Google's contentious new privacy policy officially takes effect today, despite some objections from Canada's privacy commissioner and others around the world.
Google insists it had users in mind when it consolidated the privacy policies for most of its more than 70 products and streamlined the text.
The main concern being raised by most critics is how Google will now start saving user information collected from all its services in one place. For example, users who log into several different services — such as Google.ca, Gmail and YouTube — will have data about all their searches and clicks stored together.
Alma Whitten, Google's director of privacy, product and engineering, in a blog post to users said.
"Our new privacy policy makes clear that, if you're signed in, we may combine information you've provided from one service with information from other services. In short, we'll treat you as a single user across all our products, which will mean a simpler, more intuitive Google experience."
Users can stop this data consolidation from happening by staying logged out when using the search engine or YouTube, or by having separate logins for each different site.
In a letter to Google, Canadian privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart said the search giant's efforts to created a more user-friendly privacy policy was "a step in the right direction." But she raised several concerns. For one, she said users aren't being told enough about how to effectively opt out of Google's new plan.
She wrote.
"We would strongly encourage you to make it clearer to users that if they are uncomfortable with these new uses of information, they can create separate accounts. This is not clearly stated in your new policy."
"As we understand it, the policy changes do not mean that Google is collecting more information about its users than it currently does. They do, however, mean that you are going to be using the information in new ways — ways that may make some users uncomfortable."
She also said the new privacy policy isn't clear about how long it will take for personal information to be deleted when requested by a user.
Google is also facing heat in Europe over the new privacy policy, which France's privacy regulator said is a violation of the European Union's data protection rules.
A letter to Google from the Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertes (CNIL) reads.
"Our preliminary analysis shows that Google's new policy does not meet the requirements of the European Directive on Data Protection. The CNIL and the EU data protection authorities are deeply concerned about the combination of data across services and have strong doubts about the lawfulness and fairness of such processing."
CBC's Ron Charles looks at the upcoming changes to Google's privacy policy. Some users are concerned about their internet use being tracked by the tech giant.
"Don't Be Evil," Google's unofficial corporate motto was originally adopted as a company-wide belief as well as a jab to its competitors. However, Google has come a long way since it was incorporated in 1998, and that has some users wondering if the company's philosophy has changed. BackgroundCheck.org asks, "Mother Can I Trust Google?" in the following infographic:
Click Image To Enlarge
COMMENTARY: Google, Twitter and Facebook have been the subject of investigation by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for numerous privacy violations.
In a blog post dated March 31, 2012, I reported that Google and Twitter had both been placed on 20-year probation, and must undergo annual privacy audits.
In the press release about the FTC settlements with both Google and Twitter, it states:
"A consent agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that the law has been violated. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000".
If the FTC had imposed that $16,000 per violation penalty, it would've been sufficient to put both Google and Twitter out-of-business. However, the feds would never impose a penalty that serious because it is not in their best interests. The Feds depend on and carefully monitor the activities of users on social networks and other sites to compile and track down criminals and terrorists. Attorney's also use social sites to gather evidence they can use in lawsuits and divorce cases. What a racket.
In a blog post dated November 30, 2011, I reported that Facebook had settled with the FTC for numerous privacy violations going back into 2010. Like Google and Twitter, the FTC placed Facebook on 20-year probation, and must undergo annual privacy audits.
Co-founder Mark Zuckerberg wrote in a lengthy post on the company's official blog on Tuesday.
"I'm the first to admit that we've made a bunch of mistakes."
He said a few "high-profile" mistakes, such as changes to the service's privacy policy two years ago, "have often overshadowed much of the good work we've done."
To ensure that Facebook did a better job, Zuckerberg said the company had created two new corporate privacy officer positions to oversee Facebook products and policy.
In its complaint, the FTC said that Facebook had repeatedly violated laws against deceptive and unfair practices. For example, it said Facebook promised users that it would not share personal information with advertisers, but it did.
Also, the company had failed to warn users that it was changing its website in December 2009 so that certain information that users had designated as private, such as their "Friends List," would be made public, the FTC said.
Facebook's Timeline feature, which it rolled out for all users on February 29, 2012, has been a subject of much controversy because of the huge potential for even more privacy violations. Also, only about 10% of Facebook users actually like Timeline.
The new Timeline feature makes everything a person has ever done on Facebook appear on a single screen that scrolls down year by year right back to when the person was born.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg described Timeline as letting you "tell the whole story of your life on a single page".
However, as Timeline makes all of a user's photographs and wall posts visible to friends, critics have warned the mandatory change could erode users' privacy.
There are also concerns that this will instantly make it easier for identity thieves and stalkers to profile individuals.
However, a spokeswoman for the site said the change would not alter existing privacy settings.
As you can readily see, user privacy is a huge concern, and the FTC has come down hard on both Google, Twitter and Facebook. LinkedIn maybe the subject of sanctions as well over ads using pictures of users without their permission.
It should be obvious by now that Google broke from its motto of "Don't Be Evil," and that controversy over privacy continues to haunt it like flies over a picnic table. If we are to hold Google accountable, then we must do the same for all the major social networks, who have violated our privacy and continue to do so to this date.
Courtesy of an article dated April 18, 2012 appearing in BackgroundCheck.org and an article dated March 15, 2012 appearing in Socialphy
If you have never lost or had your smartphone stolen, you are probably the exception, rather than the rule. I have lost at least two phones, and it is such a helpless feeling which they now call mobophobia.
iPhone and iPad theft is big right now. There is a small criminal economy developing around stolen iPhones and iPads. Thefts are often violent, conducted by one or more perpetrators, and in broad daylight. So pay attention no matter where you are. Avoid using your smartphone when you are alone. A lot of thefts occur on buses, the theft happens so fast, and the thief is gone like a flash, and a lot of victims are helpless women.
Whatever you do, make sure you backup your contact list to your cellular service provider's servers. Put it on automatic update, so that everytime you add a new contact or change an existing contact, your contact list on the phone carrier's servers is automatically updated. Should you lose or have your smartphone stolen, you can quickly retrieve your contact list intact, and not be inconvenienced.
Never, ever save your user ID's and passwords, or vital I information like credit card numbers, social security numbers on your smartphone. If you do lose your smartphone, you could quickly become a victim of identify theft and the thief could take money out of your bank account or charge things to your credit cards.
According to BackgroundCheck.com, $2.7 billion worth of smartphones were lost in 2011. Checkout this very interesting infographic.
Tips To Protect Yourself Before or After Your Cellphone is Lost or Stolen
A decade ago, losing your cell phone wasn't a huge deal. Sure, the loss of your text message history, contacts might be a painful blow, but you'd be able to get a replacement and move on quickly. Nowadays, our smartphones reveal much more; our phones are packed with our close friends, Facebook contacts, photos, location data, and tweets as well as access to personal banking, shopping and social networking tools.
Fortunately, security advancements have kept up with smartphone development, so remote locking, tracking and wiping is an easy-to-setup reality. These apps, many of which are free, only take a few minutes to install on everything from your iPhone to the latest Windows Phone device, so we urge you to take the time to install one. Taking just a few security precautions with your phone can turn the potential disaster of a phone accidentally left in a cab into a minor inconvenience.
Click Image To Enlarge
Here are a few tips on securing your cell phone and what to do if you lose it or have it stolen.
Call Your Cell Phone - PCMag recommends using another phone to text your lost phone with a message offering a reward for the device, and you can always try calling it as well. If you don't have a phone handy, you can use a service like Skype, Google Voice or fonefindr.com to ping your phone. It can't hurt -- someone may have found your phone or maybe you'll find hear it ringing between the couch cushions.
Notify Your Cellular Phone Carrier - After you've called or texted your phone, and retraced your steps, you'll want to call your cellular phone carrier immediately and tell them your phone has been lost or stolen. Ask them to suspend service (i.e. disable messaging and calls) on the device, because thieves could rack up thousands of dollars in international calls or app purchases. AT&T will even let you do this from your account on the Web.
Password Protect Your Cell Phone - With all the messages, years of email, contacts, social networking accounts and other personal data stored on today's smartphones, we can't recommend password protecting your phone enough. Refer to your users manual for instructions on how to password protect your cell phone. A thief could still remove your password, and there's always the possibility you just lost the phone for good, the alternative (going password-free) leaves not only your cellphone account but your bank, social networking, and e-mail accounts completely open. If your phone was stolen and you haven't locked it down, immediately change the passwords to your online accounts and alert any banks or services that you enabled on the phone.
Use Remote Security Apps - Many remote security apps are now available for smartphones and tablets, and they offer everything from near real-time GPS location tracking (often showing your phone's location on a map via a Web interface) and the ability to remote wipe your phone in case of theft to remote photo and data backup. There are many free options, and they take just a few minutes to install and set up. Here is a list of remote security apps:
Save Your Phone's Unique ID Number - Take a note of your phone's ESN, IMEI or MEID number (often found behind the battery or on the back of the iPhone near the FCC ID). This number will come in handy when reporting a lost or stolen phone to the police or to your cellphone provider.
Schedule Regular Backups - Regularly back up your smartphone to your computer or cellular carrier's servers (if that service is available), to ensure that you don't lose essential documents, purchases, apps, videos and photos that are stored on your phone. Even if you're forced to wipe your cellphone or if it's lost for good, you can often restore a factory fresh replacement to the last backup you've got, complete with apps, settings and documents. Depending on how much you use your phone, we recommend backing up between once a month and once a week. NOTE: Many cellular carriers install an app that will allow you to automatically upload your contacts, photos and other valuable data to their servers. Some of them may charge an extra charge for this service, but its well worth the cost. Check your phones settings or contact your cellular phone carrier for instructions.
Other Preventive Measures - Don't lend your cellular phone to strangers unless there is an obvious emergency. Be aware of cell phone and tablet thieves. The theft of iPhones, iPads and Android phones are on the increase. Many involve muggings or "grab and run" tactics on subways and buses. Always be aware of your surroundings, and don't walk and text or use your phone when you are alone or in a crowd.
Cellular Phone Carriers Band Together To Counter Act Rise of Cell Phone Theft
The nation's major wireless providers have agreed to a deal with the U.S. government to build a central database of stolen cellphones—part of a broad effort to tame an explosion of thefts nationwide.
The database, which the wireless companies will build and maintain, will be designed to track phones that are reported as lost or stolen and deny them voice and data service. The idea is to reduce crime by making it difficult or impossible to actually use a stolen device, reducing resale value.
Currently, Verizon Communications Inc. and Sprint Nextel Corp. block phones that are reported stolen from being reactivated. AT&T Inc. and Deutsche Telekom AG's T-Mobile USA don't. All four have agreed to be part of the new database.
Julius Genachowski, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, which negotiated the database proposal said.
"New technologies create new risks. We wanted to find a way to reduce the value of stolen smartphones."
Cellphone theft is one of the fastest growing crimes in the U.S., law-enforcement officials nationwide say. The deal between the FCC and the wireless carriers is partly the result of pressure from frustrated police chiefs. The Major Cities Chiefs Association, an affiliation of 70 police chiefs from large cities across the U.S. and Canada, published a resolution in February calling on the FCC to require telecom companies to implement technology to disable stolen devices.
Behind the increase in crime: A lucrative market for used phones. Thieves can sell pilfered devices to local merchants or street-corner middlemen—or hawk them on sites such as eBay.com, Amazon.com or Craigslist.org, where a used iPhone, for instance, can fetch several hundred dollars.
In New York there were more than 26,000 incidents of electronics theft in the first 10 months of 2011—81% involving mobile phones—according to an internal police-department document reported by the New York Daily News.
The report said electronics are now the most stolen type of property, surpassing cash. In Washington, D.C., cellphone-related robberies jumped 54% from 2007 to 2011 according to the Metropolitan Police Department.
Details of the national stolen-phone database have yet to be worked out, but a broad outline has been agreed to.
Wireless phones that have been reported stolen to the carrier will be listed in the database using unique serial numbers associated with mobile gadgets. The carriers will block listed phones from accessing carrier networks for voice and data service.
Employers already know it’s a good idea to check job candidates’ Facebook pages to make sure there aren’t any horrible red flags there. The reddest flags for most employers seem to be drugs, drinking, badmouthing former employers, and lying about one’s qualifications. But there’s another good reason for checking out a candidate’s Facebook page before inviting them in for an interview: it may be a fairly accurate reflection of how good they’ll be at the job.
That’s the conclusion in a study published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology last month. The researchers hired HR types to rate hundreds of college students’ Facebook pages according to how employable they seemed.
One of the study author’s, Don Kluemper, of Northern Illinois University says.
“We asked them to form impressions of a candidate based solely on their Facebook page.”
This involved looking at what was publicly available on those pages (photos, status updates, and conversations with friends) and then assigning each person a score for a number of qualities important to being a good employee, such as their degree of emotionally stability, conscientiousness, extroversion, intellectual curiosity and agreeableness. (In other words, will they flip out on you, care about completing tasks, be fun to work with, be creative in problem solving, and be willing to kiss up when necessary?) The review took about five to ten minutes per profile.
Six months later, the researchers got in touch with their guinea pigs’ employers to ask about their job performances. Unfortunately, of the over 500 guinea pigs, just 56 of the employers responded. So the sample is small, but the researchers found a strong correlation between those employers’ reviews and the employability predictions they had made based on folks’ profile pages.
I asked Kluemper about the “personality red flags” that their reviewers looked for. He was a little vague but said that a person with obvious mood swings, who is overly emotional in their postings would not be an attractive candidate. Meanwhile, a person with a lot of Facebook friends who takes a lot of crazy photos would be rated as extroverted and friendly — which are attractive qualities in a candidate.
Key takeaway for hiring employers: The Facebook page is the first interview; if you don’t like a person there, you probably won’t like working with them. The bad news for employers, though, who are hoping to take the Facebook shortcut Kluemper said.
“So many more profiles are restricted in what the public can access.”
Given the small sample size for that first study, I was more impressed by the second. In the second study, the researchers did a similar assessment of students’ Facebook selves and also had the students take personality and IQ tests. Then, instead of following up with employers, they turned to students’ transcripts. Kluemper says.
“We were able to better predict a student’s academic success based on their Facebook page than on the cognitive tests.”
(Most universities claim they don’t stalk applicants on social networking sites during the admissions process. Maybe they should?)
Of course, there are some legal questions to think about before jumping into someone’s Facebook page. Employers can discriminate against potential employees who seem like bummers based on their Wall postings and interests, but will get into trouble if what the Facebook user has said about their religious views affects the hiring process.
COMMENTARY: For quite a while I have been warning my readers about the dangers of posting or saying offensive things on Facebook, Twitter and other social networks. Unless you make your Facebook or Twitter page private, you are an open book, and whatever you post on your social network page, could come back to haunt you, no matter how qualified you may be for the job.
The addition of Facebook's Timeline is going to be a goldmine for employers because it makes it much easier for an employer to dig up dirt you may have long forgotten about. If you've said some derogatory things about an opposing political party or candidate, a former employer or co-worker, or even an ex-girlfriend or spouse, even the boss' favorite sports team, this can be viewed very negatively by employers.
Law enforcement organizations and government agencies like the FBI, NSA and the CIA are actively involved and working closely with many of the major social networks to conduct investigations, gather evidence and track down criminals and terrorists. Much of this investigation and data gathering is done under the auspices of the Patriot Act in the interest of national security, so in special circumstances they may not be required to obtain a subpoena to access your private Facebook or Twitter account. The former Director of the CIA testified before a U.S. Senate subcommittee about the billions Facebook had saved the agency. The director said with a smile on his face,
"After years of secretly monitoring the public, we were astounded that so many people would willingly publicize where they lived, their religious and political views, alphabetize a list of all their friends' personal email addresses, phone numbers, hundreds of photos of themselves, and even status updates of what they were doing moment-to-moment. It is truly a dream come true for the CIA."
Here, checkout the YouTube video yourself.
To assist employers in their hiring decisions, many employers are now using what I call "professional social media snooping" firms to scour the internet to find out what you say and post online, particularly on social networks like Facebook, Twitter, and others. In a blog post dated October 3, 2010, I profiled Social Intelligence Corporation, one of these social media snoopers, and at that time called it a "creepy startup" and "truly scary" company.
Apparently consumers hurt by this companies activities filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), claiming they were in violation of the Federal Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) of 1996, 2004 with amendments there to.
On May 9, 2011, the Federal Trade Commission ruled on behalf of Social Intelligence Corp claiming that they were not in violation of the Federal Credit Reporting Act. This effectively gave Social Intellignece Corporation the legality to provide social media consumer reports to employers conducting background checks on prospective employees.
On February 3, 2012, I told you about the growing trend by employers to use social media snooping firms to help employers screen employees through their social media behaviors. It's not just a U.S. trend, employers all over the world are now using social media snooping firms. More than half of my readers are from countries outside the U.S., so you should be aware of this.
According to Social Intelligence Corp. CEO Max Drucker, the company focuses on screening social media profiles for the usual suspects -- racist remarks, sexually explicit content, pictures with guns, knives, or other weapons, and other illegal behavior (think bongs).
There are some limits on how employers may use archived social media content, however. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, companies are required to tell prospective employees (or, say, credit applicants) that they are going to perform background check and obtain their permission to do so. Employers are also required by law to tell the applicant about any damaging information they find online.
The majority of my readers probably have nothing to worry about, but if you have a previous felony conviction, been fired for cause, previously lost your job due to a layoff, and you voiced your anger online, you have a lot to risk. By some estimates, as many as 40% of longterm unemployed may be in limbo and simply unemployable because of their online social media behaviors. Social media snooping firms have already expanded into the insurance industry. Their reports could cause you to lose your health or life insurance coverage or prevent you from obtaining insurance coverage. If you have any experience or information about the activities of these snoopers, post it on my blog, or shoot me an email. I have a feeling we have just scratched the surface.
Courtesy of an article dated March 5, 2012 appearing in Forbes
Let's take a healthy sodium-dose here, but London's Sunday Times is alleging that Facebook has admitted to reading users' text messages. People at Facebook supposedly read the private SMS messages of users who downloaded the Facebook app on their smartphones.
This was allegedly in preparation for Facebook launching their own messaging service, but it is not known if it still continues today. Or, really, if it happened at all. The Sunday Times article is very scant in the way of evidence, quoting only unnamed sources, and then devolving into a rehashing of every other known privacy concern to pad the article.
While it certainly wouldn't surprise me if it happened—we've come to expect this sort of thing as of late—let's hold off on the torches and pitchforks until we have some more substancial proof. We are reaching out to Facebook for a comment, and will update if we hear back. Then we can light our pitchforks and sharpen our torches. Or something like that. [Sunday Times viaTechCrunch]
"On the Android App store, the Facebook app permissions include SMS read/write."
"The reason it is on there is because we have done some testing (not with the general public) of products that require the SMS part of the phone to talk to the Facebook App. That's what the read&write refers to – the line of communication needed to integrate the two things."
"Lots of communications apps use these permissions. Think of all those apps that act as replacements to the build-in sms software."
"That's not necessarily what we're working on. SMS can be used for carrier billing (where users opt to pay for things like apps through their phone bill). Again – that's not to say we're launching this. It's just an example of why an app might use these permissions. The Sunday Times leap to the conclusion that is was a messaging feature."
"Anyway – we have yet to make any such features available to the public. (so the Sunday Times is completely wrong when it says Facebook is reading people's SMS. Wrong on the terminology, and wrong on the suggestion that it has been implemented)."
"But Facebook is right to insert this into the Android app permissions – because yes, the app technically has the capability to integrate with the phone's SMS system – even if that is just for our own testing."
So, there you have it. As we suspect, sounds like a lot of getting excited about what isn't much, or at least isn't much yet. It looks like they're working on a new feature, so we've probably got some time before that rolls out, and then we can freak out when we realize that it's sold all of our precious love-letters (or love-texts) for drug money. Or something. Until them, BOOOOOOto the Sunday Times for trying to trick people into paying to read their sensationalized article.
COMMENTARY: That Facebook response is all PHOOOEYYY!! if you ask me. I didn't actually understand much of it. It was just too lengthy, and a bit too technical. Anytime I have to read something two or three times, it's probably mumbo jumbo, or something that the writer has problems explaining.
Our locations and reading our messages is one of the last frontier of privacy violations that are now occuring. Facebook would love to hear what people say outside their social network like in their text messages about brands and their products, or what they say about Facebook, for that matter.
They would love to know where we are all the time so they can feed us a mobile ad or two, or a text message reminder that McD's has a two-for-1 sale on their hamburgers.
I just turned off the GPS function on my smartphone through my settings because any app I run on it could be tracking me right now. GPS also wears down your battery. Unless you absolutely need to turn on GPS, because an app needs your location, I would be very careful about turning it on.
Finally, I don't trust most social networks, especially Facebook, because Facebook has committed the most privacy violations of any of the big five social networks. I have warned you that Facebook is under the grip of the CIA, FBI, NSA and numerous law enforcement organizations. They just love it that you post everything about yourself on those sites. Everytime I post a blog post, it ends up on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and now Google+. I need the traffic, but when it comes to providing personal information about myself, watch out.
This latest allegation about Facebook reading our SMS text messages would not be too farfetched. Take the above denial with a grain of salt. It's probably happening under our noses. The more they deny, the more it seems they are nice guys, but don't think about it that way. When a company doesn't make anything, then YOU are the product.
Courteshy of an article dated February 26, 2012 appearing in Gizmodo
People who constantly reach into a pocket to check a smartphone for bits of information will soon have another option: a pair of Google-made glasses that will be able to stream information to the wearer’s eyeballs in real time.
According to several Google employees familiar with the project who asked not to be named, the glasses will go on sale to the public by the end of the year. These people said they are expected “to cost around the price of current smartphones,” or $250 to $600.
The people familiar with the Google glasses said they would be Android-based, and will include a small screen that will sit a few inches from someone’s eye. They will also have a 3G or 4G data connection and a number of sensors including motion and GPS.
A Google spokesman declined to comment on the project.
Seth Weintraub, a blogger for 9 to 5 Google, who first wrote about the glasses project in December, and then discovered more information about them this month, also said the glasses would be Android-based and cited a source that described their look as that of a pair of Oakley Thumps.
Click Image To Enlarge
They will also have a unique navigation system. Mr. Weintraub wrote this month.
“The navigation system currently used is a head tilting to scroll and click. We are told it is very quick to learn and once the user is adept at navigation, it becomes second nature and almost indistinguishable to outside users.”
The glasses will have a low-resolution built-in camera that will be able to monitor the world in real time and overlay information about locations, surrounding buildings and friends who might be nearby, according to the Google employees. The glasses are not designed to be worn constantly — although Google expects some of the nerdiest users will wear them a lot — but will be more like smartphones, used when needed.
Internally, the Google X team has been actively discussing the privacy implications of the glasses and the company wants to ensure that people know if they are being recorded by someone wearing a pair of glasses with a built-in camera.
The project is currently being built in the Google X offices, a secretive laboratory near Google’s main campus that is charged with working on robots, space elevators and dozens of other futuristic projects.
One of the key people involved with the glasses is Steve Lee, a Google engineer and creator of the Google mapping software, Latitude. As a result of Mr. Lee’s involvement, location information will be paramount in the first version released to the public, several people who have seen the glasses said. The other key leader on the glasses project is Sergey Brin, Google’s co-founder, who is currently spending most of his time in the Google X labs.
One Google employee said the glasses would tap into a number of Google software products that are currently available and in use today, but will display the information in an augmented reality view, rather than as a Web browser page like those that people see on smartphones.
The glasses will send data to the cloud and then use things like Google Latitude to share location, Google Goggles to search images and figure out what is being looked at, and Google Maps to show other things nearby, the Google employee said. They said.
“You will be able to check in to locations with your friends through the glasses.”
Everyone I spoke with who was familiar with the project repeatedly said that Google was not thinking about potential business models with the new glasses. Instead, they said, Google sees the project as an experiment that anyone will be able to join. If consumers take to the glasses when they are released later this year, then Google will explore possible revenue streams.
As I noted in a Disruptions column last year, Apple engineers are also exploring wearable computing, but the company is taking a different route, focusing on computers that strap around someone’s wrist.
Last week The San Jose Mercury News discovered plans by Google to build a $120 million electronics testing facility that will be involved in testing “precision optical technology.”
COMMENTARY: In a blog post dated February 8, 2012, I commented on the article by Seth Weintraub of 9to5Google.com, that revealed Google's development of "Terminator" style, Android-based head-up-display (HUD) glasses. That was just a rumor, but it now appears that Google is rapidly moving towards launching their new HUD glasses by year-end.
I hate to say it, but these augmented reality HUD glasses are going to be very controversial and create many privacy concerns and liability issues. Information about you is now readily available on the internet, especially from social networks, and Google will be able to tap into that information to display your name and possibly your contact information, and anything else you may have posted online.
In an article February 22, 2012 by Thomas Claburn appearing in InformationWeek, there were 7 potential problems Google may encounter with their new augmented reality HUD glasses:
"Here are a few potential pitfalls:
"Privacy - The outcry over people beaming images back to Google's data centers will be deafening, far worse than complaints about Google's monitoring of Web browsing habits. Google engineers are said to be actively discussing the privacy implications of the glasses. But the company's history of repeated privacy blunders suggests controversy is inevitable."
"Google has the technology to enable facial recognition with its Google Goggles app, but has avoided doing so for fear of privacy problems. And that's the real shame here, because augmented reality glasses should be able to do things like present the name of the person you're looking at. That kind of technology will be available eventually, at least to police departments. But as a society, we're not ready for it."
"Redundancy - Augmented reality is cool. But putting the technology into a pair of glasses isn't strictly necessary. Everything your Google glasses might be able to do, your Android phone will do better, particularly given the assumption that the glasses will be intended for periodic rather than constant use."
"Cost - For several hundred dollars, you'll get what? Services already available on your smartphone. Augmented reality makes a lot of sense if you're, say, a NASA astronaut who needs to see Space Shuttle schematics in your visor while you're on a space walk to make repairs. Augmented reality makes less sense for consumers. A more cost-effective solution might be a smartphone scaffold for mounting your phone on your baseball cap."
"Health - There's already enough FUD about mobile phones and brain cancer. But even the most scientifically-minded are likely to balk if Google's glasses rely on anything more powerful than Bluetooth to transmit and receive data. And that's to say nothing of the potential health effects of visual distraction and impairment. No one wants their last thought to be, 'Hey, Google Maps says I'm walking across Highway 101...'"
"Liability - And if there are health risks, there will be liability problems. People will wear Google's glasses while driving, despite explicit warnings not to do so. They will collide with elderly pedestrians and someone will get hurt. Someone will end up going cross-eyed. There will be lawsuits. And some politician will hold a hearing. Add the cost of an insurance policy to your Google Glasses bill."
"Battery Life - Battery life continues to hinder the utility of smartphones, tablets, and notebook computers. And in these devices, you can generally feel the weight of the battery. Glasses need to be light to be comfortable, so the battery will necessarily be small. As a consequence, the glasses are unlikely to be useful for very long, unless they require a separate tethered battery ... and that would ruin the experience. The ideal augmented reality glasses will be able to run perpetually on sunlight. We're probably several decades away from that kind of photovoltaic and processor efficiency."
"Control - Head-tiling will not be enough if the glasses are to offer services beyond navigation. The glasses will either have to convert hand gestures to commands or accept voice commands. So add a microphone, which adds another layer of privacy problems and engineering requirements."
"The glasses will also have to be extraordinarily responsive--when you turn your head you won't be happy with information related to where you were looking three seconds ago. That will mean either a very fast network connection--something many mobile carriers can't manage consistently--or displaying as little data as possible for the sake of speed and to appease mobile carriers, which already consider you a data hog."
Wow, it looks like Thomas Claburn covered all the possible pitfalls that Google could experience. Notice that privacy was No 1 on his list. I wonder if Google's X-Labs team asked themselves, "What would Steve do?" Better yet, did Google confer with their attorney's about liability and privacy issues and did they conduct field studies and get feedback from consumers?
This is a great time to mention that the Obama administration is working hard to legislate an online "Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights" bill, and if the proposed bill passes in its present form without Congressional infighting, it could change the entire internet landscape with regard to privacy concerns. Checkout my blog post dated February 23, 2012 about Obama's proposed Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights bill.
I also envision a lot of ads appearing to the HUD whenever you look at a restaurant, movie theater, product whether a book or consumer electronics device, and a message telling you what it is, where you can get it, the price and if there is a deal on that item. So unless you don't mind receiving these invasive ads appearing on your HUD, then its going to open up a whole new world for those individuals willing to forkup $250 to $650 and the software to use these new HUD glasses.
I have always felt that technology would be heading this way, and it looks like it will be happening sooner, rather than later. You can expect Microsoft, Apple and others to introduce similar devices, but they will probably wait to see just how much traction Google is making with their new HUD augmented reality glasses before launching their own.
Hopefully most readers of this column are aware that their social media profiles are fair game for potential employers, who may peruse the photos and updates posted to a Facebook page to gather evidence as to the character and sobriety (often literally) of a prospective job candidate. This week brings more evidence that ill-advised social media content can hurt your chances, courtesy of a survey of executives responsible for hiring decisions in Australia.
The survey of 1,255 bosses and other hiring executives, conducted by Pure Profile on behalf of Australian telecom Telestra, found that 28% of the respondents use social media to screen job candidates by doing research into their backgrounds. Within this group, respondents said they were turned off by something posted on a profile around 40% of the time. That compares to one-third who said that something posted on a profile helped decide them in favor of a particular candidate.
No surprise, one of the biggest mistakes made by job applicants in their social media profiles was criticizing their current employer:
44% of Australian employers who use social media for screening said they automatically disqualified jobseekers who posted critical comments about their current workplace, according to the Pure Profile-Telestra survey.
37% said making discriminatory remarks about your previous employer was an automatic deal-breaker.
31% of employers actually fired an employee who made critical remarks about them.
Again unsurprisingly, Facebook was the most popular source of information on job candidates, used by bosses:
41% of bosses screened applicants using Facebook.
31% of bosses screened applicants using LinkedIn
14% of bosses screened applicants using Twitter
7% of bosses screened applicants using both YouTube and MySpace
Interestingly, social media surveillance may continue even after someone lands a job:
43% of Aussie employers say they accept friend requests from their employees.
33% of Aussie employers say they check their employees’ social media profiles.
18% of Aussie employers say they monitor their employees to make sure the employees aren’t badmouthing the company online.
15% of Aussie employers say they monitor for productivity.
Back in the U.S., there’s no question employers are zeroing in on social media profiles as sources of information about job candidates -- sometimes with the help of professional background researchers. In June of this year I wrote about a decision by the Federal Trade Commission which effectively allows everything an individual puts on social media (which is publicly available under their privacy settings) to be archived by third parties for up to seven years, for the explicit purpose of background checks -- even if the individual has deleted the content in question from his or her own account.
The FTC determined that a company called Social Intelligence Corp. was operating within the bounds of the law when it created "cached" archives of social media profiles for review by employers, including potentially damaging photos and statements.
According to Social Intelligence Corp. CEO Max Drucker, the company focuses on screening social media profiles for the usual suspects -- racist remarks, sexually explicit content, pictures with guns, knives, or other weapons, and other illegal behavior (think bongs).
There are some limits on how employers may use archived social media content, however. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, companies are required to tell prospective employees (or, say, credit applicants) that they are going to perform background check and obtain their permission to do so. Also, companies must tell the applicant about any damaging information they find online.
COMMENTARY: In a blog post dated October 3, 2010, I profiled Social Intelligence Corporation, a "creepy startup" and "truly scary" firm that screens job applicants by what they say or do on social networks for employers. This is a quote from Max Drucker, CEO of Social Intelligence Corp:
"Once employees have been hired, their online behavior poses a possible threat to your company. Employees may criticize managers or coworkers on a social networking site, post questionable photos on a blog, or regularly update personal sites while on the clock. Therefore, it is vital that employers implement and enforce a strong social media policy. Social Intelligence offers nearly real-time surveillance of employees' online behavior (based on e-mail, SMS, and workflow) using customizable reports, summaries, and screenshots to document activity. Findings are prioritized by predefined, color-coded alerts, ensuring that employers see only the information they desire. Consistent monitoring creates awareness and strict adherence among employees, thereby reducing “cyber slacking,” fraud, and negative company publicity. Social media monitoring leads to an increase in overall productivity and a significant improvement in your bottom line."
He says employers should "implement and enforce a strong social media policy" and he calls its service "nearly real-time surveillance of employees".
The idea that your employer can play "Big Brother" on its employees in "real-time" including screening their "email, social media sites and workflow" is "truly scary." Does this mean that employers are eavesdropping on their employees at will? I call that invasion of privacy. I would like to know what they mean by "workflow." I would go as far as to call it "employer peeping-tom" This should be worrisome for you.
In a blog dated October 3, 2011, I again profiled Social Intelligence Corporation, I discussed the Federal Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) of 1996, 2004 with amendments there to. The FCRA is a fairly complex 86 page document (see below) that provides consumers with certain rights.
Social Intelligence Corporation had been sued by privacy advocates claiming that the company was in violation of the FCRA, but the FTC dropped the case after its investigation of Social Intelligence, finding that it is in compliance with the guidelines of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
I became very interested in learning exactly what information Social Intelligence Corporation provides employers "using customizable reports, summaries, and screenshots to document activity," includking which social sites they were using for screening and how they determined that a particular jobseeker "presents a threat" to a prospective employer. I sent them an email requesting this information, but I received a very lame response from one of their spokespersons that they could not provide that information unless I were a client.
Social Intelligence Corporation provides two services to employers:
"Social Intelligence℠ Hiring is an FCRA compliant background screening service that enables employers to navigate the complicated legal landscape of social media with clear, consistent, and insightful results. Using a combination of automated and manual review processes, Social Intelligence Hiring ignores information that is not legally allowable in the hiring process, such as the “protected class” characteristics defined by federal anti-discrimination law (race, religion, national origin, age, sex, familial status, sexual orientation, disability status, and other qualities that are not allowed to be used as decision points). Therefore, job candidates are protected from discrimination based on these characteristics and, in turn, employers are protected from allegations of discrimination."
Social Intelligence Employment Solutions
"Social Intelligence℠ Monitoring enables employers to implement and enforce a strong social media policy. Using a combination of automated and manual review processes, Social Intelligence Monitoring provides a powerful, cost-effective method of alerting employers to social media policy violations, including negative publicity, fraud and “cyber slacking,” and mitigating risks posed by existing employees. As with Social Intelligence Hiring, Monitoring ignores “protected class” information to insulate employers from employee discrimination claims. Whether employees are displaying or discussing illegal behavior, publicly disparaging management online, discussing sensitive company information, or updating personal websites while at work, Social Intelligence Monitoring provides employers with the knowledge and tools necessary to protect their organizations."
The word "Monitoring" sounds an awful lot like "watching" or "spying". If I say, "I am going to monitor you," I think you would automatically assume that I am watching you. Yes, that's Big Brother watching over you.
Incidentally, Social Intelligence Corporation is sponsoring a live webinar titled, "Using Social Media for Hiring Online"on Friday, December 2, 2011 between 12:00 noon to 1:00 p.m. (PST). Here's what's on the agenda:
"Attendees will learn what social media is and how to use it their advantage when hiring for their organization. They will learn its powerful way to augment traditional employment background screening using FCRA compliant social media searches. Lastly, we’ll show a demonstration how Social Intelligence and TalentWise makes a comprehensive social media screening simple and risk-free with searches that allow HR, recruiting and staffing professionals to gain deeper insight into job candidates’ personal and professional characteristics while screening candidates in a systematic way to ensure compliance with federal, state and local employment laws and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)."
I am pleased to report that I have registered for this webinar and encourage anyone interested in their invasion of privacy to do the same. You can register HERE. Just so you know I am in no way plugging Social Intelligence Corporation.
Courtesy of an article dated November 29, 2011 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf
The country’s premiere law enforcement organization is looking to develop an early warning system for domestic and global threats drawing on information from social networks. The Federal Bureau of Investigation released details of the planned system in a request for information from private contractors who are qualified to help build it.
Your typical FBI Special Agents (Click Image To Enlarge)
The FBI's Strategic Information and Operations Center said the RFI was intended to determine the capability of industry to provide an “Open Source and social media alert, mapping, and analysis application solution.” As indicated here, the system would be able to scrape material from social networks about emerging threats and then superimpose the information graphically on maps, giving FBI analysts a spatial sense of the threat landscape.
Among other capabilities, the proposed system should:
Be able to provide an automated search and scrape capability of both social networks and open source news sites;
Allow users to create, define, and select new keyword search parameters;
Display different threats on maps, color coded to distinguish the threat level, preferably including Google Maps, Google 3D maps, Yahoo Maps, and ESRI;
View and plot historic and current foreign and domestic terror data “mashed with geo coordinates”;
Instantly translate foreign language tweets into English;
Display video feeds from traffic cameras.
The RFI emphasizes that
"Flexibility is critical because the users must have the ability to select and display to a common operating picture or dashboard both unclassified open source feeds, and social media vetting and analytical tools in support of a breaking event or crisis."
The platform must also be able to "view terrorist activities by location, terrorist group, and type of attack," and “change search parameters and geo-locate the search based on breaking events or emerging threats."
As far as privacy concerns go, the RFI notes that
"Information posted to social media websites is publicly accessible and voluntarily generated. Thus the opportunity not to provide information exists prior to the informational post by the user."
Of course, U.S. government agencies like the CIA and NSA are probably also engaged in surveillance of ostensibly private social media content in at least some cases where a serious terrorist threat is felt to exist.
The FBI certainly isn’t alone and is monitoring social media for security threats. The Department of Homeland Security has admitted in a public statement that it creates profiles to monitor “publicly available online forums, blogs, public websites, and message boards,” including social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, in what is known as the “Publicly Available Social Media Monitoring and Situational Awareness Initiative.” The aim is to “to provide situational awareness” for the federal, state, and local governments; the DHS “may also share this de- identified information with international partners and the private sector where necessary and appropriate for coordination.” Crucially, the DHS statement also reveals that participating agencies may reveal personally identifying information about Internet users in emergency, life-and-death situations.
The DHS is also using social networks to ferret out fake “green card” marriages between U.S. citizens and immigrants for the purpose of obtaining residency or citizenship for the latter.
COMMENTARY: The Patriot Act is really the force driving the FBI's strategy to developan “Open Source and social media alert, mapping, and analysis application solution.”
The original Patriot Act was signed into law during the Bush administration October 26, 2001 following the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. The title of the act is a ten letter acronym (USA PATRIOT) that stands for Uniting (and) Strengthening America (by) Providing Appropriate Tools Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.
Click Image To Enlarge
On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama signed a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act: roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the "library records provision"), and conducting surveillance of "lone wolves" — individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups.
Opponents of the Patriot Act have criticized its authorization of indefinite detentions of immigrants; searches through which law enforcement officers search a home or business without the owner’s or the occupant’s permission or knowledge; the expanded use of National Security Letters, which allows the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to search telephone, e-mail, and financial records without a court order, and the expanded access of law enforcement agencies to business records, including library and financial records. Since its passage, several legal challenges have been brought against the act, and Federal courts have ruled that a number of provisions are unconstitutional
It does not surprise me that the FBI now wants to directly tap into social network profiles and databases in order to gather information in their criminal investigation and counter-terrorist activities.
What concerns me the most is whether this is a first step towards government censorship. We know that the Patriot Act has pretty much destroyed the Bill of Rights as we know it. We really don't have any rights, because the Patriot Act gives the government the authority to spy on us at will, arrest us, hold us indefinitely without the rights of Habeaus Corpus.
Of course I see a need for criminal surveillance, including wire taps, but this must all be done under court order, but the FBI doesn't need such authority to carry out the mission of the Patriot Act.
If China, Iran, Syria, North Korea and other countries can censor what its citizens say and do online, this new move by the FBI gets us one step closer to censorship and an even deeper violation of our privacy.
I know some of you believe in a strong America, believe there is a terrorist hiding in every closet, a scheme our government concocted to pass the Patriot Act. The theory goes like this: If we can be made to fear terrorism, are reminded of it constantly, we will be less reluctant to give up our individual, Constitutionally-guaranteed rights. I am really sick and tired of my government constantly using the fear card. And, low and behold, that's exactly what we did under Bush, and now under Obama.
This is the sort of thing I have been warning everybody about for years now, so be careful what you post on Facebook, Twitter or Google+ for that matter. Government spying and censorship is sure to follow. Shit, the FBI will probably read what I say on my blog, and label me a "person of interest."
In an earlier blog entry dated January 26, 2012, I told you about how Washington insider Erskin Bowles was added to Facebook's board of directors recently.
Big Brother Is Watching......YOU!!
Courtesy of an article dated January 26, 2012 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf
Facebook Inc. is continuing its rapid pace of growth, with the social network doubling its revenue to $1.6 billion in the first half of 2011 from about $800 million a year earlier, said a person familiar with the matter.
Facebook's improving financial performance comes as speculation has swirled over its plans for an initial public offering. The company hasn't made any formal announcements around an IPO but has said it will begin disclosing financial information next April. Facebook's valuation has soared this year in the secondary market.
Erskine Bowles, at a Senate hearing this year, has joined Facebook's board. Bowles will serve as the CIA's "inside man" at Facebook, making sure Zuck does as he is told.
Separately, the company said Wednesday that it appointed Erskine Bowles, president emeritus of the University of North Carolina and a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, to its board of directors. Mr. Bowles is Facebook's second recent addition to its board, having brought on Netflix Inc. Chief Executive Reed Hastings in June. In total, Facebook now has seven board members, including Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg.
The revenue figures for privately held Facebook were earlier reported by Reuters.
Facebook's revenue has been driven by its online-advertising business, as big brands rush to the site to interact with consumers through display ads and fan pages. Facebook brand campaigns, or fan pages created by big companies to interact with their consumers, are up 104% from last year, according to a recent report by TBG Digital.
Facebook's world-wide ad revenue increased from $40 million in 2006 to close to $2 billion in 2010, and an estimated $4 billion in 2011 according to data compiled by eMarketer. Facebook's share of display-ad revenue in the U.S. is projected to grow to 17.7% in 2011, up from 12.2% share last year, according to eMarketer. The research firm projects that Facebook's ad revenue will be close to $6 billion by 2012.
Social gaming and the sale of virtual goods within games has also become an important part of Facebook's business. EMarketer estimates that social-gaming companies generated more than $500 million in revenue from selling virtual goods last year. As of July 1, Facebook requires game developers to accept payments through its virtual payment system, called Facebook Credits. Through credits, the company takes a 30% cut of all game-developer revenue.
COMMENTARY: This blog post was supposed to be about Facebook's mid-year 2011 revenues, but when I saw that Erskine Bowles had been appointed a new Facebook board member, it all came together for me. Here's why.
It is not surprising that Facebook would add a Washington insider to its board of directors. Bowles has served under two U.S. Presidents, Bill Clinton (Chief of Staff) and Barack Obama (co-chair National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform). He also happens to be a member of the board for Morgan Stanley, who will probably figure prominently in any future Facebook IPO.
Facebook is getting too big, too influential, too intrusive, so Bowles fits in quite nicely with the federal governments future plans. Here's how it works: Bowles became President Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff in Janury 1997, taking over from former CIA director Leon Paneta who was Clinton's COS at the time. Do you see the connection now? Bowles will be the CIA's "inside man" at Facebook, covering the CIA's "back" so to speak, insuring the CIA's clandestine and information gathering activities proceed unimpeded.
Facebook doesn't sell or make anything that I know of. YOU are the product. Facebook is, quite simply, in the information gathering business. Essentially, they gather the most intimate details of information about YOU. In Mark Zuckerberg's own words, "privacy is no longer a social norm". He once said,
"It's incredible what members will reveal about themselves on Facebook, that they wouldn't anywhere else."
I view Facebook as the perfect spy disguised as a social network, that has secretly become an arm of the CIA, NSA and FBI, who have funded the social networking giant directly or indirectly through several venture capital firms who are just conduits for money. Mark Zuckerberg maybe the major stockholder, but he has very little to say about it now. Here's Zuck hobnobbing with President Obie and other Silicon Valley CEO's:
Click Image To Enlarge
That guy in the foreground (tongue sticking out) who is just behind Zuck is CIA spy Eric Schmidt who used to be Google's CEO. Eric is Google's Washington D.C. go-between guy now, and makes regular visits to Langley, VA.
To insure that the information about YOU flows to the CIA, the CIA secretly spent nearly $300 million of taxpayer dollars for a new 150,000 square data center for Facebook. Everytime you click that LIKE button, the CIA knows about it. Everytime you post a Wall post, the CIA knows about it. If you play Mafia Wars, the CIA knows about it. They know everything about you punkasses. Be careful who you friend on Facebook, he's probably a CIA spy.
The TOUGHBOT by Inspector Bots is a small lightweight affordable robot designed for surveillance, law enforcement l and building inspection. The TOUGHBOT is a ruggedized PLATFORM with an infra red camera, a water resistant shell and the ability to turn on a dime. The video shows the TOUGHBOT being thrown through a glass window and searching for bombs under a low profile vehicle. Both platforms are designed and sold by Inspectorbots.com For more information write info@inspectorbots.com.
Vehicle:
4WD electric vehicle with high-torque gearing and motor and rechargeable batteries. You can charge the TOUGHBOT in the field with your own vehicles’ 12 volt battery. The TOUGHBOT is perfect for confined spaces or remote operations. It is Lightweight- only 9 Lbs
Vehicle Specifications:
4-Wheel Drive Platform
All Aluminum Body
Billet Aluminum Wheels
Carry Handle
Dimensions: 14” W x 14”L x 4.75” H
Easy / Intuitive to use
Hi-Torque Motors
Invertible
IR Front Facing Camera
Lightweight: Only 9 Lbs
Low Profile -Perfect for Under Vehicle Inspection.
Payload: 7 Lbs
Range 500 Ft. LOS
Rugged
Runtime: 1.5 Hrs
Stainless-Steel Fasteners
Water Resistant
Wheelbase: 7.5”
Ground Clearance: 1.5”
Zero Turning Radius
Min Speed: .06 m/s
Max Speed: .1.66 m/s (3.7 mph)
Max Incline: 30 Degrees
Vision System:
Completely Mobile- No AC required. This is a stable and reliable system. It includes a low lux Camera. With its high powered transmitter and receiver you can see where you can’t see.
This is a Teleoperated FPV UGV. First Person View, Unmanned Ground Vehicle. You control it as if you were inside the vehicle itself. Drop it into a hazardous environment and record the video as you look up, down, left, right and everywhere in-between while driving, while sitting in a safe comfortable location!
Vision System Specifications
Compact Color Camera
Completely Mobile: no AC required.
FPV (First person View)
High-Power Transmitter/ Receiver
Operators Control Unit
Infra-Red Camera (Night Vision)
Live Feed
Recordable Video
Virtual Reality Ready
Rapid Deployment
Range 250 Ft. LOS
Possible Applications
Crawl Space Inspectio
Wire/Cable installation
Surveillance
Reconnaissance
Under-Vehicle Inspection
Insurance Claims
Law Enforcement
Military
Covert Investigation
Pest Control
Tactical / SWAT
HVAC Inspection
Disaster Restoration
Energy Auditing
Building Inspection
Chemical Plant
Situational Awareness
Engineering
Price: $4,990 + Shipping
COMMENTARY: The TOUGHBOT is one versatile, but tough video surveillance system on wheels. If you need to conduct a surveillance of tight quarters where a man cannot fit, or get up close to the scene of the action or dangereous situations, then the TOUGHBOT is your choice. The folks at Inspector Bot manufacture a broad line of bots capable of performing surveillance, inspection, and law enforcement. Even if you don't need a TOUGHBOT, it sure could be a lot of fun to unleash one.
Courtesy of an article dated January 23, 2012 appearing in Robotic Trends
Background: Thule Air Base sits within 800 miles of the Arctic Circle, making it the northernmost U.S. military installation. Among the many challenges posed by the region's climate is that the base's port is only accessible for three months each year, so major supplies need to be shipped during the summer. The base may be frozen and remote, but the 12th Space Warning Squadron operates an early warning system for Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles from Thule, while the 21st Space Wing is in charge of space surveillance operations.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: Brad Schulz, vice president of federal architecture at HNTB, who recently worked on a dormitory replacement project at Thule, explains that construction crews essentially need to build on the most stable layer of permafrost they can get to. With temperatures dropping below minus-60 F, keeping troops warm is crucial. One of the more interesting weather-specific features is that all of the utilities are above ground, because it would be too hard to quickly access them if something went awry. "You don't bury any waterlines, communication lines or even sanitary lines," Schulz says. "They're all insulated and triple-heat-taped." Schulz also notes that all the buildings on the base are equipped with so-called arctic vestibules, which provide 24/7 access to shelter while ensuring the buildings remain secure.
Background: Within two months of the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt set aside the first 127,000 acres of Dugway Proving Ground in Utah's Great Salt Lake Desert. Over the past 60 years, the site has expanded to nearly 800,000 acres, roughly the size of Rhode Island. Geographically, Dugway is located in the eastern Great Basin desert region of the American West. The mean elevation is 4,350 feet above sea level. Dugway sits under a huge invisible container of protected airspace known as the Utah Test and Training Range, controlled by the U.S. Air Force. Military Flight Operations in this area are very frequent. NASA has also used the combined air/land space for critical recovery operations of its Genesis and Stardust Mission Craft. The nearest major national-scale city is Salt Lake City, Utah, 85 miles northeast.
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: Dugway's massiveness allows it to be the premiere site for testing defense systems against chemical and biological weapons, as well as military-grade smoke bombs. During World War II, the facility played a vital role in the development of incendiary bombs. In order to test the fire-causing weapons, crews at Dugway built replicas of German and Japanese villages, even going so far as to fill the model buildings with furniture that would be similar to that found in the respective country. Today, the remains of the German village are eligible to be included on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places.
Background: This joint U.S. and U.K. operation is situated on a tiny atoll about 1000 miles from India and tasked with providing logistical support to forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: "There's a certain amount of logistical difficulty" with ultra-remote facilities like Diego Garcia, Schulz says, and shipping materials can be costly. Diego Garcia's remoteness, though, allows it to be a key hub for tracking satellites, and it is one of five monitoring stations for GPS. Additionally, the island is one of only a handful of locations equipped with a Ground-based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance system for tracking objects in deep space. As an atoll, the land itself is rather oddly shaped, too. From end to end, Diego Garcia is 34 miles long, but its total area is only 11 square miles.
Background: HAARP, or the High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, is a collaborative project involving the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Army and the University of Alaska. Researchers at the facility use a powerful high-frequency transmitter and an array of 180 antennas to temporarily disrupt the ionosphere in hopes of yielding potential communications and surveillance benefits.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: HAARP has been the centerpiece of countless conspiracy theories, ranging from rumors that it will be used for mind control to claims that it can manipulate the weather of individual countries. The project's website says that the equipment can only function properly if it is located in the auroral region, and Alaska happens to be the only U.S. state that fits that criterion. A quiet electromagnetic location is needed for the system to operate, which further explains the removed location of HAARP. In past interviews, HAARP's operators readily admit they're researching potential defense applications.
Cheyenne Mountain Complex Air Force Station, Colo.:
Background: This iconic underground base has been inspiring science fiction writers and awing engineers since 1966. Located nearly a half mile under a granite mountain, the labyrinthine facility is run by Air Force Space Command. The base earned its place in pop culture when the television version of Stargatemade Cheyenne Mountain the HQ of cosmic time travel.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: One-of-a-kind bases like Cheyenne pose countless construction challenges and need to satisfy seemingly impossible requirements, like being able to withstand multi-megaton attacks. "It would be hard for a contractor to bid a project like this, because you might be using new construction techniques, new construction technology," Schulz says. Aside from sitting under a mountain of granite, an extremely hard rock, the base is protected by 25-ton blast doors, and some rooms sit on massive beds of springs to better absorb a blast. "It's certainly not a very secret installation, but it's well-protected."
Background: Near the hot, desolate center of Australia, just outside of Alice Springs, is the Joint Defence Space Research Facility Pine Gap. Australia and the U.S. agreed to build the compound in 1966, but desert flooding, blistering heat and a lack of paved roads slowed initial construction efforts. The site officially opened in June 1970 and has been a joint U.S./Australian operation since.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: Pine Gap's collection of eight or so radomes and its remote location have sparked many UFO-related rumors, both in Australia and abroad. The main function of Pine Gap is to monitor any missile activity in the region and relay intelligence to U.S. and Australian forces. Schulz points out there are certain military installations, like Pine Gap or HAARP, that can only operate effectively in certain geographical areas. "Even though they're in terrible environments, some portion of that land is strategically important," he says. In 2009, the Australian Department of Defence announced plans to upgrade antiquated equipment at the facility, indicating that Pine Gap has a long future ahead of it.
Background: Anthrax, Ebola virus, plague and monkeypox are just a few of the deadly microbes handled by researchers at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, commonly known as USAMRIID. Over the years, the institute has made significant contributions to the development of vaccines, diagnostics and treatments that have both military and civilian applications.
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: USAMRIID is the only Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratory under the purview of the Department of Defense. Facilities like these are all about redundancies, Shulz says, and the safety requirements needed for BSL-4 certification are extensive and complex. A few of the more notable precautions include double-door airlocks, sophisticated filtration systems capable of catching microscopic particles, fumigation chambers and a completely air-tight building. According to the National Institutes of Health, many of the BSL-4 facilities build buffer corridors around the laboratories to help mitigate damage from any potential blasts.
Background: This notoriously cryptic facility is built under Raven Rock mountain near the border of Pennsylvania and Maryland. The site was birthed during the Cold War and goes by many names, including Site R and the underground Pentagon.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: Raven Rock Mountain Complex (RRMC) is a underground continuity of government facility built by the U.S. government in the early 1950s. It is located about 14 km (8.7 miles) east of Waynesboro, Pennsylvania, and 10 km (6.2 miles) north-northeast of Camp David, Maryland. It is also called the Raven Rock Military Complex, or simply Site R. Other designations and nicknames include “The Rock”, NMCC-R (National Military Command Center Reservation), ANMCC (Alternate National Military Command Center), AJCC (Alternate Joint Communications Center), “Backup Pentagon”, or “Site RT”; the latter refers to the vast array of communication towers and equipment atop the mountain. Colloquially, the facility is known as an “underground Pentagon”.
Background: Lajes Field, on the small, Portuguese-owned Terceira Island, is an important refueling station for aircraft that can't clear the Atlantic Ocean in a single shot. In 1953, the U.S. established its first presence on the island when it positioned the 1605th Air Base Wing at Lajes. Today, the 65th Air Base Wing is stationed at the facility, providing support to U.S. Air Forces in Europe and to a variety of allies.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: Lajes Field is on a small chunk of volcanic rock about 1000 miles off the coast of Portugal, a location that can be stressful for first-time navigators. About 11 miles long from north to south, the island is not capable of supporting more than one airport, so the field is split between civilian operations and military operations. "All the military support facilities line one side of the runway, and the passenger terminal, if you will, is very small on the other side," Schulz says.
Background: The U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency's Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility is one of six locations that stores chemical weapons. During the 1960s, 7 percent of U.S. chemical weapons were stashed at Anniston, including stockpiles of VX nerve-agent munitions. The Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, currently under construction, is located 50 miles east of Birmingham, Alabama, and eight miles west of Anniston. The stockpile at Anniston is maintained on 762 acres in the northeastern portion of the Anniston Army Depot, and holds 2,254 tons, or 7.4 percent of the original US stockpile of chemical weapons. Anniston's stockpile consists of cartridges, projectiles, ton containers, rockets and mines containing the nerve agents GB and VX, and the blister agent HB, more commonly referred to as or mustard agent.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
List of Chemical Weapons stored at Anistan Chemical Weapons Disposal Facility
How It's Unique: Operations at Anniston have shifted from storing chemical weapons to safely destroying and disposing of them. Mustard-gas-filled munitions can't just be chucked in the garbage or buried, so the facility is equipped with high-tech robotics that disassemble weapons and powerful incinerators that help destroy certain waste materials. Workers at the site have recently started using a Linear Projectile Mortar Disassembly machine—a six-axis, remote-controlled robot—to extract the explosives from mortars filled with chemical agents.
Background: Around 1980, the Navy began overhauling Kings Bay to be the East Coast location for Ohio-class nuclear submarines, a project that took nearly a decade and cost $1.3 billion, making it the largest peacetime construction project for the Navy at the time. Spread over 16,000 acres, about a quarter of which is protected wetlands, this submarine base is the habitat of 20 threatened or endangered species.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
How It's Unique: When a submarine needs a little TLC, there's not a better place than the Trident Refit Facility at Kings Bay. The 700-foot-long covered drydock, one of the largest in the world, is impressive, but what really stands out is the state of the art Magnetic Silencing Facility. The entrance of the silencing facility is designed as a drive-in, like a Jiffy Lube for Naval vessels. After a sub is in place, it is subjected to a deperming treatment, which basically erases the sub's magnetic signature, allowing it to remain as stealthy as possible during future voyages.
COMMENTARY: I wanted to add one final military facility that is glaringly missing from the above list. This is the military facility known as Area 51 (see below) a.k.a Groom Lake and Dreamland. If you ask the U.S. government about Area 51, they will tell you that it does not exist.
Click Image To Enlarge
Fifteen miles south of Area 51 is S-4, a super-secret facility located at the base of the Papoose Mountains adjacent to the Papoose dry lakebed. Individuals with authorized access to S-4 are flown from Las Vegas to Area 51, then transported by bus over a dirt road to S-4. The windows of the bus are deliberately blackened so that passengers are unable to see the route to S-4.
The airspace over Area 51 and S-4 is highly restricted, and any pilot or aircraft that accidentally or intentionally strays into sector R 4808 N is subject to pursuit by Air Force jets scrambled for intercept, or subject to outright destruction by surface-to-air missiles.
Sector R 4808 N houses Area 51 and S-4 and is completely offlimits to all unauthorized air traffic
The S-4 installation is built into the mountain, and there are nine hanger doors that are angled at about 90 degrees to match the hillside. These doors are covered with a sand-textured coating to blend-in with the sides of the mountain, amid the desert floor.
According to several S-4 informants, including Conner O'Ryan, Bob Dean, Phil Schneider (btw, the powers that be within the U.S. government probably arranged to have Phil Schnider murdered in 1996 for divulging the existence of S-4), and Bob Lazar, S-4 houses several recovered extra-terrestrial spacecraft that either crashed or were shot down.
Below are some aerial images of an underground facility located at Area 51/S-4 taken by Google Earth.
An aerial view of S-4 underground facility taken by Google Earth
Construction of S-4 undeground facility entrances
S-4 underground facility entrance aerial view
Aerial view of another S-4 underground facility entrance
The S-4 underground facility has several entrances. Here's one of them.
The following videos do an excellent job of describing the location of Area 51 and S-4.
Now you know where your tax dollars go.
Courtesy of an article appearing in the November 2011 issue of Popular Mechanics
Recent Comments