وثائقي: قد تنطبق الشروط والأحكام | Terms and Conditions May Apply

Summary

"Terms and Conditions May Apply" is a documentary that explores how tech companies and governments exploit the fine print in user agreements to gather massive amounts of personal data, often unbeknownst to users. This film highlights the extensive surveillance and privacy invasions justified by these agreements, and questions the societal and ethical ramifications of relinquishing privacy for convenience. Through interviews, case studies, and shocking examples, the documentary underscores the urgent need for reforms in digital privacy laws in the face of technological advancements that prioritize profit over personal freedom.

Highlights

• A shocking revelation that reading all the terms and conditions could take 180 hours a year. 🤯
• Government and tech giants working hand-in-hand for data collection under the guise of security. 😱
• Examples of companies embedding invasive clauses, like selling your 'soul,' to gauge user attention. 👻
• Privacy policies have evolved to serve corporations more than consumers – often with little transparency. 🏢
• Real stories of people unintentionally flagged as threats due to misinterpretations of their data. 🚨

Key Takeaways

• Always read the terms and conditions, or at least skim them – your soul (or privacy) depends on it! 📜
• Tech companies track everything; what you think is private probably isn't. Beware! 👀
• Government surveillance has grown under the guise of protecting national security, but at what cost to personal freedoms? 🕵️‍♂️
• Anonymity isn't profitable, which explains why most free services aren't truly free. Your data is the product. 💰
• Public outrage is crucial to initiate changes in privacy laws. Speak up for your rights! 📢

Overview

Ever wondered what you're actually agreeing to when you click "I agree"? This documentary dives into that very question with a keen eye on how the fine print in terms and conditions could mean surrendering your privacy or worse. The film takes a look at various companies and highlight the creative and sometimes bizarre clauses hidden within their agreements that most of us never read.

With vivid case studies, the documentary showcases alarming instances where personal data was exploited either by tech companies or government agencies, ostensibly for national security or business interests. It challenges viewers to rethink their own privacy online and offline in a world where almost every digital step is tracked and archived.

The film not only serves as a wake-up call about the current state of digital privacy but also urges the need for collective action to rethink and reform privacy policies. Much like Orwellian fiction, it reminds us that our freedoms might be more conditional than we assume, begging the question: what are we really giving up for the sake of convenience?

Chapters

• 00:00 - 02:00: Introduction The chapter titled 'Introduction' begins with a musical theme that sets the ambiance, followed by an engaging yet brief interaction characterized by repeated musical interludes and the word 'yes.' This chapter primarily focuses on creating an immersive audio experience.
• 03:00 - 13:00: The Reality of Terms and Conditions This chapter delves into the often overlooked and underestimated realm of 'Terms and Conditions' that accompany most software applications, websites, and online services. It explores how users frequently agree to these legal agreements without thoroughly reading or understanding them, mainly because of their complex legal jargon and length. The discussion highlights the potential risks and pitfalls, including privacy issues and unintended consent, that users may unknowingly accept. The chapter also suggests best practices for users to better protect themselves, such as dedicating time to read key sections or seeking simplified summaries. The narrative is underscored by background music that emphasizes the gravity and pervasiveness of this digital age dilemma.
• 15:00 - 26:00: Big Tech and Privacy Policies The chapter discusses the complex relationship between big technology companies and their privacy policies. It highlights the implications of data privacy and security, and how these large corporations handle user data. The narrative might include insights into the transparency of these policies and the impact on users' privacy rights.
• 31:00 - 52:00: Mass Surveillance and Government Legislation The chapter titled 'Mass Surveillance and Government Legislation' seems to provide an introduction with music playing in the background. It indicates a thematic focus on government policies related to mass surveillance. However, the available transcript is limited to some background noise and music, suggesting that either the content of the chapter isn't fully transcribed or it consumes a multimedia format where non-verbal elements are significant.
• 56:00 - 75:00: Citizen Surveillance and Dissent The chapter ‘Citizen Surveillance and Dissent’ seems to begin with thematic or introductory music, indicating a possible multimedia or podcast format, but does not provide any further information in the provided transcript.
• 81:00 - 100:00: The Erosion of Privacy The chapter titled 'The Erosion of Privacy' seems to lack a transcript or content to summarize, as the provided text only includes placeholder elements like 'wow [Music] [Music]'. Please provide a detailed text or key points from the chapter for a comprehensive summary.
• 120:00 - 129:00: Potential Solutions and Call to Action In this chapter titled "Potential Solutions and Call to Action," the focus is on the frequent usage of the internet and its communication links or applications. The chapter discusses the habitual interaction with digital services and platforms, which is briefly interrupted by background music before proceeding with the discussion on digital connectivity.

وثائقي: قد تنطبق الشروط والأحكام | Terms and Conditions May Apply Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 [Music] [Music] yes [Music]
• 00:30 - 01:00 [Music] [Music]
• 01:00 - 01:30 oh [Music] a million tiny flashlights
• 01:30 - 02:00 [Music] we gotta turn it off [Music] but tonight [Music]
• 02:00 - 02:30 too much [Music]
• 02:30 - 03:00 wow [Music] [Music]
• 03:00 - 03:30 um [Music] gotta turn it off [Music] just about every time we use the internet a communication link or an app
• 03:30 - 04:00 we agree to some very long terms and conditions but what exactly are we agreeing to you guys you gotta help me these business casual g-men are trying to kidnap me what it's crazy dude they're saying it's because i agreed to the latest terms and conditions on itunes why what did the terms and conditions for the last update say i don't know i didn't read them you didn't read them who the hell reads that entire thing every time it pops up i do can you tell can can apple tell how
• 04:00 - 04:30 many people actually read it well they have to say that they agree we can't we can't know for sure if they've read we try to make it in plain english and very short if i were trying to make a user agreement uninviting i would choose a small font a sans-serif font and i would set it in all caps because what happens then is that you have type that becomes a texture rather than words and spaces no one has read the terms and conditions
• 04:30 - 05:00 no one in the world no one even the lawyers who wrote it wrote it like this you come to a website and they have a set of rules usually described in terms of services then they have a privacy policy and as soon as you start using the service in essence you have agreed to the terms of service and the privacy policy do these terms and conditions that we sign up for even apply they do i think if they didn't apply i think the web would topple over and so to the extent there have been contract decisions um
• 05:00 - 05:30 they've held that these terms and conditions are valid and this concept is pretty new for instance you never had to sign a user agreement for an old-fashioned landline or to watch tv or to read a book but if you use a smartphone a kindle or you watch hulu then you do finally baby don't you sign anything there what's this all about standard form of content don't talk to me about contracts wonka i use them myself they're strictly for suckers yes but you wouldn't begrudge me a little protection in fact
• 05:30 - 06:00 if you were to read everything you agreed to it would take one full month of work out of every year that's 180 hours you would need to spend every year and according to the wall street journal consumers lose 250 billion dollars each year due to what's hidden in fine print here's an example from linkedin's terms you grant linkedin a non-exclusive irrevocable worldwide perpetual unlimited assignable sub licensable fully paid up and royalty free right to us to copy prepare
• 06:00 - 06:30 derivative works of improve distribute publish remove retain and process so linkedin takes pretty much everything forever you'll find this kind of language in google pinterest facebook pretty much anything that people consider free instagram is finding that pictures are worth much more than a thousand angry words after the company updated its user agreement to say it would have the right to sell posted
• 06:30 - 07:00 photos without compensation for use in advertising and even if you are paying companies have the ability to make you accept just about whatever they please in 2009 game station a company in the uk put some pretty sneaky stuff in their terms they didn't take money or your first born child but for one day their term stated by placing an order via this website you agree to grant us a non-transferable option to claim now and forevermore your immortal soul
• 07:00 - 07:30 the contract was only live for a day but game station happened to rake in the lives of seven thousand immortal souls this was of course a joke however it makes you wonder what if there were more serious consequences that might result from not reading terms and conditions and what if your phone came with these long terms the condition said well if you use the phone the government can wire tap you that would be insane but that's what the kind of world we're living in a world where the government could wiretap you because of terms and conditions so if
• 07:30 - 08:00 you look at the iphone user agreement wiretapping isn't mentioned but in a t's privacy policy they say that they can use data to investigate prevent or take action regarding illegal activities prevent [Music] hut in 1994 pizza hut became the first
• 08:00 - 08:30 major chain to accept a delivery online suddenly the internet needed a way to remember who you were where you lived and how you were going to pay my question is what the hell like how do they know who you are yeah okay um there are these things called cookies where like if you go to a site and buy something it'll remember you and then create ads for other stuff you might want to buy so it learns information about me seems like an invasion of privacy
• 08:30 - 09:00 it wasn't until the late 90s that companies began voluntarily adding privacy policies to explain what was happening with this data then in 2000 an online company called toysmart went bankrupt but they had an idea they tried to sell their database of 195 000 users to another company this included names billing information shopping preferences and family profiles even though their privacy policy said they would never share information people felt like they were being duped lawmakers tell you time and time again
• 09:00 - 09:30 that every time they go back to the district to their district people are telling them that they want some internet privacy laws they want some protection in early 2001 over a dozen bills were introduced in congress to protect privacy online [Music] these acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat but they have failed all of the privacy legislation was killed or abandoned and the patriot act
• 09:30 - 10:00 was of course initiated the bill before me takes account of the new realities and dangers posed by modern terrorists this new law that i signed today will allow surveillance of all communications used by terrorists including emails the internet and cell phones the patriot act expanded the ability of the federal government to do surveillance in a lot of little ways you don't need a judge's approval for instance to find out uh what website someone visited uh what
• 10:00 - 10:30 search terms they typed into google the question of your if you will information being retained by google is not really at this point of google decision it's really a political or public policy decision enforced by different governments in different ways what if privacy policies weren't about protecting privacy at all but rather taking it away let's take a look at google's privacy policy around this time to see if any changes were made so here's google's privacy policy from
• 10:30 - 11:00 december of 2000 google may also choose to use cookies to store user preferences a cookie can tell us this is the same computer that visited google two days ago but it cannot tell us this person is joe smith or even this person lives in the united states and here's the privacy policy from one year later in december of 2001. google does this by storing user preferences and cookies and by tracking user trends and patterns of how people search google will not disclose cookies to third parties except as required by a
• 11:00 - 11:30 valid legal process such as a search warrant subpoena statute or court order now it's important to note the fundamental difference between these two policies one says that you're totally anonymous the other says when necessary you're not but here's what's strange so the first screenshot you saw of google's oldest policy was taken by a non-profit internet archival service it records what websites used to look like by taking snapshots and has been doing it since the 90s now
• 11:30 - 12:00 google also lists the history of its privacy policies on its own official archive page in their archives they state they've got every privacy policy that goes back to the beginning but what google shows is their original privacy policy doesn't match that of the archive service instead they show the policy from december of 2001 the one that says that users are not anonymous google claims this is their first privacy policy which it isn't so why would google not include its original privacy policy on its own archives page the one that said you would remain anonymous
• 12:00 - 12:30 what if the data collection that the patriot act required became the foundation of a whole new business model and the foundation of the modern internet as we know it would that be something worth covering up even though we don't write checks to google and that's one of the reasons we kind of like the company it doesn't mean that google is really free or that we are free in the liberty sense when we use it it might feel very different if google was effectively a 500 a year service because that's the amount
• 12:30 - 13:00 of that's the value of the data that you're providing i mean that was a really critical finding and that advertising could be you know targeted based on information that people were somehow you know supplying about themselves suddenly you didn't have to wonder was somebody watching my commercial you knew someone clicked on my ad that meant that they paid attention to it in 2012 google was one of the most valuable stocks in the world and mark zuckerberg the founder of facebook had become one of the richest
• 13:00 - 13:30 men in america my job is to help investors figure out for themselves what this thing's worth i look at what what facebook has as an asset which is 900 million people and a ton of data on those people and i say if they use 10 of that data they're going to be the most valuable company ever when personal data is worth this much why would google or any free internet service be opposed to the data retention that the patriot act required anonymity wasn't profitable the people
• 13:30 - 14:00 say who are willing to you know give up a little bit of information in exchange for having access to something that's free or something that's fun um or a free taco i don't think that ever changes right you always want something free and a lot plenty of people are willing to provide information to get that and plenty of companies picked up on this fact [Music] let me let me give you some very
• 14:00 - 14:30 practical tips first of all i want everybody here to be careful about what you post on facebook what the default settings are on facebook this is how most people use this technology when these companies are are uh building this these systems they know that so why is it um for everything sharing every photo when i start facebook why isn't it just for my friends why is the default for everybody because
• 14:30 - 15:00 it's really confusing for my mom to figure out how to just share to her friends the way we've designed the site is that it's a community thing right so people want to share with just their friends but a lot of people also want to share with the community around them right so i want to share with everyone who works with me at facebook i want to share with everyone who went to my college everyone in the village around me um and those people aren't just my friends even mark's explanation doesn't make any sense he says he wants to share with the school with the quaint village next to him he
• 15:00 - 15:30 doesn't say he wants to share with the entire world and yet that's the default the challenge with defaults is that you get comfortable with whatever the default is when the default is public you actually can adapt really beautifully and deal with it when the default is private you can adapt comfortably and deal with it when the defaults change that's when problems emerge and in fact that's what facebook did in 2009 facebook made changes to their privacy policy without telling anyone
• 15:30 - 16:00 doing a privacy change for 350 million users yeah is is a really you know it's it's not a pain it's not the type of thing that a lot of companies would do you know we decided that these would be the social norms now and we just went for it you might remember the fan page with over a million people who tried to get the policy reversed what was the big deal you might ask well over the course of a night facebook turned what was once private information into totally public information
• 16:00 - 16:30 these platforms have an incentive to keep as much information about you and make it as visible as possible it's almost the questions and becomes what's what's the less forgivable sin having this crazy one-night scan or not knowing how to use facebook properly [Music]
• 16:30 - 17:00 most relationships in your life it's very good that the other person doesn't know everything you've ever said or scribbled or thought when you choose to share a photo album you go to facebook and you choose to put those photos there [Music]
• 17:00 - 17:30 opt in on every single thing opt-in opt-in opt-in [Music] i'm okay with facebook behaving like a company but i think we need to treat it like a company and not treat it like some benign public utility these are the default settings on facebook in 2005 divided into 12
• 17:30 - 18:00 categories as time passes more and more information is shared by default in 2009 facebook began automatically sharing personal information with the entire internet by 2010 everything was shared by default except for your contact info and your birthday we could if you did a search and a gmail and a youtube and so forth yesterday and you did it from your home i'll give you the worst case you did it from your home and you only have one computer in your home in theory we could cross correlate those and get all all three together but we don't
• 18:00 - 18:30 do that and we're not likely to do that but in january of 2012 google made changes to their privacy policy and they did just that google combined all of the information any of their services had collected about a person and put them into one single profile when eric schmidt had said was the worst case scenario google had actually done how can you honestly sit here and tell
• 18:30 - 19:00 this committee this is not a growing problem a good deal of what i was trying to say is that i don't think there is evidence of a market failure or consumer harm from the legal and legitimate use of personal information uh inco in commerce i don't i don't think there's there's there's evidence of it there are companies that you've never heard of like axiom that claim to have about 1500 points of data on the average american citizen
• 19:00 - 19:30 everything from you know whether you're right-handed or left-handed what kind of dog you have what your sort of psychological outlook is and all of that can be used to inform decisions that businesses make about us as well these are the types of companies that a potential employer would go to to try and run a background check on somebody before they hired them they are able to connect the fact that you went to site a and then later to site b and then eventually to site c and create this detailed history of what sites you visit online
• 19:30 - 20:00 they don't put your name in the cookie they put a unique serial number in the cookie that could then be linked to your name in their database i don't know if you've ever seen the the picture of the ad network ecosystem that shows all the parties in the in the at network ecosystem it's just it's a bit overwhelming the information is valuable to different people for different reasons what if you buy a lot of alcohol you know they might want to raise your premiums because they think you're at risk for alcoholism or something like that the
• 20:00 - 20:30 company might use it in a way that actually harms you for example in 2008 thousands of people suddenly had their credit limits reduced seemingly for no reason while on vacation one wealthy business owner from atlanta saw his limit plummet from 10 800 to just 3 800 ruining his vacation the letter he received said this other customers who've used their card at establishments where you recently shopped have a poor repayment history with american express this means companies like walmart and in
• 20:30 - 21:00 minneapolis a father came into a target outraged that they were sending his teenage daughter pregnancy coupons coupons that were addressed to her the man thought the target was trying to encourage his daughter to get pregnant as it turned out thanks to her shopping habits target knew that this high schooler was pregnant before her own father did the father later apologized [Music] and in the netherlands data was being used to harm customers in a whole new way now while you're driving and using gps that gps is sending back signals to tell
• 21:00 - 21:30 how fast you're moving it's really useful for helping us avoid traffic but that got a little company called tomtom wondering who else might be interested in knowing the speed of traffic and so in the netherlands the data that people were willingly trading to find a faster way home was being sold to the authorities to give those same drivers tickets [Music] it's the reason we don't have any baseline consumer privacy law
• 21:30 - 22:00 because of the fbi no that is largely due to lobbying by companies that have built extremely lucrative businesses around these business activities and don't want to do anything to disrupt that under facebook's terms and conditions a user must be 13 or older despite this according to a recent consumer consumers report study an estimated 7.5 million users were younger than 13 first of all we we don't allow people
• 22:00 - 22:30 to have accounts under the age of 13. and my reaction to that is that that's just absolutely indefensible it's unbelievable that you would say that well senator i just want to say we we really emphatically agree with your points they say that facebook sent an army of lawyers so that the final privacy legislation that emerged in 2011 was watered down significantly in a way that wouldn't affect facebook's business model my name is alan davidson and i am the director of public policy for google in north and south america my message today is simple as we've
• 22:30 - 23:00 heard mobile services create enormous social and economic benefits i reject the notion that privacy protection is the enemy of innovation it absolutely doesn't have to be and isn't it was an expensive year of lobbying for these big companies google spent five times as much as the year before and facebook spent four times as much senate bill 242 will protect users of social networking internet sites it will protect these users from identity theft
• 23:00 - 23:30 and from unwanted contact by keeping their private information private of course unless they agree to share it i know that many members including myself do not want to negatively impact a very important industry for the state of california individuals involved in this industry don't want to see any regulation whatsoever so i think that's that's really the key and one of the most interesting things i've found in these conversations is that many members of the legislature don't
• 23:30 - 24:00 even have network uh social network sites because they're concerned about their privacy and at the time the bill was being heard although lobbyists were in the committee room for the entire hearing they did not come forward to speak so it was sort of an interesting process sort of a stealth killing of the bill without the opportunity for the public to really see who was in opposition so people like google and facebook were in strong opposition facebook in particular
• 24:00 - 24:30 you know i really do not understand um their logic and you'd have to ask them about that but when i analyze an issue like this i'm not surprised i don't i don't think the rules of of law and regulation necessarily apply when it comes to you know interacting with you know a company that wants to sell you something
• 24:30 - 25:00 yeah we should be worried but worried about what sure the data collection allowed by privacy policies had to field commerce but was there something more serious we were agreeing to [Music] total information awareness a program initiated by the government
• 25:00 - 25:30 in january of 2002 its mission to collect every digital transmission imaginable and yes this was their real symbol the eye of the pyramid scanning the earth with a laser beam it actually looks oddly similar to what's inside of mark zuckerberg's hoodie making the world more open and connected oh my god it's like a sequel total information awareness was a program designed to connect with dots to link banking activities to flight searches to to online activities but the pentagon
• 25:30 - 26:00 is clearly moving to create the largest electronic eye ever to look at any and all americans you're looking for trends and and transactions that are associated with some potential terrorist act they believe that with enough data that they could predict who would be engaging in nefarious crimes the public was outraged congress was outraged the program was shut down the lesson that the government learned
• 26:00 - 26:30 after the failure of total information awareness was that if you're going to create a gigantic spying program don't give it a creepy name there's nothing to prevent them from developing the same capabilities just in smarter ways from their standpoint [Music] a wiretap requires a court order nothing has changed by the way but in reality lots had changed we were told one day in
• 26:30 - 27:00 late 2002 that an nsa representative was coming to the office mark klein came to us the electronic frontier foundation with data and documents that showed that atnc was engaged in a wiretapping program the nsa is much different from the cia first of all it's about three times the size it costs far far more it's uh it's tremendously more secret than the cia
• 27:00 - 27:30 and uh what it does is very different it's uh focused on eavesdropping on tapping into major communications links they actually had a secret room in their facilities and they were creating a copy of internet traffic and sending it to the nsa so in a sense they are vacuuming up scooping up everything they are blindly vacuuming up everything going across those links and you're certain of that i'm certain of that so president bush owned up to it
• 27:30 - 28:00 i authorized the national security agency to intercept the international communications of people with known leaks links to al qaeda and related terrorist organizations it's taken less than 24 hours after the bush presidency ended for a former analyst at the national security agency to come forward to reveal new allegations about how this nation was spied on by its own government the national security agency had access to all americans communications faxes phone calls and and their uh their
• 28:00 - 28:30 computer communications is there a recording somewhere of every conversation i had with my little nephew in upstate new york is it like that it would be everything yes um it would be everything but then a beacon of hope arrived in the white house hi senator obama i appreciate your uh giving us the opportunity to ask you questions i'm an attorney who represents federal whistleblowers and i was very disappointed when i learned that you supported
• 28:30 - 29:00 the bill that lets phone companies off the hook when they've helped the federal government [Applause] without warrant wiretap phones i recognize that some people feel like yeah well the phone companies still were complicit in this they should be held accountable still i understand that argument but the problem was the surveillance program is actually one that i believe is necessary for our national security so they were immune but that means that
• 29:00 - 29:30 the programs are still shut down right the programs are shut down yeah the wiretapping program and i have no reason to believe that the wiretapping programs have been shut down no the if the wiretapping programs had been shut down then i don't believe that uh the government and att would still be fighting in court for the legality of it um so barack obama hasn't changed no barack obama did not shut those programs down after he took office even though he had
• 29:30 - 30:00 threatened tube before he became president when we got started just in my in my dorm room at harvard um you know the question that a lot of people asked was why would i want to put any information on the internet at all like why would i want to have a website and people have really gotten comfortable not only sharing more information and different kinds but more openly with more people and that social norm is just something that's evolved over time
• 30:00 - 30:30 you may have seen the onion take on facebook which was the cia has just announced its most recent handy invention facebook according to department of homeland security reports facebook has replaced almost every other cia information gathering program since it was launched in 2004. after years of secretly monitoring the public we were astounded so many people would willingly publicize where they live their religious and political views an alphabetized list of all their friends
• 30:30 - 31:00 personal email addresses phone numbers hundreds of photos of themselves uh and even status updates about what they were doing moment to moment it is truly a dream come true for the cia you know the fbis and the nsas of the world are appreciative of the fact that google and facebook you know have built business models around collecting user data because it makes their jobs much easier that article in time started with this anecdote they're sitting in their transparent cubicle in their open space
• 31:00 - 31:30 in facebook robert mueller was the one man in the room with a tie on and he was older in a suit and he comes in he says i was just in the building and i wanted to say hello to mark zuckerberg so he says hello to mark zuckerberg a little chit-chat and then he leaves and everybody saying what the hell was that now nobody asks the question why was mueller in the building he's the head of the fbi on the one hand mark zuckerberg said he
• 31:30 - 32:00 wants to create a more open society and facebook is a way to do that um on the other hand you know there's a lot about the way that facebook uses information that people don't know if only there was a way of knowing how much information these companies were storing about us well in the case of facebook we learned some pretty interesting things thanks to one student in austria and unlike the us europe has a law that requires a company to tell a customer what data they have stored on them if that customer wants to know
• 32:00 - 32:30 and facebook unlike most major internet companies had actually built a headquarters in europe apparently we're like the only three people that were like pushing hard enough and like asking again and again again and going through also the irish authority to finally really get um at least um like a bigger part of our data set we still didn't get everything right now got it right there just to have like an idea how much it actually is and that's like just to picture it and to see how much it is
• 32:30 - 33:00 wow this is more than a baby yeah that's 1222 pages i'm a member of facebook for three years but um i was using it more intense for like the last one and a half years or so what's interesting as well is that i i didn't post too much actually like i'm a person i put something like once a week or so with this giant ream of information in front of me is it hard to go through it and actually find specific details about a person no that's super easy because it's p i mean we just used the search function in the pdf file so you just type in one word let's say
• 33:00 - 33:30 demonstration or sex or a political party or something yeah and within a second you find the right information so within a couple of minutes you can figure out what people voted for what i don't know psychological problems they have what parties they've been to um all these informations are like really easy to find actually while using that service for such a short time you still had a data file that's bigger than anything that any cia fbi or i don't know stars you ever had about an average person if you hit the remove button it just means that it's flagged as deleted so
• 33:30 - 34:00 you hide it actually from yourself but anyone like facebook or any government agency that wants to look at it later can still retrieve it and get it back um and that means that it's there for an indefinite time um even though you hit the delete button and they ask you three times if you really really want to delete it it's not actually gone it's not actually gone it's still there [Music] so we've ultimately adopted roughly the
• 34:00 - 34:30 following rule we think of it as we anonymize the information within 18 months it might be anonymized after 18 months but all the searches that we've ever done are still there the underlying data is still there to be de-anonymized at some point and de-anonymizing search records turns out to be shockingly easy that is taking private searches and finding out whose records they are in 2006 aol turned over a bunch of these anonymized search records of their users to the public
• 34:30 - 35:00 and it only took a few short hours for reported decode who user number 4417749 was between searches for things like numb fingers 60 single men and dog that urinates on everything the reporter uncovered a woman named thelma arnold she was age 62. but then there's user 17556639 who looked up how to kill your wife multiple times along with decapitated photos and then in the middle the user actually looks up steak and cheese steak and cheese and there were plenty
• 35:00 - 35:30 of users online who were quick to judge what was going on here it was murder [Music] jesus hey old friends so what take a seat i'm gonna show you something okay what i'm showing you here is uh a list of anonymized search records um these records were released by aol have are there actually things on this list that you
• 35:30 - 36:00 know you've searched for before um sure yeah i have definitely uh i've definitely looked up car crash photos they're definitely typed in decapitated i've definitely looked up dead people photos uh wife i've definitely looked at white killer yeah in fact i've looked up every single search term i'm looking at here you see jerome had been a writer on cold case a tv show where each week cops have to solve a murder mystery that's always what scared me when i was entering those search terms was if there's some sort of automated system that just red flags you based on the
• 36:00 - 36:30 search term they're not going to look and say oh yeah he was probably working on a tv show and that's why he was just googling how to murder my cheating wife i just wanted to confirm that i had not murdered you and that you were alive no i am allowed to come out of this room and our baby's safe okay good it has a clean diaper oh thank god so we can rest assured you are not a murderer i am not a murderer you're a writer i'm a writer okay
• 36:30 - 37:00 glad we can clear that up glad we could clear that up so what would happen if that red flag system did exist if a dad like jerome might someday have his door knocked on because his search records became public consensus seems to be that the retention of this kind of information should be greater than zero days and the reason it has to do with police actions terrorists patriot act
• 37:00 - 37:30 all those sorts of things it turns out that in this environment the digital environment there's a loophole to the fourth amendment which is if a third party collects a lot of this information that government doesn't have to go through those same hoops it's called the third party doctrine the third-party doctrine means that when you a consumer share your data with a bank with an email provider with a search engine uh with any kind of technology company you have basically given up what would
• 37:30 - 38:00 have been uh your fourth amendment protections over that data for the government to get information from a google or facebook is a lot easier than the government doing it itself and putting a wiretap on our phones large companies like google and facebook receive thousands of requests a year from government agencies facebook has 25 employees doing nothing but surveillance and these companies routinely receive requests they process the request you may be surprised to hear that secret searches of email by the government seem to be
• 38:00 - 38:30 commonplace law that governs when uh the government can get electronic communications like emails and things that are stored in in remotely was written in 1986 and can have effects that allow the government to at least claim that they should be able to get location data without a warrant or at one point the government was claiming that it doesn't need a warrant to get emails that you've opened
• 38:30 - 39:00 well in the spring of 2011 um the department of justice and in particular the fbi made several requests to internet companies as part of an investigation leading to individuals associated with wikileaks we released 400 000 classified documents for those of you who don't know who julian assange is he started wikileaks now in the past wikileaks has released secret documents related to the iraq war
• 39:00 - 39:30 guantanamo bay and afghanistan and that's you know obviously a positive development for those of us who think that information uh should be more accessible almost no matter what and obviously the threatening developments to those institutions like corporations in many cases that depend on secrecy i condemn the action that wikileaks has taken it puts at risk our national security twitter received an order that requested
• 39:30 - 40:00 data regarding certain twitter users these were all users that were related to the whistleblower website wikileaks however it wasn't just an order it was actually a d order and it came with a gag order it required that twitter never speak publicly about the fact that they had received this request denouncing the move assange said he believes other american internet companies such as facebook and google may also have been ordered to disclose information companies like amazon yahoo dropbox
• 40:00 - 40:30 even facebook will be capable of handing data to the government without first informing users even if you think what the people are doing is wrong that's why the first amendment exists to protect unpopular people engaging in unpopular speech but twitter fought back they released the information to the users and let them know ahead of time and they were successful in getting the gag order overturned meanwhile amazon paypal mastercard and
• 40:30 - 41:00 visa they all gave in to the pressure regarding their users you know a culture of loyalty to not you but a greater cause is important to be successful it seems like to me and it's disloyal in this case to the country while president bush might think it's disloyal thanks to twitter standing up for the privacy of activists like julian assange you can now be shown this today we release over 287 files documenting the reality of the
• 41:00 - 41:30 international mass surveillance industry an industry which now sells equipment to dictators and democracies alike in order to intercept entire populations 911 has provided a license for european countries for united states australia canada south africa and others to develop spying
• 41:30 - 42:00 systems that affect all of us [Music] the spy files show the massive industry that surrounds selling to the us government and governments around the world instead of having something called information awareness act with with this big symbol with the eye of the pyramid looking at everybody and scanning the world that's sinister laser beams instead they just have a bunch of companies that exist that are providing bits of those capabilities that are provided under
• 42:00 - 42:30 different contracts that you go up to the same agency the same people one of the most popular is called a massive intercept and basically what governments are trying to do with this is get as much information as possible from our communications so they can analyze that and uh detect detect patterns in that and it's interesting you know in your article that you really talk about the secretive nature of the business right uh that they sell through trade shows which are not open to the media but we actually went to one of these
• 42:30 - 43:00 conventions it was pretty easy we just called and asked for a pass so we talked to the representative from one of these companies a firm called celebrity they were included in the spy files they're a company that sells cell phone extraction tools to every major government sector in the us so my name is uh christopher shin i'm the vice president engineering for celebrate usa uh today i'm presenting to you the uh celebrate e-fed system to my right here it is a device used to extract
• 43:00 - 43:30 countless information from mobile devices so text messages pictures video audio call logs that kind of thing it's used by agencies across the united states in the world yeah the iphone specifically stores a lot of information more more than uh your normal handset it really is a digital store of of your personal life your business life and uh this is why the the field is actually it's it's been growing uh exponentially over the last couple of years so as the devices get more complex they can hold more information
• 43:30 - 44:00 this is one of the most personal devices to you today even more than your laptop so we think of ourselves as a basically a tool manufacturer just like you know glock or beretta is producing a a firearm we're producing a tool that does a certain task and we're marketing that tool only towards um just like you can't buy it you go out and just buy a handgun without credentials we're not just selling it to everybody so but could you conceivably sell it or are there laws against it there are no laws against uh uh selling this to uh someone that's not in
• 44:00 - 44:30 law enforcement or government something like that someone wants to dump my phone tomorrow they might get a good laugh out of the content in it but i don't think i'd be put in jail so um i think that uh it really depends on how you look at it i mean there are privacy concerns but i'm a little bit more on the i guess the the liberal side of my my privacy uh being being exposed i mean other people of course that's a completely different it's a completely personal view my device my phone itself that i mean i actually take that back i have a lot of work related information on my
• 44:30 - 45:00 blackberry so if this information did get out i probably would be pretty uh pretty concerned so the surveillance vendors target two types of customers they target governments directly and then they also target internet service providers and telecommunications carriers who are tasked with the responsibility of spying on their own customers for example there was a little piece of software that had been installed on every phone in america this software was called carrier iq
• 45:00 - 45:30 and thanks to a little video the systems administrator from connecticut posted on youtube the world now knows that this software had been monitoring our every keystroke 553 and so on and so forth [Music] according to carrier iq's chief marketer they're aware this information is sensitive and call it a treasure trove it became big enough of a deal that al franken decided to take this issue to congress this director millions of of americans have smartphones
• 45:30 - 46:00 with pre-installed software designed by a company called carrier iq recent research has shown that it captures a broad range of sensitive information let me start off by saying we have neither sought nor obtained any information from carrier iq in any one of our investigations okay not directly from carrier but what about from the wireless carriers no i don't believe so if you're if you're specifying the use of the carrier iq software in uh i
• 46:00 - 46:30 buy another bio wireless carrier have we sought that i do not know in the information we seek from wireless carriers or what have you and i'm not talking about uh uh carrier iq i'm talking about wire wireless carriers that may obtain information that in some way carrier iq may have been involved with why would the fbi need carrier iq to send them all of this information after all they could be using any of
• 46:30 - 47:00 these services that were included in the spy files take this product for instance scan and target which claims that it can search through the sms the ims twitter emails facebook blogs and forums all while analyzing huge volumes of information in real time or finn fisher which demonstrates how police can infiltrate anyone's system through a variety of videos that used to be available on their website they even show the agent hacking into google and facebook in their demo massive interception equipment is sold
• 47:00 - 47:30 by surveillance vendors around the world so it's really up for grabs for anyone who wants it and can pay the price the finn fisher system was sold to egypt to monitor people who oppose their leader these are the actual documents it even includes training for two to four people for the low low price of about 11 grand or the hacking team's project which advertises that it can track hundreds of thousands of cell phones all on one system or software like kapow that analyzes all social networks with
• 47:30 - 48:00 features like the ability to search out key words and phrases everything that happens on facebook and it shows the frequency of conversations between one person another and all that kind of thing that allows for a lot of profiling it creates massive databases for law enforcement to exploit and often misread with hundreds of companies offering these services why would the fbi need to use carrier iq everything coming from a cell phone everything from coming from a computer anything that's going over the internet
• 48:00 - 48:30 out of the country or even internal within the country can be monitored using this kind of equipment if you look at news stories now about what they call big data big data is really looking up the question of how can government and corporations work with that data in order to look for anomalies and predict when you're going to do something so they can stop you from doing it and the government isn't even that secretive about it if you visit their business website there's an application there looking for
• 48:30 - 49:00 developers to create better tools for mass surveillance for online activity examples for surveillance include but are not limited to fox news cnn msnbc twitter facebook etc which brings us back to that word you'll find in many user agreements it's the word that sent us down this whole path in the first place prevent so this might make you wonder what potential threats would all of the surveillance we agreed to actually prevent
• 49:00 - 49:30 basically january the 3rd 20 days before i go on holiday i tweet are you free this week for a gossip slash prep before i go destroy america ended the tweet with a kiss as threatening as that is um 20 days later go on a flight go to lax we had a hotel in hollywood boulevard we were just going to park around for a week just looking around just being tourists got off the plane went through the
• 49:30 - 50:00 passport controls swipe my password through and they're like can you come this way and i was like because i got an irish passport i thought maybe irish people was like stereotype ira bombers they went through my suitcase and i was like what are you doing and then when they pulled me into the holding room i was questioning me for five hours about whether i had a twitter account i was like are you being serious are you actually holding me because of a tweet and i'm like what do you mean by destroy america i was like to party it means to go wild get drunk any [ __ ] that could read that tweet and
• 50:00 - 50:30 see what it's meant as like it ends with a kiss i'm sure like hitler doesn't end his memoirs with her kits or whatever he did so then they moved us to a holding room but then at midnight the staff changed over and they weren't aware of what we were there for so they handcuffed us stuck us in the back of a police van and then took us to a downtown like prison detention center innocent people shouldn't be treated like absolute dirt and they were dragging us around pushing us into walls sounds like a horrible vacation is the
• 50:30 - 51:00 government refunding you at least no um they won't comment on what happened well if i'd put i was going to paint the town red they'd have me done for graffiti as well wouldn't they when i go to other countries this is going to show up that i got refused from america so more than likely i'm now going to get dragged off at every airport and questioned about what happened and i have to explain to them that it was a tweet italian irish french portuguese native american black i don't even like
• 51:00 - 51:30 118th avatar this is joe lopari joe lapari had had a rough day at the apple store he had been forced to wait in line for four hours before finally leaving so i get home from the apple store still a little irritated uh smoke a little dope put on fight club just trying to relax go on facebook and this button down oxford cloth psycho might just snap and then stalk from office
• 51:30 - 52:00 to office gas power semi-automatic weapon i said the same thing but except yeah and uh you know basically word for word except for where hanging out on facebook getting ready to go to yoga class and there's a shave and a haircut two bits knock on my door so i was like hey maybe somebody's here to watch fight club with me open it up boom nypd swat they're bulletproof vests on their guns drawn and they uh
• 52:00 - 52:30 tear the place apart you know they really go through everything when the one cup you know uh finds the box that has all my like military awards he comes bringing it down he's like oh you were in the military and we start talking like you know army talk he sees that i speak the language and that's when he asked me is like so do you know what a normal at ar 10 and i was like that's that's why you're here guys you're here because i made a bad joke on facebook like i you know it blew my mind like it can be it's the ultimate buzzkill really it's your
• 52:30 - 53:00 facebook page is brought swat to your house they told me not to like you know go far from new york because i'm gonna be needed for all these court cases for a year they claim one of my facebook friends called 911. which is another thing i think is bogus so i asked for the 911 tape which they keep on file they have to and it's my right it's my stuff they they have to give me my mug shots if i want it so they come back it's like oh uh turns
• 53:00 - 53:30 out it wasn't someone that called 911 it was someone that just walked into the police station and that's something we don't keep a record of and how did you get my address i'd lived there for like 10 days you know i didn't update my mailing address yet like all my banking stuff was still going to my old apartment like there was nothing saying i lived there except for a verbal agreement three minutes after being done with my lunch i was told to go up to the office and then i would sat down inside the
• 53:30 - 54:00 the vice principal's office and i was wasn't told what was going on until maybe 10 minutes later phone rings i'd look at it and it was the number to his school and i answer it and it's the school security guard just giving me a fyi you know for your information just to give you a heads up the secret service is here with the tomah police department and they have veto and they're talking to him a man walked in in a suit and glasses and he said that he was part of the
• 54:00 - 54:30 secret service and he told me it was because of a post that i made and it indicated as a threat towards the president yes a seventh grade boy was visited by our fbi because of a red flag that came up in their spy system i was saying how osama is dead and for obama to be careful because there might be suicide bombers it didn't consider his age or that his comment about obama needing to watch out was one of concern the machine simply
• 54:30 - 55:00 determined that based on a series of words veto was a potential threat pre-crime uh their [Music] belief this potential breach of the peace [Music] their belief that you might cause a crime it's a um there's pre-crime arrest in minority reports mr marx my mandate of the district of
• 55:00 - 55:30 columbia pre-crime division i'm placing you under arrest for future murder of sarah marks and donald dunno's take place today april 22nd it's zero 800 hours four minutes no i didn't do anything this arrest that happened on the royal wedding day when i attended a zombie flash mob wedding picnic and myself and four other zombies were arrested preemptively for potential breach of the peace even if you dress up as a zombie it seems to me that the crime isn't really committed until you eat some brains yeah to be fair we did have some brain cake
• 55:30 - 56:00 so there's that how did they know that you were going to be dressing up as a zombie this day there could have been emails or any anything it could have been like it's hard to know yeah i think that's the the scary thing yeah yeah the indication that they were monitoring private social networks came in the way they were reacting to certain things and asking about certain things so they were asking out maggots and asking about climbing gear which they must have heard about through some exchanges on the internet neither of which was true nobody had maggots or climbing gear
• 56:00 - 56:30 not and not something that was itself posing a hazard to the royal wedding celebrations we were nowhere near the royal wedding celebrations and we had no plan of going near the royal wedding celebrations anything that wasn't part of the official ostentatious joyous expensive celebrations of this wedding of two strangers was prevented from happening and that seems deeply disturbing you can see that surveillance measures are being used to silence protests before they even happen this was of course the royal wedding um
• 56:30 - 57:00 we'd all helped pay for the royal wedding it was a you know it wasn't it wasn't just a private wedding you're arrested a professor of anthropology that runs the streets yet again one occasion one we couldn't believe this was happening it was just we were so obviously a street theater troop some of us had actually got the costume on you know so we were locked away in lewiston police station for 25 hours once the whole wedding was safely over we were let out
• 57:00 - 57:30 for the first time as far as i'm aware in this country a number of us something like 50 of us were arrested and in most cases incarcerated for thinking about protest thinking about in this case some street theater a lot of a lot of life is based upon trust i mean if you have a conversation uh with your inner circle on a key strategic decision that is
• 57:30 - 58:00 vital to your company and you read about it in the newspaper before the decision is implemented you get preempted from from acting because somebody inside your company has talked you're not gonna like it and it'll hurt the activists didn't need to commit any crime they just needed a text to email and to call each other about potentially protesting uh but i think that the answer is not to take away the capacity of looking at the public actions of citizens and keeping a record of them
• 58:00 - 58:30 the solution is to make sure that we elect better governments so one of the things i hear a lot is who cares if they're collecting all of this information about me i don't have anything to hide so why does it matter well i know this argument and it is not not very new it's old-fashioned saying we are uh com complying with uh rules and so what happens
• 58:30 - 59:00 between you know leading my leading you know the sinful life i would like to lead and hoping that governments will protect my privacy or assuming that no one's going to protect my privacy and leading a more less sinful life i'll go i'll go with the latter it's simply just the odds of success seem higher to me i congratulate the people who say they have nothing to hide i don't believe them and i also say that they're probably hiding something from someone we all do you have nothing to hide till you do and you are not necessarily going to know what you have to hide or not
• 59:00 - 59:30 you might remember the case of millie a teenage girl in britain who disappeared in 2002 police in surrey say they're growing increasingly concerned about the safety of a 13 year old girl who hasn't been seen since thursday afternoon before the police found her body her parents were holding on to hopes that she might still be alive i'd say if someone has taken millie
• 59:30 - 60:00 and is holding her then please please give her back to us why is that you might ask well because according to phone records millie had checked and deleted her voicemail we were sitting downstairs in reception and i rang her phone yes and it clicked through onto her voicemail so i heard her voice yes and i was it was just like i jumped she's picked up her voicemails bob she's alive and i was just it was then really as it turned out
• 60:00 - 60:30 members of rupert murdoch's corporation had been hacking into millie's phone trying to be the first to reveal details of this national news story i think this is the watershed moment when uh finally the public uh start to see and feel above all just how um low and how disgusting uh this particular newspaper's methods were this was a murdered schoolgirl and the thought that a very tight-knit circle
• 60:30 - 61:00 of very senior politicians linked up very closely intimately with the police and with the media mogul republic for 30 years as british prime ministers came and most certainly went a constant character in their worlds was rupert murdoch the billionaire media mogul for years celebrities and individuals like millie had the voicemails they thought were hidden in private
• 61:00 - 61:30 accessed by rupert murdoch's corporation at the expense of people like millie's parents and it took nearly a decade to expose the misuse of this highly personal data [Music] transparency which you know bonds us together and gives us all so many friends that we didn't know before but all these friends that are connected gives the state uh an absolutely unparalleled in the history of humanity
• 61:30 - 62:00 ability to know what's going on in its citizens to find out who the dissenters are the government is making whistleblowing a crime they are making dissent a crime especially when it embarrasses the government and calls the government to account if sources are going to get discovered and if whistleblowers cannot securely and anonymously provide that information to journalists we as a society won't know when our
• 62:00 - 62:30 rights are being silently violated [Music] of course the president has defended his administration the only way he knows how if we can root out folks who have leaked they will suffer [Music]
• 62:30 - 63:00 consequences if you look at a technical perspective the technologies of maintaining privacy are actually running ahead of the technologies that break it for example encryption which can maintain your privacy is running ahead of decryption but what if there was a way to store information until it could be decrypted us intelligence officials will soon be allowed to keep information on u.s citizens much longer than they used to even if those
• 63:00 - 63:30 citizens have no known ties to terrorism under new rules the government can store data it gathers for five years that's up from the current limit of six months uh general alexander um if dick cheney elected president and wanted to detain and incessantly waterboard every american who sent an email making fun of his well-known hunting mishaps what i'd like to know is does the nsa
• 63:30 - 64:00 have the technological capacity to identify those cheney bashers based upon the content of their emails the in the united states we would have to go through an fbi process a warrant to get that and serve it to somebody to actually get it but you do have the capability of doing not in the united states there are new questions about the national security agency's massive spy center under construction in the desert
• 64:00 - 64:30 of utah once finished it'll be five times the size of the u.s capitol building the nsa is not allowed to spy on americans but now a whistleblower has come forward saying that the agency is doing it anyway this massive agency that's collecting a tremendous amount of information every day by satellites and tapping the cell phones and and data links and your computer email links and so forth um and then it has to store it someplace and that's why they built bluffdale it's going to cost 2 billion dollars it's
• 64:30 - 65:00 being built in this area on a military base outside of salt lake city in bluffdale as i said they had to actually extend the boundary of the town so it would fit into it and the whole purpose of this is the centerpiece of this massive eavesdropping complex this network that was created after 9 11. the reality of information technologies
• 65:00 - 65:30 progresses exponentially only information technology exponential growth starts out very slow looks like nothing's happening you're doubling tiny little numbers and suddenly it takes off and we've seen that with paradigm after paradigm like social networks in recent times in 1984 to store one gigabyte of data cost eighty five thousand dollars by 2012 it cost about five cents in the city of chun king there are about five hundred thousand cameras in 2012 the cost of permanently
• 65:30 - 66:00 recording a high resolution fee was 300 million by the year 2020 the projected cost is less than 3 million the uk being called one of the cultures that's introduced cameras most ubiquitously and most quickly so far the population seems fine with it um if they weren't i they know who to call there are 2 000 cameras and soon there will be 3 000 all of which feed into this control center housed in a secret location
• 66:00 - 66:30 and i can call up in real time all instances where a camera caught someone wearing a red shirt that this is the shape and the size of a potentially suspicious unattended package many police departments set to use controversial new devices capable of scanning people's faces then checking that information against a criminal database when we're at war when you're protecting your society against people who want to come in and kill civilians
• 66:30 - 67:00 you have to be able to defend what we're doing you have to be able to defend our way of life and you have to put these powers into somebody's hands according to the brookings institution this kind of pervasive monitoring will provide what amounts to a time machine allowing authoritarian governments to perform retrospective surveillance for example if an anti-regime demonstrator previously unknown to security services is arrested it will be possible to go back in time to scrutinize the demonstrator's phone conversations
• 67:00 - 67:30 automobile travels and the people he or she met in the months and even years leading up to the arrest the government is using the existence of terms of service to justify the surveillance state that we now live in the messages are free to use and most importantly they're encrypted so the police can't actually get in there to encrypt in what's happened so that's prompted calls to shut down the entire network it's easy to justify using these technologies to stop a riot but shouldn't we be concerned when the
• 67:30 - 68:00 government is able to read our emails text messages phone calls search history to track our movements and limit our free speech what crime did that seventh grade boy really commit is having zombies at a royal wedding really so bad what about millie's parents and what happens when these technologies are used to watch peaceful protesters like all the people at occupy wall street or the tea party folks what happens if the government doesn't like tents being set up [Music] [Applause]
• 68:00 - 68:30 [Music] despite all of this it was starting to seem like so what so what if the government can acquire all of this information maybe it's good they can keep the peace when riots are happening and besides maybe it was already too late do you think privacy is dead
• 68:30 - 69:00 i mean it's certainly dying um whether or not it for privacy to i mean privacy is going to remain dead unless there's a really fundamental shift in the dynamics by which that's decided by which i mean i mean the only real effective response is to monitor and to change the behavior uh the tendencies of the intelligence industry and law enforcement and all
• 69:00 - 69:30 that and even companies and that's that's very very unlikely i don't know exactly who the us is but i'm very critical of us i will i think that this is an area in which we have allowed ourselves to be smitten we want this technology to grow and grow and we don't want anything to rain on our parade and we have woken up to the privacy concerns
• 69:30 - 70:00 in my view at least four years too late i mean is privacy down yeah without question without question prior yeah it's dead it's safe to work under the assumption that nothing's private you know anything that's been digitized is not private and that is terrifying when this becomes the size of a blood cell and i can just send them into my brain and my body through the bloodstream this will become quite ubiquitous and it really will be part of who we are and
• 70:00 - 70:30 people say well okay that's going to be a real threshold to move beyond but i don't think so it's a very smooth continuum from you know when i was a student i had to take my bicycle to get to the to the computer to having it in my pocket to having it in my body it's a convenient place to put it i won't lose it that way but they say if you put a frog in a pot of water and slowly turn up the heat the frog will just die because it doesn't realize it's it's
• 70:30 - 71:00 boiling and i think that um like anything else i think we're opting in a centimeter at a time and you know pretty soon you're pretty far down the road you look behind you and you sort of wonder how you got where you were i think that's true it's just completely out of control i mean it's just sky's the limit you know they know everything
• 71:00 - 71:30 about us now it takes someone it's like take someone who's in charge of laws having what is being done to american citizens done to their email account their facebook profile pay attention yeah all these powerful institutions uh they're not subject to the same the same invasions of privacy as the rest of us are eric schmidt the ceo of google once said if you have something that you don't want anyone to know maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place then he got very angry when cnet which
• 71:30 - 72:00 is owned by cbs published a picture of his house well when you ask google about do not track they claim we have to understand how to define that before we can implement any technology do not trek's pretty simple it means we don't want to be tracked the only reason google doesn't understand it is because google doesn't want to implement it
• 72:00 - 72:30 my unless someone comes and makes it
• 72:30 - 73:00 uh no longer practical for them to engage in that kind of activity pressure is put upon ceos of the companies they're going to engage dawn um we're going by the facebook campus right now i really have no idea what to expect um
• 73:00 - 73:30 i've not had breakfast um [Applause] you'll know that i checked in here too so that's that's good he knows that i'm right next to his house let's see we have a here's here's the exact quote from mark so having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity lack of integrity
• 73:30 - 74:00 they just did a knock up on his door so it seems very likely that we might get a mark zuckerberg sighting today i mean you might have been wrong vince you might actually have been might actually have a tunnel there's some definite motion in the yard [Music] there we go
• 74:00 - 74:30 [Music] mr zuckerberg hey i'm working on a little documentary here but wondering if i could just ask you a couple questions sorry really can i ask do you still think privacy is dead what are your real thoughts on are you guys privacy um we are
• 74:30 - 75:00 you please not um i can stop yeah all right mark zuckerberg had asked me to please not record him so we shut off the main camera but since mark doesn't seem to mind storing our data after we think it's been deleted this only seemed fair can you please not um i can stop yeah all right can i come by your front desk though and ask about setting up an interview yeah i mean we have a department where
• 75:00 - 75:30 you can talk to people about that yeah i know i've tried going through it a few times and i never hear back there's a major difference here mark loosens up after he thinks we've stopped recording and you see that that right there that's a smile mark zuckerberg smiled at me and you know why because he thought i had stopped recording and he was relieved imagine what a relief it would be if all of these companies and the government stop recording everything we do if we could just make a simple request
• 75:30 - 76:00 to them something that mark zuckerberg knows how to ask for can you please not can you please not record us monitor us and share our information unless we ask first we need terms and conditions that are reasonable and we need privacy policies to promote the most basic principles of our democracy rather than taking them away or as a young senator once said back before he became president we need to find a way forward to make sure that we can stop terrorists while protecting privacy and liberty
• 76:00 - 76:30 of innocent americans we have to find a way to give the president the power he needs to protect us while making sure that he doesn't abuse that power and that simple principle that uh there there's there's somebody watching the watcher whether that's on an issue of freedom of the press or it's an issue of warrantless wiretaps that simple principle is one that we can't give up and we don't have to give up
• 76:30 - 77:00 well mr president we are watching and i guess we have to ask ourselves one simple question do we agree [Music]
• 77:00 - 77:30 in a time rise to the occasion a million tiny flashlights i gotta turn it off cold and a tide rise to the occasion a million tiny flashlights i gotta turn it off but
• 77:30 - 78:00 [Music] washington is caught in its very own episode of spy versus spy the tactics once employed by top intelligence gathering teams the cia sifting through ip addresses emails and fake drop boxes have now been turned against the intelligence community's top official [Music] the fbi uncovered evidence of an affair between petraeus and his biographer paula broadway that's
• 78:00 - 78:30 right petraeus had an affair with the author of his fawning biography all in these did not implicate criminal activity these did not implicate national security these were not a threat to david petraeus the person or to general petraeus the director of the central intelligence agency those are not my words those are the fbi's words [Music]
• 78:30 - 79:00 but instead of actually sending those emails in many cases they wrote them as drafts in a gmail account they both had access to and that way they could both log on and check the draft folder never having to actually hit send very embarrassing for for the obama administration and for its national security command [Music] it's troubling because there are laws
• 79:00 - 79:30 that the fbi has to follow and he has the right to be protected from an unwarranted unjustified investigation by the fbi or anyone people don't really know how they're being monitored and they think well hey if it's working if we keep stopping another 911 then then it's worth it [Music]
• 79:30 - 80:00 [Applause] so the greatest fear that i have regarding um the outcome uh for america of these disclosures is that nothing will change [Music]