The NSA will snoop and Samsung will build. Yet as much as we hear people complain about government intrustion into private lives. The public still cant help but to post their personnal information online and buy their TV's.

Get rid of your computer ad TV and will not need a 'safe room'. But we have no will power like an addict we need the fix

[Oberon]

I wonder if in the near future a necessity in any home or apt. would be a sort of safe room for private and safe conversation. Kind of like 'the cone of silence'.:D

Of course for the truly paranoid you would have to be prepared to scan, strip and cavity search any one going in with you.:O:

I don't know about necessity, but certainly some people will probably go that far. Everyone else will just accept it and move on. Will it end in a dystopian future where people are disappeared for thinking bad thoughts? Perhaps...can't be ruled out, but what can be done against it? Not a great deal really. Perhaps there'll be a migration in the future by people out of technological western societies to less economically developed countries, like deepest Africa or South America. Luddite refuges perhaps? :hmmm:

[Rockstar]

Also, is it Samsung that is out of their minds? Or is it the people who buy their products the ones out of their minds?

[Oberon]

Also, is it Samsung that is out of their minds? Or is it the people who buy their products the ones out of their minds?

Convenience trumps all else. Always has, always will. :03:

[Skybird]

I should tell you, Oberon? But you would not want to know anyway.

Also, I have nothing to tell you. What i say is just the obvious hint at where our voyage is leading us, and that is a total surveillance and police state. You may question how else to protect ourselves, I would say if our societies would be basing on different preimsses form beginning on, and if their design would be difefrent from all beginning on, we would have lesser reasons to wqorry for dangers form within, and coul limit more of our defences towards the "outside". But we have chosen to maximise certain qualities, and by that we also have maximised vulnerabilties resulting from that. You cannot have the one without also getting the other. The basis of this acceptance has been lacking understanding and lacking common education on involved risks of "progressive trends" in technology as well as social views. Well - so be it, I cannot help it. We get what we decided for, and it comes at according costs. To me, the costs are too high.

What is going on in the present, is leading to total surveillance of everybody, suspect or not. And that has consequences, it reverses some basic and most fundamental premisses of our legal system. For example - and I am not the first pointing that out - people now are assumed guilty as long as they are not proven innocent. And "innocence" for a variety of reasons gets more and more defined in relative ways only.

And police squads waiting in ambush in every house at the corner? Nonsense. The magic words is automatization and technical capacity. In 1980, the production of 1 GB of data storage costed around 300,000 dollars. thirty years later, in 2010, producing the same data storage capacity costs less than 10 cents. And automatic data tracking and pattern recognition and auto-filtering - I lack a grippy example right now, but you should be educated enough to easily imagine that all this is already reality since a long time, and gets constantly refined. The israelis claim to have a software that allows the prediction of somebody committing a crime from his social, communication and behavioural patterns - and most subtle changes in it. We do amazing stuff with artificial intelligence, we have automatic analysis software to put fragments of verbal communications into contexts, auto-filtering critical communications, and forensic software the public usually never hears of. Pluis all the digital transaction s we do, and voluntary surrendering of biographic data and details.

You try to make all this looking exaggerated by comparing it to Stasi times' technical standards, by mentioning police squads at every corner. But what is possible today, and is being done already, is beyond the Stasi's wildest wet dreams. And it does not need police squads in every house at a street corner. It only needs the digital infrastructure that most people voluntarily allow to get established.

I must not tell you anything more, you have eyes and ears yourself and can add 2 and 2 together yourself, too, and if you and many other people refuse to do that, then I cannot help it. I only remind of that we reap what we sow, and I show where we are heading for. And I do not like it. Not one bit. Its not the tidy, clean, morally good Star Trek style of future, not by a huge margin.

[u crank]

The public still cant help but to post their personnal information online ...

So true. In fact many of those who do blissfully boast about it.

Yikes. I just realized I have a Samsung cell phone. Lower the cone!:03:

[Oberon]

I must not tell you anything more, you have eyes and ears yourself and can add 2 and 2 together yourself, too, and if you and many other people refuse to do that, then I cannot help it. I only remind of that we reap what we sow, and I show where we are heading for. And I do not like it. Not one bit. Its not the tidy, clean, morally good Star Trek style of future, not by a huge margin.

Oh, I know where we're heading, and it's not the Star Trek style of future, alas, although I hope that when we migrate into the online world the morphine will be strong enough to take away from the pain that will be the reality. After all, it's partially what we do now.
The problem is, that there is no solution, it was inevitable from the moment Tim Berners Lee created the internet, despite his best wishes, sure technology is making it easier for widespread surveillance, but it's always been there.
It's like with most things, there's a quiet apathy to events, a social inertia to certain things, and where convenience is involved then everything else takes a back foot. There's sod all that the average person can do about it unless it is done en masse, and I don't see anything like that happening in the western world any time soon.

[Schroeder]

Then tell me, Skybird, how are governments to protect themselves and their populace from domestic cyber terrorism? Turn off the internet?
The genie is out of the bottle, the internet has been free and unregulated unlike any other form of media for a while now simply because governments did not see it coming and have spent the last two decades scrambling to catch up.
Of course we're going to be under surveillence, we've been under surveillence for decades, centuries even, all that's changed is the ease in which it is done.
Let's face it, how would you know if the house across the road from you actually contained a police task-force watching your every move? That car that parked up at the end of the street, how do you know it's not plain clothes police officers watching you? When you pick up the telephone to ring someone, how do you know that your message is private? When you send mail, how do you know it's not been intercepted, opened, read and resealed again?
Simple answer, you don't, you never have done and you never will.
It's there, it's always been there, and it's not going to go away.
You can run around in circles trying to escape it, but short of moving into the middle of Africa and living in a mud hut, you'll never succeed.
The difference is that the police car in front of your house or the surveillance unit next door needed some form of justification to be there. Now everyone is presumed guilty by default and gets spied on. That's not exactly what should happen in a state of law.

The problem is, that there is no solution, it was inevitable from the moment Tim Berners Lee created the internet, despite his best wishes, sure technology is making it easier for widespread surveillance, but it's always been there.
That still doesn't give a private company the right to listen into my private living room.
That Samsung TV is outright disgusting. Next step will be to report what stuff you're watching to the GESTAPO and take pictures of you.

[Rockstar]

So true. In fact many of those who do blissfully boast about it.

Yikes. I just realized I have a Samsung cell phone. Lower the cone!:03:


No Max, not the cone of silence!

http://carbolicsmoke.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/COne-of-Silence.JPG

[Rockstar]

Convenience trumps all else. Always has, always will. :03:

Lust for Luxury. Its one of the things which separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom.

[Catfish]

^ It is not only this, but what i already experienced and saw with Google.

You know when i search for something across the net, i am interested in a lot of things, from the Great White at Australia's barrier reef, to parts for my car, to the next travel, or something geological, biological, whatever.
But the outcome of my search is now adapted to my behaviour as recorded, so i do not get an unbiased information from Google, but things that fit into what i have looked for some time ago. When i now look for sharks, it will show me a lot of Great Whites, but nothing else about sharks.
I do not get all unbiased information anymore.

1st example
You are looking online for Jaguar parts, to buy new car, fittings for your house. It's alright, you get advertisements tailored to your usual behaviour if you want it or not, but what is more worth, you get a credit at the bank. Because your behaviour showed interest in expensive goods, and it seems you have money. (This will certainly be gone as soon as government and companies know exactly what you earn in a month, and what you have on your bank account).

2nd example
You have NOT been looking for a Jaguar, but for a small or used VW ? You looked for how to get a credit with as few as possible interest, you did not pay your telephone bill in time, and online ? Sorry, you will not get the credit. Let alone a job, or an apartment to rent.
Over sixty years old (posted at Facebook) and not Mr. Rockefeller? Again sorry, no credit for you.

Already nice, isn't it ?

3rd example
But then comes the false accusations by mistake or intentionally, like "$ubsim €sc0rt $ervice" (words changed here for exactly that reason, it happened already) and Neal being banned from certain access or paid advertisements, because those words were found somewhere in the forum here. And it is not only about this relatively harmless episode, but about all you do, you are interested in, and where and when you are somewhere, with which intentions. You leave a trace, in the internet, and since human beings are creatures of habit, your metadata paint an exact picture, of you.
Add Facebook and there is not much you can hide anymore, to anyone.

[Dowly]

Voice recognition = off
Butt = unhurt

[Eichhörnchen]

@ Catfish:
Is that the reason I only got pictures of naked women when I went online to find a new fender for the car last year?

[Schroeder]

@Catfish
You should delete your browser history and cookies from time to time. That usually rests Google to normal search patterns. Works at least with Youtube (I don't use any other Google product unless I'm really desperate).

[Catfish]

@ Catfish:
Is that the reason I only got pictures of naked women when I went online to find a new fender for the car last year?


Stop using my account :shifty:

[Skybird]

Voice recognition = off
Butt = unhurt
Hack = switch position irrelevant
use of data = unknown
5 Eyes = never ask anyway

Have you forgotten that Google Chrome had used dummy switches for privacy protection in its interface, that made the user believe he had switched it to "secure". while the switch indeed did nothing and the function in the background still was active? That these features could only be turned off when the user is advanced and goes below the interface level? AFAIK it still is like this.

Do you know that Samsung devices and many other phones and tablets as well need to be rooted in order to get rid of all that crap they come with, preinstalled, that also can be used - and does get used! - to establish profiles of your behaviour and habits, and track you

A software switch-off solution means nothing. Only a physical disconnection works 99% reliable. Note that I do not say 100%. To abuse the remaining 1%, however, tools and efforts would be needed that only secret services have, and an according justification.

Justification of intel ops = beyond control by "checks and balances"

Dowly = butt still unhurt?

[Dowly]

Dowly = butt still unhurt?
Yep.

The moment I turn on my computer and have it connected to the internet,
I accept the fact that, with or without my permission, my data will be
collected and there is absolutely nothing I can do about it if I want to keep
using the internet.

[Catfish]

^ of course.

As they say "if you accept something as inevitable, it stops being a problem".

But following this, any resistance against any dictatorship wordwide, would be impossible. What can the individual do, against this, it is all inevitable.
Or against a democratically elected government, that spurns its own laws and principles.

The point is when to call something "inevitable"...

[mapuc]

Have read about it 2 minutes ago in a Swedish News paper

As an expert said. Do not press the "Voice" button on the remote control, while you speak to friends etc. Only use when "Talking" to TV.

Markus

[Oberon]

The difference is that the police car in front of your house or the surveillance unit next door needed some form of justification to be there. Now everyone is presumed guilty by default and gets spied on. That's not exactly what should happen in a state of law.

No, I do get what you mean and I don't like it either, but generally speaking it's only used in extreme examples, namely terrorism cases. What defines terrorism is another good question, and that's a slippery slope alright, but as it stands with the risk of extremists coming back from the likes of Syria and that, how on Earth do you combat this breed of terrorism without having to intrude deeply into peoples private lives?
The average domestic police, at least in the UK, have limits on their technology, which can be detrimental to their case. For example, I did jury service recently, and we had the case of a chap caught in procession of three counts of Class A narcotics, and one Class B, he'd confessed to intention to supply the Class B, but denied intention to supply two of the Class A. However, the police had seized two mobile phone devices and were able to retrieve text messages which they used in their case against him, however they were unable to retrieve the contents of vocal phone calls, only the existence and length of them, and they were also unable to retrieve CCTV footage from the betting shops he'd claimed to have visited (he was arrested with two amounts of cash which he'd claimed to be from betting shops which he provided slips from...but honestly they could equally have been collected from someone else and just used as defence) because the footage is only kept for a week before being overwritten and the police didn't get the receipts given to them for a month or so after the initial arrest.
Now, if they had had as much evidence as people think the police are capable of getting then they would have had a much tighter case and we wouldn't have debated for six and a half hours over whether or not he was intending to supply Class A drugs.


That still doesn't give a private company the right to listen into my private living room.
That Samsung TV is outright disgusting. Next step will be to report what stuff you're watching to the GESTAPO and take pictures of you.

I concur, but the genie is out of the bottle. Catfish asks when was too late...well, I'd say it was too late post-9/11 when things like the Patriot Act started appearing and the anti-Terrorism measures went into full swing. If there was a time to protest loss of freedoms that would have been it, but we were all too intimidated by the spectre of the Twin Towers collapsing and the Pentagon in flames and we meekly accepted (well, the majority of the public) that such measures were necessary to protect us from the spectre of terrorism. From those measures the big businesses leapt onto the bandwagon, as they are want to do, and brought in information gathering systems through the guise of convenience, and from that we slowly shuffled to where we are now, and will continue to shuffle on. Some people will turn away, will be scared of where this will go, just as many have done in the past with other forms of technology. Other people will work within the system to try and make them secure from businesses snooping, and others will just carry on as normal.
Let's face it, by logging on to the internet you're already giving up a fair sized chunk of privacy, by logging onto Subsim that's more information going out into the ether and by posting your political viewpoints that's another clump of information for whoever is interested to hoover up.
As Dowly put it, the internet is a two way street, you receive information but you also put it out, in ever increasing quantities.

[Wolferz]

You watch your TV.
Your TV watches you.

Wait! Whut?!?!:timeout:

A strategically placed piece of electrical tape should cure the problem.:up:

[mapuc]

Here's a funny story from the good old days and it's from the real life- My ancestors life

Before I was born my Grand dad and Grandmom got a TV. Every evening before they sad down to watch TV-They toke on Sunday clothes, like they were in church-they believed that people in the TV could see them







Markus

[Skybird]

In my 2nd last year at school, when I was 17, this recommended reading had a jubilee, and thus was talked about back and forth in the media, and we also read it at school, in English class.

LINK (http://www.amazon.com/1984-Signet-Classics-George-Orwell/dp/0451524934/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1423432873&sr=8-1&keywords=1984)

Back then, I hated it, and found it completely idiotic, and exaggerated.

Later I learned to not hate it - but to fear the pace at which it turned out to become reality more and more. And that goes far beyond omnipresent surveillance.

[Oberon]

But don't you see, Skybird, we've always been at war with Islam.

[Skybird]

Hm?

[Oberon]

:doh: And I haven't even read the book!

http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i/we-have-always-been-at-war-with-eastasia.png

:03:

[Skybird]

I hated the book back then because I did not understand its relevance, or did not know tech development and social trends, considered the book to be exaggerated, and when that lack of understanding changed, I liked it more, seeing its visionary relevance.

I did not care for Islam back then and saw no evil in it back then, because I was not interested and again not educated on it. When that changed, I learned to not stand aside and realised how dangerous it really is.

My views do change over time sometimes. But usually not without good reason.

Does that clear it for you? :stare:

[Oberon]

I hated the book back then because I did not understand its relevance, or did not know tech development and social trends, considered the book to be exaggerated, and when that lack of understanding changed, I liked it more, seeing its visionary relevance.

I did not care for Islam back then and saw no evil in it back then, because I was not interested and again not educated on it. When that changed, I learned to not stand aside and realised how dangerous it really is.

My views do change over time sometimes. But usually not without good reason.

Does that clear it for you? :stare:

:hmmm: I refer to Transferred nationalism.

Transferred nationalism: In mid-sentence an orator changes the enemy of Oceania; the crowd instantly transfers their hatred to the new enemy. Transferred nationalism swiftly redirects emotions from one power unit to another (e.g., Communism, Pacifism, Colour Feeling and Class Feeling). This happened during a Party Rally against the original enemy Eurasia, when the orator suddenly switches enemy in midsentence, the crowd goes wild and destroys the posters that are now against their new friend (Eurasia) and many say that this must be the act of an agent of their new enemy (and former friend) Eastasia. Even though many of the crowd must have put up the posters before the rally, they now say that the enemy has always been Eastasia.

It's not just the state surveillence issues of today that echos 1984.

[Onkel Neal]

:doh: And I haven't even read the book!



:03:


What?! You must read this book! :yep:

[Oberon]

What?! You must read this book! :yep:

I really must, I am its generation after all. :hmmm:

[Buddahaid]

You watch your TV.
Your TV watches you.

Wait! Whut?!?!:timeout:

A strategically placed piece of electrical tape should cure the problem.:up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljdYlme9N3E

[Stealhead]

If your PC has a camera it is possible for it as well as any attached microphone to be hacked so it records when the user is not aware.

They hide bugs inside two by fours so don't shop at Lowes man.

[ikalugin]

It is typical corporate stuff at work. While the governments (in functional democracy) are accountable to the people, companies are accountable only to their shareholders, thus they would go to any lengths to produce profit.

At least in case of Samsung they inform about them gathering information on yourself (not really on purpose of spying as such, but for voice recognition service they offer, which appears to be outsourced).

[Skybird]

:hmmm: I refer to Transferred nationalism.



It's not just the state surveillence issues of today that echos 1984.
I still don't see your point, however, you are right, 1984 by far is not just about technological omnipresent surveillance, but other schemes of totalitarian power, too. Personally, I always remember that mind control by language control thing. And the general effect that the outside censors get internalised and moved into the minds of the subjects, so that they censor themselves, and then truly love Big Brother. Fully internalized censorship is the best tool of dicatorship to secure its power, that can be imagined.

I doubt that many people are aware how massively this is being used already today, considering the hostility and disbelief I often meet when attacking the political parties, genderism or neo-feminism, do-gooderism or hysterically derailed environmentalism. Or the Germans' most preferred emotional state: general "Angst". Just that it does not get implanted by torture, but in softer, alleged morally superior ways and establishing the monopoly for "Deutungshoheit" in the media and the education sector.

[Schroeder]

"Deutungshoheit"
Deutungshoheit = interpretational sovereignty or prerogative of interpretation

@Sky
Why do you keep putting German words into your texts when responding to English speakers? They can't understand them and if you couldn't find a proper translation while knowing what you were looking for how shall they find one when they don't even know what they are looking for.:hmm2:
It doesn't add anything to your post if the other side has no clue what you were trying to say.;)

[Jimbuna]

Deutungshoheit = interpretational sovereignty or prerogative of interpretation

@Sky
Why do you keep putting German words into your texts when responding to English speakers? They can't understand them and if you couldn't find a proper translation while knowing what you were looking for how shall they find one when they don't even know what they are looking for.:hmm2:
It doesn't add anything to your post if the other side has no clue what you were trying to say.;)

That has crossed my mind several times in the psat so, come on Sky, stop being a 'slacker' :know:

[Skybird]

I did not know how to put it, and the dictionaries (2) I use did not had the word. Some non-Germans nevertheless understand German, so for some it still is a gain.

And some words I use because I know for sure that they already have found entry into contemporary English (most likely because English knows no equivalent terms). Zeitgeist, for example.

Beyond that I use a phrase-dictionary, and Google's translator-bot.

And to be fair: sometimes I just simply forget to include a translation afterwards.

Honestly, I am more entitled to being criticised for my terrible typing discipline, considering the overwhelming number of typos that I sometimes produce and am too lazy to sort out...

[Schroeder]

I did not know how to put it, and the dictionaries (2) I use did not had the word.

And some words I use because I know for sure that they already have found entry into contemporary English (most likely because English knows no equivalent terms). Zeitgeist, for example.

Beyond that I use a phrase-dictionary, and Google's translator-bot.

And to be fair: sometimes I just simply forget to include a translation afterwards.
I usually use http://www.dict.cc/
It's very good.:yeah:
(the above translations are from it as I had no idea what Deutungshoheit is in English either.:D)

[ikalugin]

I think that "the brave new world" is closer to truth than the 1984.

[Wolferz]

I think that "the new world order" is closer to truth than the 1984.


*Fixed that for you*
:03::O: