RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet?

RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Phydeaux -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/22/2013 11:43:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: Well, if you and Ken want to look into it, you will find that they have a different mechanism for error correction for large drive arrays. Don't let me stop you guys from going and educating yourself. As for indexing - again commercial indexes were doing 43 billion files in an hour. I don't know how that scales. Ken already explained RAID, but yeah, I am aware of the different error mechanisms having been a computer programmer that geeked in places the depth and breath of this country, for over twenty years and creating (not alone) the E911 system (among other things) for verizon, and oh, and voice compression and recognition for automated operators for verizon. And have done most of my work in telephony and computing gizmos. Yanno, like telemarketing stuff. Hooking telephones and computers together to transform that stuff. Yeah, cute shit on indexing, you ain't in the universe, let alone the galaxy.0 And I've been in the IT industry for longer than that. And I can tell you quite interesting stories about the e911 and the ESS switches as well as the 4.0 switches. And I've implimented literally hundred of raids systems. And again, I can tell you regardless of what FactlessKen thinks that Raid is not the methodology used for very large arrays. Doesn't meet the requirements for scaleable and time response, as well as the addressing requirements. And if you have the experience you claim with voice compression - you know that the data rate for a voice line is miniscule. Regarding indexing - no one ever said they are indexing by conversation content - nor are they. The indexes are #, date, time. With the voice recorded for analyst playback. Likewise for the internet by ip address. Additionally, google and others cache huge amounts of web page data. Once a cached image is tokenized it compression is huge. You don't have to analyze and store packet traffic.

DomKen -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 4:21:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: Well, if you and Ken want to look into it, you will find that they have a different mechanism for error correction for large drive arrays. Don't let me stop you guys from going and educating yourself. As for indexing - again commercial indexes were doing 43 billion files in an hour. I don't know how that scales. Ken already explained RAID, but yeah, I am aware of the different error mechanisms having been a computer programmer that geeked in places the depth and breath of this country, for over twenty years and creating (not alone) the E911 system (among other things) for verizon, and oh, and voice compression and recognition for automated operators for verizon. And have done most of my work in telephony and computing gizmos. Yanno, like telemarketing stuff. Hooking telephones and computers together to transform that stuff. Yeah, cute shit on indexing, you ain't in the universe, let alone the galaxy.0 And I've been in the IT industry for longer than that. And I can tell you quite interesting stories about the e911 and the ESS switches as well as the 4.0 switches. And I've implimented literally hundred of raids systems. And again, I can tell you regardless of what FactlessKen thinks that Raid is not the methodology used for very large arrays. Doesn't meet the requirements for scaleable and time response, as well as the addressing requirements. And if you have the experience you claim with voice compression - you know that the data rate for a voice line is miniscule. Regarding indexing - no one ever said they are indexing by conversation content - nor are they. The indexes are #, date, time. With the voice recorded for analyst playback. Likewise for the internet by ip address. Additionally, google and others cache huge amounts of web page data. Once a cached image is tokenized it compression is huge. You don't have to analyze and store packet traffic. So what is this mysterious not RAID system for ensuring data integrity? No one I know of uses anything else and I've never even heard of a competitor. And how exactly could any system achieve the goal without mirroring the stored data on multiple separate drives? Any system that doesn't rely on mirroring surely involves data loss when a single drive fails. Yes, you would need to store the data at packet level. To do otherwise would require building up the packets received into the various requests and responses in real time. That would crush any super computer going. BTW, if you throw away the packet data what do you think you'd have? Trillions of web requests and responses with no idea who received them. As to compression you cannot use any kind of lossy compression due to steganography. Once you're dealing with lossless compression images and video do not compress usefully and the reason to do compression in the first place would be to store all of that (all the text sent over the net is probably a miniscule portion of the bandwidth).

JeffBC -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 6:41:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux And I've implimented literally hundred of raids systems. And again, I can tell you regardless of what FactlessKen thinks that Raid is not the methodology used for very large arrays. Doesn't meet the requirements for scaleable and time response, as well as the addressing requirements. This is the amusing thing about this "tech" discussion. Some folks who think they know what they are talking about are using technologies like "RAID" and "router" to describe what is "possible" here. A more knowledgeable tech person would be speaking in terms of SAN frames, prisms and fiber. An even more knowledgeable person would know that the NSA is seriously cutting edge tech so it's a safe bet that they've got some shit going on that nobody else has heard of. quote: Additionally, google and others cache huge amounts of web page data. Once a cached image is tokenized it compression is huge. You don't have to analyze and store packet traffic. ... a point which has already been made on this thread. The vast majority of internet traffic is stuff which is known and repeated (eg: highly tokenizable and compressible. When someone watches a netflix movie there's no need to capture the movie stream itself. Ditto with a ton of other very common and very normal internet traffic. All of which misses the real point. Whether or not current tech as of this moment allows them to "capture the internet", it is absolutely their goal... their stated goal if you dig a bit. If they can't do it today then they are building out that capability as fast as they can... on my tax dollar. Nor would some seriously scary data mining even require anything like 100% capture.

mnottertail -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 6:57:04 AM)
Symbolizing an already encoded page is a trivial thing. Symbolizing and encoding a free form conversation is something entirely different. For example, if they are saving anything and everything, they have at least 12 hours a day all day long of my girl on facebook, on youtube, and baking game, candy crush, and some other games. fiber, sans and prism have nothing to do with where and how to store massive data. Do you know that there are thumbdrives (not your everyday walmart jobs) that can store every newspaper ever written? Great, now what the fuck you got besides a BLOB (in the computing sense). What I am saying is they have what amounts to ATF 4473s, and thats all. It is not usefull unless they have a tigers tail to nail down. IN other words, once they have a number of a suspect, they can go back and forth from that key to other numbers and so what? To find out that the boston bomber blew up the marathon after he did it, and have phone records that say he called over to bumfuckistan and made some local calls. They have better toys than the average mainframer, but they ain't got magic, that aint been invented yet. And if it is not RAID what is it, and how do they make it work without using either IBM or CRAY computers? What the fuck they got an array of Ipods? So, back to encoding, CRAYS are used to forcast the weather, that is a free form indexing and mathematical crypto operation. . . how they doin? And quite like compressing encoded and symbolized web pages, innit?

chatterbox24 -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:08:21 AM)
Hmmm, I imagine they do tap the internet. In certain circumstances, I think its pretty awesome we have that kind of technology. I don't think the government cares about our trivial nonsense, but for security reasons, I think it would be very beneficial. As long as our personal rights are left alone, and is not a direct hit on freedoms that don't hurt people, I am actually all for it.

mnottertail -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:14:33 AM)
OH no question they can ride along over packets and SS7 and lots of other backbones. DARPA.........DERP!................DONE. If I shovel off 18 libraries worth of books in a pile off of 18 wheelers and then ask you, what year did the grinch steal christmas, how you gonna.....................anything?

Toysinbabeland -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:20:24 AM)
There will always be someone hacking somewhere, whether it be someone doing it for fun, for "our safety" (rme) or for a darker purpose. Human nature is fraught with curiosity.

mnottertail -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:24:24 AM)
I hacked up a louie just now, in fact. Dusty out there in the yard, and raising hell with my allergies. I will text it to the NSA. Nevermind, they already got it.

Toysinbabeland -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:28:02 AM)
See, I was right. Hacking is everywhere. Always.

DomKen -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:28:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux And I've implimented literally hundred of raids systems. And again, I can tell you regardless of what FactlessKen thinks that Raid is not the methodology used for very large arrays. Doesn't meet the requirements for scaleable and time response, as well as the addressing requirements. This is the amusing thing about this "tech" discussion. Some folks who think they know what they are talking about are using technologies like "RAID" and "router" to describe what is "possible" here. A more knowledgeable tech person would be speaking in terms of SAN frames, prisms and fiber. An even more knowledgeable person would know that the NSA is seriously cutting edge tech so it's a safe bet that they've got some shit going on that nobody else has heard of. Why would we be talking about a network of storage devices when the subject is can the physical storage needed to do the job exist? Also I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a name for this mythical superior to RAID data integrity scheme. Why not talk about routers? They kind of are where tapping the internet would occur if it was actually happening. Is this another case of someone claiming to know what the subject is without actually knowing? As to fiber maybe you should try reading my posts a little more carefully. So this cutting edge tech no one has ever heard of, I accept they might have some small number of custom built items, but are you really suggesting they have the capability to mass produce all the various hardware needed that is orders of magnitude faster and larger than all existing network hardware and storage devices? You do know how utterly impossible it would be to hide a chip foundry of the scale you're talking about right? quote: quote: Additionally, google and others cache huge amounts of web page data. Once a cached image is tokenized it compression is huge. You don't have to analyze and store packet traffic. ... a point which has already been made on this thread. The vast majority of internet traffic is stuff which is known and repeated (eg: highly tokenizable and compressible. When someone watches a netflix movie there's no need to capture the movie stream itself. Ditto with a ton of other very common and very normal internet traffic. All of which misses the real point. Whether or not current tech as of this moment allows them to "capture the internet", it is absolutely their goal... their stated goal if you dig a bit. If they can't do it today then they are building out that capability as fast as they can... on my tax dollar. Nor would some seriously scary data mining even require anything like 100% capture. Tokenizing a streamed video or other routine traffic means putting the packets together. The data would be coming in (a little rough calculation says it's roughly 40 terabytes of data per second) so fast that simply reading each packet for a destination ip and inserting it into a DB store with an update to the index would be an undertaking of truly monumental proportions. So spinning off a processing thread to build up each request or response and figuring out what it is in real time is beyond absurd. I've done quite a bit of reading on this matter and have never seen a source for these vague claims that some NSA official has stated their goal is capturing all internet traffic. Since the idea is fairly ludicrous I really doubt anyone at NSA has ever said anything like that.

chatterbox24 -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:29:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I hacked up a louie just now, in fact. Dusty out there in the yard, and raising hell with my allergies. I will text it to the NSA. Nevermind, they already got it. Stop putting keywords out there, they just shut down my computer. Its all your fault.[:D]

Toysinbabeland -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:32:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I hacked up a louie just now, in fact. Dusty out there in the yard, and raising hell with my allergies. I will text it to the NSA. Nevermind, they already got it. Stop putting keywords out there, they just shut down my computer. Its all your fault.[:D] I rest my case.

mnottertail -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:36:32 AM)
Ken quote: I've done quite a bit of reading on this matter and have never seen a source for these vague claims that some NSA official has stated their goal is capturing all internet traffic. Since the idea is fairly ludicrous I really doubt anyone at NSA has ever said anything like that. And my goal is to get an end of the world good blowjob from every girl I want one from. We all have dreams. Sometimes they are unrealistic, but shoot for the stars and hit the moon, hah? Like the teabaggers goal is to take the whitehouse, they tried it thru the illusion of magic underpants, they didn't have the physical ability is all. Lets not quell any scaremongering here, I think we would both agree they are doing something, jesus, nobody was shitting their pants when darpa was running the interwebz in the day..........that was for the good of mankind, and when they had a shot at recording the traffic, but now it is for sinister purposes of finding out who likes their cock sucked and who don't...AND THEY ARE COMING TO YOUR DOOR. I think we can both agree that we don't like that the government is trying to spy like this, but it is at this point and for the forseeable future of our lifetimes, pretty fuckin innocuous in real life.

DomKen -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:43:47 AM)
I don't like the way they are doing it, first the warrantless wiretaps and now these warrants issued by a court that never releases its rulings, but I do find the amount of paranoia and magical thinking about the subject frustrating. Also why do people who don't even understand how the net works keep making claims about how easy it is to do things?

mnottertail -> RE: Is the Govt. "tapping" the Internet? (7/23/2013 7:50:16 AM)
Thumb drives Walmart, new non raid encoding scheme, be there or be square.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 5 [6]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875