Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
On 09/01/13 21:49, Michael Rogers wrote: On 01/09/13 10:00, Caspar Bowden (lists) wrote: AFAIK Deleuze, Foucault et al. did not say anything specifically about covert (mass-)surveillance, or analyse how the inherently secret nature of such organizations might be a causal element in theories of social control. Secret surveillance organizations are NOT Panoptic in a technical sense - they normally don't want you to know or fear they are watching (with tactical exceptions). Is there anyone who's aware of overt surveillance and who doesn't at least suspect that some form of covert surveillance also exists? And isn't that suspicion enough to create a panoptic effect? to some *unconscious* extent yes, but I have never seen any psychological studies into this. There ought to be an effect where even solid citizens become inhibited from communicating (or thinking! much harder experiment) certain ideas, depending on the level of ambient NSA-phobia, and this indeed might function as a form of social control. Never seen any studies on that idea. [Of course the STASI and others would make the surveillance obvious for the purpose of intimidation as a standard tactic in particular cases, but in general the watchers don't want the watched to know true capabilities] However on the face of it, that isn't the classical Panopticon, where discipline is maintained by fear of detection by the unseen warden The prisoners don't know whether they're being watched at any moment, or whether the watchtower is even occupied; the secret surveillance organisation, the existence of which cannot be confirmed, corresponds to the warden who may or may not be in the watchtower. In Jeremy Bentham's original proposal, his idea was that prisoners who break discipline wilfully or transgress otherwise are singled out (at random possibly) and then publicly punished in the sight of all the rest as an example, but only a few days after the transgression, to magnify the prisoner's demoralisation after thinking they have got away with it. Incidentally, Bentham envisaged this system becoming a dynastic livelihood for him and his family, and petitioned the government to build a prison, and make him the warder! Nice work if you can get it, plenty of time for scholalry pursuits between semi-random episodes of exemplary punishment. However, a possible Waiting-for-Godot variant of this idea would be that nasty things happen to prisoners in a more ambiguous way, so that prisoners never know if the watching warden even exists at all - it might all be random misfortune (of course well-behaved prisoners would also have to be punished sometimes randomly to maintain the uncertainty). It isn't clear why this is a better strategy for the wardens, except perhaps the uncertainty makes it harder for enough resentment to crystallize for a rebellion to occur. Wasn't the NSA closer to the panoptic ideal when it was No Such Agency than now, when we know we're being watched? Yes, absolutely, but I don't think NSA wanted that, although a grimly conspiratorial interpretation of current events is that it is a vast planned PR gambit to effect transition to a global neo-Panoptic society, after all civil libertarians have exhausted themselves in protest... Caspar -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
On 09/01/13 22:21, Guido Witmond wrote: ... Before the revelations and the subsequent confirmations, many people would rather believe the old truth (having nothing to hide) than to live with the new truth that they've been misled. Truth hurts. That's the reason why so many people claim they have nothing to hide. It's emotional. And often the people claiming this most loudly are politicians, because the clamour for transparency into every detail of a political candidate's private life has made this imperative. We should be afraid of that tendency, because if the only people prepared to go into public life are those whose interior life is so dull or non-existent that they really have nothing to hide, then it is certain we will be ruled by philosophical zombies with a sub-normal sense of empathy and self-awareness. I'd rather elect a hypocrite any day Caspar -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
On 09/02/13 08:46, Caspar Bowden (lists) wrote: On 09/01/13 21:49, Michael Rogers wrote: ... Wasn't the NSA closer to the panoptic ideal when it was No Such Agency than now, when we know we're being watched? Yes, absolutely, but I don't think NSA wanted that, although a grimly conspiratorial interpretation of current events is that it is a vast planned PR gambit to effect transition to a global neo-Panoptic society, after all civil libertarians have exhausted themselves in protest... Sorry I misread, that was a non-seqitur, i.e. the NSA is *now* the warden of a Panoptic Internet in consequence of the revelations. When it was No Such Agency, the Panoptic effect only occurs with paranoids or (as above speculatively) unconsciously CB -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
Caspar Bowden (lists) wrote: On 09/01/13 21:49, Michael Rogers wrote: ... Is there anyone who's aware of overt surveillance and who doesn't at least suspect that some form of covert surveillance also exists? And isn't that suspicion enough to create a panoptic effect? to some *unconscious* extent yes, but I have never seen any psychological studies into this. There ought to be an effect where even solid citizens become inhibited from communicating (or thinking! much harder experiment) certain ideas, depending on the level of ambient Speaking of mind control in the authoritarian, possibly panoptic context, in speaking to a couple of ordinary-seeming college-age city kids in a large, well known, largely industrial, regime in recent years (over telephone and unencrypted online communications, such as VOIP and instant messaging, which admittedly with the prospect of surveillance could effect what they would say), I wanted to get to know them and their world view. They happily talked about their family life and their career aspirations, and their city and environs, and whether they'd traveled (very little within their own country and happily explained to me how and why it was nearly impossible for them to leave the country). They had a kind of patriotic pride in their local industry. But I wanted to get to know how they thought... what their opinions were... philisophically, religiously, spiritually, and politically. I was stonewalled on those topics by the couple of (independent) young people I talked to. They were willing to hear my thoughts and views, but not really to respond to them. When pressed, I really upset one of them, and in both cases was told that they have no political views. The one who got upset said that only leads to unhappiness (or was it trouble?). At the same time, I've found something interesting with instant messaging over the years. If I have a public profile and am online, I get periodic random contacts from people around the world reaching out. These people have been mostly from more authoritarian countries with minor contact with the outside world. A surprising number from countries with hardly any internet access (those people had some amount of privelege, obviously, and often contacted me from shared public terminals at some cost). So there is this desire to reach out to the world, to connect, to participate, to have access to information, but in some cases simultaniously continued denial of holding philosophies, and in particular, political opinions. NSA-phobia, and this indeed might function as a form of social control. Never seen any studies on that idea. [Of course the STASI and others would make the surveillance obvious for the purpose of intimidation as a standard tactic in particular cases, but in general the watchers don't want the watched to know true capabilities] However on the face of it, that isn't the classical Panopticon, where discipline is maintained by fear of detection by the unseen warden The prisoners don't know whether they're being watched at any moment, or whether the watchtower is even occupied; the secret surveillance organisation, the existence of which cannot be confirmed, corresponds to the warden who may or may not be in the watchtower. ... Yes, absolutely, but I don't think NSA wanted that, although a grimly conspiratorial interpretation of current events is that it is a vast planned PR gambit to effect transition to a global neo-Panoptic society, after all civil libertarians have exhausted themselves in protest... Although I doubt that much of the way things have been playing out in the US re. the NSA and with encryption providers was calculated in advance, it does seem possible that some actions taken as this all unfolded were done in part to enhance a culture of fear and to stifle freedom of expression. Luckily, there is more public criticism in the U.S. and elsewhere around the world now than during Bush Jr.'s leadup to the second Iraq war, where media and the public fell in line so neatly and quickly it would seem Bush could have---should he have chosen---followed the example of the Nazis. It was part of the same playbook. And Jr. being famously uncharismatic and inarticulate (whether that was partly staged or not) didn't seem to put much of a damper on the freezing-effect on all major and most minor media outlets and the greater part of the populace. As a man, I give Jr. the benefit of the doubt, and assume he was just lacking in wisdom. That is not so important to me in any case. What was frightening for me was the susceptibility of the media, the public, the Congress, and the judiciary to control, and the ease in which rule of law was lost to a large degree. I believe people get wiser over the generations, and that democracy, still relatively new, especially in widespread popularity, can work well. But no matter the form of governance, it requires vigilence of the people to maintain
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
Many thanks Yosem, Luis Felipe Greg
On 08/31/13 07:14, Luis Felipe R. Murillo wrote:
On 08/30/2013 01:54 PM, Yosem Companys wrote:
From: Caspar Bowden li...@casparbowden.net
I realize this is an improbable request (I think), but is anyone aware of
any Surveillance Studies research on the organisations conducting *
covert/secret* mass-surveillance (a securitocracy)
many thanks any pointers
I am not particularly familiar with this literature, but I know of a few
pointers.
This seminar in Brazil brought together researchers studying
surveillance and social control. They had three panels of interest
('Internet and Surveillance', 'New Technologies of Surveillance', and
'Institutional Surveillance'):
http://www2.pucpr.br/ssscla/
Yes - that is in the mainstream Surveillance Studies tradition
These two references are central in the debate (so Caspar must be super
familiar with them):
- Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish (redefining the debate on
the nature of power and the nature of state power):
http://www.foucault.info/documents/disciplineandpunish/foucault.disciplineandpunish.panopticism.html
- Deleuze, Gilles. Society of Control (updating Foucault's treatment
of surveillance to the contemporary 'society of control'):
Yes :-)
AFAIK Deleuze, Foucault et al. did not say anything specifically about
covert (mass-)surveillance, or analyse how the inherently secret nature
of such organizations might be a causal element in theories of social
control. Secret surveillance organizations are NOT Panoptic in a
technical sense - they normally don't want you to know or fear they are
watching (with tactical exceptions).
In the sense that it aims to remain un-knowable by society, it seems
academic Surveillance Studies neglects covert surveillance to a large
extent becuase (a) it's very hard to study (!) , and (b) because it
doesn't (overtly and ordinarily) interact with Society like overt
surveillance it is less of interest to Sociologists (!)
To share back, one interesting reference so far:
*
Bridget Nolan (PhD thesis) 'Information sharing and collaboration in the
United States Intelligence Community: An Ethnographic Study of the National
Counterterrorism Center'
o est.sandia.gov/consequence/docs/JICRD.pdf
Caspar
--
Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/09/13 10:00, Caspar Bowden (lists) wrote: AFAIK Deleuze, Foucault et al. did not say anything specifically about covert (mass-)surveillance, or analyse how the inherently secret nature of such organizations might be a causal element in theories of social control. Secret surveillance organizations are NOT Panoptic in a technical sense - they normally don't want you to know or fear they are watching (with tactical exceptions). Is there anyone who's aware of overt surveillance and who doesn't at least suspect that some form of covert surveillance also exists? And isn't that suspicion enough to create a panoptic effect? The prisoners don't know whether they're being watched at any moment, or whether the watchtower is even occupied; the secret surveillance organisation, the existence of which cannot be confirmed, corresponds to the warden who may or may not be in the watchtower. Wasn't the NSA closer to the panoptic ideal when it was No Such Agency than now, when we know we're being watched? Cheers, Michael -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQEbBAEBAgAGBQJSI6hYAAoJEBEET9GfxSfM27kH+Kt8FGxycdshcGVp9JAJmjTp JmCLCl+mdJFI+zn2T+evk+z28dKdfLg5Tia9+0u48PYxce41GsRJBs7xWVnLjEw5 e9sBOPTQVIjoy1QiD6jNijOozGA3VHOcTJkgCKGnRxHnPpR7OZ0amF2VUbDIS5YE e48RVNNEmu7RyWaHJw8q+NYJ30mJA7WJep0FlgfmbS8c8ZmJ3SlXOwmyZqHtSmUe pXqdIXRAwGlpfv5SH99JSuPk0m8CqNSNcS0nZWvtiqVerqTr4uMlXytz4mHv47HG 4mTAJ/vQ75nR7XH5s686sK9vSM5JHAf2a2LZUqUn3bYx5dTHpBkhsq9riBSMIA== =gUxM -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
On 09/01/13 22:49, Michael Rogers wrote: On 01/09/13 10:00, Caspar Bowden (lists) wrote: AFAIK Deleuze, Foucault et al. did not say anything specifically about covert (mass-)surveillance, or analyse how the inherently secret nature of such organizations might be a causal element in theories of social control. Secret surveillance organizations are NOT Panoptic in a technical sense - they normally don't want you to know or fear they are watching (with tactical exceptions). Is there anyone who's aware of overt surveillance and who doesn't at least suspect that some form of covert surveillance also exists? And isn't that suspicion enough to create a panoptic effect? The prisoners don't know whether they're being watched at any moment, or whether the watchtower is even occupied; the secret surveillance organisation, the existence of which cannot be confirmed, corresponds to the warden who may or may not be in the watchtower. Wasn't the NSA closer to the panoptic ideal when it was No Such Agency than now, when we know we're being watched? The one 'good' thing about the original Panopticon design is that you *know it* when you are inside one. Inside a panopticon, you don't have the luxury of denial. The fact that this opportunity of denial has been taken away makes so many *watched* people upset. Before the revelations and the subsequent confirmations, many people would rather believe the old truth (having nothing to hide) than to live with the new truth that they've been misled. Truth hurts. That's the reason why so many people claim they have nothing to hide. It's emotional. Guido. -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
This isn't quite what you are looking for, but as a jumping off point for the old-school intelligence/diplomatic studies nexus of culture we are inheriting, this is not a bad historic orientation or bibliographic compass set. http://www.amazon.com/Diplomacy-Intelligence-During-Second-World/dp/0521521971 It's good to remember that these cultures predate the USA PATRIOT Act and yes, even the internet, yea, even DARPAnet, verily! (Shows off her ticket stub from Noah's ark… ;) You will likely have to go to interlibrary loan for this one. Not exactly bestseller list material, even in college libraries, I imagine. SN On Aug 30, 2013 4:54 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.edu wrote: From: Caspar Bowden li...@casparbowden.net I realize this is an improbable request (I think), but is anyone aware of any Surveillance Studies research on the organisations conducting * covert/secret* mass-surveillance (a securitocracy) many thanks any pointers Caspar Bowden -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
On 08/30/2013 01:54 PM, Yosem Companys wrote:
From: Caspar Bowden li...@casparbowden.net
I realize this is an improbable request (I think), but is anyone aware of
any Surveillance Studies research on the organisations conducting *
covert/secret* mass-surveillance (a securitocracy)
many thanks any pointers
I am not particularly familiar with this literature, but I know of a few
pointers.
This seminar in Brazil brought together researchers studying
surveillance and social control. They had three panels of interest
('Internet and Surveillance', 'New Technologies of Surveillance', and
'Institutional Surveillance'):
http://www2.pucpr.br/ssscla/
These two references are central in the debate (so Caspar must be super
familiar with them):
- Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish (redefining the debate on
the nature of power and the nature of state power):
http://www.foucault.info/documents/disciplineandpunish/foucault.disciplineandpunish.panopticism.html
- Deleuze, Gilles. Society of Control (updating Foucault's treatment
of surveillance to the contemporary 'society of control'):
http://www.nadir.org/nadir/archiv/netzkritik/societyofcontrol.html
best!
luisfelipe.
--
Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
This isn't exactly what you're looking for, but an alleged anonymous TSA
screener started a blog. I think that some of the details, such as the
fact that they allegedly have acronyms for bogus bag checks designed to
inconvenience passengers who are difficult speaks volumes.
http://boingboing.net/2012/12/21/anonymous-tsa-insider-blog.html
- Greg
On 8/31/13 2:14 AM, Luis Felipe R. Murillo wrote:
On 08/30/2013 01:54 PM, Yosem Companys wrote:
From: Caspar Bowden li...@casparbowden.net
I realize this is an improbable request (I think), but is anyone aware of
any Surveillance Studies research on the organisations conducting *
covert/secret* mass-surveillance (a securitocracy)
many thanks any pointers
I am not particularly familiar with this literature, but I know of a few
pointers.
This seminar in Brazil brought together researchers studying
surveillance and social control. They had three panels of interest
('Internet and Surveillance', 'New Technologies of Surveillance', and
'Institutional Surveillance'):
http://www2.pucpr.br/ssscla/
These two references are central in the debate (so Caspar must be super
familiar with them):
- Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish (redefining the debate on
the nature of power and the nature of state power):
http://www.foucault.info/documents/disciplineandpunish/foucault.disciplineandpunish.panopticism.html
- Deleuze, Gilles. Society of Control (updating Foucault's treatment
of surveillance to the contemporary 'society of control'):
http://www.nadir.org/nadir/archiv/netzkritik/societyofcontrol.html
best!
luisfelipe.
--
Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
compa...@stanford.edu.
[liberationtech] Sociological studies of covert mass-surveillance organisations
From: Caspar Bowden li...@casparbowden.net I realize this is an improbable request (I think), but is anyone aware of any Surveillance Studies research on the organisations conducting * covert/secret* mass-surveillance (a securitocracy) many thanks any pointers Caspar Bowden -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
