<p>What if everyone carried a device that captured what they were saying and replayed it, layered along with other recordings of their own voice?</p>
<p>Or we could hold all of our meetings without devices, in the fields and mountains, with birdsong our walls and the sky as our roof.<br>
</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mar 5, 2013 11:22 AM, "Matthew D. Howell" <<a href="mailto:matthewdhowell@gmail.com">matthewdhowell@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
@Rachel The state of the technology for recognizing and separating<br>
patterns in audio is advanced enough to overcome that sort of thing.<br>
Every person's voice has a distinct signature that can be recognized.<br>
I would venture a guess that some kind of encrypted digital signal<br>
transmission would be the best way to keep any sonic communication<br>
private in the most extreme of situations. (most interested party with<br>
the best technology at their disposal)<br>
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – >8<br>
/V\ /-\ + + |–| ø \/\/ ∂ £ £<br>
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––<br>
Matthew D. Howell<br>
misterinterrupt, tHe M4d swiTcH, the RuinMechanic<br>
cell: <a href="tel:%28617%29%20755-1481" value="+16177551481">(617) 755-1481</a><br>
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––<br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:16 AM, rachel lyra hospodar<br>
<<a href="mailto:rachelyra@gmail.com">rachelyra@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Wouldn't it need to be non-commercially available music, so they couldn't<br>
> just find the audio data of the track, invert its wave, and cancel it out of<br>
> the recording?<br>
><br>
> CACOPHONY FOR THE REVOLUTION!<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://mediumreality.com" target="_blank">mediumreality.com</a><br>
><br>
> On Mar 5, 2013 10:23 AM, "Steve Berl" <<a href="mailto:steveberl@gmail.com">steveberl@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> You could carry a boombox around playing loud music where ever you go.<br>
>> Perhaps this would be the end of earbuds. :-)<br>
>><br>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Anthony Di Franco <<a href="mailto:di.franco@gmail.com">di.franco@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> People have rendered surveillance cameras useless with very bright IR<br>
>>> LEDs in their fields of view.<br>
>>> Could something similar be done for sound recording devices?<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Mar 5, 2013 6:17 AM, "Anon195714" <<a href="mailto:anon195714@sbcglobal.net">anon195714@sbcglobal.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Yo's-<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Something I forgot to add re. DARPA's desire for universal recording of<br>
>>>> face-to-face conversations.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> What's the ideal device for doing all that recording?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> How'bout something you wear? How'bout something that "everyone" wears?,<br>
>>>> or even a significant fraction of "everyone"?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Like maybe Google Glasses.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Always on, camera and mic always "connected" to "the cloud." Orwell's<br>
>>>> telescreen gone mobile.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Everyone who wears them will become, in effect, _unpaid surveillance<br>
>>>> drones_ watching their family and friends, not from up in the sky, but<br>
>>>> from up close where every word can be heard.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Some will say "oh, there's no stopping technology." People said that<br>
>>>> about the atomic bomb and the hydrogen bomb. But public outcry led<br>
>>>> first to treaties and then to progressive degrees of nuclear<br>
>>>> disarmament. We haven't used that technology since it was first used in<br>
>>>> WW2.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> We can stop pernicious tech if we choose. We can refuse, we can<br>
>>>> withdraw consent, we do not have to press the Buy button.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Technology should liberate and empower people. "Conveniences with a few<br>
>>>> strings attached" are not liberation, they're puppet-strings.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> It's all about control: technology that you can control, vs. technology<br>
>>>> that can control you.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> -G.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> =====<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On 13-03-05-Tue 1:50 AM, Anon195714 wrote:<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > Yo's-<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > This just in:<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > "DARPA wants to make [voice recognition/transcription] systems so<br>
>>>> > accurate, you’ll be able to easily record, transcribe and recall all<br>
>>>> > the<br>
>>>> > conversations you ever have. ... Imagine living in a world where every<br>
>>>> > errant utterance you make is preserved forever. ... DARPA [awarded<br>
>>>> > U.Texas comp sci researcher Matt Lease]... $300,000... over two years<br>
>>>> > to<br>
>>>> > study the new project, called “Blending Crowdsourcing with Automation<br>
>>>> > for Fast, Cheap, and Accurate Analysis of Spontaneous Speech.”"<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > "The idea is that business meetings or even conversations with your<br>
>>>> > friends and family could be stored in archives and easily searched.<br>
>>>> > The<br>
>>>> > stored recordings could be held in servers, owned either by<br>
>>>> > individuals<br>
>>>> > or their employers. ... The answer, Lease says, is in widespread use<br>
>>>> > of<br>
>>>> > recording technologies like smartphones, cameras and audio<br>
>>>> > recorders...<br>
>>>> > [A] memorandum from the Congressional Research Service described [an<br>
>>>> > earlier DARPA project of this type known as] EARS, as focusing on<br>
>>>> > speech<br>
>>>> > picked up from broadcasts and telephone conversations, “as well as<br>
>>>> > extract clues about the identity of speakers” for “the military,<br>
>>>> > intelligence and law enforcement communities.”"<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > <a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/03/darpa-speech/" target="_blank">http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/03/darpa-speech/</a> (Yes, "real<br>
>>>> > geeks<br>
>>>> > don't read Wired," but nonetheless its news pages are useful for<br>
>>>> > keeping<br>
>>>> > a finger on the pulse of Big Brother and his corporate Brethren.)<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > In short:<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > DARPA is researching the means by which every conversation you have,<br>
>>>> > in-person, whether at work or with family or friends, gets picked up<br>
>>>> > by<br>
>>>> > the mic in your smartphone or other portable device, and stored on a<br>
>>>> > server, where DARPA's algorithms and human editors turn all of it into<br>
>>>> > fast-searchable text, that could be used by your employer, the<br>
>>>> > military,<br>
>>>> > law enforcement, and intel agencies. Presumably the credit bureaus,<br>
>>>> > insurance companies, and financial institutions will want "in" on the<br>
>>>> > data as well.<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > Now connect that with this, about cell-site tracking and call detail<br>
>>>> > records:<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > "The government maintained [that] Americans have no expectation of<br>
>>>> > privacy of such cell-site records [call detail records or CDR] because<br>
>>>> > they are in the possession of a third party — the mobile phone<br>
>>>> > companies."<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/gps-drug-dealer-retrial/" target="_blank">http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/gps-drug-dealer-retrial/</a><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > The key point is that the gov's current position is that data stored<br>
>>>> > on<br>
>>>> > a third party's servers have "no expectation of privacy." What begins<br>
>>>> > with CDR will eventually include voicemail messages stored on the<br>
>>>> > mobile<br>
>>>> > phone companies' servers, and then eventually all of your live<br>
>>>> > in-person<br>
>>>> > conversations that are stored "in the cloud."<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > "Anything you say can and will be used against you..." Mark my words.<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > Meanwhile people keep using gmail and Google Voice, and smartphones<br>
>>>> > from<br>
>>>> > which they can't remove the batteries. Because nothing is more<br>
>>>> > important<br>
>>>> > than "convenience," right?<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > As a character in a sci-fi piece I wrote in the mid-1980s said, "Why<br>
>>>> > put<br>
>>>> > a person in prison, when you can put prison in the person instead?"<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > -G.<br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>>>> > sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
>>>> > <a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
>>>> > <a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
>>>> ><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
>>>> <a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> -steve<br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
><br>
</blockquote></div>