The Tallahasse Democrat has a bit more information...(Sorry, I'm not a link wizard)
https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2020/12/07/agents-raid-home-fired-florida-data-scientist-who-built-covid-19-dashboard-rebekah-jones/6482817002/
It looks like they served a warrant because someone accessed a custom built messaging system used for notifying people during emergencies. The system has one username and password that everyone uses, or so the article says. More than 17,000 people received the illicit message, so chances are the password was long ago completely compromised. I'd expect some sort of hacking charges or unauthorized access charges to be leveled against her with plenty of pressure to take a deal. Since this involves the internet, it is quite likely that the Feds get to have a hand in it - knowing how much they love this sort of thing.
The article mentions that there are a lot of former employees who were purged from the various agencies using the insecure message system who might also be motivated to put a message on the system urging recipients to speak up about the dead and dying. No where are there any other former employees mentioned as having been raided. It is my observation that when law enforcement thinks that a group of people is behind some act, they raid the whole group and then it makes the news (if it makes the news at all). This sure seems like a clear case of scapegoating.
The Tallahasse Democrat has a bit more information...(Sorry, I'm not a link wizard)
https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2020/12/07/agents-raid-home-fired-florida-data-scientist-who-built-covid-19-dashboard-rebekah-jones/6482817002/
It looks like they served a warrant because someone accessed a custom built messaging system used for notifying people during emergencies. The system has one username and password that everyone uses, or so the article says. More than 17,000 people received the illicit message, so chances are the password was long ago completely compromised. I'd expect some sort of hacking charges or unauthorized access charges to be leveled against her with plenty of pressure to take a deal. Since this involves the internet, it is quite likely that the Feds get to have a hand in it - knowing how much they love this sort of thing.
The article mentions that there are a lot of former employees who were purged from the various agencies using the insecure message system who might also be motivated to put a message on the system urging recipients to speak up about the dead and dying. No where are there any other former employees mentioned as having been raided. It is my observation that when law enforcement thinks that a group of people is behind some act, they raid the whole group and then it makes the news (if it makes the news at all). This sure seems like a clear case of scapegoating.
Risk factors - like spending time with certain other people. Boys spending time with girls. Who was at that party in the dorm room where alcohol was involved. Who was there before and who came after we busted them? How many of these parties did they have this semester?
This is about behavior control, but not the ones that are being discussed. This is not about attendance, or grades, or preventing suicides. This about controlling the social and sexual interactions of the students.
When I went to college, the university was very interested in where the students were - especially lunch areas and dorms. The administration did not care who went to the library, but they very much cared about who visited the dorms. And they cared about lunch room attendance. If it involved food or sex, they cared. A Lot.
Why? We were told it was because of crime. Can't trust people to not steal. Someone is going to do it. Oh and here is a list of rules about having girls visit the boys dorm and vice versa. The crime did go on, but more often that occurred in the parking lots at night than in the dorm. But what happened often was a girl in the boys dorm and vice versa. The sexes want to hook up and will find a way to do it. Getting caught was a real pain in the butt and could lead to expulsion from school - but only if you were living on campus.
Being able to track the student location on campus will start in the class rooms and soon be in the dorms. No bribable RA to look the other way when a member of the opposite sex is over after hours. The fact that they are looking for changes in behavior patterns tells me that this is exactly what they are looking for. X and Y meet in class. X and Y begin to show up together in areas. They leave campus and return together - a date perhaps? Then X's phone goes idle one night at the same time Y's shows idle or a minimum amount of activity. A sexual event between X and Y? What about X and Y together in a dorm while the room mate is away? These things will be examined. A campus counselor making the wrong assumption about X and Y's behavior and showing up for some sort of behavior intervention will not be pleasant. The data will be taken as fact, regardless of the plethora of inaccuracies inherent in it, and certainly over the word of some miscreant lying youth.
Don't forget that data is manipulatable, corruptible, and easily compromised. It won't be hard for this to become a nightmare.
Going to college should not be the Human version of the BBC documentary The Secret Life of the Cat.
I had a subscription to the newspaper back in the days when your choices were newsprint or broadcast. What killed the newspapers was in a large part sloth. Go back and pull an old newspaper and look at all of the AP and UPI articles. The newspapers were re-printing the AP and UPI stories that the editors thought would appeal to their readers. When the internet came along, the newspapers were all competing against each other on a global scale using the same AP and UPI stories. Why pay for the paper when the articles are all online for free? (Don't get me started on the shitty delivery and poor customer service.)
Sure, there was local content, but for the most part, that was slim to none. Want to know about that accident on the highway that blocked up traffic for most of the morning? Not in the newspaper. You might get a minute on the evening broadcast news if the traffic helicopter got good footage, otherwise nothing. Local crime, barely covered. Local government? Barely covered. Local elections? Maybe the results are printed in the back of page 8 but only if you are the paper of record. For the most part, these organizations were simply reprinting AP and UPI along with the comics and some other nationally licensed content. They didn't have the infrastructure to find the local news let alone print it. As far as I can tell, they were never even interested in what the public wanted to read. Every buy a newspaper subscription pitch was the same: Stay informed! Buy a paper. But never once why YOUR paper.
Well, when the information hit the internet and it was free, I quit buying that useless newspaper. Why pay $35 or more per month for a paper that was usually tossed in the ditch by the hapless delivery person? Especially once the AP and UPI stories that I was buying for that subscription were simply free for the cost of the cable internet connection. Furthermore, to my wonder, the newspaper was often completely online for no cost at all and damned few ads! Again, nobody actually thought about how people work. Offer someone an ice cream cone for ten bucks at the first counter and then for free at the counter next to it. Guess how much ice cream is going out the door for free? All of it!
In the early 2000's, I was accosted on the phone by a nice older woman who wanted me to buy a subscription to the county paper. I asked her why and she rattled off a whole bunch of reasons - all of which were about the wonderful content. Then I asked why I should pay for the paper if they were putting it on their website for free without so much as an advertisement. She was completely stunned. I didn't buy the paper. I did suggest various ways they could keep from screwing themselves out of business.
My current local news organization - not really local, and owned by some conglomo out of Texas, is often described as "yesterday's news, tomorrow." I had a subscription and cancelled it. Too many paragraphs of word salad, bad English, bad spelling, typo's, full of ads, and lean on reading material. Expensive for a miniaturized version of Craig's list meets facebook with banner ads. To their credit, they don't allow their local stories on the internet having tucked them nicely behind a pay wall. I don't miss much because the quality is so poor and I get more of what happened from facebook, and that is as sorry a comment on journalism as I have ever made.
I'll say this: The internet has not killed music. It has not killed literature. It has not killed movies. It won't kill journalism.
This is so lazy on the part of the piracy victims. If they wanted to they could eliminate all piracy completely. Here's how: Sell tickets to the event. Ensure that no electronics are allowed into the building - say every attendee has to change clothes into an event jumpsuit along with a good strip search - the TSA could help here (some off duty hours to those dedicated airport security mavens.) Cell phone jammers and some of that nice fake cell tower technology the FBI won't admit to using would prevent anything from leaking out. Cut off all the phone, DSL, Cable, Internet from the building, and jam all radio transmissions during the event.
As long as the cable companies control the connection from the distribution box to the house or business, they won't care about the fate of the content creators. They are not in the content creation business. They are in the connection business. So all of their work is about making monopolies on those connections. Getting rid of a cable company in the loop is hard, even when you have public supported fiber. Eventually their sloth and apathy will do them in.
First of all this is not about money, but rather control. The MPAA was created to represent an monopolistic film industry back when movies were made on 35 mm film and shown in studio owned theaters for prices the studios controlled. Content, actors, music, etc., was completely controlled by the studios. The monopoly attitude and arrogance was a huge part of hollywood when the MPAA was created. The music industry's RIAA comes from a similar place.
There is a pattern to the behavior: From the DMCA, COPA, SOPA, PIPA, and the court's Citizens United decision (which is an affront to the very concepts that founded this republic), act in concert to reveal the actual goal: the destruction of the public liberty. These people do not want prosperity or even wealth, they want absolute power. The power to decide who gets published, who gets heard, who gets to sell what and for what price. Other companies want this too.
SOPA and PIPA removed for now. A victory. But people like Chris Dodd would prefer this to be all about a few nice people in Washington DC who represent multi billion dollar legal fictions rather than the people who will be forced to live with the costs and consequences.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Delestoran.
it's all marketing
Meh.
I've got one of those fancy iphones with the 5G and all I ever get is the LTE.
But my Public Utility District has fiber to the house with 10gig up and down.
I live in the example of why the monopoly carriers are shit and the public would do a better job on their own.
A bit more to the story
The Tallahasse Democrat has a bit more information...(Sorry, I'm not a link wizard) https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2020/12/07/agents-raid-home-fired-florida-data-scientist-who-built-covid-19-dashboard-rebekah-jones/6482817002/ It looks like they served a warrant because someone accessed a custom built messaging system used for notifying people during emergencies. The system has one username and password that everyone uses, or so the article says. More than 17,000 people received the illicit message, so chances are the password was long ago completely compromised. I'd expect some sort of hacking charges or unauthorized access charges to be leveled against her with plenty of pressure to take a deal. Since this involves the internet, it is quite likely that the Feds get to have a hand in it - knowing how much they love this sort of thing. The article mentions that there are a lot of former employees who were purged from the various agencies using the insecure message system who might also be motivated to put a message on the system urging recipients to speak up about the dead and dying. No where are there any other former employees mentioned as having been raided. It is my observation that when law enforcement thinks that a group of people is behind some act, they raid the whole group and then it makes the news (if it makes the news at all). This sure seems like a clear case of scapegoating.
A bit more to the story
The Tallahasse Democrat has a bit more information...(Sorry, I'm not a link wizard) https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2020/12/07/agents-raid-home-fired-florida-data-scientist-who-built-covid-19-dashboard-rebekah-jones/6482817002/ It looks like they served a warrant because someone accessed a custom built messaging system used for notifying people during emergencies. The system has one username and password that everyone uses, or so the article says. More than 17,000 people received the illicit message, so chances are the password was long ago completely compromised. I'd expect some sort of hacking charges or unauthorized access charges to be leveled against her with plenty of pressure to take a deal. Since this involves the internet, it is quite likely that the Feds get to have a hand in it - knowing how much they love this sort of thing. The article mentions that there are a lot of former employees who were purged from the various agencies using the insecure message system who might also be motivated to put a message on the system urging recipients to speak up about the dead and dying. No where are there any other former employees mentioned as having been raided. It is my observation that when law enforcement thinks that a group of people is behind some act, they raid the whole group and then it makes the news (if it makes the news at all). This sure seems like a clear case of scapegoating.
Re:
Risk factors - like spending time with certain other people. Boys spending time with girls. Who was at that party in the dorm room where alcohol was involved. Who was there before and who came after we busted them? How many of these parties did they have this semester?
Something not said
This is about behavior control, but not the ones that are being discussed. This is not about attendance, or grades, or preventing suicides. This about controlling the social and sexual interactions of the students.
When I went to college, the university was very interested in where the students were - especially lunch areas and dorms. The administration did not care who went to the library, but they very much cared about who visited the dorms. And they cared about lunch room attendance. If it involved food or sex, they cared. A Lot.
Why? We were told it was because of crime. Can't trust people to not steal. Someone is going to do it. Oh and here is a list of rules about having girls visit the boys dorm and vice versa. The crime did go on, but more often that occurred in the parking lots at night than in the dorm. But what happened often was a girl in the boys dorm and vice versa. The sexes want to hook up and will find a way to do it. Getting caught was a real pain in the butt and could lead to expulsion from school - but only if you were living on campus.
Being able to track the student location on campus will start in the class rooms and soon be in the dorms. No bribable RA to look the other way when a member of the opposite sex is over after hours. The fact that they are looking for changes in behavior patterns tells me that this is exactly what they are looking for. X and Y meet in class. X and Y begin to show up together in areas. They leave campus and return together - a date perhaps? Then X's phone goes idle one night at the same time Y's shows idle or a minimum amount of activity. A sexual event between X and Y? What about X and Y together in a dorm while the room mate is away? These things will be examined. A campus counselor making the wrong assumption about X and Y's behavior and showing up for some sort of behavior intervention will not be pleasant. The data will be taken as fact, regardless of the plethora of inaccuracies inherent in it, and certainly over the word of some miscreant lying youth.
Don't forget that data is manipulatable, corruptible, and easily compromised. It won't be hard for this to become a nightmare.
Going to college should not be the Human version of the BBC documentary The Secret Life of the Cat.
A missing piece to the story
I had a subscription to the newspaper back in the days when your choices were newsprint or broadcast. What killed the newspapers was in a large part sloth. Go back and pull an old newspaper and look at all of the AP and UPI articles. The newspapers were re-printing the AP and UPI stories that the editors thought would appeal to their readers. When the internet came along, the newspapers were all competing against each other on a global scale using the same AP and UPI stories. Why pay for the paper when the articles are all online for free? (Don't get me started on the shitty delivery and poor customer service.)
Sure, there was local content, but for the most part, that was slim to none. Want to know about that accident on the highway that blocked up traffic for most of the morning? Not in the newspaper. You might get a minute on the evening broadcast news if the traffic helicopter got good footage, otherwise nothing. Local crime, barely covered. Local government? Barely covered. Local elections? Maybe the results are printed in the back of page 8 but only if you are the paper of record. For the most part, these organizations were simply reprinting AP and UPI along with the comics and some other nationally licensed content. They didn't have the infrastructure to find the local news let alone print it. As far as I can tell, they were never even interested in what the public wanted to read. Every buy a newspaper subscription pitch was the same: Stay informed! Buy a paper. But never once why YOUR paper.
Well, when the information hit the internet and it was free, I quit buying that useless newspaper. Why pay $35 or more per month for a paper that was usually tossed in the ditch by the hapless delivery person? Especially once the AP and UPI stories that I was buying for that subscription were simply free for the cost of the cable internet connection. Furthermore, to my wonder, the newspaper was often completely online for no cost at all and damned few ads! Again, nobody actually thought about how people work. Offer someone an ice cream cone for ten bucks at the first counter and then for free at the counter next to it. Guess how much ice cream is going out the door for free? All of it!
In the early 2000's, I was accosted on the phone by a nice older woman who wanted me to buy a subscription to the county paper. I asked her why and she rattled off a whole bunch of reasons - all of which were about the wonderful content. Then I asked why I should pay for the paper if they were putting it on their website for free without so much as an advertisement. She was completely stunned. I didn't buy the paper. I did suggest various ways they could keep from screwing themselves out of business.
My current local news organization - not really local, and owned by some conglomo out of Texas, is often described as "yesterday's news, tomorrow." I had a subscription and cancelled it. Too many paragraphs of word salad, bad English, bad spelling, typo's, full of ads, and lean on reading material. Expensive for a miniaturized version of Craig's list meets facebook with banner ads. To their credit, they don't allow their local stories on the internet having tucked them nicely behind a pay wall. I don't miss much because the quality is so poor and I get more of what happened from facebook, and that is as sorry a comment on journalism as I have ever made.
I'll say this: The internet has not killed music. It has not killed literature. It has not killed movies. It won't kill journalism.
All this piracy
This is so lazy on the part of the piracy victims. If they wanted to they could eliminate all piracy completely. Here's how: Sell tickets to the event. Ensure that no electronics are allowed into the building - say every attendee has to change clothes into an event jumpsuit along with a good strip search - the TSA could help here (some off duty hours to those dedicated airport security mavens.) Cell phone jammers and some of that nice fake cell tower technology the FBI won't admit to using would prevent anything from leaking out. Cut off all the phone, DSL, Cable, Internet from the building, and jam all radio transmissions during the event.
Viola - no piracy just like in 1810.
Re:
As long as the cable companies control the connection from the distribution box to the house or business, they won't care about the fate of the content creators. They are not in the content creation business. They are in the connection business. So all of their work is about making monopolies on those connections. Getting rid of a cable company in the loop is hard, even when you have public supported fiber. Eventually their sloth and apathy will do them in.
Re:
First of all this is not about money, but rather control. The MPAA was created to represent an monopolistic film industry back when movies were made on 35 mm film and shown in studio owned theaters for prices the studios controlled. Content, actors, music, etc., was completely controlled by the studios. The monopoly attitude and arrogance was a huge part of hollywood when the MPAA was created. The music industry's RIAA comes from a similar place.
There is a pattern to the behavior: From the DMCA, COPA, SOPA, PIPA, and the court's Citizens United decision (which is an affront to the very concepts that founded this republic), act in concert to reveal the actual goal: the destruction of the public liberty. These people do not want prosperity or even wealth, they want absolute power. The power to decide who gets published, who gets heard, who gets to sell what and for what price. Other companies want this too.
SOPA and PIPA removed for now. A victory. But people like Chris Dodd would prefer this to be all about a few nice people in Washington DC who represent multi billion dollar legal fictions rather than the people who will be forced to live with the costs and consequences.