robn13
Magistrate
Image Maker posted content from Facebook in a thread below without comment. The general consensus seemed to be that that type of content had no place on a website like Facebook and could potentially stimulate further investigation by the "morality police."
Several of you voiced concern about the potential consequences of the discovery of your involvement with forums such as this and voiced what I thought were excellent suggestions re methods of protection. If what I just read is true , forget about it.
The following is from a computer "geek" oriented website, "semi-accurate," and is part of a rundown on Intel's new Ivy Bridge processors, just introduced. If you have a good computer bought within the past couple of years with an Intel processor, it is probably Sandy Bridge.
That last one is Intel Insider, and it is a horrendous step backward for Ivy Bridge, and Sandy Bridge before it. Basically it spends power and time to encrypt everything on the system buses. It is useless work, lessened battery life, and the only reason it is there is to placate the content MAFIAA.
To make matters worse, Intel Insider is not user controllable, it is only controllable by unnamed remote 3rd parties who can now do things to your system that Intel won’t list. Seriously, think about the security implications, you are giving an unknown list of entities that are proven to be hostile to users the right to silently deny you use of your computer. They can potentially put things on your PC, take things off, and do so in a way that you can’t control, avoid, or worst of all detect. This ‘technology’ is actively harmful to the owner, and enough of an issue that I suggest that you avoid Ivy Bridge until it is not just fully documented, but user controllable. Scary on a whole new level.
I agree with the author's assessment that this is scary, but at least here in the United Police States, if what he claims is true, ( and he does seem to have a VERY sophisticated understanding of the subject) it also implicates potentially very serious violations of 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. "Big Brother" is alive and well!
I have a friend in LOCAL law enforcement and he has seen a room full of computers with real time monitoring of a staggering number of active child pornography investigations. He was shown a specific example of a case where every single instance of internet activity had been documented.
I just want to share this information for your consideration and protection. Process it as you please. But there is one rule that someone in my distant past passed along to me that has proven very valuable: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
Crux regards.
Several of you voiced concern about the potential consequences of the discovery of your involvement with forums such as this and voiced what I thought were excellent suggestions re methods of protection. If what I just read is true , forget about it.
The following is from a computer "geek" oriented website, "semi-accurate," and is part of a rundown on Intel's new Ivy Bridge processors, just introduced. If you have a good computer bought within the past couple of years with an Intel processor, it is probably Sandy Bridge.
That last one is Intel Insider, and it is a horrendous step backward for Ivy Bridge, and Sandy Bridge before it. Basically it spends power and time to encrypt everything on the system buses. It is useless work, lessened battery life, and the only reason it is there is to placate the content MAFIAA.
To make matters worse, Intel Insider is not user controllable, it is only controllable by unnamed remote 3rd parties who can now do things to your system that Intel won’t list. Seriously, think about the security implications, you are giving an unknown list of entities that are proven to be hostile to users the right to silently deny you use of your computer. They can potentially put things on your PC, take things off, and do so in a way that you can’t control, avoid, or worst of all detect. This ‘technology’ is actively harmful to the owner, and enough of an issue that I suggest that you avoid Ivy Bridge until it is not just fully documented, but user controllable. Scary on a whole new level.
I agree with the author's assessment that this is scary, but at least here in the United Police States, if what he claims is true, ( and he does seem to have a VERY sophisticated understanding of the subject) it also implicates potentially very serious violations of 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. "Big Brother" is alive and well!
I have a friend in LOCAL law enforcement and he has seen a room full of computers with real time monitoring of a staggering number of active child pornography investigations. He was shown a specific example of a case where every single instance of internet activity had been documented.
I just want to share this information for your consideration and protection. Process it as you please. But there is one rule that someone in my distant past passed along to me that has proven very valuable: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
Crux regards.
