Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Beijing To Track Citizen's Cell Phones

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the following-the-signal dept.

Privacy 120

wan9xu writes "Purportedly to help alleviate Beijing's traffic congestion, the new initiative, literally translated as 'Platform for Citizen Movement Information,' proposes to track individual citizens' movement in real time via cell phone signals. Cell phones will be automatically registered at cell towers as soon as they are switched on. The rest is just like the phone tracking you see every week on CSI."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

You mean like people do already? (3, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35366922)

U-TDOA [wikipedia.org] except it should probably be named DTOA [wikipedia.org] instead. I like how they keep changing the names of this stuff so you don't catch on.

Nothing to see here.

Re:You mean like people do already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35366984)

The fact that they "go public" about it is a signal sent to their own people: do not dissent, we know who you are... And even if we don't know who you are, you'd better not be at the wrong place at the wrong time!

Re:You mean like people do already? (1)

naz404 (1282810) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367286)

The more common term in the mobile industry is LBS [wikipedia.org] (location-based service). It's supposed to be opt-in with some carriers, but I hear it's turned on by default on some.

So what's new? Everyone already knows that anyone who carries a mobile phone is tagging himself with a GPS.

Don't have any illusions of privacy either with your calls and SMSs.

Re:You mean like people do already? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367412)

not everyone is tagging himself with a gps.

however, if the operator wants, it's pretty easy to build a system that matches the cell towers sightings of the phones to a database and after that you have a "live" map. some operators in the world already did this with gsm years ago, for example in finland you could opt in to the service so that you could share your location real time - with just a regular gsm phone and without having to run any application on it. however around here they stopped promoting that service ages ago, it was probably bought from a subcon that made it expensive for the operator and provided little perceived value for the customers at large.

so they could do that. the cellphone network needs to know where the subscriber is anyways.

the cell-tracking information can be used in homicide etc cases as evidence as well. so really, it's only up to the laws to keep them private. still, it's a heck more private than asking an operator to connect you and to stay on the line to eavesdrop..

Re:You mean like people do already? (1)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#35368022)

GPS tracking like in the US would be a great deal more difficult in China, I'd think. Unlike the US, which is predominately done by cellular service contracts so that it's easy to make a 1-to-1 match from the subscriber to the phone to the GPS location tagging, China handles most cell phones by means of pre-paid SIM cards. A person's telephone number and IMSI can change quite often, from month to month or whenever they run out of minutes. Tracking it by the phones themselves isn't assured, either, since phones can be extremely cheap in China and can be replaced pretty easily.

Re:You mean like people do already? (2)

asvravi (1236558) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367332)

Here [www.btis.in] is an extensive implementation of traffic tracking using mobile phone density for Bangalore and other Indian cities.

Re:You mean like people do already? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367356)

That's the problem with a whole raft of modern technologies: They Just Don't Work without(entirely incidentally) generating a lot of potentially useful(or dangerous) data.

It would be pretty difficult to connect a call if you didn't know that handset A, in close vicinity of tower B, wants to talk to handset C in close vicinity of tower D. With non latency-critical applications you can add a lot of proxies(tor style) to make following the trail slightly more difficult; but that doesn't really work for cell service.

Credit cards and banking are analogous(though there, at least, there are some theoretically viable crypto-trick alternatives...).

functioning cell system "tracks" users at least to the granularity of "which tower is the handset talking to". That's the problem. Historically, surveillance was an active process, distinct from the productive systems of society, and often pretty expensive. Increasingly, it simply consists of gathering the data that must be generated just to get the packets from point A to point B. Still not free; but surveillance is, increasingly, not the act of Watching; but simply the act of Remembering.

I am, of course, totally unsurprised that China would adopt such a scheme broadly and unapologetically; but it is a matter of public record that cell tracking has been used, pursuant to warrants, even in the US, and that is only the stuff that becomes public record. Welcome to the new baseline, ladies and gentlemen...

Re:You mean like people do already? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35368106)

There's no reason an IPv6 mesh-network of phones and other devices could not be successful, with VoIP delivered via SIP from your choice of provider, decoupling the infrastructure from the service. There are of course numerous reasons this is not the situation we're in. E-911 can then be provided by GPS, and only when necessary (provided you have as much control of your phone as you think.)

Re:You mean like people do already? (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#35371984)

There's no reason an IPv6 mesh-network of phones and other devices could not be successful, with VoIP

1) Latency.
2) Privacy.
3) Coverage.
4) Bandwidth

Those are just a few off the top of my head. Mesh networks look good on paper, but not so much in practicality

Re:You mean like people do already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367398)

Nothing to see here.

Wrong. If Beijing publicly admits it is planning to track cell phones and it's pretty clear that they have been doing that for quite a while, the question is WTF are they already doing now? We'll probably find out in a decade or so.

fun with tracking (5, Informative)

Torvac (691504) | more than 3 years ago | (#35366952)

www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-vorratsdaten
german politician got his tracking data from telekom and visualized it, just press play.

Re:fun with tracking (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#35366996)

Better than the CSI version.

Re:fun with tracking (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367032)

A bit of background info, since Google translate is hardly understandable:
German telecom providers had to store communication data of every citizen (currently suspended by the constitutional court but politicians and law enforcement already work on getting it reinstated). That data includes cell phone data. A politician sued his provider to hand over data they stored on him and then contracted a data visualisation company to create an interactive map that tracks his path on a map. Aside from his location it also shows phone usage (calls, texts, WWW) and links it with additional info available from Twitter, Blogs and Websites, if available, to tell what he was doing at a certain location.

Re:fun with tracking (1)

ChrisCampbell47 (181542) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367690)

Holy crap, that is awesome!

I love how his first overnight stop is in Erlangen.

Naming conventions (2)

foolish_to_be_here (802344) | more than 3 years ago | (#35366954)

Another patriotic naming convention (i.e. Patriot Act). It will be an easy sell. It's all about control. Nothing more than control.

Re:Naming conventions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367540)

Another stupid America hater from slashidiot go figure.

Re:Naming conventions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35371300)

Is this coming from someone who supports an unAmerican, unpatriotic and unconstitutional law?

Hmm... (4, Insightful)

netsharc (195805) | more than 3 years ago | (#35366990)

"Cell phones will be automatically registered at cell towers as soon as they are switched on." ... err, as they usually do? Since otherwise, how would the cell company know how to route a call for you?

Of course TFA is in Chinese, and I don't know what it really says, but yeah, the very design of the cell network allows for such tracking, and there's a lot of potential for abuse there, whichever government does it.

I guess this is in response to the Arab protests, if you as the authority can see where people are gathered/gathering, you know where to send the skull-crackers to.

Oh, and logging individuals would make it easier to see which people (phones) show up at these things regularly, for whatever reason, so we can crack their skulls too!

I wonder what sort of techniques can be used to fight this; multiple phones (useless since afaik you need an ID card to get a SIM card), leave your phone at home, go to "airplane mode" at a random time before the planned demo? Should the protesters buy walkie-talkies and tune to xy frequency? (The police would then just skull-crack anyone caught with a walkie-talkie).

Re:Hmm... (1)

Jahava (946858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367008)

"Cell phones will be automatically registered at cell towers as soon as they are switched on." ... err, as they usually do? Since otherwise, how would the cell company know how to route a call for you?

Of course TFA is in Chinese, and I don't know what it really says, but yeah, the very design of the cell network allows for such tracking, and there's a lot of potential for abuse there, whichever government does it.

I guess this is in response to the Arab protests, if you as the authority can see where people are gathered/gathering, you know where to send the skull-crackers to.

Oh, and logging individuals would make it easier to see which people (phones) show up at these things regularly, for whatever reason, so we can crack their skulls too!

I wonder what sort of techniques can be used to fight this; multiple phones (useless since afaik you need an ID card to get a SIM card), leave your phone at home, go to "airplane mode" at a random time before the planned demo? Should the protesters buy walkie-talkies and tune to xy frequency? (The police would then just skull-crack anyone caught with a walkie-talkie).

There are still ways for critical people to remain safely anonymous under this circumstance. For example:

  • Leaders could receive donated phones from their supporters and remain anonymous.
  • A person could easily steal a phone from someone else and use it until it's deactivated, then steal another. If this person had a following, part of that group of followers could be tasked with maintaining a constant influx of stolen phones.
  • People could steal the phones of high-ranking officials or their families, or just random people, and bring them to protests to increase their own plausible deniability.
  • People could also steal or forge IDs when buying a phone, so that it's incorrectly registered.

That or China could legitimately be using this to monitor traffic density. I mean, traffic is a huge problem in several areas, and knowing the migration paths and times of citizens would be invaluable to devising an ideal solution.

Re:Hmm... (1)

zwei2stein (782480) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367118)

* Leaders could receive donated phones from their supporters and remain anonymous.

Leader that is important enough for this to happen is already target of BB.

        * A person could easily steal a phone from someone else and use it until it's deactivated, then steal another. If this person had a following, part of that group of followers could be tasked with maintaining a constant influx of stolen phones.

Participating in crime is nice way to alienate general population. Especially when you take away someones means of communication as news will spread around: "hi this is john, my phone was stone by those protesters, my new number is ..." ...sympathy will not be with phone thief.

        * People could steal the phones of high-ranking officials or their families, or just random people, and bring them to protests to increase their own plausible deniability.

Plausible deniability? Joke, right? If goal is to hit protesters hard, no-one will care about legalese. Officials and related people will be simply filtered out, everyone else (including those random people) hammered.

        * People could also steal or forge IDs when buying a phone, so that it's incorrectly registered.

Stolen ID ... yeah, that is heart winner. I am quite sure person that is target of it will be overjoyed. As will anyone close him when he gets taken into custody/beaten bloody.

---

Lets see, you want to steal phones and ids to cover your protesters, making general population mistrust you and be afraid of you. You also just gave propaganda fuel away and pissed off some official.

Smooth move.

Re:Hmm... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367264)

"A person could easily steal a phone from someone else and use it until it's deactivated, then steal another"

I gather this method is already used by drug dealers and such organised criminals.

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367370)

I gather this method is already used by drug dealers and such organised criminals.

They usually don't bother with hi-tech communication means, but use paper [wikipedia.org]

Re:Hmm... (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 3 years ago | (#35368074)

I gather this method is already used by drug dealers and such organised criminals.

They usually don't bother with hi-tech communication means, but use paper [wikipedia.org]

LOL and the mafia used the nearly-unbreakable ROT-3 cryptographic method. The police must have pissed themselves laughing.

Re:Hmm... (1)

AlecC (512609) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367312)

The trouble with all these schemes is that they are fine for those who are already criminals, but they push those who want to campaign peacefully for political change into criminal or criminal-like behaviour. You should have an assumption of privacy: until you appear to be something nefarious, your comings and goings should be your private business. This means that the authorities can, at their choice, track your recent movements and get a good idea of your contacts. Of course, this can be used for good, but history shows that good uses are soon overwhelmed by authoritarian control.

Re:Hmm... (2)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367010)

Custom GSM firmware could theoretically connect to a less than ideal base station and fool the trackers as to the location. Maybe preferentially use towers with low signal strength. Maybe somebody could come up with a broad band frequency hopping walkie-talkie. Perhaps a unit which uses a lot of commercial frequencies at very low power. Such a device might be useful all over the place.

Re:Hmm... (2)

alt236_ftw (2007300) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367092)

*Custom GSM firmware could theoretically connect to a less than ideal base station and fool the trackers as to the location*

You can still track at that point, but with reduced accuracy. The neighbouring Cell towers will still record your mobile phone as it attempts to enumerate its neighbours.

Re:Hmm... (1)

Sabriel (134364) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367134)

Your mobile's ID needs to be registered with the cellular network to use it to make calls (how else can they know who to bill). As soon as it broadcasts that ID, so long as there's at least two stations in range it doesn't matter which one your mobile "talks" to, all of them can still "hear" and triangulation solves the rest (to whatever accuracy the local environment allows; a signal that's bounced off a few skyscrapers on its way to the towers may be problematic, but there's nothing stopping the government from placing extra "listen-only" stations to compensate).

Re:Hmm... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367244)

Don't forget that with just one cell tower they can get a decent idea of where you are, because cell towers use sectored antennas.

Re:Hmm... (1)

commodore6502 (1981532) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367096)

>>>I wonder what sort of techniques can be used to fight this

Laws. - "The right of the people to peaceably assemble shall not be infringed," so it won't matter if you're being tracked to a demonstration because the police cannot stop you. - Of course to pass such a law in China or Egypt or elsewhere, one needs to first overthrow the government and make it part of the new constitution. A bit of a catch-22.

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367196)

"I wonder what sort of techniques can be used to fight this"

Leave the phone at home?

Skull Crack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367488)

Taking into account what you said, maybe they should just buy hard-hats?

Psyops (1)

ko7 (1990064) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367014)

It is not that the Chinese gov't is going to start doing anything new. When you use fear as a great motivator to control your people, it never hurts to draw attention to the amount of scrutiny maintained over each citizen (in the interest of the common good). It's best not to let citizens forget for one moment that their actions are subject to significant, continuous observation. [XXX is watching you, from a distance.]

Re:Psyops (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367062)

XXX is watching you, from a distance

Vin Diesel doesn't scare me.

Re:Psyops (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367462)

Vin Diesel doesn't scare me.

You're much braver than I.

Re:Psyops (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35371538)

I've seen him in interviews before. Its actually pretty funny. He comes off as a simple guy whos happy with his success. He's actually fairly short. He's very geeky; including many years of D&D. No joke. His personality is about 180-degrees from what he portraits in movies.

Just turn the damn thing off (0)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367028)

Hell, this is well known from military airplanes . . . if your radar is on, you can see them . . . but they can see you! So if you are doing some Secret Squirrel stuff, and think that you might be tracked, turn the damn thing off.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367048)

Keep in mind that turning off your phone also works in favour of oppressive regimes. If you are not able to communicate, you cannot organise or participate in protests in large numbers (due to lack of knowledge).

It's a passive effect of constant surveillance: people automatically censor themselves (consciously or subconsciously). This is one of the main reasons why more surveillance directly results in less freedom.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367330)

Then set up wifi networks (it could be a small set of gateways with 3G modems that route connections out through Tor or a VPN, or it could be something like HSMM-MESH), from there you have a wide range of communication options.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (4, Informative)

dtmos (447842) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367056)

...and pull the battery out.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (3)

krenaud (1058876) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367862)

Sorry, no can do. iPhones have a fixed battery and special screws.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (1)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 3 years ago | (#35368180)

A design flaw that shouldn't be overlooked when buying.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#35369836)

A design flaw that shouldn't be overlooked when buying.

Comrade! You won't buy an iPhone because you can't remove the battery to thwart surveillance activities?

Please to come this way.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35368226)

Remove the SIM card? Oh wait, Apple is working on making that impossible too.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (1)

siriuskase (679431) | more than 3 years ago | (#35370402)

No problem, just stick it in a metal baggy. Real engineers don't buy toys they can't take apart.

Re:Just turn the damn thing off (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35370684)

No problem, just stick it in a metal baggy. Real engineers don't buy toys they can't take apart.

'Real' engineers won't be deterred by a custom screw head.

It was designed by an engineer, it's not like it's alien technology we couldn't even begin to figure out how to get into.

"Citizen's"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367030)

Which citizen is the poor schmuck whose phones are bugged?

million baby marches; new york, paris, cairo etc.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367044)

they're coming 'armed' with their hopeful good natures, some of their toys (to share with others) & many of their mommies. they just can't get wrapped around the notion that there's 'too many' of them. probably because they're so tiny, & most of US are so wasteful/selfish/misinformed? see you there? other options include;

The Georgia Guidestones, a massive granite edifice planted in the Georgia countryside, contains a list of ten new commandments for Earthâ€s citizens. The first commandment, and the one which concerns this article, simply states; â€Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.â€

Robert Walker, former chair of PepsiCo and Proctor & Gamble on water:

Water is a gift of nature. Its delivery is not. It must be priced to insure it is used sustainably.

Mikhail Gorbachev:

â€We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there arenâ€t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.â€

Jacques Cousteau UNESCO Courier 1991:

â€In order to save the planet it would be necessary to kill 350,000 people per day.â€

Jacques Cousteau, Population: Opposing Viewpoints:

â€If we want our precarious endeavor to succeed, we must convince all human beings to participate in our adventure, and we must urgently find solutions to curb the population explosion that has a direct influence on the impoverishment of the less-favoured communities. Otherwise, generalized resentment will beget hatred, and the ugliest genocide imaginable, involving billions of people, will become unavoidable.â€

â€Uncontrolled population growth and poverty must not be fought from inside, from Europe, from North America, or any nation or group of nations; it must be attacked from the outside – by international agencies helped in the formidable job by competent and totally non-governmental organizations.â€

David Rockefeller: Memoirs 2002 Founder of the CFR:

â€We wield over American political and economical institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as â€internationalists†and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political structure, one world, if you will. If thatâ€s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.â€
David Rockefeller, Co-founder of the Trilateral Commission:

â€We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine & other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plans for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American Case Officer for the State Departmentâ€s Office of Population Affairs (OPA) (now the US State Dept. Office of Population Affairs, est. by Henry Kissinger in 1975): â€There is a single theme behind all our work -we must reduce population levels,†said Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the State Departmentâ€s Office of Population Affairs (OPA). â€Either they [governments] do it our way, through nice clean methods or they will get the kind of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran, or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it. â€The professionals,†said Ferguson, â€arenâ€t interested in lowering population for humanitarian reasons. That sounds nice. We look at resources and environmental constraints. We look at our strategic needs, and we say that this country must lower its population -or else we will have trouble.

â€So steps are taken. El Salvador is an example where our failure to lower population by simple means has created the basis for a national security crisis. The government of El Salvador failed to use our programs to lower their population. Now they get a civil war because of it…. There will be dislocation and food shortages. They still have too many people there.†(1981)

Aldous Huxley, Lecture named Population Explosion 1959:

â€â€¦Let us ask ourselves what the practical alternatives are as we confront this problem of population growth. One alternative is to do nothing in particular about it and just let things go on as they are…The question is: Are we going to restore the balance in the natural way, which is a brutal and entirely anti-human way, or are we going to restore it in some intelligent, rational, and humane way…Try to increase production as much as possible and at the same time try to re-establish the balance between the birth rate by means less gruesome than those which are used by nature – by intelligent and human methods?…There are colossal difficulties in the way of implementing any large-scale policy of limitation of population; whereas death control is extremely easy under modern circumstances, birth control is extremely difficult. The reason is very simple: death control – the control, for example, of infectious diseases – can be accomplished by a handful of experts and quite a small labour force of unskilled persons and requires a very small capital expenditure.â€

Barry Commoner, Making Peace with the Planet:

â€There have been â€triage†proposals that would condemn whole nations to death through some species of global â€benign neglectâ€. There have been schemes for coercing people to curtail their fertility, by physical and legal means that are ominously left unspecified. Now we are told that we must curtail rather than extend our efforts to feed the hungry peoples of the world. Where will it end?†Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, April 28, 1997, Testimony before Congressional Committee: â€There are some reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. Itâ€s real, and thatâ€s the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and thatâ€s why this is so important.â€

Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, April 28, 1997; Testimony before Congressional Committee:

â€And advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.â€

Sir Julian Huxley, UNESCO: its Purpose and its Philosophy:

â€Political unification in some sort of world government will be required… Even though… any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.†In the early 1950â€s, former Communist Joseph Z. Kornfeder expressed the opinion that UNESCO was comparable to a Communist Party agitation and propaganda department. He stated that such a party apparatus â€handles the strategy and method of getting at the public mind, young and old.†Huxley would lard the agency with a motley collection of Communists and fellow travelers.

President Richard Nixon believed abortion was necessary as a form of eugenics to prevent interracial breeding

Theodore Roosevelt to Charles B. Davenport, January 3, 1913, Charles B. Davenport Papers, Department of Genetics, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.:

â€I wish very much that the wrong people could be prevented entirely from breeding; and when the evil nature of these people is sufficiently flagrant, this should be done. Criminals should be sterilized and feebleminded persons forbidden to leave offspring behind them…The emphasis should be laid on getting desirable people to breed…â€

Ted Turner makes the radical statement that, â€A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal,â€

Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood, funded by the Rockefellers) said in her proposed â€The American Baby Codeâ€, intended to become law:

â€The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.â€

**This is the woman (Margaret Sanger) whom Hillary Clinton publicly declared she looked up to, during the 2008 presidential debates.**

Here is a short list of some advocates of eugenics; Alexander Graham Bell, George Bernard Shaw H. G. Wells, Sidney Webb, William Beveridge, John Maynard Keynes, Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Emile Zola, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Winston Churchill, Linus Pauling, Sidney Webb, Sir Francis Galton, Charles B. Davenport Futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard (who wanted to create a Dept. of Peace)...

â€Out of the full spectrum of human personality, one-fourth is electing to transcend…One-fourth is ready to so choose, given the example of one other…One-fourth is resistant to election. They are unattracted by life ever evolving. One-fourth is destructive. They are born angry with God…They are defective seeds…There have always been defective seeds. In the past they were permitted to die a â€natural deathâ€â€¦we, the elders, have been patiently waiting until the very last moment before the quantum transformation, to take action to cut out this corrupted and corrupting element in the body of humanity. It is like watching a cancer grow…Now, as we approach the quantum shift from creature-human to co-creative human—the human who is an inheritor of god-like powers—the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from the social body. We have no choice, dearly beloveds. Fortunately you, dearly beloveds, are not responsible for this act. We are. We are in charge of Godâ€s selection process for planet Earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death. We come to bring death to those who are unable to know God…the riders of the pale horse are about to pass among you. Grim reapers, they will separate the wheat from the chaff. This is the most painful period in the history of humanity…â€

Alexander Haig is quoted referring to the US State Department Office of Population Affairs, which was established by Henry Kissinger in 1975. The title has since been changed to The Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental and Scientific Affairs:

â€Accordingly, the Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental and Scientific Affairs has consistently blocked industrialization policies in the Third World, denying developing nationâ€s access to nuclear energy technology–the policies that would enable countries to sustain a growing population. According to State Department sources, and Ferguson himself, Alexander Haig is a â€firm believer†in population control.

PBS touting nuclear war as good for environment (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367130)

eye gas they'll get to be fundead for another year. don't even think that the babies don't get to watch tv (often, more than they'd care to). they also have connections we're not even bright enough to acknowledge. many think hillary's daughter should be having a heart2heart with her pretty soon? see you on the other side of it?

fake plastic diapers are pain in the butt, etc.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367194)

why, when the aliens gave us cotton to warm/comfort our little selves, must we favor poisonous petroleum products, which we kill each other for the rights to, not thinking that the planet may need that crud to stay balanced? is it slow (mutated) thinking? bad information? go down with the ship? what? if even babies know when somethings are 'not right' (even the calendar)?

Re:million baby marches; new york, paris, cairo et (1)

Onuma (947856) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367482)

Robert Heinlein - Starship Troopers
"Is it possible to abolish war by relieving population pressure (and thus do away with the all-too evident evils of war) through constructing a moral code under which population is limited to resources?

Without debating the usefulness or morality of planned parenthood, it may be verified by observation that any breed which stops its own increase gets crowded out by breeds which expand. Some human populations did so, in Terran history, and other breeds moved in and engulfed them."

Perpetual balance with Nature -- this is not natural. The way Nature [and the universe, effectively] "balances" things out is by wiping out populations, not subtle and controlled limitations on breeding and death. I don't recall seeing any live dinosaurs for the last ~65M years. We'll either find room to expand elsewhere (Terraforming, colonization, etc.) or we'll bide our time until we our natural genocide/extinction.

Re:million baby marches; new york, paris, cairo et (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35369550)

LOLWUT? You are a idiot.

Re:million baby marches; new york, paris, cairo et (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35368472)

words words

So what is your opinion on HOSTS files?

that's nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367064)

At the end of March, US "defence" contractor Lockheed Martin will administer a census in England and Wales which it is compulsory for every householder to complete.

Manhunt: Beijing (1)

martijnd (148684) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367072)

It is set in the (then) futuristic year of 2004, when Earth has been enslaved by a race of aliens known as the Orbs. The Orbs, who look like giant floating eyeballs, have implanted all humans with global tracking devices, forced them to wear nondescript robes and forbid them from speaking or communicating. The protagonist has been assigned by the Orbs to track down fellow humans who are believed to be forming an underground resistance.

USA already mandated GPS chips a long time ago (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367080)

for all phones sometime since 9/11 (IIRC) under the guise of helping you (ie - helping the 911 emergency service locate you). Not sure when it was implemented though.

With the microphone, camera, and other sensors plus ubiquity - cell phones is one of the most insidious government spy tools around. Tiny little trojan horses we pay for.

Re:USA already mandated GPS chips a long time ago (1)

Omniskio (1153619) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367108)

Bad in USA. Bad in China.

Re:USA already mandated GPS chips a long time ago (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367258)

No they didn't. You have to provide E-911 services with a certain level of positional accuracy but how you achieve it is up to you. GSM providers overwhelmingly went with TDOA (Timed difference of arrival) which is like GPS in reverse; instead of one receiver figuring out the position of multiple transmitters based on their synchronized and highly accurate clocks, multiple receivers figure out the position of a single transmitter on the same basis. Since cell cites have sectored antennas, only one cell site is necessary to locate a user to a fairly narrow, curved strip. With two you can find out where they are to within a few meters.

Re:USA already mandated GPS chips a long time ago (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367340)

Mod parent Informative, GP is wrong.

LOL (1)

Chems_R_Us (1413757) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367114)

and You THINK the US GOVT DOES not? lolL

Re:LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35368510)

That all stopped on 1/20/2009.

If you don't believe that then you are racist.

The don't already?!?!? (0)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367128)

You could moan about this; but when they caught the guys in the 2008 Chinese milk scandal they stuck a bullet in their heads. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal [wikipedia.org] You can't like the régime; but they do tend to win me back from time to time. Of course I don't condone the death sentence; but now that I have a child I'm very irrational about these things. Also being in the UK, I'm so tracked when I walk around YET STILL THERE BE CRIME It doesn't bother me. My lord I'm off topic!

Theres nothing irrational about the death sentence (0)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367204)

The majority of people in most western countries (according to surveys I've read about) are quite happy with an eye for an eye - even non religious people. Its only the libtard agenda thats been promoted by vested interests for the last 50 years that has tried to paint the death penalty as some sort of neanderthal throwback when in fact its the most just penalty for certain crimes including the one you mention.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367252)

Actually, the death penalty in the US, once you examine who has been executed, is clearly racist. IHO, where it becomes irrational is that the same people that advocate the death penalty are avid Pro-Life-ers.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367254)

Actually, it's not true.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/international-polls-and-studies [deathpenaltyinfo.org] - support for death penalty in most progressive countries is either low or declining.

And yes, death penalty is a neanderthal throwback.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (0)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367310)

Yes, I'm really going to believe a webpage that is clearly anti death penalty.

"And yes, death penalty is a neanderthal throwback."

Care to explain why or is it just for the usual spurious "it makes us no better than them" or its "state murder" or whatever other drivel people like yourself dish up to try and explain your point of view?

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367346)

Care to explain why or is it just for the usual spurious "it makes us no better than them" or its "state murder"

Spurious? "Do as I say, not as I do" has never worked.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (0)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367976)

Doesn't it? So people who are executed re-offend then do they? The thought of being executed doesn't make some people hold off the violence compared to the through of 20 years in prison?

You see, this is the spurious logic people like yourself work by. Its all bullshit.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35368078)

Doesn't it? So people who are executed re-offend then do they?

The question is not whether they re-offend but whether the total number of offenders is reduced.

The thought of being executed doesn't make some people hold off the violence compared to the through of 20 years in prison?

Studies have shown that the threat of punishment does not, in fact, stop crime, especially when you fail to address social inequality that produces it.

You see, this is the spurious logic people like yourself work by. Its all bullshit.

You want an excuse to satisfy your bloodlust. You will find none here.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (0)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#35368702)

"Studies have shown that the threat of punishment does not, in fact, stop crime, especially when you fail to address social inequality that produces it."

Social inequality my arse. A huge proportion of crime is white collar such as fraud or hacking or tax evasion or even street violence and is commited by middle class types. So wheres the inequality my friend? Your argument is just the standard issue left wing nonsense trotted out to explain why their liberal prison policies don't work.

"You want an excuse to satisfy your bloodlust. You will find none here."

There we go , hyperbole again. Its not about bloodlust, its about justice for the victims. Something sorry little bleeding heart hand wringers like you have no concept of.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35369688)

"Studies have shown that the threat of punishment does not, in fact, stop crime, especially when you fail to address social inequality that produces it."

Social inequality my arse. A huge proportion of crime is white collar such as fraud or hacking or tax evasion or even street violence and is commited by middle class types.

So now we're talking about white collar crime?

There we go , hyperbole again. Its not about bloodlust, its about justice for the victims.

Justice is subjective. Killing helps no one.

Something sorry little bleeding heart hand wringers like you have no concept of.

When you have to resort to Ad Hominem then it's clear you have no argument worth making. Thanks!

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#35369844)

"So now we're talking about white collar crime?"

You were talking about the threat of punishment. You didn't limit it to murder. And was OJ Simpson poor (we know he's guilty)? What about those rich boy terrorists?

"Justice is subjective."

Of course its subjective , its not a law of physics, its a human desire. And if the victims family wants the death penalty for a murder they should get it.

"Killing helps no one."

Really? Got anything to back that up with or are you just resorting to vague handwaving now?

"When you have to resort to Ad Hominem then it's clear you have no argument worth making. Thanks!"

Truth hurts?

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35369974)

Of course its subjective , its not a law of physics, its a human desire. And if the victims family wants the death penalty for a murder they should get it.

I feel victimized for having to listen to your nonsense, and I think you should get the death penalty for spouting it. If I want you to have the death penalty, you should get it. My argument is every bit as rational as yours since nothing gets better if you murder a murderer.

"Killing helps no one."

Really? Got anything to back that up with or are you just resorting to vague handwaving now?

Since there is no evidence that killing helps anyone, but there is plenty of evidence that killing is harmful, I think you're the one with the burden of proof.

"When you have to resort to Ad Hominem then it's clear you have no argument worth making. Thanks!"

Truth hurts?

Who's hurt? I'm only filled with pity for you.

Because it kills innocent people (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367390)

Because it kills innocent people. That's why.

It's quite simple.

Re:Because it kills innocent people (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#35368350)

Thats why it should require a higher standard of proof than incarceration and why theres a huge wait before conviction and execution in a lot of places in case more evidence comes to light.

Re:Because it kills innocent people (2)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 3 years ago | (#35369240)

Standards of proof are already as high as they get. Yet still innocent people are killed by the death penalty.

You can argue that relatively few innocents are killed or that the ends justify the means.

But you can't argue with the fact that not only criminals are executed.

Re:Because it kills innocent people (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35369394)

Thats why it should require a higher standard of proof than incarceration

It does.

and why theres a huge wait before conviction and execution in a lot of places in case more evidence comes to light.

There is.

And yet, innocent people are still executed. Hmm... I can think of one easy way to prevent this situation, can you?

Re:Because it kills innocent people (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35369512)

There have been several studies in the U.S. and Great Britain that 10 percent of defendants for typical crimes are wrongfully convicted. DNA evidence seems to support this. Prior to statistical studies the number was believed to be less than one percent. See Link http://www.innocenceproject.org/

Actual Innocence by Barry Scheck, Peter Neufeld and Jim Dwyer makes an intersting read.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367294)

The majority of people in most western countries (according to surveys I've read about) are quite happy with an eye for an eye - even non religious people.

Ah, so it's revenge. Someone once said something like, "If you take an eye for an eye, then everyone will be blind.".

Its only the libtard agenda thats been promoted by vested interests for the last 50 years that has tried to paint the death penalty as some sort of neanderthal throwback when in fact its the most just penalty for certain crimes including the one you mention.

Libtards! Hahahaha! Yeah!

Yeah, this real asshole once said to forgive is the way to salvation or some such horseshit - goddamn bearded sandal wearing hippie pinko comie if you ask me! I thin he was even Spanish! He called himself Jesus!

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367336)

"Someone once said"

Ghandi. And with all due respect to the man if that were the case then winning the 2nd world war against Hitler was a waste of time. Its easy to rattle off a nice pithy, superficially profound statement like that , but when you did deeper you generally find they're BS.

"He called himself Jesus!"

And? I'm not religious, I couldn't care less what he said.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35371674)

Ah, so it's revenge. Someone once said something like, "If you take an eye for an eye, then everyone will be blind.".

And he was a better politician than logician.

Taking an eye for an eye is a reference to the ancient law (found in the Old Testament and Hammurabi's code) that the offense of putting out another person's eye is to be punished by having the offender's eye put out. It's an important point to notice that no retaliation is due for the punishment; it's explicitly not like a vendetta.

Thus, if no one puts out anyone's eye, no eyes are lost. For each person who puts out an eye, one additional eye is lost. Even assuming no deterrent effect (which is of course the whole point), only twice as many eyes will be lost under "an eye for an eye" than under some less harsh regime. Since we can see that very few eyes -- far less than half -- are put out under the current less-harsh regime, we can tell that instituting "an eye for an eye" will in fact NOT leave everyone blind.

The same goes for "a life for a life". There are something like 16,000 crimes classed as "murder and non-negligent homicide" each year in the US. Assuming these are all committed by different people, and no deterrent effect, only 16,000 more people would die if each murderer were to be killed.

Re:Theres nothing irrational about the death sente (2)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367362)

All I can say is that these "eye for an eye" people must have a great deal of faith in the infallibility of their justice system. Personally I can't understand why anyone would want to give the state the right to take it's own citizen's life, weather said citizen deserves to die or not is irrelevant.

Why is this a headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367148)

Every single carrier can do it and does it already. It's the very definition of how cell networks work.

Saving the data generated for later analysis is, on the other hand, something the carriers would not probably do on their own as you need a huge storage for the crap that's a PR nightmare if anyone leaks it's existence and it's of no real use to them. But, I have no doubt that most of the carriers in the world are doing it under government pressure.

Obrigatly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367176)

Slittyzens?

phone without the tracking? (1)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367178)

Don't have enough experience with this....but can you turn off the actual phone functions, incl. the regular checking-in at the nearest cell tower, and just use (smart) phones for their apps in quasi local-only offline mode?

All phones I know/owned turned on everything when you turned on the phone itself...

Re:phone without the tracking? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367236)

Re:phone without the tracking? (1)

Onuma (947856) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367512)

If you turn off all Blackberry signals, the next time you reboot you will still find them in the "off" position. It may still be able to receive signals (GPS, etc.) but it will not transmit unless you reactivate those functions ... in theory.

"cellphone please, citizen!" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367212)

Sooooo... how long until it becomes a crime in China not to carry a switched-on cell-phone with you at all times...?

Just like CSI (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367298)

So they're using a Visual Basic GUI?

The future's bright (1)

anti-pop-frustration (814358) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367304)

Toy Size Spy Drones [slashdot.org] , Live government cell phones tracking, ACTA, Arbitrary domain names seizing, Law mandated year-long ISP data retention policies. Innocent citizens detained at airports [wikimedia.org] (during which agents copy and/or seize their laptops and cellphones).

It sure is nice living in the future.

get a sat phone (1)

sam0737 (648914) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367350)

And i'll tell my boss, i might not be able to answer because i'm at indoor.

The next big step? (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367576)

Once they have all those phones registered and ready to track, the Chinese Big Brother will have to conquer one more obstacle: Convincing all those people to keep their phones turned on all the time in order for this tracking system to actually work.

Airplane mode save? (1)

asnelt (1837090) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367838)

I am a bit paranoid and don't like the idea of being trackable. For this reason I typically have my phone in airplane mode and turn off this mode when I expect phone calls or want to browse / check mails. I still do not fully trust the proprietary firmware not to transmit any signals. I would really like to check whether it still transmits anything in airplane mode. Does anybody know an easy and inexpensive way of how to do that?

Re:Airplane mode save? (0)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#35370018)

I am a bit paranoid and don't like the idea of being trackable. For this reason I typically have my phone in airplane mode and turn off this mode when I expect phone calls or want to browse / check mails. I still do not fully trust the proprietary firmware not to transmit any signals. I would really like to check whether it still transmits anything in airplane mode. Does anybody know an easy and inexpensive way of how to do that?

1) Remove battery if possible (iPhone users skip to 2)
2) Cover unit in high quality tin foil, using at least three separate layers and orienting each layer 60 degrees clockwise from the previous layer.
3) Follow your normal daily activities. Remember to stop occasionally to look in picture windows for agents tailing you. Carefully note the license plates of all vehicles you see. Avoid any vehicle with a camera mast and / or antennas. Now.
4) Put the battery back in phone and remove the tin foil. Repeat step 3.
5) If you notice any difference you can either assume you're being followed by some nefarious, likely quasi-governmental agency or
6) Your life is so totally worthless and boring that you have the time and inclination to keep tab of all the license plates in your vicinity and you're a total loser.

Either way, you're hosed.

Citizen's Cell Phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35369074)

Which citizen?

Not like CSI (1)

OhHellWithIt (756826) | more than 3 years ago | (#35369076)

I read TFA on Google Translate, and while the resulting English was a mess, it is clear that the article is about measuring traffic flow from cell phone signals, a thing that has been tried here in the U.S. No mention was made of whether they intend to anonymize the data. In the U.S. project that I read about, there was some amount of concern raised about privacy, even though the article I read made clear that there would be anonymization.

I'm not saying that the Chinese government wouldn't use cell phones to track and control the movements of people, but as others have already pointed out, that's an accompanying risk of the technology. But in this case, I think the Chinese gov't bashing isn't appropriate.

We've done the same for years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35369598)

Here in Texas, this is part of how we get the metrics of our highway usage. Toll tags make up the other half, and I'd expect that license plate recognition has part of the share as well. I wouldn't be surprised that China is doing something else with these. But here, TxDOT uses these as nothing more than a unique identifier. None of the data is saved in the long term, if it were, it would be subject to open records requests, and everyone could find out that their baby mama is driving to Dallas every weekend to go see her sancho. But it is amazingly accurate, and has helped us build roads in the places that need it most, even when we're all frakking broke. China is *the* leader in transportation infrastructure, like it or not. We have so many other reasons to look down on them, and everyone is shocked and awed any time they're mentioned. This is not one of those times, this time they're using technology for the greater good, which is how it should be used in the first place. Btw, this post is biased from the very first word.

oh goody! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35370538)

so if soemone needs the police to clear / re-route some traffic, all you need to do
is dump 100 mobile phones into the backseat:"congestion approaching!"

Short straw there (1)

blibbo (928752) | more than 3 years ago | (#35370680)

What makes this one citizen so important that he/she gets the whole city's attention? It's some mega-celebrity right?

Oh, the apostrophe's supposed to be after the s

Tyranny 2.0 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35371098)

Tyranny 2.0, it's about the syn(against man)ergy.

Swedish government wants to do this (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 3 years ago | (#35371548)

As part of the implementation of the EU data retention direcitve, the Swedish government wants to go even further and require operators to retain the location of every phone at the beginning and end of a call.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?