http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/app-installed-on-millions-of-phones-secretly-records-all-activity/
This sickens me. Seriously, how many blatantly dishonest people did it take to get this onto millions of Android, BlackBerry, and Nokia phones? From now on, anyone who tells me that they have any doubt that corporate America is utterly corrupt and evil is either too stupid to do their research, extremely gullible, or part of the corruption. To get this software onto so many phones, first a number of people had to knowingly create and market this to phone companies. Then, a fair number of people at each of those companies had to endorse the software and install it on their products. This must have required the cooperation of large numbers of corporate officials, upper management, engineers, and software developers. This attack on the American people, from within, should be treated as treason by our government.
The behavior of these companies and individuals is very close to that of revolutionaries. Historically, powerful organizations have used their influence to infiltrate and control the general populace. In the past, this was done by getting sympathizers to record and report the behavior of people around them that might be a threat to the movement, or that might be potential sympathizers themselves. These people might also record data on business transactions and other things that the organizations might be able to use to increase their power, or to gain control of people. Often this data was used to blackmail or even assassinate those who could be dangerous to the organization. It would sometimes be used to control those with sensitive information, or even as a means of collecting sensitive information, without detection. Now, we have technology that is, evidently, extremely easy to misuse for such purposes, with much smaller chances of detection.
If you are not convinced that this is dangerous enough to warrant charges of treason, consider one more thing: How many government officials use Android, BlackBerry, or Nokia phones? How many of these officials use those phones for confidential communications? Right, there are probably rules against that, but don't kid yourself. If you know anything about the ethics of our government officials, you should have no doubt that nearly all of them have, at least once, used their phones to transfer, or at least store sensitive information. While this by itself is only a potential security risk, if those phones contained this software that logs and reports key strokes to some company, this is no longer a "potential security risk." No, it is a leak. In this case, it is potentially thousands of leaks.
By putting this software on their phones, without informing their customers, these companies have created potentially one of the biggest security risks the US government has ever faced. These companies first should be given extremely heavy fines, for their crimes against their customers. Second, they should be exhaustively investigated by the US government to ensure that no sensitive data was obtained using this extremely unethical system. Third, any of these companies that has obtained sensitive data should be charged with treason, and further investigation should be done to determine who else may have obtained that data. In addition, each individual who was involved with, or knew about this and did not report it should be charged with crimes against the people who's data may have been compromised by this system, and with treason, if any of the companies involved obtained any amount of sensitive government data. None of these people should ever be allowed to work in communications jobs again.
It may seem hard to believe that this could have been intended for harmful purposes. I submit that if this were really just some innocent plan devised to learn habits of customers and how they use their phone software, it would have been advertised as a feature, not hidden from view and kept extremely secretive. This was intentional dishonesty, not some innocent plan with unexpected side effects. It should be treated as such. If we do not send a message that we will not tolerate this kind of violation, eventually some company will gain enough information to become a very serious threat to our freedom.
Lord Rybec
30 November 2011
21 November 2011
xkcd Money Chart
http://xkcd.com/980
I am tempted to print this on my 2' wide printer and put it on the wall. This is the most comprehensive chart of where money in the US is/goes that I have ever seen, and I just finished extensive research on this subject for a paper. I wish this had been posted a week ago.
Ok, so there are people starving in the US, while our government is spending $11 billion on military aid, and another $11 billion on foreign humanitarian aid (not certain if that is yearly, or total, but yearly makes more sense). Total US population (in 2009 according to Google) is 307 million. That is equal to $71 per person. If you discount the 50% of the population that is totally above the poverty line, and does not need the money, that is $142 per person. Note that this is not money that we are paying for our own defense. Also note that in the past this money has been used explicitly against us (by Iran and Iraq, for instance).
Corporate tax deductions are at $125 billion, which is equal to $407 per person.
Cost of war in Afghanistan is $321 billion, at $1,045 per person.
Iraq war was $784 billion, at $2,553 per person.
Stimulus spending was $206 billion in 2008 and $748 billion in 2009, totaling at $954 billion and $3,107 per person.
Recent bailouts totaled around $393 billion, $1,280 per person.
US annual charitable giving: $295 billion, at $960 per person.
And a bunch of small stuff that probably totals at several more trillion (not willing to take the hours to count it all).
So, the totals of the stuff that I provided values for is $2,872 billion. That comes out to $9,355 per person. If that money was distributed only to those that actually need it (the lower 50%), it would be $18,710 per person. xkcd.com assumes around $22,000 as the poverty level (on a per household basis). In a household of 2 people, $18,710 per person is enough money to survive on for a year, without even working a job. Many of the above are yearly figures, meaning that the government could dramatically improve the standard of living of the bottom 50% by giving them money, instead of wasting it on useless projects (admittedly, some of the money is spent on useful stuff, for instance, stimulus includes some education grants).
Note that the lower 50% includes households that earn less than $55,000 a year. Those making more than $40,000 a year and only include 2 people could be excluded based on research showing that $20,000 a year per person is the optimum income for happiness. This would further increase the per person payout of the nearly $3 trillion counted above.
Also, a wage cap and a profit cap for businesses would extremely dramatically redistribute wealth. A $500 million profit cap (I support something even more aggressive) would save $15.5 billion from Walmart (I'll be rounding down to the nearest $.5 billion), $29.5 billion from ExxonMobil, $5.5 billion from PepsiCo, $11 billion from Coca-Cola, $2 billion from VISA, $1 billion from MasterCard, $11 billion from GE, $12 billion from Berkshire Hathaway, $5.5 billion from GM, $6 billion from Ford, $19 billion from AT&T, $1.5 billion from Bank of America, $16.5 billion from JP Morgan Chase, $2 billion from Verizon, $10 billion from Citigroup, $51.5 billion from HP, $13.5 billion from Apple, $18 billion from MS, and $8 billion from Google. That totals to $239 billion, which is another $1,557 per person, and this time entirely on a yearly basis (and automatically adjusted for inflation even). And, this only includes a very small number of businesses that make over $500 million a year. If this money was distributed among the lower 50%, it would be $3,114 per year per person, enough to pull quite a few people out of the poverty level.
I don't want to do the work for finding the benefits of the wage cap, but I am certain they are at least as dramatic as the profit cap.
In short, if our government would quit squandering money, and if it would enforce a wage and profit cap, everyone one in the entire US could be living above the poverty level. (Hmm, according to the dollar section of the xkcd.com chart, the average CEO in the US makes $5,420 per hour. I could work for a single day every year at those wages, and be just barely at the poverty level. I take this to mean that each day of work for a typical CEO is robbing one person of an entire year's salary. Of course, this is presuming an 8 hour work day.)
If, in addition to this, taxes for the top 10% of wage earners was increased by even a little bit (ie, a few percent), it would generate enough more money to put the entire US population in the middle class. Note that this does not include large businesses, which would generate far more than that with a similar tax increase.
Anyhow, I like this chart. It gives very complete information (and would have made a nice reference for my paper, if it had come a week earlier).
Lord Rybec
I am tempted to print this on my 2' wide printer and put it on the wall. This is the most comprehensive chart of where money in the US is/goes that I have ever seen, and I just finished extensive research on this subject for a paper. I wish this had been posted a week ago.
Ok, so there are people starving in the US, while our government is spending $11 billion on military aid, and another $11 billion on foreign humanitarian aid (not certain if that is yearly, or total, but yearly makes more sense). Total US population (in 2009 according to Google) is 307 million. That is equal to $71 per person. If you discount the 50% of the population that is totally above the poverty line, and does not need the money, that is $142 per person. Note that this is not money that we are paying for our own defense. Also note that in the past this money has been used explicitly against us (by Iran and Iraq, for instance).
Corporate tax deductions are at $125 billion, which is equal to $407 per person.
Cost of war in Afghanistan is $321 billion, at $1,045 per person.
Iraq war was $784 billion, at $2,553 per person.
Stimulus spending was $206 billion in 2008 and $748 billion in 2009, totaling at $954 billion and $3,107 per person.
Recent bailouts totaled around $393 billion, $1,280 per person.
US annual charitable giving: $295 billion, at $960 per person.
And a bunch of small stuff that probably totals at several more trillion (not willing to take the hours to count it all).
So, the totals of the stuff that I provided values for is $2,872 billion. That comes out to $9,355 per person. If that money was distributed only to those that actually need it (the lower 50%), it would be $18,710 per person. xkcd.com assumes around $22,000 as the poverty level (on a per household basis). In a household of 2 people, $18,710 per person is enough money to survive on for a year, without even working a job. Many of the above are yearly figures, meaning that the government could dramatically improve the standard of living of the bottom 50% by giving them money, instead of wasting it on useless projects (admittedly, some of the money is spent on useful stuff, for instance, stimulus includes some education grants).
Note that the lower 50% includes households that earn less than $55,000 a year. Those making more than $40,000 a year and only include 2 people could be excluded based on research showing that $20,000 a year per person is the optimum income for happiness. This would further increase the per person payout of the nearly $3 trillion counted above.
Also, a wage cap and a profit cap for businesses would extremely dramatically redistribute wealth. A $500 million profit cap (I support something even more aggressive) would save $15.5 billion from Walmart (I'll be rounding down to the nearest $.5 billion), $29.5 billion from ExxonMobil, $5.5 billion from PepsiCo, $11 billion from Coca-Cola, $2 billion from VISA, $1 billion from MasterCard, $11 billion from GE, $12 billion from Berkshire Hathaway, $5.5 billion from GM, $6 billion from Ford, $19 billion from AT&T, $1.5 billion from Bank of America, $16.5 billion from JP Morgan Chase, $2 billion from Verizon, $10 billion from Citigroup, $51.5 billion from HP, $13.5 billion from Apple, $18 billion from MS, and $8 billion from Google. That totals to $239 billion, which is another $1,557 per person, and this time entirely on a yearly basis (and automatically adjusted for inflation even). And, this only includes a very small number of businesses that make over $500 million a year. If this money was distributed among the lower 50%, it would be $3,114 per year per person, enough to pull quite a few people out of the poverty level.
I don't want to do the work for finding the benefits of the wage cap, but I am certain they are at least as dramatic as the profit cap.
In short, if our government would quit squandering money, and if it would enforce a wage and profit cap, everyone one in the entire US could be living above the poverty level. (Hmm, according to the dollar section of the xkcd.com chart, the average CEO in the US makes $5,420 per hour. I could work for a single day every year at those wages, and be just barely at the poverty level. I take this to mean that each day of work for a typical CEO is robbing one person of an entire year's salary. Of course, this is presuming an 8 hour work day.)
If, in addition to this, taxes for the top 10% of wage earners was increased by even a little bit (ie, a few percent), it would generate enough more money to put the entire US population in the middle class. Note that this does not include large businesses, which would generate far more than that with a similar tax increase.
Anyhow, I like this chart. It gives very complete information (and would have made a nice reference for my paper, if it had come a week earlier).
Lord Rybec
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)