back
205 comments
My thoughts as someone who doesn't know much about these types of things:

1. Terry Albury calling this list the "Panopticon" could have merit since he's a former FBI agent. However, I'd have to research more into him to figure out how credible he is, and why he is framing it like this.

2. Amazon and Facebook being in the title is most likely clickbait. They're literally only mentioned once in the article and the rest of it has nothing to do with them.

3. It's concerning that the National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM) can potentially cause this network to be used to label protestors as "far-left domestic terrorists", however, that is more of an issue with the NSPM than this network. Understanding the NSPM and the effects of it is probably worthwhile.

4. The article mentions that there's no oversight program for Seattle Shield. Is that a problem? Is it typical to have oversight for a program like this, or necessary? What would the program be like?

Overall, the article feels sort of sensationalized. It frames Seattle Shield as suspicious and questionable due to its secrecy and the fact that it performs surveillance. However, there aren't any strong facts or evidence of this program being abused in some Big Brother-type way. Terry Albury framing it in this manner might be the most credible point against it, but I would have to look into that to determine how credible it is.

> The article mentions that there's no oversight program for Seattle Shield. Is that a problem?

Any government body with no oversight program indicates that rule of law is optional.

The thing is... under the laws as they're written today, if US Gov wants to take a peek at your stuff on FB and friends servers, FB can be barred from informing you that such a request has come in under the National Security Letter (NSL) guidelines.

It's a very complicated thing :/.

I don't want any secretive surveillance, I don't care if you can prove whether its malicious or not.
It's like you never heard of Snowden.

You don't need to try to force yourself to believe it not being that bad because it has been worse for like 20 years already.

> Secret + surveillance + no oversight : Is that a problem?

You've gotta be shitting me.

> For instance, the Church of Scientology, U.S. Navy, and the Washington State Military Department told Prism that they are no longer working with the network.

That first one took me by surprise. What a random hodgepodge of organizations.

4chan validated in their protests against Scientology was not in my bingo card.
Scientology is essentially a scheme to get private/incriminating information from very important people. Why the surprise?
Scientologists being involved with intelligence agencies doesn't surprise me even a bit, it makes a lot of sense as a CIA cutout.
Edited title to be more sensationalist - this is a Seattle local thing

> The Seattle Shield website states that its mission “is to provide a collaborative and information-sharing environment between the Seattle Police Department and public/private partners in the Seattle area. Seattle Shield members assist Seattle Police Department efforts to identify, deter, defeat or mitigate potential acts of terrorism by reporting suspicious activity in a timely manner.”

That network is shared with police departments in cities outside Seattle per the article.
Good thing that ICE has such a stellar reputation of not pushing the agenda of the national government into local affairs!
I don’t understand. This seems like some version of NextDoor / neighborhood watch but for companies and larger interests in the Seattle area that might have their own security apparatus.

Why are folks jumping to some conclusions that this is some illuminati threat to democracy? Why is the article so breathless?

I don't know what neighborhood you live in, but there aren't many billion-dollar corporations hanging out on my block. Given how much shady stuff has come out about some of these companies, I don't think it's really that terrible a presumption that pretty much anything they've invested time and effort into that isn't already public knowledge might have been used for some stuff that we'd be unhappy to find out about.
It might be a purposefully sensationalist framing in order to increase KPIs. It works because a lot of people have strong opinions things without thinking much.
> All suspicious activity reported must be behavior based. It is important to keep in mind that suspicious behavior, such as taking photographs or videos, is not a criminal act by itself, but may be a precursor to criminal activity.

  the number of times I've been harassed by police for taking photos... even in small towns in the middle of nowhere people are paranoid.
I couldn't help but remember when the police talked to David Hobby (aka Strobist) for photographing a tree.

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/02/chronic...

A fictional public service announcement from the classic game Deus Ex (2000), also involving photographs...

> [Be Safe: Be Suspicious] How can you tell who might be a terrorist? Look for the following characteristics:

> * A stranger or foreigner.

> * Argumentative, especially about politics or philosophy.

> * Probing questions about your work, particularly high-tech.

> * Spends a greater than average amount of time on the Net.

> * Interests in chemistry, electronics, or computers.

> * Large numbers of mail-order deliveries.

> * Taking photographs of major landmarks.

> And those are just a few. If you're suspicious, then turn them in to your local law enforcement for a thorough background check. Better safe than sorry. You and your neighbors will sleep more securely knowing that you're watching each other's back.

Unfortunately we have to live in the reality that any unusual thing is a suspicious thing. There’s a whole entire concept that has been popularized around the concept of “see something, say something” and it would be expected that such vague concepts generate paranoia. I am not in a touristy or scenic area so seeing people out taking photos is unusual here and I could see how at least talking to the photographer isn’t a bad idea from a security standpoint.

Might help to mention I’m American so, you know, random joes blowing stuff/people up is part of my reality.

> suspicious behavior, such as taking photographs or videos

What is the logic behind this? Why is it suspicious?

Everybody's got a camera now. People taking puctures is the most normal thing in the world now.

archive that won't hijack your back button https://archive.is/Td9AR
Have a look at your local branch here: https://globalshieldnetwork.com/programs-2/
Random Idea:

Make a tool/browser extension that submits suspicious queries to Google, Facebook, Amazon on behalf of the user like "how to make a bomb", "How to make an explosive drone" or whatever. Have it run several times a day and use a lightweight abliterated llm to create unique queries that would match the kind of heuristics these programs are filtering for.

Hopefully 10s of thousands of users use it and poison the ETL of these intelligence gathering operations. This kinda creates a prisoner dilemma for the first set of users, perhaps the tool would only start making queries once there was enough of a user base so that the first few users aren't signing up themselves for unnecessary scrutiny.

Reminder if you work for any of these companies (not unlikely on this site) you are actively enabling this. If your first reaction is doubt, deflection, rationalization or discomfort, there are ways out.
The thing with screaming FIRE as an overreaction is that it’s not an overreaction when everyone is doused in kerosine.
With gun rights and the right to defend yourself in many US cities, surveillance is the next step to stop crime.

In places like the UK, where guns are nearly banned, this is the norm.

If I can't stop you from robbing me, I should have the ability to record you and identify you later.

I'm fine if we reduce surveillance, if gun/defense rights are added.

Self censored headline to avoid flagging? "Amazon, Facebook, ICE, and the FBI have access to a private intelligence-sharing network operated by Seattle police"
Didn't stop me from nearly getting attacked by a homeless junkie hearing voices a few weeks ago on Capitol Hill.
Looks like a nothingburger? It's unfunded. An email describes a protest without giving a framing that the site would prefer. Then it turns out that nobody knows what it does, but it might do something bad.

I'm all for transparency and accountability but my assumption is that the bad things being done by LEO and intelligence are far worse than this.

As an American, I genuinely trust my data with China more than I do with the United States.
Not so surprising - we kind of suspected this. Anyone remembers Snowden or Assange?

We have to accept the fact that presently all democracies are merely simulation of a democracy. At the least in the USA; other countries may be a bit better, e. g. Switzerland or the scandinavian countries are somewhat better (though also not to be trusted - see how Sweden pursued Assange).

Perhaps this is how things always end? Democracies are kind of like an obsolete model when you compare it to authoritarianism (assuming the USA would still be a democracy rather than a tech-corporate-fascist country run by a corrupt elite of superrich).

People are never going to quit doing this. I'm surprised we still get "incensed" by being "watched without consent". There is

No. Way. It's. Going. To. Ever. Get. Stopped.

The only way to level the effects are to radically increase the surveillance so that everyone ends up in a Dark Forest "I know shit about you too" deterrence stand off. And/or flood the sensors with so much input/noise that meaningful signal is tough to suss out.

Please tell me they're using Workplace.
Having a coalition of mega corporations all allied with each other isn't any better than having a strong government. Both are dangerous to personal liberties. I think we're due for a break up of these companies. No more Amazon, Google, Facebook, etc. We the people need to start taking power back.
I'm convinced Meta is a cult with Total control. It will go to any lengths to make money.
Where is the "I did that" sticker with trump pointing at this article.

:(

Interesting they have not contacted me about how they are going to be paying their subscription fee

I hope they dont think im doing all of this for free

How bad are things in Seattle that they are resorting to this? What the hell happened to my hometown?
So what you're saying is that everyone that works at Amazon and Facebook are now at grave risk because the bad guys now think they're informants?
Ah the new dark pool. Does anyone remember those from the trading? I still remember ARCA (good rebate back in the day), ECN (very fluid and very cheap), and a few dark pools that I used to get out of a trade quickly.