Warning

[PunkReaper 0]

Came across this on a Napoleonic Wars forum. Thought it may be of interest here...

FAO: ALL FORUM MEMBERS WHO COLLECT MILITARIA

I know many of you post images of valuable items in your personal collections such as medals, swords and other Napoleonic militaria in showcases and other threads. Please, therefore, take note of the following...

An issue has come to my attention through a forum connected to Rolex watches. It appears a member on said forum posted photos of his Rolex collection which had been taken using the camera on his iPhone. Sadly his collection was then later stolen. It has been suggested (by a US police officer to myself) that thieves may have used the photos to ascertain the home of the member. It appears (and I have checked this out myself with shocking results!) that by default iPhones and some Smartphones embed the GPS location of where the photo was taken in the picture file. By saving the file to your computer you can look at the properties of the file (right click and properties) to obtain the GPS coordinates then use Google Maps to pinpoint the location where the photo was taken. When you upload your images online this GPS information remains with the image. Apparently thieves are now known to be abusing this system.

While I would hope that this is highly unlikely to happen to members of the NWF I felt it wise to post this thread just as a warning. If you do use your iPhone or Smartphone camera to take photos of your valuable collectors items please ensure you turn the GPS tracking information off first - or better still use a digital camera!

Mark

[bagerap 706]

It may sound like an urban myth, but it's true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geotagging

However, you can turn this facility off. Check your phone's handbook.

[Gary 7]

Thanks for the warning. Very interesting Info.

[Coinery 1,148]

Yes, thanks for that, much appreciated!

Absolutely love the galloping knight, superb!

[Accumulator 52]

Very soon, the concept of privacy, along with opinion, will be something relevant only to history lessons. Another brick, building a world in which we are told what to do and what to think. It's happening everywhere and it's very sad.

[PunkReaper 0]

Here is information on how to disable it

Edited June 7, 2012 by PunkReaper

[Peckris 579]

Very soon, the concept of privacy, along with opinion, will be something relevant only to history lessons. Another brick, building a world in which we are told what to do and what to think. It's happening everywhere and it's very sad.

You HAVE to be kidding!! While I agree with the "privacy" thing, "opinion" is something that now runs wild and unfettered, thanks to the internet. God save us from all the trolls who are proliferating behind their computer monitors and broadband. There's far too much opinion out there now. IMO

[Accumulator 52]

Very soon, the concept of privacy, along with opinion, will be something relevant only to history lessons. Another brick, building a world in which we are told what to do and what to think. It's happening everywhere and it's very sad.

You HAVE to be kidding!! While I agree with the "privacy" thing, "opinion" is something that now runs wild and unfettered, thanks to the internet. God save us from all the trolls who are proliferating behind their computer monitors and broadband. There's far too much opinion out there now. IMO

Not kidding at all. How can unfettered opinion be a bad thing? God save us from the day when we are not allowed to have our own opinions!

Whilst I agree that the internet has provided a place where some pretty outrageous opinions can be voiced, one has to presume these opinions were held prior to the arrival of the web. Only the ability to communicate them has changed, though there seems to be a fairly concerted attempt to police this (witness jail terms handed out for twitter comments etc.). We need to be careful not to build a dystopian society where only opinions which align with prevailing political thought or policy are allowed. Fahrenheit 451 maybe.

Edited June 8, 2012 by Accumulator

[declanwmagee 122]

Fahrenheit 451 maybe.

Nice topical reference, Mr Accumulator, and bang on.

I had the misfortune to get into my brother-in-laws car the other day and the thing kept bleeping at me. "What it doing that for" says I. "It's telling you you haven't got your seatbelt on" says he. So where do I type in "don't be silly, this is rural Gloucestershire"? If it had been my car I'd have been in the fusebox, but they probably send an alarm to HQ if you do that.

Sooner or later, everything will be either mandatory or prohibited.

[Peckris 579]

Very soon, the concept of privacy, along with opinion, will be something relevant only to history lessons. Another brick, building a world in which we are told what to do and what to think. It's happening everywhere and it's very sad.

You HAVE to be kidding!! While I agree with the "privacy" thing, "opinion" is something that now runs wild and unfettered, thanks to the internet. God save us from all the trolls who are proliferating behind their computer monitors and broadband. There's far too much opinion out there now. IMO

Not kidding at all. How can unfettered opinion be a bad thing? God save us from the day when we are not allowed to have our own opinions!

Whilst I agree that the internet has provided a place where some pretty outrageous opinions can be voiced, one has to presume these opinions were held prior to the arrival of the web. Only the ability to communicate them has changed, though there seems to be a fairly concerted attempt to police this (witness jail terms handed out for twitter comments etc.). We need to be careful not to build a dystopian society where only opinions which align with prevailing political thought or policy are allowed. Fahrenheit 451 maybe.

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

[1949threepence 3,367]

Very soon, the concept of privacy, along with opinion, will be something relevant only to history lessons. Another brick, building a world in which we are told what to do and what to think. It's happening everywhere and it's very sad.

Thing is, who is making these decisions and giving the orders ?

You HAVE to be kidding!! While I agree with the "privacy" thing, "opinion" is something that now runs wild and unfettered, thanks to the internet. God save us from all the trolls who are proliferating behind their computer monitors and broadband. There's far too much opinion out there now. IMO

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

[Coinery 1,148]

Very soon, the concept of privacy, along with opinion, will be something relevant only to history lessons. Another brick, building a world in which we are told what to do and what to think. It's happening everywhere and it's very sad.

Thing is, who is making these decisions and giving the orders ?

You HAVE to be kidding!! While I agree with the "privacy" thing, "opinion" is something that now runs wild and unfettered, thanks to the internet. God save us from all the trolls who are proliferating behind their computer monitors and broadband. There's far too much opinion out there now. IMO

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Ahhh, now, the big problem there is, the society has produced a machine that can no longer permit us residencies in the communities we were brought up in...and given that the same machine no longer grants us the privilege of moving at a snail's pace, we have to communicate by the fastest means, namely, the monitored technologies! It's no longer any good to write a letter to a friend saying you've just got a couple of day's off...you're back at work before he's read the letter (obviously a very insignificant example of the main point)!

[Accumulator 52]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Edited June 9, 2012 by Accumulator

[Peckris 579]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists.

Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion.

[argentumandcoins 70]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists.

Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion.

A more pointless waste of human existence I (thankfully) have yet to encounter.

My wife is 39 and has never read a book in her life but will happily spend 5 hours a day (every day)reading total pish about her friends/acquaintances and family on Brainf**k Facebook. Whenever I casually ask her WTF the point of the drivel is she tells me to "get a life, and see what's happening in the real world" Facebook, the real world???? Shit I think I must have taken the red pill by mistake

[Peckris 579]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists.

Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion.

A more pointless waste of human existence I (thankfully) have yet to encounter.

My wife is 39 and has never read a book in her life but will happily spend 5 hours a day (every day)reading total pish about her friends/acquaintances and family on Brainf**k Facebook. Whenever I casually ask her WTF the point of the drivel is she tells me to "get a life, and see what's happening in the real world" Facebook, the real world???? Shit I think I must have taken the red pill by mistake

Ye gods!

[Accumulator 52]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists.

Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion.

I agree that may be true today, BUT the data is being collected and from more sources than most of us imagine (CCTV everywhere, Facebook, Twitter, border control, credit card use, mobile phone automatic tracking and use, Oyster cards for travel etc. etc. The list is almost endless and expanding daily). Whilst it would be impossible to provide enough manpower to collate and use most of this information it is inevitable that such work will eventually be undertaken by artificially intelligent computers. That really isn't science fiction! How long before a camera clocks you driving at 33mph on your way to the airport for a holiday and the passport check won't let you through customs until you pay the fine which appears on their screen? Or your Facebook account mentions support for the Freedom Party and you go on line to vote in the 2020 election but are automatically denied access for having unacceptable views?

[DaveG38 405]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists.

Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion.

A more pointless waste of human existence I (thankfully) have yet to encounter.

My wife is 39 and has never read a book in her life but will happily spend 5 hours a day (every day)reading total pish about her friends/acquaintances and family on Brainf**k Facebook. Whenever I casually ask her WTF the point of the drivel is she tells me to "get a life, and see what's happening in the real world" Facebook, the real world???? Shit I think I must have taken the red pill by mistake

The opposite nearly occurred the other day, when some young girl stepped out into the road without so much as look for traffic, too busy twiddling her thumbs on a phone. Mind you, the look on her face was priceless when a car screeched to a halt a foot from her!

Edited June 10, 2012 by DaveG38

[Accumulator 52]

A more pointless waste of human existence I (thankfully) have yet to encounter.

My wife is 39 and has never read a book in her life but will happily spend 5 hours a day (every day)reading total pish about her friends/acquaintances and family on Brainf**k Facebook. Whenever I casually ask her WTF the point of the drivel is she tells me to "get a life, and see what's happening in the real world" Facebook, the real world???? Shit I think I must have taken the red pill by mistake

Surely she meant to say (new) 'wife' not life, John?

Edited June 10, 2012 by Accumulator

[argentumandcoins 70]

A more pointless waste of human existence I (thankfully) have yet to encounter.

My wife is 39 and has never read a book in her life but will happily spend 5 hours a day (every day)reading total pish about her friends/acquaintances and family on Brainf**k Facebook. Whenever I casually ask her WTF the point of the drivel is she tells me to "get a life, and see what's happening in the real world" Facebook, the real world???? Shit I think I must have taken the red pill by mistake

Surely she meant to say (new) 'wife', John?

If only I had the money..... in fact I think I would stay single and spend it on important things like good Malts, fine wines, Cuban cigars and fishing :D

[Peter 615]

A more pointless waste of human existence I (thankfully) have yet to encounter.

My wife is 39 and has never read a book in her life but will happily spend 5 hours a day (every day)reading total pish about her friends/acquaintances and family on Brainf**k Facebook. Whenever I casually ask her WTF the point of the drivel is she tells me to "get a life, and see what's happening in the real world" Facebook, the real world???? Shit I think I must have taken the red pill by mistake

Surely she meant to say (new) 'wife', John?

If only I had the money..... in fact I think I would stay single and spend it on important things like good Malts, fine wines, Cuban cigars and fishing :D

invite me to your party...I'm a 6am man and pay for it from Mrs Peter...my eldest daughter is going out with a hopeful Para.I gave him a Monte Christo and a slug of Glenmoray...he is now converted.

[Mongo 1]

Another reason for me not to give in, and go buy an iphone! I will stick with my knackered old sony aino

[Peckris 579]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists.

Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion.

I agree that may be true today, BUT the data is being collected and from more sources than most of us imagine (CCTV everywhere, Facebook, Twitter, border control, credit card use, mobile phone automatic tracking and use, Oyster cards for travel etc. etc. The list is almost endless and expanding daily). Whilst it would be impossible to provide enough manpower to collate and use most of this information it is inevitable that such work will eventually be undertaken by artificially intelligent computers. That really isn't science fiction! How long before a camera clocks you driving at 33mph on your way to the airport for a holiday and the passport check won't let you through customs until you pay the fine which appears on their screen? Or your Facebook account mentions support for the Freedom Party and you go on line to vote in the 2020 election but are automatically denied access for having unacceptable views?

Even sophisticated AI wouldn't be able to uncover the real person behind a fake identity based on a hotmail email address, which is what anyone with any sense does now anyway, when they register for a forum. And if on top of that they use a proxy server, or TOR, then that's game set and match.

[1949threepence 3,367]

Sorry, I'm having difficulty squaring your circle Steve! On the one hand you say that opinion will soon be consigned to history books, on the other you say that we have unfettered opinion. Not sure which way your pendulum is swinging (no sexual references there, I hasten to assure you )

Don't worry, I'm not a mason!

What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion.

Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire).

Privacy is still possible by communicating face to face or by ordinary letters/notes, all offline. It's not difficult to sidestep any monitoring if you use a bit of nous.

Not that anybody would actually be interested in 99% of the drivel peddled via electronic communication.

As for opinion, you're definitely right on that, Chris. The internet is full of opinions, many of them quite brutal.

You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists.

Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion.

I agree that may be true today, BUT the data is being collected and from more sources than most of us imagine (CCTV everywhere, Facebook, Twitter, border control, credit card use, mobile phone automatic tracking and use, Oyster cards for travel etc. etc. The list is almost endless and expanding daily). Whilst it would be impossible to provide enough manpower to collate and use most of this information it is inevitable that such work will eventually be undertaken by artificially intelligent computers. That really isn't science fiction! How long before a camera clocks you driving at 33mph on your way to the airport for a holiday and the passport check won't let you through customs until you pay the fine which appears on their screen? Or your Facebook account mentions support for the Freedom Party and you go on line to vote in the 2020 election but are automatically denied access for having unacceptable views?

Every action generates a reaction ~ if the state starts using social media to the active and obvious detriment of its citizens, that is the time the vast majority will desert it in droves and revert back to the traditional means of communication, for all but the most banal crap. Actually facebook is mostly this already, as John alluded to.

[Accumulator 52]

Even sophisticated AI wouldn't be able to uncover the real person behind a fake identity based on a hotmail email address, which is what anyone with any sense does now anyway, when they register for a forum. And if on top of that they use a proxy server, or TOR, then that's game set and match.

I agree than one can take steps to make it more difficult for 'the state' or other agency to track our every movement BUT why should we have to? The mass of information collected is so great and so diverse that none of us is likely to remain hidden for long unless we individually make it our life's mission, and who has the time and energy for that? Am I really alone in seeing a worrying trend in which all but the most determined of us will eventually lead a life in which our every movement and communication is tracked?

Remember how this thread started. Did most of us even know that smart phone pics contained date, time and location information? How many of us read Google, Apple or Facebook's privacy policy ('privacy' is a joke). This recent article about Google's StreetView is just but one example of what is happening around us.