Well this is fantastic. I guess we've entered the age where the Government will be able to censor material from the public without the public ever really knowing.
All in the name of terrorism and our safety of course.
UK Home Secretary Amber Rudd has announced a tool that purports to detect and block jihadist content online, and tech companies may end up being legally required to use it. London-based firm ASI Data Science was handed £600,000 by government to develop the unnamed algorithm, which uses machine learning to analyse Daesh …
Or rather what we have actually done is fund another private firm whose owners/founders *know* people in the civil service (and in the space of a couple of weeks this will come out ), along with independent tests showing just how crap this 'amazing' tech actually is. Rudd has put her name to it so we should be pretty sure of the outcome.
Wonder how much from Al Jazeera will get incorrectly flagged?
I wonder how much from Albertson's will get incorrectly flagged.
This will probably put the lid on the Theresa May bits where she wonders about shorting those people engaged in Labor; just when the exact opposite of what it supposedly discusses (plus honorifics and NHS LSD microdosing ad libum for the people who voted stay, and not waiting to TKO the rest of the wait or EU exit or probably poorly coined political terms in general) is earnestly needed.
The department claimed the algorithm has an "extremely high degree of accuracy", with only 50 out of a million randomly selected videos requiring additional human review.
1) 'Randomly Selected' - Permanent Undersecretary of State's Pornhub bookmarked favourites?
2) '50 out of a million requiring additional human review' - there were some Pornhub videos he hadn't watched yet?
3) 'extremely high degree of accuracy' - CivilServantSpeak for 'Capita says they have fixed the bugs'.
I guess we've entered the age where ...
Where have you been this past decade?
Of course I agree with the point you were making. It's your wording I take issue with.
This post has been deleted by its author
Actually it is not 'used' by the Government at all. the purpose of the software is to intercept the upload process and prevent the video actually making it online to Vimeo, Youtube etc., whom I presume would be requested to integrate the ASI software into their sites.
More information here
Well this is fantastic. I guess we've entered the age where the Government will be able to censor material from the public without the public ever really knowing.
Yes, the slippery sloop has been trod upon and there's no telling how steep it is or how slippery. What's next... political parties added to the mix? Anything on the whim of government wanting to ban? I'm surprised a certain leader hasn't jumped in on this about "fake news"....
Automated
Detection of
Extremist
Propaganda
Transmission
There you go. Snappy, took 2 minutes to come up with, apt... belies the reality. That'll be £6 million please. More likely:
British
Internet
Governance
Jihadi
Information
Zerg
Upload
Monitoring
I can suggest names for free. "Big Brother" or "Maybot".
The name Maybot is already in use.
Sadly, I found Maybot to be rather unconvincing. It made far too much sense and showed too much human feeling to pass for the real thing. But with further development it can only improve.
CensorBot.
Soon to be forked by every other Government Department, Quango and busybody who thinks they are entitled to block random content regardless of the actual legislation. (CEOP, FACT, Movie Pigopolists, City of London Plod - I'm looking at you)
The Capita cubicle slaves in some dodgy offshore tech hub are going to be busy operating the master blacklist that it really runs off.The "AI" is just a randomiser on the top.
What does that actually mean? Either it detects something as what it's looking for or it doesn't. If it detects 94% than that's a meaningful figure. But what does "with 99.99f% accuracy" mean? Unless it's a means of saying it has 0.005% false positives - which they could say more explicitly - I can't see that it has any meaning at all. I would instinctively distrust anyone who produces a statement like that. OTOH I suppose there might have been something meaningful that went into the Rudd "I don't really understand it but it went something like this" regurgitation mill.
I wish she and Davis would swap jobs. He seems to have his head screwed on right about the Home Office and its doings while she seems sound on Brexit.
Even humans aren’t that accurate.
If you’re positively identifying terror videos at that rate, you must have a huge false-positive rate. So a movie like Mad Max Fury Road, featuring fighty young people with big guns on dusty desert roads, would probably be flagged as jihadi propaganda.
"You laugh but an episode of Peppa Pig is banned in Australia...
(for saying spiders aren't dangerous, basically, which is a little bit misleading in Oz...)"
There's only three dangerous to people spiders in Oz, funnel web spider, jump spider, and red back spider. The jumping bird spider is only dangerous to birds, and that one that went viral carting a mouse up the side of a 'fridge, well it was just helping it's mate get to the cold cheese. As for the so called dangerous white tail spider, that one's a myth.
"As for the so called dangerous white tail spider, that one's a myth."
Whitetails are aggressive (most spiders try and run away, white tails attack) and whilst not particularly venomous seem to have pretty filthy fangs which lead to a high chance of infection when they bite.
A friend in New Zealand lost a finger (actually the entire metatarsal back to the wrist) after being bitten by one. Apparently it still aches 20 years later.
> 99.995% is impossible
Not at all impossible for the test's they'll have run.
If you've _very_ carefully curated your test content, with an eye to claiming a high headline effectiveness rate you could quite easily score damn near 100% (though you don't want 100, because people would question that). Of course, the Government would *never* massage figures, so it couldn't possibly be they're using the best result from a test designed to prove it works (rather than look for failure scenarios)
In real world conditions, definitely not going to happen.
"Even humans aren’t that accurate."
That's not entirely fair. Given the, presumably deliberate, lack of details given, it's not unreasonable to assume that the test set is actually the same as the training set. Under those circumstances, it's very easy to get close to 100% accuracy - "Here's a video we've already told you is a terrorist video. Is it a terrorist video?". That's about what I'd expect if you pay just £600k to a largely unheard of small company (they don't even get a mention on Wiki, and their own website mainly talks about empowering your productionising (yes, really) by teaching you data science in 8 easy step). You get what you pay for, and Rudd paid for people who can spout buzzwords she likes the sound of.
Here's a video we've already told you is a terrorist video. Is it a terrorist video?
TBH this isn't how that works. It's here's a curated set of ISIS/not videos. Here's another *different* set of ISIS videos mixed with other, which are/aren't, what's the accuracy rate? If they did it the way you say their reputation would be in tatters by the end of the day, I doubt they're that stupid.
That being said with real world data the reality is it's going to be massively inaccurate. It's entirely possible for a tool like this to exist and kinda work but I'd suggest only using it for flagging videos for a real person to look at - although as others have pointed out meat-based AI fails at this sort of thing too.
TBH this isn't how that works. It's here's a curated set of ISIS/not videos. Here's another *different* set of ISIS videos mixed with other, which are/aren't, what's the accuracy rate? If they did it the way you say their reputation would be in tatters by the end of the day, I doubt they're that stupid.
There are three different error rates. The training error rate, which is unnaturally high and not meant to be cited outside the algorithm, the test error rate, which is a reasonable measure of the progress of the algorithm and is used as an indicator of when it's "cooked" so to say, and the validation error rate, which is done at the end as a measure of how good it is.
If Amber Rudd saw all three and someone explained what they were, what are the chances she wouldn't cite the wrong one?
"TBH this isn't how that works. It's here's a curated set of ISIS/not videos. Here's another *different* set of ISIS videos mixed with other, which are/aren't, what's the accuracy rate? If they did it the way you say their reputation would be in tatters by the end of the day"
Yes, that was exactly my point. The process you cite is how it's supposed to work. When you have an unheard-of, buzzword spouting company claiming incredibly high accuracy with a tiny amount of funding that wouldn't even cover validating their tests, it's clearly not how it actually did work. Maybe it's not quite as blatant as simply using the training set as the test set, but clearly there's something fishy going on.
If they're using the term "accuracy" correctly (proportion of true negative and true positive out of all all outcomes, taking into account relative frequencies of positives and negatives), then it's pretty impressive, though still means about 5 in 100,000 other videos will be incorrectly flagged. All it needed was someone to spend £600k? Bit sceptical, unless it's checking whether the publisher is listed as "Islamic State".
I'm being very sceptical. Everyone is talking about error rates, and neural nets, and such and such.... I wouldn't be surprised if the algorithm just checks the metadata for the word "(C) DAESH".
I look forward to when Rudd takes her piece of no name software written by a no name company with it's no brains logic, with the money spent mainly on team building exercises and shiny business cards and insists to the development labs in Google, Facebook, Youtube, etc that they have to make it the gatekeeper of their systems.
Will not go down well.
This post has been deleted by its author
The figures sound perfectly reasonable to me.
99.995% of the internet is cat videos and only 6% of terrorist beheading feature kittens, so the test dataset was the entire internet and the algorithm is: (drumroll)
return false == IsCatPresent();
(More seriously, given any non-random algorithm that isn't completely one-sided, I can obtain any error rate I want by fixing the test dataset.)
The answer is in the quote used - the false positive rate is claimed as 0.005% or 50 out of a million. You can find this number also discussed by Marc Warner on a range of recent interviews online.
There are also some fairly frank admissions that the training is focused on achieving a low false positive rate rather than letting it rise to get more than the 94% detection rate (6% failure rate), that it cannot detect all forms of Daesh propaganda, and that Daesh make it relatively easy to detect with relatively consistent 'branding' while other organisations are less formulaic and more varied.
So independent validation would be interesting to see, but ASI Data Sciences, while I presume making hay while the sun shines, do not appear to be carpet bombing media outlets with super-inflated claims.
First they came for the Jihadist and I did not speak out,
because I wasn't a Jihadist.
You know where I'm going with this. Let me be f*cking crystal clear, I do not trust this government as far as I can throw it. They are the nastiest, most vile pieces of sh*t I have ever seen, just for balance the alternative isn't much better either.
This blocking tool will be a piece of code linked to an evolving government block list and I do not for one minute think this will be limited to social media. The fact they are alluding to legislation makes this worse.
> This blocking tool will be a piece of code linked to an evolving government block list and I do not for one minute think this will be limited to social media.
Worse, they're using AI so when they inevitably get caught blocking something they shouldn't, they're gonna shrug and say "sorry, dunno how it learned that one, clearly a mistake"
I don't trust this government either, but actually the one that really worries me is the next government (or the one after that). What are they going to do with this lovely infra we, the tax payer, have been building for them?
Longer term, it's almost certain newer platforms will arise to get around the Government's fuckery, but in the short-term it's potentially pretty unpleasant (and spinning up those new platforms may potentially carry a lot of risk).
I heard this on the radio.
My instant bullshit detector went off.
From the BBC report:
'ASI Data Science said the software can be configured to detect 94% of IS video uploads.'
Ok. How many video that arn't IS video uploads does it trigger on?
Is there something special about IS videos? You know, AL Queada, or the legion of homosexual jihadis, or whatever bunch of disgruntled muslims?
For 200k I can produce an algorithm that will detect 100% of IS AQ or whatever terror group vids:
If file_suffix in known_video_formats then:
print("Danger Terrorist!!!")
> My instant bullshit detector went off.
This isn't an excuse for disengaging the brain and engaging the Daily Mail outrage reflex. The information required is either in the article (actually in the sentence quoted) or it is repeated elsewhere on a range of online sites discussing exactly this topic.
The claimed failure rate is 6% (94% detection rate - hint, take 100 and subtract 6 to get 94). Just in case percentages are too hard to work with, that means of every 100 IS videos in a larger sample that the algorithm is used to assess, the claimed expectation is that 6 will not be flagged as problematic.
Yes, there is something special about IS videos which again, minimal reading to get marginally informed about the subject and what has been said publicly about the success of this against IS videos, highlights the fact that IS have really formulaic approaches to producing propaganda videos. This makes the IS videos a standout choice for being successfully detected using machine learning and this is explicitly acknowledged by ASI Data.
The 200K algorithm has a false positive rate slightly above 0.005% as well.
Then this is a waste of everyone's time and money.
The amount of time spent finishing/vetting/implementing this software > the amount of time ISIS needs to change its formula.
Its gov.uk, it will take 3 years to get the software into any system that matters, and by then the chances are we're onto the next asymmetric war in a desert.
There's another alternative, that politicians could actually listen to technical experts and either develop enough knowledge to understand what they're saying or to take it on trust.
The real 'sneering' is what politicians do to experts by disregarding everything they have got to say that doesn't match their (the politicians) already held beliefs. Nobody is calling Rudd an idiot for not understanding encryption - they are calling her it for being sure that she's right even though (a) she has admitted she doesn't understand it and (b) all the experts are telling her she's wrong.
The terrifying alternative would be commenting on the wrong story about Amber Rudd though we wouldn't want to sneer.
Hint: this article is about machine learning algorithms being applied to identifying a specific class of problematic on-line content with a view to equipping content providers and hosting platforms with a means to take down illegal material. It is not about encryption and it isn't about something Amber Rudd has said which flies in the face of technical possibilities.
First they came for the Jihadist and I did not speak out,
because I wasn't a Jihadist.
You know where I'm going with this.
Indeed. But it's still worth spelling out.
I am not an AI expert, but my first thought when I saw this reported elsewhere was "Surely they can train it to detect other things?".
Porn next - probably illegal stuff first, but eventually anything that the kids shouldn't see.
Ultimately, though - anything that the Government doesn't like.
Porn may not be to everyone's taste but (most of) it isn't illegal in many jurisdictions.
ML algorithms could be trained, to varying degrees of success, to try and spot any type of asset on the Internet. Any government could (and many probably will) use such available technology to apply the laws as best they can in their jurisdiction. If the ML algorithms are good enough then it may help a government apply them more assiduously so it is the laws defining something as illegal which need the scrutiny not so much the fact that better algorithms exist for identifying content.
In the UK there are types of material online that are deemed illegal both reasonably and popularly so. We have the opportunity to vote for politicians to update those laws (or not) as we democratically wish. In other countries, the law on what is acceptable content may be less to your personal taste while there is little or no mechanism for influencing them.
Can we get one that's configured to detect and remove videos which contain extremist content from Theresa May and Amber Rudd? it is truly terrifying seeing speeches and videos by Amber Rudd for example where she talks about removing encryption and such like.
Genuinely terrifying to see such incompetence and alarming speeches. It'd be great to have these people filtered out of society!
@ smudge
Many people would say that in Britain, general elections do deliver the will of the people. 1945, 1979, 1997, even 2010 with its indecisive result.
Problems arise in deeply divided places such as Ireland and Belgium. The lesson is that democracy only works if there is sufficient consensus or apathy.
Politicians rarely discuss apathy, because apathy causes high falutin' political verbosity to dissolve.
Such a filter already exists. We call it a "General Election".
That only partially works. Look at the current crop of politicians. There's other solutions but discussing them in public will bring an enquiry from the plod so we don't/can't discuss. Fine with me but I wish the electorate had better discretionary powers to realize what BS is being shoveled and it's real value.
Genuinely terrifying to see such incompetence and alarming speeches. It'd be great to have these people filtered out of society!
No. If anything, it needs to be preserved for posterity. When they look back on the early 21st Century and find that "patronising" became a euphemism for smarter people telling the clueless they're wrong, we need as much evidence as we can muster. Covering up history never did anyone any good.
Hmm indeed. ASI happens to coincide with Ambient Sound Investments, an investment company set up by original Skype developers.
This page tells that Jaan Tallinn has invested in the project
http://www.cityam.com/253029/ai-firm-asi-data-science-raises-15m-investment-backing
So unknown that twenty seconds on Google turns content from the last couple of years. And even the ASI CEO states that the plan is not infallible - in several interviews words to the effect of the algorithm is trained for low false positives rather than high false negatives, IS videos are really easy to train ML algorithms to find because of their repeated style, and other organisations would be considerably harder to deal with.
As for magic - well, someone from the 17th century would probably consider antibiotics as witchcraft and electric lights as magic, but for a technology web site, a discussion about Machine Learning shouldn't really create too many surprises.
Those results look decidedly like:
1) They had 50 jihadi johnny videos in total, hence the complete disparity in decimal places.
2) They tested on their training data. Don't do that. Seriously, don't do that.
Let's also not forget that 3 of their 50 videos got through. This number will go up when the bastards start tweaking their videos.
Being a flat earther MGTOW psychonaut tinfoil hatter that works in IT Infrastructure god damn hippy type person who somehow manages to still have a job, its great to see and hear people in these comments all agreeing on what would have been a tin foil hatter type view when I first started to read el reg.
No idea why Im commenting this but it is very refreshing to see. Posting anonymous for the obvious..!
> "94 per cent of Daesh propaganda with 99.995 per cent accuracy". I'd like to hear what proportion of everything else gets identified as Daesh propaganda
As per the quoted text, 0.005% (claimed) of everything else gets identified as Daesh propaganda. It's intended to be trained that low and miss so much Daesh content at 6% because large content providers need false positives to be a very low rate or they would be blocking too much acceptable content while actual Daesh content is a mere speck in the ocean of cat videos.
Elsewhere noted, but cats are inherently evil anyway.
This post has been deleted by its author
And what if so called terrorists do exactly the same without watching a video? Maybe they are 'unconventional' in Rudd's eyes, a bit more educated and read books at the British Library? What then?
Has clueless Amber Rudd thought of her next 'back of fag packet' techy suppression move? If you hate people having a voice by using technology, just say so Amber.
"Oh, it's horrible, put it back in the box!"
(Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson’s pet tarantula has been evicted from the MoD HQ – because a colleague is afraid of spiders)
"The 41-year-old kept his beloved pet, named Cronus after a Greek god who castrated his dad and ate his children to stop them overthrowing him"
Now that sounds like a video worth watching, hey Amber?
I wonder as an IT professional if the Ministers are even aware that the capability, filtering and monitoring has been around for many years.. A brave new thought given the recent problems with MP's and ministers being caught with porn on their computers is why the hell they force us all to be GDPR/PCI compliant and still don't use the firewall technology and monitoring for the top echelon of government staff. ITS BEEN AROUND FOR YEARS!!! get a grip you stupid people and lead by example..
...the Germans broadcast continual propaganda via presenters such as 'Lord Haw-Haw' (William Joyce). They also wanted "... to incite violence in our communities, recruit people to their cause, and attempt to spread fear in our society...". Indeed, we were in a much more comprehensive shooting war with them.
We never made it illegal to listen to Lord Haw-Haw.
I'm thinking....
Radicalizing propaganda does not work well on people who are happy, safe, or even apathetic. Agitprop generally only serves to move people away from apathy, in whatever direction they are inclined. If a person feels that the Mideast should be left to sort their problems, the Daesh videos will make them less sympathetic; however someone who feels that "The Man" has been giving them grief will see the same video and think "That's how you handle The Man!"
So, in short: If you want to stop Agitprop videos from radicalizing you citizens, stop shitting on them and making the Murdering Terror Bastards seem reasonable in comparison.
I was really impressed with the announcement this morning. The Government have procured a new system that can instantaneously detect and translate any written or spoken language (around 6,900 worldwide including 11 different indigenous languages in the UK alone) appearing in a video file and determine that it contains Jihadi content with over 99.9% accuracy.
I am very convinced that my alarm didn't go off and it is now April 1st.
ASI Data Science offers a range of bespoke services to businesses, including consulting, training and sourcing data specialists from its own data science fellows and community.
[http://www.cityam.com/253029/ai-firm-asi-data-science-raises-15m-investment-backing]
So perhaps, given the relative newness of ASI and the above description, perhaps ASI is just an acceptable public and commercial front for those who wish to remain in the shadows.
If we blocked extremist content "properly", it would block A huge chunk of the government for a start. Certainly, Ms Rudd would find it hard to get her thoughts online.
I am not sure it needs to block Boris. He may not be so much extremist as extremely stupid. We can block Ree-Smogg though. It's a bit late though. Most of his nasty comments are already out there.
What's odd is how they find their own bile content perfectly acceptable, reasonable, somehow 'Normal'? As though it's fit for human consumption.
Jacob Rees-Mogg's idea that he'd be somehow undermining the skill and dedication of 'Nanny', changing his child's nappy. Proudly stating he had never done it.
What sort of example does that show to absentee fathers FFS and there is a lot more of them, than would-be terrorists.
What does this even mean?
So it is 99.995% accurate with 94% of the videos. How accurate is it with the other 6% of daesh videos. How accurate is it with the considerably larger population of cat videos, videos of people playing computer games, porn and so on?
And they know this how?
How many out of that million were (correctly) identified as positive for "terrorist content"? How many were (correctly) declared "clean"?
So that infers that some human has checked all of the videos and agreed with the classification. Not a bad effort, given the timeframe and ££ involved.
Or are they just saying their system said "Dunno" on 50 of them and they just assumed all the others must be ok then?
And while I'm ranting, how did it go identifying, say, neo-nazi or Continuity IRA videos? Or don't they count as "terrorist" because they're not in Arabic?
What's that familiar smell? Ah yes - it's bullshit.
The bit that makes you laugh when a politician speaks about cryptography, is the ignorance of how most cryptography can be jotted down on a piece of paper with a Pen or Pencil.. For example:
B = B + S[0]
D = D + S[1]
for i = 1 to r do
{
t = (B*(2B + 1)) <<< lg w
u = (D*(2D + 1)) <<< lg w
A = ((A ⊕ t) <<< u) + S[2i]
C = ((C ⊕ u) <<< t) + S[2i + 1]
(A, B, C, D) = (B, C, D, A)
}
A = A + S[2r + 2]
C = C + S[2r + 3]
Now the really technical and hard to understand bit, that Ms Rudd seems to find impossible to grasp or understand, is that anyone, yes anyone can now go and type that into there computer and presto!
The marvels of modern technology!
What's all these calls about backdoors about then? What it's always all about, MONEY ie: when they where using old broken crap, they found a load of guys stole a crap load and then got caught and murdered. So clearly the political establishment hasnt learnt it's leasson and would like to break it all again because you know, trust us... What's wrong with a few guys stealing a few Million here and there, even the president with no Tax returns would agree right Amber?
R is the number of the rounds w-bit round keys S[0, ... , 2r + 3]
I'm guessing there extremist blocking tool with be of course YouTube!
Where they can moan and complain and YouTube will bend over backwards going, of course minister, yes, minister. "We'll remove it right away!"
I agree it's far more ethical to just cache the video and then target the twit that uploaded it with an instant account ban. But just remember what government put the instant upload capability in there hand's with a smart phone in the first place. There's 5 step's to glorious communism...
Lookup Yuri Bezmenov on YouTube and sit there and listen carefully, he's not on the Wiki of Defectors to the USA but! "Deception was his Job!" and he outlines it well, we're in the Crisis stage!
Because of the "We're entitled to take away peoples rights and freedoms because we can mentality!"
I'm a little bit hazy on how this "tool" will work in the real world; so it spots an "extremist item" on a website and does what? It can't take it down as it won't have access to the site to do so. So the best that could be done would be a message sent to site owners, which would/could, depending on geographical location of said website host/owner, be completely ignored surely?
The tool is given to website owners and then in censors people after that...
The USA is in the hot seat of trouble because it chose it's bed fellows, it chose to go with Russia and India same as the UK, the fact they suddenly find out it's actually all powered by the KGB Pushkin super weapon known as "Communism" TCP-IP "The Communist Parties Intellectual Property" and then scream on about regulating a wiretap, that is actually the wiretap of the Communist Party as published and written about by Matt Blaze for the people by the people to spy upon the politically elected is purely down to there own misinformation and there own political hubris!
In india they worship Jai Ma Kali, the Goddess of "death" as spoken about in the Christian bible as the Black Virgin Mary and all this Rays of the Sun crap you read about, oh that would be Cambodia with the Jai of Amun. Last time I checked Vietnam was still in the throws of "Communism" and it hasn't taken long for the misinformed spies from both the UK and the USA to follow in there footsteps going we're doing this to protect you all, meanwhile at the Bank, there elected President and his kids has been busy evading taxes and getting rich with Mob money. It's just so surreal that at last they find the face of there Democratic enemies sitting there smiling going "we told you so!" I don't even recognize my own country any more, it's turning into the very police state they swore it would never become and out there on the net is the wiretapping device's for any law abiding citizen to download so they can all go after these corrupt politicians and destroy everything they thought they knew as the truth and expose them to the ONE world truth. That in the end - "Communism" wins!
All 'terrorists' need to do is get a copy of the software and run their videos through it, making small changes until they pass. Because it uses machine learning, by its nature, this would be trivially easy. SO basically, what Amber Rudd has done is give more than half a million quid to her mates to produce something that by definition is non-functional, and by logical analysis is non-fixable. It just goes to show she really is as clueless as her predecessor.
"All 'terrorists' need to do is get a copy of the software and run their videos through it, making small changes until they pass. Because it uses machine learning, by its nature, this would be trivially easy."
All they need to do is put a small rainbow in one corner of their flag.
I have no desire to endorse or support violence as an answer to anything. Violence is the abandonment of any other form of communication. The sense of being denied a voice, or a life, is hateful and induced hatred.
The violence exported by 'western' and globalist cartel interests is a broad spectrum dominance over the 'developing world' that includes setting the official narrative and increasingly enforcing it - by law or by economic sanction or by mob.
This is a way of thinking that sucks out profit regardless of negative effect on others or the environment. Fear blindness always starts in the people it then works through.
But fighting a perceived and believed evil does not make us good, righteous or delivered to paradise.
Communication is lost to the cognitive dissonance that blames to shame and afflict or target penalty upon.
Communication is the great need when inflammations are denied and more deeply repressed to become world threatening chaos. But it has to begin within our own hearts - or the mind capture merely persists under this or that polarised 'identity' set against another.
As for oppressed peoples; they generate coded private messaging that seems innocuous. And the criminal intent starts raving about pizza. But the laws of oppression operate against the population as a whole, to degrade and deny freedom to be. Of course criminal acts are to be checked and met with the law. But the interpretation of the law extends the label of 'terrorist threat' to anyone and anything that offers a 'rival' perspective to the official narrative. To a dictated version of what the world is and how you must thinks and act. Or else.
the government has got the jihadies off the internet....
Now for the next enemy... how about the racists.........they're all evil too
Now for the next enemy...... those filthy commies (and fellow travellers) bet they're all upto no good
And the next enemy... cant have UKIP stoking the fires of nationalism....
And labour is a threat to the rightful rule of the tories... so we'll ban them
the pr0n is long gone thanks to the great firewall of great britian
So we're doomed to an internet of shopping sites that never pay tax here and cat videos..... and some of those cats look dodgey as fek..
There is no great firewall, there is only something that's broken vs something that's fixed, how did computers come about? The actual history of the internet? It came about from the telephone system.
Re: Now for the next enemy...... those filthy commies (and fellow travellers) bet they're all upto no good.
You could surmise that yes, they broke into the SWIFT banking network and started embezzling large sums of cash unbeknownst to several members of there own party, however when it came to light that's what they where doing those lucky individuals where exposed to phase 5 of the 5 steps. ie: They where lined up against a wall and shot.
As for Labor, they are the political left - in other-words they are the RED party just like Republicans are also the far LEFT, it's just nice having the Democrat's out of the way for a bit. But there will be no more embezzling of funds, so they're pretty much skint!
As for the pr0n being gone, clearly you haven't searched that hard for it last time I checked it's still out there in radical abundance and they wonder why so many people become a recluse with a strong right hand.
The CATS are symbolic... Black Cats "Fu** Communism" is I believe is the mantra of the US Skunk works being of course an idiom of Cop's as Cat's and a reminder of the works of Mark Twain. Lenin’s love of cats is testimony, despite the image of Lenin as an unfeeling, granite-chiseled caricature of a statue, of his immense humanity. The working class must, like cats, demand there independence.
Except it doesn't combat terrorism, because by its nature, ML is incapable of doing this. What it does is divert public funds to a private company, and reduce the freedom of the general public. Something the Tory government* is very good at, and the reason our country is is such a mess.
*Other governments are available; your satisfaction may go down as well as up...
...and just to check; you do know that secularism is the alternative to fundamentalist theocracy, don't you? Are you advocating a theocracy, and if so, please inform us non-believers as to the One True Faith, so we can convert immediately, and avoid being [beheaded/burned at the stake/broken on the wheel]*
*Delete as appropriate.
No-ones complaining, in fact some of us are celebrating, you see once you become declared as an enemy of the People which is pretty much on par with where the US & UK sit at the moment, you loose all benefits of being aligned with the Left. It is no accident that some people who shall remain nameless in the news can't seem to get any money or financing for the troubled condo's or property re-development scheme's. That little black mark next to there name will never be erased or wiped off the slate.
A vision of the future:
Amber Rudd's face beaming from large Telescreens all over London with the text "Amber Alert!" in scrolling letters underneath as Immigrant/Muslim/Pakistani/Nigerian/Whatever mobs protected by Antifa goons ransack shops and burn down cars as Whitey cowers in fear in his bathub in darkened bathrooms while being scolded by The Press in 20-page editorials for his white supremacism, vigilantism and deplorable Anglo-Saxonism by writers bearing frankly $ethnic names while only Asians armed with shotguns and baseball bats defend their families and livelihoods. As the Commitee against Anti-Semitism delivers the latest on the increasing HateThreat one can, by resolutely drilling down into the newstream, find out that Israel is ripping apart Syria, Lebanon and Jordan for incorporation into a Largish Chosen Land. At the same time limited nuclear war is being fought over Ukraine's right to be the Latest Democracy run by NonDemocrats and it's all Putin's fault. All of this is being calmly observed via Augmented Reality by smirking Oligarchs tended by Tensorflow Robobutlers as they take a morning dump into solid gold seats.
YOUR NOT LISTENING
Yuri Bezmenov (KGB Defector) - Go look him up on youtube bro, then sit there and listen to the entire broadcast titled (Deception was my Job) - it was filmed way back in the 70's and he even tell's you about Big Brother coming to Washington in the guise of Technology used by the Soviets to Destroy the USA from within. He sum's it up beautifully, "the greedy capitalists and useful idiots will be unable to help themselves!"
Most news paper outlets are propaganda pieces for the far LEFT .. he even admits that in the video..
So the C library, your precious C library is actually harmful and unsafe with no sure way to harmonize the computer code into anything useful, in other-words your left with nothing but something closely resembling a virus, that you prattle on about being a secret capability.
The secret capability is actually your own missile defense system, with more holes in it than a pile of swiss cheese!
Shouldn't the security services be looking at this computer given that it has seen hundreds of pro-terrorism videos?
If the computer can look and not get turned shouldn't we trust the people just as much?
In the free marketplace of ideas we need computers to determine what us humans can and can't handle.
Lack of knowledge does not confer the ability to provide a valid opinion.
This applies not just to Amber Rudd if she happens to make foolish pronouncements about encryption (which in this case, she hasn't), but as well to the many comments on this thread supported by neither the knowledge nor the inclination to acquire the knowledge about the topic under discussion. Instead such comments are particularly able to demonstrate a deep lack of understanding or a willingness to play the affront card well before actual thinking occurs.
Eventually the US and the UK will remember this all came out in the wash years ago, back in the 80's and Putin's mistake was letting these guys out of the Gulag which is where Stalin chucked them all in the first place. Because when they investigated this incident before, they found the Isreali's helping them with there espionage where in fact double agents standing a Hanukkah behind there front door so when people went in there apartment they disturbed the Hanukkah from it's standing position. Chuck em back in the gulag!
>Chuck em back in the gulag!
What, haven't you seen reports of Daesh camps? my impression is that the only real difference is the location, yet Daesh seem to be able to get people to want to go to their camps.
I think even Yuri Bezmenov missed this one; make the gulag attractive and people will be queuing to visit...
This ignorant Tory has only herself to blame, she is a living example of the term "dumb as a brick", as did her predecessor.
Without a doubt this schema will fail - particularly in the U.S. of A. with it's First Amendment,
Recently read a great article [https://lukeoakdenrayner.wordpress.com/2017/12/18/the-chestxray14-dataset-problems/] on AI interpretation of chest x-ray images - by comparison with propaganda videos a relatively controlled and circumscribed data set. Ought to be easy? Turns out the system accurately identified all the chest x-rays where there was fluid on the lungs. Also turns out a) doctors don't need x-rays to do that and b) they install drains before the x-ray is taken (because ethical!) and so the algorithm was actually spotting chest drains.
What's the betting that the algorithm here is detecting 'black flag with squiggly white writing'?
Actually (of course) the papers a bit more complex and I have probably totally misunderstood-seems people were validating the systems success in 'identifying' conditions against a set of tags that had been applied previously - so another issue is that you might actually have a 96% success rate in identifying the 10% of images that were identified in your training set, and never know you are missing the other 90% of images that weren't tagged in your training set where the flag guy had run out of white paint.
I think the most "fear" from watching one of these videos would be the plod knocking down your door.
Hardly any normal people would want to see this stuff or go looking for it; those that did see this stuff would feel disgust rather than be intimidated by it.
"According to the Home Office, tests have shown the tool automatically detects 94 per cent of Daesh propaganda with 99.995 per cent accuracy."
What the hell does that mean? Does it detect 6 per cent of material with .005 per cent accuracy? is that probability of accuracy? Sounds like bullshit to me.
I give it a 13 per cent chance of being 17 per cent useful 14 per cent of the time.
In this world where the bad guys are trying to cause us death and distress, weapons that we are using to defend ourselves with should not be broadcast to our enemies. Reading through the posts here there are mentioned ways around this defence program.
Some things are above the need to be freely broadcast and need to be kept as secret until that requirement is past. I am a firm believer of an open society, but when this freedom is being turned against us then we need to restrict that spread of knowledge. We should remember the people of Bletchley Park, many of whom took their secrets to their graves.
Today we are fighting an ideology that wants to destroy our way of life just as much as Mr. Hitler did. We need to remember that careless talk does cost lives. The difficulty that we have in getting intelligence about the next terrorists target is simply down to the fact that they do not broadcast their next act. We should also not broadcast our weaponry...
Dear Aged Parent. If you think anything in this thread has compromised our security I want some of the pills you are on.
Lets's imagine you locked up your Werther's Originals in a safe. If I published a guide to cracking the combination lock, you could have justifiably claimed I was aiding the bad guys. If I pointed out that the safe was actually a kids toy, and the combination lock was nothing more than a clicky wheel to amuse a 4 year old, I'm doing you a favour.
>If I pointed out that the safe was actually a kids toy, and the combination lock was nothing more than a clicky wheel to amuse a 4 year old
Just hope the said safe isn't in the US being used by government agencies, as then you are likely to be on the receiving end of an extradition demand - remember in the eyes of the user it is a 'safe'. Also, TPTB will regard the use of anything more secure as defacto evidence that you are up to no good...
It was embarrassing when Rudd took her lonely brain cell on tour and spoke about how disgusting the cheese market was. Mind you...telling lies live on TV...the WH in a league of their own. Tune in to Hillbilly (KFC) Saunders. A chat with selective amnesia Neilson..."WTF...I'M getting paid loads" One wonders what all this is doing for the sale of sniper rifles !