The S.M.A.R.T Psy-op Consumers Don’t Recognize

BigBrother
Source: ActivistPost.com
Catherine Frompovich & Contributing researcher Kerri Ellen Wilder
June 9, 2017

“Smart” is really S.M.A.R.T., an engineering acronym for Specific – Measurable – Achievable – Relevant – Time-based. The reality that ultimately will evolve from this psy-op is a dystopian future destructive of dignity and freedom. Your liberty, your privacy, and the American way of life are on sale right now for electric dollars. The Internet of Things (IoT) and 5G are being represented and presented as the harbingers of a global utopia. They are, in fact, nothing short of a Faustian bargain of illusory promises many will live to regret when all their individual freedoms are forfeited for technology.

The “smart” meme and techno world stretches back to the 1930s when M. King Hubbert authored his  “Technocracy Study Course,” which developed  technocracy’s principles for the distribution of energy resources, as well as the monitoring and measurement of all of energy’s outputs.

Five of Hubbert’s seven requirements necessary for Technocracy’s implementation are listed below; think of them in terms of AMI smart meter technology being forced on the global population.

  1. Register on a continuous 24 hour-per-hour-day basis the total net conversion of energy.
  2. By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.
  3. Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption.
  4. Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced and where used.
  5. Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.

Number 5 is implemented by and with the algorithm Onzo® [1].  Conversely and legally, smart meter data mining probably does not pass constitutional muster!

According to Chris Turner, Esq., Allison Grande published the article “Meter Data Needs Privacy Protection, 7th Circ. Told,” at Law360 March 2, 2017. Attorney Turner provides some quotes from that article:

A pair of privacy groups are urging the Seventh Circuit to find that the Fourth Amendment protects data generated by smart meters, arguing that the granular details produced by these increasingly prominent readers are “far more intimate” than cumulative information collected periodically from more traditional analog meters.

“Whereas analog meters provide a single monthly measurement of cumulative household energy use, smart meters — by measuring energy use at much shorter intervals; here, every 15 minutes — provide information regarding not only how much energy was used, but also the time at which it was used,” the groups wrote. “Smart meters thus not only generate far more data every month than analog meters — here 2,880 meter readings in a 30-day month compared to just one — but the data includes an entirely new variable, i.e., time.”

The time component is essential, the groups argued, because it allows a detailed picture to be painted of what’s going on inside a home, including how and when residents are using electricity and when they are home, sleeping, taking a shower or how they are cooking dinner.

“As a result of this time granularity, smart meter data — even in ‘aggregate’ form — constitutes intimate information regarding a person or family’s private, in-home activities,” the groups said.

Americans reasonably expect details of their private, in-home activities to remain private, and U.S. Supreme Court case law — including the 2001 ruling in Kyllo v. U.S., which held that raw thermal imaging data revealing “the relative heat of various rooms  in the home” constituted “intimate details” regarding the interior of the home protected under the Fourth Amendment — supports the conclusion that smart meter data is entitled to heightened privacy protections, the groups argued…

Of course, the technology to do these things did not exist in the 1930s; today it does, and the keystone device to accomplish the above five requirements is called a smart meter. Americans of the 1930s actually debated—and rejected—these ideas as antithetical to Constitutional Republicanism.

But while America politically rejected Technocracy, Technocracy’s tenets found fertile fields in which to germinate—in National Socialist Germany. I won’t dwell on the crimes of Nazi Germany, many of which could never have been carried out, certainly to the degree they were, without Hitler’s army of technocrats.

What the PA PUC, the seven PA EDCs retrofitting smart meters and harassing those who refuse, and what the federal Department of Energy hope to institute is a modern-day Technocracy. In order to build a national Smart Grid, and ultimately a worldwide Smart Grid, the technocrats are determined to place a smart meter in every residence and business globally. No electric consumer is to be left behind. Or it might be better phrased, “No one can be permitted to escape Technocracy’s control.”

The Nazis of the 1930s well understood what American technocrats were trying to do. While they didn’t buy into the exact system American technocrats were developing, they did comprehend the obsession with absolute control of electric power. The Nazis called the American Technocrats’ system of energy credits, “electric dollars.

The above SMART technology memes eerily bring to mind something discussed about two thousand years ago; some say it is apocryphal, others claim it’s prophecy.  However you want to define it, it certainly has signature fingerprints of the next technocracy meme to be forced upon us: Microchip implants [2-3].

Revelation 13. 16-18

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name…and his number is Six hundred three score and six.

How about making purchases with a wave of your hand! [4-5]

Currently in the mad world of corporate-influence and oft-run mandates ruling our lives [vaccines and smart meters], I can only imagine the problems that will occur with a totally-implemented technocracy.  I’m constantly running into folks complaining about computers and how they’ve made life more frustrating and difficult, not easier and certainly unsafe regarding information.  Really!

The United States has morphed from thirteen British colonies into a democratic republic, to a currently fascist-run Corporatocracy heading toward its final, in my opinion, new world order meme: technocracy.

Doesn’t all this really sound like a psy-op?

Read More At: ActivistPost.com
__________________________________________________________________________

References:

[1] http://www.activistpost.com/2017/03/onzo-possibly-utility-customers-worst-friend.html
[2] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/microchips-privacy-implants-biohacking/
[3] http://nypost.com/2017/04/03/bosses-are-already-tracking-employees-with-microchip-implants/
[4] http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/chip-implants-beneath-the-skin-bring-a-new-meaning-to-pay-wave-20150528-ghbq71.htm
[5] http://www.businessinsider.com/microchip-implants-in-healthy-people-2014-7

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)

Catherine’s NEW book: Eat To Beat Disease, Foods Medicinal Qualities ©2016 Catherine J Frompovich is now available

Facebook Could Secretly Watch Users Through Webcam Patent Reveals

Monitoring people’s emotions would help the company keep them on the site for longer

Privacy
Source: Independent.co.uk
Aatif Sulleyvan
June 8, 2017

Facebook is considering secretly watching and recording users through their webcams and smartphone cameras, a newly discovered patent suggests.

The document explains how the company would use technology to see how your facial expressions change when you come across different types of content on the site.

It would analyse those images to work out how you feel, and use the information to keep you on the site for longer.

If you smiled as you looked at pictures of one of your friends, for instance, Facebook’s algorithm would take note of that and display more pictures of that friend in your News Feed.

Another example included in the patent application explains that if you looked away from your screen when a video of a kitten played, Facebook would stop showing similar type of videos in your Feed.

In another case, the document says that if you happened to watch an advert for scotch, Facebook could choose to target you with more adverts for scotch.

The patent application was submitted in February 2014 and published in August 2015, but was only recently spotted, by CBInsights.

“We often seek patents for technology we never implement, and patents should not be taken as an indication of future plans,” said a Facebook spokesperson.

However, the document raises yet more concern about a company that, in 2014, was found to have secretly manipulated hundreds of thousands of users’ News Feeds as part of an experiment to work out whether it could affect people’s emotions.

The company later admitted that it “failed to communicate clearly why and how we did it”.

Last year, a picture posted by Mark Zuckerberg showed that he covers his webcam and microphone with tape. The public rather predictably made a big deal out of it, and the discovery of Facebook’s patent will only fuel speculation.

The site isn’t believed to have put its plans into action yet, and there’s no guarantee that it ever will.

The patent also details a new text-messaging platform that would detect how hard you type, and use that information to attempt to work out how you feel.

Read More At: Independent.co.uk

Brave Police Save Town From Man Selling Veggies


Source: TheDailyBell.com
June 4, 2017

It is the simplest, most basic aspect of life: you need food, so you grow some vegetables. If you have extra you sell them on a street corner to your neighbors, and if you live in California you get arrested for it.

Licensing is when the government takes a right from you, and sells it back. This California man failed to purchase his rights back from the state.

But the poor police had pictures taken of them while arresting the man, and now they are hearing from the public about their unjust actions.

The Sheriff’s Department of Alameda County Florida responded on Facebook to the public outrage, including thousands of criticisms posted to their Facebook page.

Selling food on street corners violates county ordinances and public health codes. Persistent street vending harms local businesses, especially small, start-up food vendors…

There you have it, from the horse’s mouth in plain black and white: the point of licenses is protection. You pay to play, if you don’t pay off the city and county, they will send their hired thugs to rough you up and demand the protection money.

It harms local businesses: apparently it is the government’s job to make sure there is no competition for certain businesses. God forbid the consumer has a choice.

And why isn’t this guy’s produce selling operation considered a small, start-up street vendor?

Simple because he didn’t pay for his rights.

Yet the Ninth Amendment in the Bill of Rights says, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

And the 24th Amendment outlawed the poll tax, saying the right to vote had been abridged by charging citizens money in order to exercise that right.

Both of these amendments suggest that licensing–charging money for doing a normal activity, having to pay just to live your life–is one method of denying a person’s rights.

And two Supreme Court cases affirm this:

In Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943), the Supreme Court stated that a law requiring solicitors to purchase a license was an unconstitutional tax on the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ right to freely exercise their religion. The Court ruled that “The state cannot and does not have the power to license, nor tax, a Right guaranteed to the people,” and “No state shall convert a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore.”

In another case, the Court ruled similarly, that “If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.” (Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262).

Earning money, engaging in basic trade, selling the excess of your labor all falls under the category of natural rights, the pursuit of happiness, liberty or whatever you want to call it. The government has no business arresting someone for selling vegetables.

So the county has their pieces of paper that say he cannot sell without a license, and he has different pieces of paper that say he can. No one bothers to think about what is right, especially the police “just doing their jobs.”

The police don’t make the rules, they just enforce them. So at what point will a law become too unjust to enforce? At what point does a cop quit his job, because he is the agent of injustice? That is such a stupid attempt to absolve oneself of responsibility.

A police officer is an individual who can choose to do evil or not. Doing injustice to fellow human beings for a salary doesn’t make it any better. Following the orders of politicians doesn’t make a cop’s actions peaceful. Throwing people in cages for selling vegetables is a terrible thing to do as one individual to another, and one should not hide behind a badge, uniform, department, or politician while being a bad person.

Let’s look at the rest of the excuse given by the Sheriff’s Department.

Selling food on street corners… poses certain health risks such as E. coli and other food borne illnesses.

Okay, getting a license doesn’t stop E. coli. There have been plenty of outbreaks in licensed food, as well as government-owned water supplies. This is simply a justification given for extortion. The government isn’t testing every veggie, and they aren’t watching every restaurant employee to make sure they wash their hands before returning to work–even if they make the restaurant hang the sign.

The Sheriff’s office continued:

In addition, illegal vending causes traffic safety issues and vendors are sometimes the target of street robberies.

Ah, there you go! The police arrested the man to help him and protect him. They defacto robbed him (the costs of going through the legal system, as well as lost veggies, and lost revenue) in order to protect him from being robbed.

And they will just throw in a “traffic safety issue” for good measure. That farmstand is much more distracting than blinding blue lights flashed all over the city whenever someone is going 5 mph over the speed limit.

(On a side note, have you ever thought about how much more dangerous it is to be parked on the side of a highway after being pulled over, versus going 80 or even 90 miles per hour with the traffic?)

The whole situation is just absurd. We don’t need police running around arresting vegetable vendors–we don’t even need them arresting drug dealers!

If the police would focus on solving the millions of rapes which they never investigate, or perhaps the 39% of murders that never get cleared, maybe their Facebook pages wouldn’t be bombarded by angry citizens as often.

The clear answer is to continue to resist and engage in your highly illegal selling of vegetables, and anything else, regardless of what the law says.Support the illegal farmstand on the roadside, and engage in gray and black markets with your community.

Support the illegal farmstand on the roadside, and engage in gray and black markets with your community.

In fact, a fun activity of resistance is to actively seek out opportunities to engage in unlicensed vending and trade. This strengthens the undocumented market.

The raw milk in my cereal was sold to me illegally, which makes it that much more delicious.

Read More At: TheDailyBell.com

How Facebook is Helping China Become a Dystopian Nightmare

Source: TheDailyBell.com
May 31, 2017

A bad credit score can be quite the hardship in America. But can you imagine a bad social credit score? China is implementing social credit scores that will influence the types of schooling, jobs, and housing available to citizens.

The population will also have the chance to review and affect their neighbors’ and acquaintances’ scores. They will be ranked in order to decide who gets what privileges, and who must remain on the outer periphery of society. What citizens of China say on the internet and in relation to the Chinese government will influence the scores, creating a stratified society with the “perfect citizen” on top, decided of course by the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

The score will be contained in information found on ID cards citizens must carry. Some citizens who renew their ID’s are finding that they must submit a sample of their DNA to the central database that China is building to keep further track of their citizens. Over 44 million samples have already been collected. The Chinese government claims it is for crime fighting purposes, however, the people forced to give samples have often committed no crime.

China also strictly limits its internet, creating a firewall that blocks whatever the government does not want people to see. Facebook, Instagram, and other social media websites have been blocked for years by the Chinese government, afraid the citizens will use the social media sites to organize protests and opposition to the communist party.

China maintains control through strict laws against freedom of the press and freedom of speech which helps them revise history in the minds of its citizens. China even went so far as to make it illegal to speak out against the “heroes and martyrs” of China and the communist party. 

Already, events like the massacre at Tiananmen Square are viewed with confusion and misunderstanding by younger generations. But now you could end up legally liable for just challenging the historical narrative told by the government.

And Facebook wants in on the action.

Facebook Wants to Impress the Repressive Regime

Zuckerberg has been sucking up to the Chinese government ever since they blocked Facebook in 2009. He has learned Mandarin in order to give some of his amazing speeches in China and even took a jog through a smog cloud last year for a photo op which included a Mao portrait in the background.

Zuckerberg has said, “You can’t have a mission to want to connect everyone in the world and leave out the biggest country.”

Zuckerberg also directly indicated his intentions by meeting with the Chinese Internet Czar and showing off his collection of Chinese propaganda and speeches by President Xi Jinping. Oh and he just happened to have JinPing’s book on his desk during the meeting, making him not just an insufferable kiss-ass but an obvious one too.

So should we really believe that Facebook made a mistake when they rejected a Hong Kong man’s controversial Facebook profile picture? (Facebook is not blocked in Hong Kong).

Facebook has apologised for “mistakenly” banning the use of a temporary profile picture frame commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre.

Facebook’s picture frame function allows users to change their profile photos in support of a cause. The frame in question carries messages calling for justice for Tiananmen protesters and an end to the “dictatorial regime” in China…

He said he received a notification within 24 hours saying that his design was rejected, on the basis that it fails to meet the company’s terms and policies. Facebook said the frame “belittles, threatens or attacks a particular person, legal entity, nationality or group.”

Fung then submitted on Saturday afternoon another frame showing a candle and the text “Don’t forget June 4,” hoping that Facebook would approve it. It was still under review at the time of publication.

Oops, Facebook later said, it was totally just a little mistake that they supported a murderous government over activists wishing to draw attention to horrible human rights abuses.

In fact, under strict censorship laws, the government does not allow any discussion of the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre in books and blocks online searches and discussions of the brutal crackdown that killed an estimated 1,000 students protesting the ruling Communist Party’s human rights abuses.

And now, the Chinese government is preparing for the 28th anniversary of the massacre on June 4th by placing many activists under house arrest and warning others not to speak out.

Facebook seems only too happy to help them in the effort of stamping out that dark mark on China’s history.

Facebook is a Dictator’s Wet Dream

People may not entirely know the extent of Facebook’s data gathering on users. It is much more than simply advertising to you based on recent Google searches, and figuring out your social circles to suggest friends. Facebook has algorithms which put together entire files on people that can be tailored to sell to an insurance company, an employer, or perhaps even the government.

It seems that China is weary of Facebook being used as a tool to organize dissent, and protest their strict Orwellian rules. But perhaps Xi Jinping is just playing hard to get. Zuckerberg will clearly have no problem altering Facebook in China to benefit the communist regime. With just a few tweaks, it will fit right into the Chinese government’s plan to turn China into an exact replica of the society depicted in 1984.

Zuckerberg is likely busy right now planning out exactly how he can help the regime implement their social credit policy–there’s no one better for the job! He can open up citizenship Facebook reviews for each profile, to streamline the process of ratting out your neighbors to the government.

He will be able to hand deliver the files on every citizen who uses Facebook to the Chinese government, revealing everything about them. It will be in Zuckerberg’s hands which Chinese citizens are oppressed and ostracized from Chinese society, and which ones are rewarded.

All the interest Zuckerberg has shown in Chinese propaganda, speeches, and leaders is simply him doing the proper research to understand how to best offer his products and services to dictatorships.

Read More At: TheDailyBell.com

CONFIRMED: Obama illegally spied on Americans… no one in the media calls for any investigation at all

Image: CONFIRMED: Obama illegally spied on Americans… no one in the media calls for any investigation at all
Source: NaturalNews.com
Jayson Veley
May 31, 2017

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that the people have a right to be “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” It was originally included in the Bill of Rights because at the time of the amendment’s ratification, the Founding Fathers were extremely fearful of the rise of tyranny in the new world. Warrantless searches and seizures were common under the rule of the king, and the framers included language about privacy protection in the Constitution to ensure that the same practice didn’t continue. Sadly, over two centuries of progressivism and corruption within the federal government has made the Fourth Amendment all but irrelevant.

Earlier this week, Circa.com reported that the Obama administration violated its own surveillance guidelines by expanding Internet searches and essentially spying on millions of Americans for the past several years.

Since 2011, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act has prohibited the practice of querying the results of upstream Internet collections. According to Circa, the Obama administration self-disclosed the NSA rule violations during a closed-door hearing on October 26, 2016, just days before Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. The court, which was usually supportive of the Obama administration, declared that the Obama administration’s failure to disclose the massive amount of personal information previously collected amounted to an “institutional lack of candor” and was a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue,” according to a court document from April 26 of this year.

Some officials that served in the Obama administration, such as National Security Adviser Susan Rice, have argued that the data collection was legal under the minimization rule changes that Barack Obama made in 2011. However, even the NSA’s own watchdog group says that this argument is simply not true. “Since 2011, NSA’s minimization procedures have prohibited use of U.S.-person identifiers to query the results of upstream Internet collections under Section 702,” the court ruling said. “The Oct. 26, 2016 notice informed the court that NSA analysts had been conducting such queries in violation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had been previously disclosed to the Court.”

The American Civil Liberties Union, or the ACLU, has recently expressed concern that the U.S. intelligence community may not have the ability to properly restrain itself and operate within the confines of their own laws. If this is true, then the further abuse of power is inevitable.

The Obama-era bombshell raises two legitimate concerns. First, it is abundantly obvious that the former administration had very little respect for the Constitution and the privacy rights of the American people. Once again, the Bill of Rights proved to be nothing more to the Obama administration than a bunch of words on a really old piece of paper; words that can be followed when its politically expedient and ignored when its not. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson would be ashamed that we have elected leaders today who put their hand on a bible, swear to uphold the Constitution, and then do the exact opposite upon stepping into a position of power.

Second, where is the mainstream media? Why aren’t television networks like CNN, MSNBC and NBC and publications like The Washington Post and Politico reporting on this? Furthermore, since liberals like Chuck Schumer and Elizabeth Warren seem to believe so strongly in the use of special prosecutors to get to the bottom of scandals that occur within the federal government, where are the calls for a special prosecutor to investigate Barack Obama and his National Security Agency?

James Madison, considered by most to be the Father of the Bill of Rights, once said, “The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.” And today, it’s clear that abuse is exactly what we the people are experiencing.

Read more at: NaturalNews.com

Big Data Exposed

Think of Big Data as a malevolent technocratic Santa Claus: it sees you when you’re sleeping, it knows when you’re awake, it knows if you’ve been bad or good (even in advance!), so be good for goodness sake!

Source: Theinternationalforecaster.com
James Corbett
May 20, 2017

Pinocchio is the story of a marionette that dreams of becoming a real boy. He wishes upon a star, proves himself selfless, brave and true, and a kind fairy grants him his heart’s one true desire.

When the history of the 21st century is written, it could very well be the story of real boys and girls that willingly become marionettes. They stare blankly into their smartphones, prove themselves selfish, cowardly and false, and a group of technocrats puppeteer them.

Allow me to illustrate: You are a white, middle class American woman in your late 20s. You are active on Facebook, where you have a lot of friends, but you spend most of your time interacting with your sister, your boyfriend, and your BFFs from college. You watch a lot of 90s teen dramas but specifically skip the episode of Felicity where she cuts her hair. You work at a dental office in a mid-rise commercial building and eat lunch at the diner in the strip mall next door every Thursday. You used to fly home for Thanksgiving and Christmas every year on United, but you recently switched to Southwest. You like ballroom dancing on the weekends. Your last three purchases were a patchwork and quilting magazine, a 32 lb. bag of chicken-flavor puppy chow, and a silk tie (a present for your father’s birthday). You are agreeable but not very conscientious and you are prone to worry.

Et voilà. Your specially-crafted toothpaste advertisement is served.

Sound like the future of advertising? Wrong. It’s already happening thanks to Acxiom, Oracle Data Cloud, Epsilon, and a host of other data analytic marketing companies you’ve never heard of.

But you may have heard of one member of this new breed of Big Data-driven marketing firms in recent months: Cambridge Analytica. They’re the company that Trump employed to out-spin the Hillary campaign, or so we have been told ad nauseam by the strangely PR-like coverage of the firm that has been showered on them by the corporate lamestream #fakenews media since the end of last year’s (s)election cycle.

They bill themselves as a “data driven services” company that specializes in “data integration” and “audience segmentation” delivering “psychographic analysis” to drive targeted advertising campaigns or profile and influence potential voters. Or, in the significantly less buzzword-laden language of their company mission statement:

“To deliver Data-Driven Behavioral Change by understanding what motivates the individual and engaging with target audiences in ways that move them to action.”

No, that’s not a typo, that’s a selling point. The firm uses the slogan “Data driven behavior change” in their online promotional videos and offers the image of balls being directed down an inclined plane to illustrate how they can shape people’s behaviors along predetermined paths using data and marketing.

The company’s CEO, Andrew Nix, likes to go on stage at various conferences and deliver spine-chillingly Orwellian pronouncements about how Big Data is helping Cambridge Analytica create detailed psychological profiles of millions of unsuspecting “cosumers” and “voters.” These profiles can then be used to deliver individually-targeted messages to each of those millions of people, whether that message is used to sell a certain brand of toothpaste or generate interest in a certain political candidate.

If you watch any of Cambridge Analytica’s presentations, advertisements or PR spots on the national news (but I repeat myself), you’ll see that they like to brag about their ability to combine over 5000 pieces of data that they can collect on any given individual—from what airlines they’ve flown on to what magazines they’re subscribed to and everything else you can possibly imagine—to help create “psychographic” profiles of that person.

Whereas “demographics” is the division of the population into age groups and/or ethnicities, “psychographics” seeks to divide the population up along personality lines. Cambridge Analytica touts an “OCEAN” profile that rates individuals on the rather smearily-defined character traits of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness and Neuroses. By rating each individual in a target market on these characteristics, the company can deliver custom-tailored messages that appeal to different people in ways that specifically appeal to them. Thus, someone high on agreeableness and neuroses would be better persuaded to buy toothpaste by preying on their insecurity over their smile while those with higher degrees of openness and conscientiousness would respond to advertising explaining the properties and characteristics of the toothpaste.

The story of Cambridge Analytica is a particularly chilling one, involving secretive hedge-fund billionaires and British military psyops officers who, we are now being told, shaped the political landscape through “data-driven behavior change” to usher in the era of Brexit and Trump. To be sure, there is a fascinating and chilling story to be told there, but that’s a story for another time.

The larger story here is the story of Big Data, and it will be familiar to those who are reading this article. The long story short is that we have reached an inflection point in history. Large data broker services have been quietly purchasing and collating thousands of pieces of data on you and everyone you know, and the burgeoning data-driven marketing industry is now weaponizing that data in psychological operations designed to influence your choices, behavior and patterns of thought without you even knowing.

Think of Big Data as a malevolent technocratic Santa Claus: it sees you when you’re sleeping, it knows when you’re awake, it knows if you’ve been bad or good (even in advance!), so be good for goodness sake!

Actually, it’s worse than that. It doesn’t even matter if you’re trying to be good (or bad) for whatever sake; the social engineers are now honing their ability to make you want to buy things, do things, vote for or against certain candidates, and otherwise shape your daily thoughts and actions, without your knowledge or consent, by appealing to your individual psychological profile. And instead of running in the other direction, people are in a mad scramble to put even more intrusive data-collection devices in their homes to scoop up every last drop of information about their lives and send it off to corporations they often don’t even know exist.

The real boys and girls are uploading their lives to facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and Alexa and every other Big Data collection front. And in the process, they are giving the Big Data puppeteers the strings with which they will be pulled around like so many marionettes.

It’s a real question whether there is any way short of living in a cabin in the woods to avoid being scooped up in the Big Data dragnet. But the more fundamental question is whether the real boys and girls will ever realize, or even care, that they are slowly becoming Pinocchio.

Read More At: Theinternationalforecaster.com

11-Year-Old Activist Warns About The Internet Of Things By “Weaponizing” A Teddy Bear


Source: ActivistPost.com
Kevin Samson
May 18, 2017

The new “smart world” that we are embarking upon as an increasing number of our computerized devices and objects become part of The Internet of Things has promised more convenience and more efficiency. And, yet, not a day seems to pass without a report about hacking.

While malware, election rigging, and corporate attacks tend to take center stage, a disturbing amount of very personal cyber invasions are also on the rise. Here is just a small sampling of articles that represent the dangerous and the downright creepy side of connecting one’s life to the Internet.

By now it should be obvious, even to a child, that we have a problem here. Well, in fact, it might just be a child who can help wake up the world to the scope of the issue.

An AFP article titled “Cyber Kid Stuns Experts Showing Toys Can Be ‘Weapons’” has gone viral. 11-year-old Reuben Paul took the stage at the World Forum cyber security conference in The Hague.

“From airplanes to automobiles, from smart phones to smart homes, anything or any toy can be part of the” Internet of Things (IOT),” he said, a small figure pacing the huge stage at the World Forum in The Hague.

“From terminators to teddy bears, anything or any toy can be weaponised.”

“IOT home appliances, things that can be used in our everyday lives, our cars, lights refrigerators, everything like this that is connected can be used and weaponised to spy on us or harm us.”

Reuben demonstrated this fact by first obtaining the numbers of audience members via their Bluetooth connection, then taking one of the numbers to hack into his toy teddy bear. The bear now became a surveillance and recording device.

 Although 11-year-old Reuben does appear to be a bona fide “cyber ninja” whiz kid, AFP‘s contention that this “stunned experts” stretches the truth a bit. Listen here to a 2012 speech given by DARPA’s Program Manager, Dr. Kathleen Fisher. Sound familiar?

Fortunately, it doesn’t appear that young Reuben is on his way to work for the dark side. Instead he is shouting from the rooftop that we are entering a very dangerous new world where the things around us become “timebombs” as he calls them. Reuben also isn’t stopping with giving speeches to the “experts”; he has formed the CyberShaolin non-profit organisation “to inform kids and adults about the dangers of cyber insecurity.” Let’s hope that Reuben will indeed spearhead a new way forward to fix what the adults in the room should have properly addressed all along.

Kevin Samson writes for Activist Post, where this article first appeared.