Podcast appearances and mentions of Jennifer Granick

Send us a textDr. Jennifer Granick takes us deep into her groundbreaking research on antibiotic prescribing patterns in companion animal practice, revealing both challenges and opportunities for improvement.This conversation unveils the complex reality of veterinary prescribing. Perhaps most surprising is the finding that preventive antibiotic treatments typically last the same duration (10 days) as those targeting confirmed infections—a practice without scientific justification.What makes this discussion particularly valuable is Dr. Granick's practical approach to creating change. Rather than overwhelming practitioners with an insurmountable challenge, she advocates starting small: "Pick one common condition, check prescribing guidelines, and make one small change." This accessible strategy empowers veterinarians to contribute meaningfully to antimicrobial stewardship without complete practice overhauls. Meanwhile, pet owners gain crucial perspective on when antibiotics truly help versus when they might cause harm.As Dr. Granick's team explores innovative methods using electronic health records and AI to gather prescribing data while maintaining privacy, the future of veterinary antimicrobial stewardship looks promising. Her parting wisdom serves as both warning and hope: antibiotics are indeed life-saving, but only if they continue to work. Join us for this essential conversation at the intersection of companion animal medicine, public health, and our shared responsibility to preserve these precious medications for generations to come.Open access JAVMA article: https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.24.11.0716INTERESTED IN SUBMITTING YOUR MANUSCRIPT TO JAVMA ® OR AJVR ® ? JAVMA ® : https://avma.org/JAVMAAuthors AJVR ® : https://avma.org/AJVRAuthorsFOLLOW US:JAVMA ® : Facebook: Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association - JAVMA | Facebook Instagram: JAVMA (@avma_javma) • Instagram photos and videos Twitter: JAVMA (@AVMAJAVMA) / Twitter AJVR ® : Facebook: American Journal of Veterinary Research - AJVR | Facebook Instagram: AJVR (@ajvroa) • Instagram photos and videos Twitter: AJVR (@AJVROA) / Twitter JAVMA ® and AJVR ® LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/company/avma-journals

In this episode, host Alyssa Watson, DVM, talks with Jennifer Granick, DVM, MS, PhD, DACVIM (SAIM), about her recent Clinician's Brief article, “Top 5 Times to Reconsider Antibiotic Prescriptions.” Dr. Granick discusses scenarios where antibiotics may be misused, emphasizing the importance of understanding the underlying causes of these conditions and the potential harm of unnecessary antibiotic use. She also speaks to the evolving perspectives on the use of metronidazole in veterinary medicine. Finally, Dr. Granick shares strategies for effective client communication, highlighting the significance of relatable analogies and shared experiences.Resources:https://www.cliniciansbrief.com/article/antibiotics-veterinary-treatment-clinical-signshttps://www.simparicatriodvm.comContact:podcast@instinct.vetWhere To Find Us:Website: CliniciansBrief.com/PodcastsYouTube: Youtube.com/@clinicians_briefFacebook: Facebook.com/CliniciansBriefLinkedIn: LinkedIn.com/showcase/CliniciansBrief/Instagram: @Clinicians.BriefX: @CliniciansBriefThe Team:Alyssa Watson, DVM - HostAlexis Ussery - Producer & Multimedia Specialist

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/jennifer_granick_how_the_us_government_spies_on_people_who_protest_including_you ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/160-academic-words-reference-from-jennifer-granick-how-the-us-government-spies-on-people-who-protest-including-you-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/pIsm6Su1XQ8 (All Words) https://youtu.be/P4BrChsoqYo (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/u4j_W6cbegw (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

Jennifer Granick is the surveillance and cybersecurity counsel with the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. She litigates, speaks, and writes about privacy, security, technology, and constitutional rights. She is the author of the book American Spies: Modern Surveillance, Why You Should Care, and What to Do About It and is an alum of New College of Florida along with host Mike Palmer. She joins Mike in a conversation about her work with the ACLU, her perspectives on the current situation at New College, and her thoughts on education and the future of work in light of the emergence of generative AI and Chat GPT. We begin by hearing Jennifer's origin story, beginning in New Jersey before studying at New College as an undergraduate on her way to becoming a lawyer. From there we hear how she began studying the Internet in its infancy in the 90s helping to create Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society. Since then she's become increasingly involved in civil liberties relating to emerging technology. We talk about the situation at New College while hearing Jennifer's thoughts on emerging trends in education, privacy, surveillance and the law. Don't miss it! Subscribe to Trending in Education wherever you get your podcasts. Visit us at TrendinginEd.com for more. And if you like what you're hearing, stay tuned for the launch of a new feed dedicated to New College coming to a podcast provider near you!

Our guests this week are Erin Frey, DVM, MPH, DACVPM, and Jennifer Granick, DVM, MS, PhD, Diplomate ACVIM (SAIM). We all got into veterinary medicine to make a difference – for one animal at a time in most cases – and sometimes it can be hard to remember that the little things we do and recommend can make a world-changing difference. Erin Frey, DVM, MPH, DACVPM, chair of the task force behind the 2022 AAFP/AAHA Antimicrobial Stewardship Guidelines, and Jennifer Granick, DVM, MS, PhD, Diplomate ACVIM (SAIM), task force member, are here to remind us of the effect small actions can make in the face of a very, very big problem. Whether it's never skipping that ear cytology even if you're running late, always having the conversation about topicals even when you're not sure the client will say yes, or being the one to run the diagnostics even when they're used to having refills approved sight unseen, Drs. Granick and Frey are quick to point out that every little bit helps – and when we know better, we can do better.   Find these and all of AAHA's most up-to-date Guidelines, including resources for your clients and team, at aaha.org/guidelines.  Check out all of UMN's antimicrobial stewardship resources at ARSI.umn.edu, including their non-antibiotic prescription pad.  Wish you could watch these conversations? Catch Central Line on YouTube.   Send us feedback or questions anytime at podcast@aaha.org.  This episode was produced by Clear Contender LLC.

If you live in a state where abortions have been banned since the overturn of Roe v. Wade, accessing abortion is a huge challenge. But unfortunately, access is not the only challenge -- pursuing an abortion without leaving a trace poses another huge hurdle. If you search for resources online, if you get in your car and travel, who you text, if you ship pills to your house -- will the state find out? In our daily lives, many of our actions are tracked for consumption and utilization by various companies and organizations. That data could now be used against you if you seek an abortion. We are used to hearing people shrug off data surveillance concerns. The saying from digital privacy naysayers goes: if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. But now, we maybe have something new to hide, and therefore maybe something new to fear. Today, we are digging into data privacy in a post-Roe world and learning both what we individually can do to best keep our data safe and what we can ask of data collectors and government officials to help us in our pursuit of privacy. Joining us is Jennifer Granick, Surveillance and Cybersecurity Counsel, for the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. Additional Resources: From the Digital Defense Fund, How to Keep Your Abortion Private & Secure: https://digitaldefensefund.org/ddf-guides/abortion-privacy From the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Surveillance Self-Defense: https://ssd.eff.org/en

Last month, a federal judge in Richmond, Virginia ruled that the use of a geofence warrant to make an arrest in a robbery case was unconstitutional because it violated the Fourth Amendment. Civil liberties advocates have raised concerns about geofence warrants for a long time because they give police data for anyone whose phone was in a given area during a specific timeframe. The Takeaway speaks with Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel with the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, about what this latest ruling means for the use of geofence warrants going forward.

Last month, a federal judge in Richmond, Virginia ruled that the use of a geofence warrant to make an arrest in a robbery case was unconstitutional because it violated the Fourth Amendment. Civil liberties advocates have raised concerns about geofence warrants for a long time because they give police data for anyone whose phone was in a given area during a specific timeframe. The Takeaway speaks with Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel with the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, about what this latest ruling means for the use of geofence warrants going forward.

Welcome!   For all of my listeners who purchased my course on Improving Windows Security - THANK YOU! We have a whopper of a warning this week about what the Department of Homeland Security is planning under the Biden Administration -- They are going to let Big Tech and Private Companies create the NO-Fly and Terrorist Watch Lists on their behalf -- Scary beyond measure.  Then Apple is doing more to protect your privacy.  We have another hack of a Commercial VPN provider and there is more so be sure to Listen in. For more tech tips, news, and updates, visit - CraigPeterson.com. --- Tech Articles Craig Thinks You Should Read: DHS Preparing to Use Private Contractors to “Scour Public Data and Social Media” To Compile Dissident Citizens for Watch List and No-Fly Lists Another Reason to hate VPNs -- Feds say hackers are likely exploiting critical Fortinet VPN vulnerabilities Mark Zuckerberg's cell phone number is among leaked personal data from 533 MILLION Facebook users, including two other founders that have been released for FREE by hackers How scammers siphoned $36B in fraudulent unemployment payments from the US Are self-driving cars safe? Will they ever be? Fender bender in Arizona illustrates Waymo’s commercialization challenge Apple is enforcing its new privacy standards and rejecting apps - New wave of App Store rejections suggests iOS 14.5, new iPad may be imminent My biggest complaint about Android? The lack of security updates. Google is trying to solve it -- What we’re expecting from Google’s custom “Whitechapel” SoC in the Pixel 6 NFTs Weren’t Supposed to End Like This Embracing a Zero Trust Security Model Turns out Most Manufacturing, Water Supply, and Power Companies Use Controllers with a Security Severity Score of 10 out of 10 Chromebooks outsold Macs worldwide in 2020, cutting into Windows market share Clubhouse is the New Up-and-Comer but  Security and Privacy Lag Behind Its Explosive Growth New York sues to shut down 'fraudulent' Coinseed crypto platform Former SolarWinds CEO blames intern for 'solarwinds123' password leak WhatsApp will basically stop working if you don't accept the new privacy policy TikTok breaching users’ rights “on a massive scale”, says European Consumer Group --- Automated Machine-Generated Transcript: Craig Peterson: [00:00:00] We're going to be talking about a fender bender in Arizona and when will these autonomous cars be safe, at least measured safe.  We've got a new wave of app store rejections from Apple. That means a couple of things, including better privacy for all of us. Hello, everybody. Craig Peterson here. Thanks for joining us today.  This is an interesting question, because we are looking at a future that we assume anyways is going to be full of autonomous vehicles. Why autonomous? What does it mean? There are various levels of autonomous, degrees, if you will. Everything from what we have today in a lot of cars, which is an assist cruise control, that'll keep you a certain distance from the car in front of you. We've got assisted braking control, where the car notices, Oh, wait a minute. Someone just hit the brakes right in front of you. I should apply the brakes and it hits the brakes even before your foot is pushing down.  Another way to do this is if you slam your foot on the brake, the car assumes you know something that it doesn't, and it increases the force that you're pushing down with. So even though you might just hit the brake fast and not necessarily hard the car will make it hard.  If you think about these types of braking, for instance, you can start to realize where we're running into a problem when it comes to defining whether or not autonomous vehicles are safe.  Bottom line is autonomous vehicles, which are all the way on the other side of this scale, it started with the brakes and now is hopefully going to end with a car that just drives itself. That's everybody's goal, Ford and GM and Chrysler- Fiat, whatever they're called nowadays of course, these autonomous vehicle companies, such as Tesla. We're going to see a way of measuring them that's different than we've ever seen before.  Right now, if you have a motor vehicle, you have a driver's license, most likely. And do you have insurance. Again, most likely and you have insurance because stuff happens. You don't really mean to hit something. You don't mean to wander out of your lane and end up in the woods. Right?  There's a lot of different things that can happen to you, including having another driver get into your way. My wife has been rear-ended. I was rear-ended. She had a beautiful little car, a little MG, and I can tell to this day that she absolutely loved that little car and she used to drive it around and go down to work. I think it was at Baxter Travenol and she'd be driving down there, just having a great time in Southern California. While she was at a stoplight and somebody rear-ended her and totaled her car. Which is just an absolute shame that wasn't her fault. Was it?  I got rear-ended, I've been ruined it, I think two or three times, never to the point that she was at, where the vehicle had major damage, let alone have to be written off, but it happened right. People aren't attentive. They misjudged the distance. It might be following too close for the conditions, rain or snow or fog or ice. There's a lots of reasons. So we have insurance and we have a driver's license to prove that we indeed at least understand the basics of driving. We passed a test, right? What is it? 70% pass rate, which frankly, isn't such a great rate if you get right down to it.  Anyway, how do we measure these cars? I mentioned the rear end collisions for a very specific purpose. These autonomous cars are racking up millions of miles on  roads out West, really California, Arizona is a very popular place for them to be tested because they don't have a whole lot of weather conditions to worry about. The roads are there and they're not changing very much, particularly in Southern California. They've all been built and there's not another square inch that isn't paved, including people's front lawn, which just absolutely boggled my mind. Why would you have a cement slab for front lawn anyways? That's California for you. These cars driving millions of miles in California are having accidents. They're not having these types of accidents you and I have.  There is a police report that was obtained by the Phoenix new times this last week that revealed a minor Waymo related crash. Now this crash occurred last October and it isn't the only one. This is, kind of, a pattern, but these have not been publicly reported until now.  I'm going to read here just a quick paragraph from what the new times in Phoenix had to say, "a white Waymo minivan" Waymo, of course, Google's little spinoff, to make these autonomous vehicles. "A white Waymo mini-van was traveling westbound in the middle of three westbound lanes on Chandler Boulevard in autonomous mode when it unexpectedly breaked for no reason." "A Waymo backup driver behind the wheel at the time told Chandler police that all of a sudden the vehicle began to stop and gave a code to the effect of stop recommended and came to a sudden stop without warning." A red Chevy Silverado pickup behind the vehicle swerved to the right, but clipped its back panel causing minor damage." No one was hurt. Overall Waymo has a pretty strong safety record.  By the way, that was from an article over at ARS Technica. They have more than 20 million testing miles in the Southwest United States.  If you think about it.  I was adding these numbers up, 20 million miles. My wife and I, we have put well more than a million miles on cars.  That's what happens when you have eight kids, right? Over the years you rack it up, 250,000 this car, 300,000 on that car. Yeah. It  adds up. That's a lot of miles.  If you start looking at how many miles the average person drives a year and start doing some comparisons with the accident numbers, you'll see really that the autonomous vehicles are having far fewer accidents. Fewer accidents involving a death, which is actually very good, but the accidents it's having, even though they tend to be minor are usually the fault of the other driver. A large majority, in fact of the accidents where these Waymo vehicles, this is according to Waymo, large majority of those crashes have been the fault of the other driver.  So what is the fault of the other driver? Who was at fault here? If that red Chevy Silverado pickup truck hit that Waymo autonomous car, it's the Chevy's fault. Why did the Chevy do it? It isn't just because he's driving a Chevy or because it's red or a pickup, he hit that car most likely, I don't know, I'm not talking to the guy, but most likely because the car did something unexpected.  If you read again, that police report it saying that even the driver quote unquote, in, in the Waymo car, this white minivan, who's sitting there to make sure the minivan doesn't run somebody over, that driver said, it was all of a sudden it began to stop. It all of a sudden began to stop and gave this code about a stop recommended and stopped with a warning. Put all of those things in a pot and stirred up and what do you have? You now have a different way of driving.  See that Chevy Silverado, if he's a good driver, he's looking ahead right down the road. If you look too close in front of you, you're going to be over-correcting. You're going to be steering all over the place. You're not going to go in a straight line. So with experience, you're looking down the road, two, three, four minimum car lengths ahead. Depends how fast you're going and that's where you're aiming.  You don't see an obstruction in front of that Waymo minivan. So you're not starting to slow down. It's just like I come up to your traffic light there's cars in front of me, and that light is red. I'm not going to be accelerating and then leaning on the brake, like so many people do. I see,  there's a red light ahead. There's cars stopped at the light. I'm just going to coast to a stop. Right? Save some energy. You save some brake pads. Stop global warming by not heating up those brake pads.  It's not something most people expect. I've never been rear-ended by doing that, but I've certainly been given the finger for doing that even though I tend to get to the cars in front of me, right? About the time the light turns green.   It's fascinating to look at, but what's going to happen? What is ultimately the way to determine how safe these cars are? We cannot use the types of assessments that our insurance companies are using.  Rear end collisions, like this, rarely get anyone killed. That's where the real high expenses come in.  The driver in the back is usually considered to be at fault.  But, what happens when the self-driving cars suddenly comes to the stop in the middle of the road. It's interesting to think about it, isn't it?   Waymo's vehicles sometime hesitate longer than a human would because they have to do all kinds of computations and consider complex situations that they're not used to.   If you've ever written code, say a hundred lines of code. It's going to be in case with cars millions of lines, but out of a hundred lines of code, about 90% of it is for the edge conditions. In other words, things that are unlikely to happen.  So when something weird happens that car's going to hesitate, and that frankly is a problem, the idiosyncrasies of self driving cars. We're going to talk about a wave of app store rejections by Apple iOS for your iPhone, iPad, et cetera. We'll tell you why right here.  You're listening to Craig Peterson, online Craig peterson.com. Apple is making another major change in order to give us more privacy.  I just started this, Improving Windows Privacy and Security Course. If you using an Apple iOS device, you're halfway there. Hello, everybody. Craig Peterson here. Thanks for tuning in . You can always hear me online@craigpeterson.com slash podcast.  Apple has been really the only major vendor out there in the smartphone industry to really have security as their prime motivation. Okay, you could argue money istheir prime motivation, right?  Apple has always tried to be secure. The hardware is quite secure. They haven't licensed their operating system to third parties and that gives them control. Like you can't have anywhere else.  Think about all of the different Android-based smartphones that are out there. There are thousands of different models.  Within each model, sometimes there are dozens of different hardware configurations. So, Google comes out with a security patch and sends it on out to the vendors, well actually makes it available for the vendors to pick up. Then the vendors go and grab it, and they have to test it, and they have to work in their own code, and then they have to work in all of the device drivers stuff, and they have to package it up.  They have to test it on all of the different models. Just think about Samsung, how many models Samsung has, just by itself, a whole lot of models.  It is almost impossible for Android phones to get security patches. Any Android phone that's more than two years old is guaranteed to not get security patches. I talked last weekend about what Samsung is doing to try and solve this. Finally, they must be listening to the show. Samsung had been more or less supporting it's top of the line models for about two years. If you bought a top of the line Galaxy phone from Samsung or another real top hot model, you might get security updates for a couple of years, and that's kind of it. Forget about it beyond that, which is why I said, if you absolutely must use Android, there's only one vendor you can use in that Samsung.  There's only one model phone that you can buy, which is Samsung top of the line phone, and you have to replace it every two years. So Samsung has come out now and said, We're going to provide support security support for our phones for five years. So they're trying to compete with Apple here. Apple has long provided support for five years. And as we saw just a couple of weeks ago with this big act of zero day attack against Apple iOS devices. They will actually provide security updates for much longer than five years, but it's way easier to provide security updates for 30 models of phones than it is for a few hundred models, which is what Samsung has. Expect Samsung to narrow down their product line and also to only really be providing support for the top models within their product lines.  Now, here's what Apple is doing right now. Apple is starting to reject some of these apps that have been in the app store for a long time, as well as new apps. They're rejecting them for a couple of reasons. The biggest reason is that as of iOS 14.5, Apple is requiring all of the vendors to tell you when you go to the app store, what information of yours they're storing, they're using, and they're selling. Okay. Pretty big deal. Isn't it? It's pretty bad deal, frankly, when you get right down to it for facebook and others. Facebook took out full page ads in major newspapers in the US saying, Oh, Apple can't do this. This is terrible. It's going to destroy a small business.  They said, it's going to destroy small business because Facebook can't pry into our lives as much. You know how it is. People say all the time, they're saying, Hey, I, why am I getting these ads? I've never even searched for it and somehow it's coming up.  There's a number of reasons why, but the bottom line is called big data. These apps like Facebook use all kinds of big data to figure out what we might like and part of that is based on what our friends are searching for. So, it puts together this massive mesh and figures it all out. Something that the Obama campaign really pioneered when Facebook gave them all of the data that they had on everyone and anyone.  I'm sitting here shaking my head because somehow that's okay, but having this Cambridge Analytica company do some of it from a paid standpoint and not get wholesale data somehow that was the most evil thing that ever happened.  They forgot about Obama, but you know, I guess that's political.  I criticize both sides of the aisle. I am an equal opportunity criticizer. They deserve it.  We've got Apple now telling Facebook and every other app developer, you have to tell the users. In fact, if you go right now to your phone, your iPad or your iPhone, or the iPod touch, you'll see if you go to the app and you scroll up. You can open a little tab and that tab will all of a sudden become a very big part of the screen because it's tell me what this app is doing with my data. If you don't tell it, Apple's going to block you from the store.  Google has, of course, a bunch of apps. You've probably used them things like Google maps, which I try not to use. Use the Apple maps its gotten much, much better than it was, and they're not tracking you and selling your data like Google does. Google has its own little app for doing searches. Of course, you've got Google Chrome, all these different things from Google. Google stopped updating their apps on the Apple app store because Apple was telling Google, you have to tell people what your doing with their data. Google didn't want to do it. We just want to update the apps, kind of, loophole that was in this whole thing.  They can't not update it forever. Now we're seeing rejections of these developers.  Here is a few lines again from ARS Technica, from a rejection letter that some developers received. "We found in our review that your app collects user and device information to create a unique identifier for the users, devices, apps that fingerprint the user's device in this way are in violation of the Apple developer program license agreement and are not appropriate for the app store."  Now, we're not talking about the fingerprint, as in the fingerprint reader, we're saying that they are looking for unique information about the phone, so they know it's you, they can put it all together. That letter goes on specifically, "your app uses algorithmically converted device and usage data to create a unique identifier in order to track the user."  Apple is really making it clear now to developers. To the ire of Facebook and Google and other companies who rely on that type of tracking to maximize the advertising revenue.  I can understand that, right. I really can. It's also clear that this app tracking transparency means that apps that are trying to track you by any means without your consent are going to face rejection. Bravo to Apple, yet again.  Now I'm not so happy about the statement they made this week. Yeah, Georgia. That's another thing entirely.  Stick around everybody. We will be right back talking more about technology. We're going to talk a little bit about what Google's planning to do in order to help with all of  these Android developers and people that are selling them. Carriers, et cetera. How's Google is going to help them with their security updates. This is an interesting way to do it. It's exactly what Apple's been doing.  You're listening to Craig Peterson. Apple's really gotten into the chip business and it isn't just because they wanted a chip for their iPhone that they could control.  In fact, Apple has even gone further and looks like Google's going to do the same. Hello, everybody. Craig Peterson here.  Google has been an interesting beast over the years. Remember they used to say that their motto was don't be evil. Then a few years ago they removed it from the website and evil seems to be their middle name, a little bit.  One of the things Google has been doing is offering an operating system that can be used and is being used to run almost anything. We're talking mostly, however, about smartphones, certainly by number.  That's called Android. Android was a little operating system, of sorts, that was developed by a kid actually Google bought it from him. They have continued to develop on it. It's not a bad little platform. The biggest problems with it really have to do with what I talked about a little earlier, the security, right? Getting the updates.  I mentioned how Apple really has a walled garden. They have their own environment where everything is contained so they can control it all. Google cannot control anything other than the Google pixel phone.  It cannot control what Samsung is doing with the operating system, Android can run on pretty much any chip that's manufactured from Intel chips, through all of these, a little fast chips, these snapdragons and many others that have been used over the years. There's a lot of them.  One of the biggest problems, of course, is the chip set. I've mentioned that Google can come out with an operating system release to fix some security problems, and then those are pushed out, but nothing's done by the carrier or maybe the developer of the handset. What Google's decided to do is make their own walled garden.  If you buy an Apple iPhone, you buy an Apple iPad, or you buy a new Apple Mac, they're all using the same basic chip set that's designed by Apple. They have some fabs where they're making some of these components. Apple has done that so again, they can control it even better. They don't have to pay that exorbitant Intel tax.  Also over at Apple trying to figure out how can we avoid the Qualcomm tax. It isn't just a Qualcomm, you know, I say tax, as in you pay way more for Intel than you would for another equivalent or better chip. In fact, I have an Apple right in front of me here, an Apple Mac. This is a Mac mini M1 based. It is way faster and cheaper than the Intel version.  You can still get the Intel version of the mini $200 more. There's your Intel tax. And it's about half the speed for some of these things.  For instance, Adobe said that this mac with the Apple chip set in it can be twice as fast as the Mac, same Mac with an Intel processor.  Apple is moving away from not just Intel now, but from Qualcomm. Google wants to move away from Qualcomm.  In many of these smartphones, including the pixels, they're using a Qualcomm Snapdragon chip. The Qualcomm makes a lot of different types of chips. They also tend to make the radio chips that are in our smartphones. The radio chips are used to talk to the cell towers, just send data to send our voice. That's what they're used for.   Apple is hiring developers right now to develop their own chip set. It might not be there for 5G. It might be 6G. In fact, that's what the advertisements for those jobs were about as 6G. But they're going to move away from all of these standard devices that are very expensive and hard to control.  Google is saying the biggest problem we have with making sure that users of the Android operating system get updates is Qualcomm. Interesting, isn't it?  Google is coming out with, what's known as a system on a chip, SOC. What that is, think of the motherboards of years past.  One of my first computers was an IBM three 60 30 mainframe, and this thing was huge and not much power.  It's just amazing to think about, but it really could sling data around even way back then. It was a nice little computer, if you will. Think about how big that motherboard was. Yeah. It had the main processor. You had the memory controllers, the bus controllers, you had everything right that needed to be there to support it. All of your IO stuff. I might have had serial UARTS built into it, et cetera, et cetera. A system on a chip is basically you got one chip and that's pretty much all you need. Obviously you got to have memory and you're going to have some sort of storage, other more permanent storage devices, but that's the basics of what a system on a chip is.  Google reportedly anyways, that the pixel six is expected to ship with Google custom white chapel is what it's going to be called system on a chip internally.  It's referred to as a GS101. And that GS could be for Google silicone. There's all kinds of people speculating that seems to be the kind of the big one.  There is a pixel six in the works. We do know that. Nine to five Google, is a website out there and they've done a lot of little spying on what's going on, but apparently it's a, I'm not going to get into all of the details, but basically it's going to have three CPU cores in it and everything. It's going to be really quite nice. A large arm core for single threaded work loads and three medium cores for multi work. We've had a problem over the years. How do you make your computer faster? And you can use Intel's approach, which is let's just throw more processors at it. That's great if the software you're using can handle multithreaded environments where you have multiple processors. Okay. You got multiple processors, but how about the access to the memory? What if the process is all one access to the same area of memory at the same time? Then you have to start blocking. It gets very complicated, very fast. Intel chips fade very, very fast. You don't have to get to too many CPU's before all of a sudden the addition of one more CPU cuts the performance of that new CPU by 50%. It really doesn't. It really doesn't take much.  They're all trying to get away from Intel. Many of them have, right? Obviously Google Android phones outside of Google as well have been based on non-Intel hardware for awhile, but they're also now trying to get rid of Qualcomm. And I think that's a good thing. Ultimately, it's going to help out a lot. We're going to see more of this thing in the future, and we're all going to benefit from it, right?  With the Google having control over their system on a chip, at least their pixel, it's going to make their life easier, which means if you buy a pixel, you're probably going to be able to get the upgrades better. Thinking in the back of my mind that maybe Samsung is looking to do the same thing. Maybe Samsung's looking to move away from the Qualcomm chips and move to Google's new system on a chip. I have no idea. I have no inside information, but that would seem to make sense for me, particularly if they want to provide support for years. By the way, Google is in the embarrassing position of offering less support for Android devices than Samsung, which is now up to three years of major updates, which by the way, is Qualcomm's maximum. Samsung has four years of security updates for some of their devices as well.  Stick around. You're listening to Craig Peterson.  You can find me online@craigpeterson.com. Don't go anywhere. You've heard about the no fly list, right? Yeah. How about the terrorist and other watch lists? These lists that people have found it's impossible to get their names off of, even when there was no reason to be there in the first place?  Well, I got some news. Hi, everybody. Craig Peterson here.  Department of Homeland security has been criticized for many things over the years. One of the things that's been criticized quite a bit about is this watch list that they maintain. They have a watch list for no fly. People get put on that watch list.  It was originally intended to be, we know this guy's a terrorist, so we're going to put them on, right.  It's not always the way it goes. It starts out almost innocuous and before you know, it, there's all kinds of people getting caught in this big, big net.  That's what's been happening lately and it's going to get worse because the Department of Homeland security has decided that they are going to hire regular old companies to help develop this no fly list and also this terrorist watch list.  Apparently these companies are going to be looking through all kinds of public data, maybe some private data, social media in order to provide information for this new domestic terror watch list. So you look at that and say, okay, I can see that.  We've talked to before problem, man, 20 years ago, I think I was talking about these data aggregators and the problems they create. Cause they're taking public records, they're putting them all together. They're figuring out how it all meshes together and they come up with a pretty accurate picture of who you are.  Now, I've got to say when I've had them on my show here before I was talking to them and said, okay, I want to look up my own records. So I looked them up on their platforms. I did not see a single one that was more than about 30% correct about me.  Now, this was again, some years ago. I think it's been probably almost a decade since I last spoke with the data aggregators. They really are trying to blend into the background, nowadays. This data that's put together by these artificial intelligence systems is not necessarily that accurate and that gets to be a real problem.  So who is DHS gonna hire? Well, from the description that has been reported on here by the Conservative Tree House, it is going to be big tech, specifically, Google, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, and more.  DHS is going to put them under contracts to hire and organize internal monitoring teams to assist the government by sending information on citizens, they deem dangerous again, what could go wrong?  Our government is not allowed to spy on us. How many times have we talked about this? You have of course the five eyes and then they added more and more. These are governments that spy on each other's citizens for each other.  So for instance, US cannot spy on US citizens. So we have an arrangement with the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, to spy on the US citizens for us that makes sense to you. Can you believe that?  We spy on their citizens for them and they spy on our citizens for us and all is good.  What's happening here is The Department of Homeland security realizes it cannot spy on us directly.  This is what they've been doing for very long time, they go to the data aggregators and they pull up the data that they want.  They want to see if this guy maybe selling illicit drugs and they pull up public records. What cars does he have? How many homesdo they own?  Who's he dating?  Has she all of a sudden been buying diamonds and mink coats? What's going on here?  So now we're seeing that the US intelligence apparatus. It's really now going live quickly, to put together lists of Americans who could be potential threats to the government and need to be watched. Now it's all well, and good. It's just like president Biden this week saying, Oh, we're going to have these red flag laws. We're going to stop the sale of certain types of firearms and things. It all sounds good. The reality is we have known about some of these people before, right? This is all just a red herring that the federal government is doing right now because the real problem is these terrorists, the domestic and otherwise that have shot up schools have almost always been reported to law enforcement as dangerous people. Some of them have even been on lists that say they cannot buy firearms, and yet they get firearms. Bad guys.  It's like here in the US. Where does our fentanyl come from?  We're not making a domestically. Our fentanyl is coming from China often through Mexico, and it is killing people here in the US. The whole George Floyd incident, and what's happening with fentanyl in his system, right. The question is, did the police operate properly? What killed him? According to the coroner's report? It was the fentanyl. that killed him.  One way or the other that fentanyl got here from China and is being used on the streets and people are dying from it. Fentanyl's illegal. How, how could they possibly get it? It's illegal for a felon to be in possession of a firearm. How did it felon get the firearm? The police were warned about people in San Bernardino, California, they were warned. The people in that business told the police. We were calling. we're really worried about this guy and nothing happened. So now what are we going to do? We're going to cast an even wider net, when we cannot take care of the reports that come in right now. We're going to get even more reports and they're going to be coming from these AI systems. Again, what, what could possibly go wrong here? It's absolutely incredible. They look at these reports, they try and determine are these actionable, the FBI or other law enforcement agencies. They've been deciding no, it's not actionable. They've been right sometimes and they've been wrong other times. This is a real problem.  What shocked me is NBC news with Andrea Mitchell, NBC news. Not a centrist news organization, very far left. NBC news is even reporting on this. They're realizing the consequences. Here's a quote from NBC. "DHS planning to expand relationships with companies that scour public data for intelligent and to better harness the vast trove of data it already collects on Americans." "The department is also contemplating changes to its terrorist. Watch listing process." Absolutely amazing. "Two senior Biden administrative administration officials told NBC news that Homeland security whose intelligence division did not publish a warning of potential violence before the January sixth Capitol riots, is seeking to improve its ability to collect and analyze data about domestic terrorism, including the sorts of public social media posts that threatened a potential attack on the Capitol." "DHS is expanding its relationships with other companies that scour public data for intelligence. One of the senior officials said, and also to better harness the vast trove of data it already collects on Americans, including travel and commercial data through customs and border protection, immigration, customs enforcement, the coast guard, secret service, and other DHS components". There you go from NBC news. So remind yourself what the FBI contractors with access to the NSA database already did in their quest for political opposition, research and surveillance, and then get everything we were just talking about. The director of national intelligence declassified, a FISA judge's ruling. So this is judge James Boasberg, 2018 ruling, where the FBI conducted tens of thousands of unauthorized NSA database queries. Do you remember that story? Very, very big deal. This judge obviously passing these things out like candy and the FBI misusing its power and authority. Again, what could possibly go wrong?  By the way, President Obama apparently has been telling us that we should use the no fly list to keep people from owning guns.  There's already a database maintained by the FBI.  This whole thing is, as I said, a red herring things are going to get really bad if law enforcement does this. Frankly, they're going to do it. There's no two ways about it.  We have to be more careful about keeping our information, our data private. That's what this whole course that started last week was all about. Improving your Windows privacy and security. Locking it down because the way Microsoft ships windows and the way it installs and configures itself by default does not keep your data private. That's a problem. So that's what we're going through. Hopefully, you were able to get into that before we closed it Friday night.  Remind yourself of this and just keep chanting nothing bad could happen here, right? Ah, the joys of all of these computers and databases and the way the work in nowadays.  By the way, if your information is out there at all, even if you use fake names and numbers and addresses and things like I do when it's not required. Right.  I don't lie to the bank. I don't lie to the IRS. Nobody else needs to know the truth. Even if you have been, keep it private, good chance that they know who you are and where you are. Crazy. Crazy.  Hey, visit me online. Craig peterson.com. Make sure you subscribe to my weekly newsletter. Hi everybody. Of course, Craig Peterson here. We're going to talk today about these drone swarms, your personal privacy risk tolerance breach highlights here over orgs individuals. What's going on? Ransomwares way up. As usual, a lot to talk about. Hey, if you miss part of my show, you can always go online to Craig peterson.com. You'll find it there. If you're a YouTube fan CraigPeterson.com/youtube.  This is really an interesting time to be alive. Is that a good way to put it right? There used to be a curse "May you live in interesting times" Least that was the rumor.  One of the listeners pointed this out, there was a TV show that was on about five years ago, apparently, and it used this as a premise. I also saw a great movie that used this as a premise and it was where the President was under attack. He was under attack by drones.  The Biden administration has a policy now where they're calling for research into artificial intelligence, think the Terminator, where you can have these fighting machines.  These things should be outlawed, but I also understand the otherside where if we don't have that tech and our enemies end up having that tech, we are left at a major disadvantage. Don't get me wrong here. I just don't like the idea of anybody doing Terminators, Skynet type of technology. They have called for it  to be investigated.  What we're talking about right now is the drone swarms. Have you seen some of these really cool drones that these people called influencers? Man, the term always bothers me. So many people don't know what they're doing. They just make these silly videos that people watch and then they make millions, tens of millions, I guess it's not silly after all.  These influencers make these videos. There are drones that they can use if they're out hiking, you might've noticed or mountain biking or climbing. They have drones now that will follow them around, automatically. They are on camera. It's following them. It focuses in on their face. They can make the drone get a little closer or further away. As long as the sky is clear there's no tree branches or anything in the way that drone is going to be able to follow them, see what they're doing and just really do some amazing shots. I've been just stunned by how good they are.  Those drones are using a form of artificial intelligence and I'm not going to really get into it right now, but there are differences between machine learning and artificial intelligence, but at the very least here, it's able to track their faces. Now this is where I start getting really concerned. That's one thing. But they are apparently right now training. When I say they, the Chinese and probably us, too, are designing drones that not only have cameras on them, but are military drones.  They have without them having to have a central computer system controlling them or figuring out targets, they're able to figure out where there's a human and take them out. These small drones, they're not going to take them out by firing, a 50 caliber round at them. These drones can't carry that kind of firepower. It's just too heavy, the barrels and everything else -- it's a part of that type of a firearm.  We're talking about small drones again. So obviously they're not going to have a missile on them either. What they do is they put a small amount, just a fraction of an ounce, of high explosives on the drone.  The idea is if that drone crashes into you and sets off its explosives, you're dead, particularly if it crashes into and sets off explosives right there by your head. Now that's pretty bad when you get down to it. I don't like the whole Skynet Terminator part of this, which is that the drones are able to find that human and then kill them.  Think of a simple scenario where there is, let's say there's a war going on. Let's use the worst case scenario and, enemy troops are located approximately here. You send the drones out and the drone has of course, GPS built into it, or some other inertial guidance system or something in case GPS gets jammed.  That drone then goes to that area. It can recognize humans and it says, Oh, there's a human and it goes and kills the human. Now that human might be an innocent person. Look at all of the problems we've had with our aerial drones, the manually controlled ones, just the ones that we've been using in the last 10 years where we say, okay, there's a terrorist here. Now they fly it in from, they've got somebody controlling it in Nevada or wherever it might be, and they get their strike orders and their kill orders. They go in and they'd take it out. There are collateral damages. Now that's always been true.  Every war.  Look at Jimmy Stewart. For example, a younger kids probably don't know who it is. Mr. Smith goes to Washington was one of his movies.  He had some great Christmas movies and stuff too. Anyhow, Jimmy Stewart was a bomber. I think he was a pilot actually in World War II.  He flew combat missions over Germany. Think of what we did in Germany, in Japan, where we killed thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds, probably of thousands of civilians. We now think, Oh we're much better than that. We don't do that anymore. We're careful about civilian casualties. Sometimes to the point where some of our people end up getting in harm's way and killed.  For the most part, we try and keep it down.  A drone like this that goes into an area, even if it's a confined area, and we say, kill any humans in this area, there are going to be innocent casualties.  It might even be friendly fire. You might even be taking out some of your own people.  They've said, okay we've got a way around this. What we're going to do is we're going to use artificial intelligence. The drone doesn't just pick out, Oh, this is a human. I'm going to attack that person. It looks at the uniform, it looks at the helmet.  It determines which side they're on.  If they're wearing an American or Chinese uniform, whatever, it might be programmed for it again, it goes into the area, it finds a human and identifies them as the enemy. Then it goes in and hits them and blows up killing that person. That's one way that they are looking to use drones. The other way is pretty, scary. It's, you can defend yourself against a drone like that. You've got a drone coming. You're probably going to be able to hear it. Obviously it depends. That drone gets close. I don't know if you've ever had the kids playing with drones, flying them around you, or you've done the same thing. You can always hit it out of the air, can't you?   If you're military and you have a rifle in your arm, you can just use the rifle and play a little baseball with that drone. There's some interesting stories of people who've been doing that already.  What happens if we're not talking about a drone, we're talking about a drone swarm. I don't know that you could defend against something like that. There have been studies that have been done. So think, you think there nobody's really working this suit? No, they sure are.  What's going to happen? Well, the Indian army is one that has admitted to doing tests and they had a swarm of 75 drones. If you have 75 drones coming after you, let's say you're a high value target. There is no way you're going to be able to defend yourself against them, unless you can duck and cover and they can't get anywhere near you with their high explosives. The Indian army had these Kamikaze-attack drones. They don't necessarily have to even have high explosives on them.   This is a new interpretation under Joseph Biden. Mr. President of the Pentagon's rules of use of autonomous weapons. We've always had to have "meaningful human control." That's the wording that they Pentagon uses meaningful human control over any lethal system. Now that could be in a supervisory role rather than direct control. So they call it "human on the loop" rather than "human in the loop." But this is a very difficult to fight against.  The US army is spending now billions of dollars on new air defense vehicles. These air defense vehicles have cannons two types of missiles, jammers.  They're also looking at lasers and interceptor drones, so they can use the right weapon against the right target at the right time. That's going to be absolutely vital here because it's so cheap to use a drone. Look what happened. What was a year plus ago now? I'm trying to remember, Central America, Venezuela, somewhere in there where El Presidente for life was up giving a speech. I'm sorry. I didn't mean that to be insulting, but that often is what ends up happening. A drone comes up and everybody's thinking: Oh, it's a camera drone, wave to the camera thing. It got very close to the President and then blew up. On purpose, right? They were trying to murder the president. That's a bad thing. He was okay. I guess some of the people got minor injuries, relatively speaking. When we're looking at having large numbers of incoming threats, not just one drone, but many drones, many of those drones may be decoys.  How cheap is it to buy one of these drones? Just like the ones that were used in China over the Olympic stadium, where they were all controlled by a computer. You just have these things, decoys, all you need is a few of them that can blow up and kill the people you want to kill very concerning if you ask me.  We're paying attention to this as are other countries as they're going forward.  We're going to talk about building your privacy risk tolerance profile, because if you're going to defend yourself, you have to know what you're going to defend against and how much defense do you need? Hey, we take risks every day. We take risks when we're going online. But we're still getting out of bed. We're still going into the bathroom. We're still driving cars. How about your online privacy risk tolerance? What is it? Hi everybody. Thanks for joining me.  We all take risks, and it's just part of life. You breathe in air, which you need. You're taking the risk of catching a cold or the flu, or maybe of having some toxic material inhaled. We just don't know do we?  Well on any given day, when we go online, we're also facing risks. And the biggest question I have with clients when I'm bringing businesses on or high value individuals who need to protect themselves and their information is: okay... what information do you have that you want to try and protect? And what is your personal privacy risk tolerance? So we build a bit of her profile from that and you guys are going to get the advantage of doing that right now without having to pay me my team. How's that for simple?  First of all, we got to understand that nothing is ever completely safe. When you're going online, you are facing real risks and no matter what people tell you, there is no way to be a hundred percent sure that your data is going to be safe online or that your individual personal, private information is going to be safe while you're online. And there's a few reasons for this.  The most obvious one, and the one we think about, I think the most has to do with advertising. There are a lot of marketers out there that want to send a message to us at exactly the right time. The right message too obviously? So how can they do that? They do that by tracking you via Google. So Google that's their whole business model is to know everything they can about you and then sell that information. Facebook, same thing. Both of those companies are trying to gather your information. They're doing it when you are not just on their sites, but when you are on other people's sites. Third party sites are tracking you. In fact, if you go to my website @ craigpeterson.com, you'll see that I do set a Facebook cookie. So I know that you're on Facebook and you visited my site and you might be interested in this or that.  Now I'm not a good marketer. Because I'm not using that information for anything, at least not right now, hopefully in the future, we'll start to do some stuff. But that's what they're doing. And the reason why I don't think it's a terrible thing don't know about you. I don't think it's bad that they know that I'm trying to go ahead and buy a car right now. Because if I'm trying to buy a car, I want advertisements about cars and I don't want to advertisements about the latest Bugatti or Ferrari, whatever it might be. I want a Ford truck, right? Just simple something I can haul stuff around. You already know I have a small farm, and I need a truck because you need one. I'd love to have a front loader and everything too, those costs money and I ain't got it. So that makes sense to me.  And now there's the other side, which is the criminal side. And then there's really a third side, which is the government side. So let's go with the government side here. In the United States our government is not supposed to track us. Now I say "supposed to," because we have found out through Edward Snowden and many other means that they have been tracking us against the law. And then they put in some laws to let them do some of it, but our government has been tracking us. And one of the ways it tracks us is through the "five eyes" program and now that's been expanded and then expanded again. But the five eyes program is where the United States asks the United Kingdom. Hey, listen. Hey bro. Hey, we can't and we're not allowed to track our citizens, but your not us.  How about we have you track,  Trump and his team? Yeah, that's what we'll do.  So there's an example of what evidence is showing has happened. So they go to a third party country that's part of this agreement,d where all of these countries have gotten together, how signed papers and said, yeah, we'll track each other citizens for each other. And that way the United States could say, Hey, we're not tracking you. And yet they're tracking because they're going to a third party country. And the United States, if you are going out of the country, then again, they can track you. Any communications are going out of the country. So that's the government side. And then of course, there's governments that track everything. You look at China and how they control all of the media. They control all of the social networking sites. They basically control everything out there.  We have to be careful with all of that stuff because it can and will be used. And we've seen it has been used to really not just harass people, but do things like throw them in prison disappear them. Look at what just happened in China, with the head of China's biggest company, basically the Amazon competitor over there. And he disappeared for months and then came back, just praising the Chinese Communist government and how great it is to have all of these people over there. Just telling them what to do and how to do it.  We obviously don't live in China. We obviously, I think have oligarchs nowadays. We have people who are rich, who are running the country. They're giving money to campaigns, they get the ear. You seen all of the bribery allegations against the Biden crime family, or his brother, his son, other members, himself as well, based on a hundred Biden's laptop. So I don't trust government for those very reasons.  The hackers let's get into the hackers here. When it comes to hackers, there are, again, a few different types. You've got hackers that are working for governments. And what they're doing is in the case of a small government, like North Korea, they're trying to get their hands on foreign currencies so that they can use those currencies to buy grain, to buy oil, coal, whatever it is they might need to buy. You have governments like China and Russia that are trying to basically run World War three. And they're out there with their hacking teams and groups and trying to figure out how do we get into the critical infrastructure in the United States? Okay. So this is how we get in. Okay. We're in over there. So if we ever want to shut down all of the power to New York City, this is what we do.  Now remember, that's what happened back in, in when was that 2004, I guess that was, yeah. I remember I was down in, I was heading actually to New York city and then all of a sudden, all of the power went out. That apparently was an accident, but it didn't need to be an accident. There are all kinds of, allegations about what actually happened there. But that's why China and Russia are trying to get into our systems. And then they obviously want to play havoc. Look at the havoc that was caused in the U S economy by this China virus that came obviously from China for Huan. if they wanted to shut down our economy, they now have proof that's all it takes. And they are working on the genetics of some of these viruses over there in China. And they're trying to modify the genes and they are the running experiments on their troops to enhance them, to make these super soldiers that maybe, need less sleep or less food are stronger or et cetera, et cetera, they are doing that.  So China is a real threat from just a number of different ways. What would it be like if they could shut down our banking system or make it so we don't trust it anymore?  Okay. That's part one of your Personal Privacy Risk Tolerance Profile. Stick around because we're going to talk more about this and what you can do to help you have privacy. What is your online, personal privacy risk tolerance? It's going to vary, I help high value individuals. I help businesses with this, and now I'm helping you as well. So let's get into part two. Craig Peterson here.  When people ask me, what should I do? That is a very nuanced question. At least it's a very nuanced to answer because you could say something like: if you want to be private, use Signal for  messaging and useTorr for web browsing, that's fine. And it works in some ways and not in others. For instance, Tor is a web browser that is like a super VPN.  It is set up so that you're not just coming from one exit point, you're coming from a whole bunch of different points on the internet. So it's hard to track you down. The problem, however, with Tor is the same problem that you have with VPN services. And I talk about this all the time. VPN services do not make your data secure. It does not keep it private. And in the case of VPN services that you might get for free or even buy, and also the case with Tor. Using those VPN services that can make you less secure again. Why did Sutton rob banks? He robbed banks because that's where the money was, where he is a bad guy going to go. If they want easy and quick access to lots of peoples. Private information?  They're going to hack a VPN server aren't they? Yeah. And if they can't hack the VPN server, why not just have server space in the same data center that VPN provider is renting their space from and then hack it from there, try and get in from there. Or maybe get into the service; the data centers will logs or the VPN servers logs, because even when they say they don't log, they all log, they have to log, they have to have your information otherwise, how can they bill you? And the ones that say we don't log, which are those people are "lieing" by the way. But those guys that have these VPN servers and they're trying not to log, they're trying not to log where you're going. They get fooled all of the time as well. Because their servers have logs, even if they're deleted and disappear.  So I just wanted to make it clear that you, I, if you have a low risk tolerance, when it comes to your privacy, Tor is not going to do it for you. VPN services are not going to do it for you. You have to look at all of the individual things you're doing online and then decide based on those. What is it that is the most. Beneficial for you in that particular case. Okay.  So Signal, I brought it up. So let's talk about it for a minute. Signal is the messaging app to use bar none. Signal is encrypted and do, and it is known to be highly secure, which again, Doesn't mean it's a hundred percent, but with Signal, you can talk to people on other platforms. You can have a Mac and talk to somebody on a, on an Android or a windows device.  But another consideration is who are you talking to? If you're talking to other people that have Macs and you don't want your information to get out, but you're not horrifically worried about it, right? You want it to be private. You want end to end encryption. You're better off using iMessage on your Mac.  If you're on Windows or Android, there are not any great built-in messaging apps. WhatsApp. If you listened last week and I've got it up on my website, WhatsApp is not great. They claim it's not horrible, but why would you use it if there's a question use Signal instead. All right. So there's just a lot to consider when we're talking about it, but here is your big bang for the buck thing. That you can do. And that is use password manager. Now we talked about how Google Chromium Google's Chrome and of course now Microsoft edge. Actually it was the other way around Microsoft edge came up with it first and now Google's adding it. But Edge has this password manager built-in. That's all well and good, but I don't know, trust those. I use a third party password manager that is designed for password management and that's all the company does. They're focused on the security behind it, which is why I recommend 1Password and lLastPass. 1Password being my absolute favorite. Use those password managers. That's the biggest bang for your buck if you have a low tolerance for your information, getting out. All right?  Now that will help to enforce good password habits. It will generate passwords for you, both of those, and it'll generate good passwords and it'll keep them for you, which is really great. If you don't want to be tracked while you're browsing online, you can use an ad blocker. I have a couple of webinars I've done on that. If you want a video of one of those webinars to go through that talks about these different blockers ad blockers and others. I'd be glad to send you a link to one of them, but you're going to have to email Me@craigpeterson.com. And I will send you a link to one of those webinars I did on that stuff. No problem. But some websites are going to break when you use an ad blocker. So sometimes you have to turn it off and you have to turn it back on. The ones I tell you  how to use and how to configure, I actually show you a step-by-step we walked through it. Those allow you to turn off that particular ad blocker on an individual site that was broken because of the ad blocker. So pretty straightforward. You don't have to remember to turn it all on and all off. All right.  Now studies are showing that people are concerned about their privacy. In fact, I believe last I saw said that I think it was about 70% of Americans believe that their smart phones are being tracked by advertisers, and the tech companies provide them with the information.  May, 2020 Pew research report talked about this, but 85% of consumers worry, they can trust corporations with their data. So what do you do? Because. Most people don't have the support or the tools. They don't have. I have the money, they didn't get a big inheritance. They're not a high value individual that needs my help and can afford it -- where we go through everything that they do and make sure they have the best solution for each thing, including banking, including going online and trading stocks, all of that stuff. You gotta be very careful with all of that stuff.  I'm really sad that I have to say this here, but there are no online privacy solutions that will work for everybody. And there are no solutions that work in every situation either. So what you need to do is understand what you care the most about. And I think for all of us, what we should care the most about is our financial situation and anything associated with that: our intellectual property, if we're businesses, our bank accounts, all of that sort of stuff is stuff we really should be concerned about. And that means you need to watch it. Make sure you're not sharing stuff that you really don't want to share. Okay?  So even privacy experts like myself, don't lock everything down. We locked most of it down. Particularly since we have department of defense clients, we have to maintain a very high standard.  All right. Stick around and visit me online. CraigPeterson.com. Make sure you sign up for my newsletter. You'll get all of the latest news and the tips I send out every week. I don't want to leave you hanging. We're going to get into a few more things to consider here, because obviously we are going to share some of our personal information. So I'm going to tell you how I share my personal information and it might be a bit of a surprise. Hello everybody. Thanks for listening.  We all enjoy products and services, and that's what I'm saying. When when I talk about security experts, we don't lock everything down. I've used 23 in me. I did that thing, of course, I'm sending in my DNA. That's been an issue in some cases, but that's what I did. I use these online map programs. I use Google maps. I use weighs more than Google maps. I use Apple maps cause I'm trying to figure out how do I get to where I want to go in a reasonable amount of time. But what I do is I lie about the answer to the security questions. Okay. I don't want them to know my dad's name. My mother's maiden name, the street. I was, I grew up on my first school, my first car, none of their business. Because it's a lot of that information is actually publicly available. How many of us on LinkedIn have right there in our profile? Yeah I went to McGill university or I w I grew up here's pictures of my childhood home, and that picture has GPS coordinates in it. So if we use the real information. We are giving away way too much. I use a little phrase I coined here, which is lie to your bank. And you might remember. I did a show on that sometime ago. And the idea here is in your line to the bank about your financial situation, it's nothing like that. You're lying to your bank about this personal information. They don't need to know these personal questions. They give you for their security questions. It's really important to understand all of this stuff. Okay. For instance, this is Jennifer Granick, she's at the ACL, you and she said her dad died recently. And the accountant said it's really important to report the death to credit companies because the answers to many of the security questions are on the public death certificate. So answers to security questions really can be a nightmare, but that doesn't mean you have to give them the right answers. So for instance, I found a site online. I should try and dig that up again, but it generated fake identities. And I had a generate like 5,000 of them for me thinking, okay, they might go at some point and it even generated fake social security numbers, fake phone numbers, names, addresses, everything, everything you'd need for a fake identity. And the idea here isn't to cheat anybody out of anything. The idea is, Hey, Mr. Website, you don't know, you don't need to know who I really am. So on some websites, I'm female some websites I've, I'm only 30 years old on other websites. I'm 80 years old. It doesn't matter. You can call it a lie if you want. But in reality, you're just trying to keep your information straight not and another advantage. Of these password managers. Cause you're trying to keep your information straight, right? It's hard to remember a lie and you have to tell a lie to enforce a lie. You're not, all that stuff your mother told you. And she's right about that too, by the way. But if you're using a password manager, what I do is I create a unique email address. In fact, my email addresses are extremely unique, so I'll use a plus sign as part of my email address and my mail server knows. Oh, okay. That's just Craig trying to track who is using. That email address. So I'll have Craig plus YouTube for instance, or@mainstreamdotnetorcraigpeterson.com. I actually have a whole bunch of domains that I use as well. And if you want a secure email service have look at proton mail. They're actually very good from a security standpoint. So there's nothing illegal about giving them this information. Yeah. You're lying to them, but you gotta keep your lies straight. Another reason to use a password manager because I have the password manager generate my. My password I put in the email, which is unique for every website I go to, I never use that same email address twice if I can avoid it. And then I, and I use aliases too in my email server. And then I go and in my notes section for that website in my password manager, I put in the answers to the security questions and I just make stuff up nonsensical stuff. So it's asking what my first car, it might be a transformational snooze. There you go. I just made something up. So I'll put those notes into my notes in my password manager and save them. So if I ever have to do some sort of a recovery with those guys, it's going to be simple. Because I just look in my password manager, I got to go in there anyways to get my password right. And my email address or username to login. And there it is, there's my security questions. And then the password manager, cause I'm using one password. It has a little database, it keeps and everything in there

Welcome!   It is another busy week on the technology front.  We delve into the Military's use of drones and AI.  We will discuss why Facebook thinks Apple has declared war.  Ransomware is up. It turns out that many of those who were victims of the SolarWinds hack did not use their software. They were breached because they had misconfiguration. Well, just a taste of today's topics, and there is even more, so be sure to Listen in. For more tech tips, news, and updates, visit - CraigPeterson.com. --- Tech Articles Craig Thinks You Should Read: Drone Swarms Are Getting Too Fast For Humans To Fight, U.S. General Warns Building Your Personal Privacy Risk Tolerance Profile Breach Data Highlights a Pivot to Orgs Over Individuals Facebook “Supreme Court” overrules company in 4 of its first 5 decisions State reps try to ban Comcast data cap and price hikes until pandemic is over Every crazy thing that happened in Apple and Facebook’s privacy feud today 30% of “SolarWinds hack” victims didn’t actually use SolarWinds Ransomware Payoffs Surge by 311% to Nearly $350 Million --- Automated Machine-Generated Transcript: Craig Peterson: [00:00:00] Hi everybody. Of course, Craig Peterson here. We're going to talk today about these drone swarms, your personal privacy risk tolerance breach highlights here over org's not individuals. What's going on? Ransomware is way up. As usual, a lot to talk about. Hey, if you miss part of my show, you can always go online to Craig peterson.com. You'll find it there if you're a YouTube fan CraigPeterson.com/youtube. This is really an interesting time to be alive. Is that a good way to put it right? There used to be a curse "May you live in interesting times" Least that was the rumor. One of the listeners pointed this out, there was a TV show that was on about five years ago, apparently, and it used this as a premise. I also saw a great movie that used this as a premise, and it was where the President was under attack. He was under attack by drones. The Biden administration has a policy now where they're calling for research into artificial intelligence, think the Terminator, where you can have these fighting machines. These things should be outlawed, but I also understand the other side where if we don't have that tech and our enemies end up having that tech, we are left at a major disadvantage. Don't get me wrong here. I just don't like the idea of anybody doing Terminators, Skynet type of technology. They have called for it to be investigated. What we're talking about right now are the drone swarms. Have you seen some of these really cool drones that these people called influencers? Man, the term always bothers me. So many people don't know what they're doing. They just make these silly videos that people watch, and then they make millions, tens of millions. I guess it's not silly after all. These influencers make these videos. There are drones that they can use if they're out hiking, you might've noticed, or mountain biking or climbing. They have drones now that will follow them around automatically. They are on camera. It's following them. It focuses on their face. They can make the drone get a little closer or further away. As long as the sky is clear, there's no tree branches or anything in the way that drone is going to be able to follow them, see what they're doing and just really do some amazing shots. I've been just stunned by how good they are. Those drones are using a form of artificial intelligence, and I'm not going to really get into it right now, but there are differences between machine learning and artificial intelligence, but at the very least here, it's able to track their faces. Now, this is where I start getting really concerned. That's one thing. But they are apparently, right now, training. When I say they, the Chinese and probably us, too, are designing drones that not only have cameras on them but are military drones.  They have without them having to have a central computer system controlling them or figuring out targets. They're able to figure out where there's a human and take them out. These small drones, they're not going to take them out by firing a 50 caliber round at them. These drones can't carry that kind of firepower. It's just too heavy, the barrels and everything else -- it's a part of that type of a firearm.  We're talking about small drones again. So obviously, they're not going to have a missile on them either. What they do is they put a small amount, just a fraction of an ounce, of high explosives on the drone.  The idea is if that drone crashes into you and sets off its explosives, you're dead, particularly if it crashes into and sets off explosives right there by your head. Now that's pretty bad when you get down to it. I don't like the whole Skynet Terminator part of this, which is that the drones are able to find that human and then kill them. Think of a simple scenario where there is, let's say there's a war going on. Let's use the worst-case scenario and, enemy troops are located approximately here. You send the drones out, and the drone has, of course, GPS built into it, or some other inertial guidance system or something in case GPS gets jammed. That drone then goes to that area. It can recognize humans, and it says, Oh, there's a human, and it goes and kills the human. Now that human might be an innocent person. Look at all of the problems we've had with our aerial drones, the manually controlled ones, just the ones that we've been using in the last 10 years where we say, okay, there's a terrorist here. Now they fly it in from. They've got somebody controlling it in Nevada or wherever it might be, and they get their strike orders and their kill orders. They go in, and they'd take it out. There are collateral damages. Now that's always been true. Every war. Look at Jimmy Stewart. For example, younger kids probably don't know who it is. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington was one of his movies.  He had some great Christmas movies and stuff too. Anyhow, Jimmy Stewart was a bomber. I think he was a pilot actually in World War II.  He flew combat missions over Germany. Think of what we did in Germany, in Japan, where we killed thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds, probably of thousands of civilians. We now think, Oh, we're much better than that. We don't do that anymore. We're careful about civilian casualties. Sometimes to the point where some of our people end up getting in harm's way and killed.  For the most part, we try and keep it down. A drone like this that goes into an area, even if it's a confined area, and we say, kill any humans in this area, there are going to be innocent casualties.  It might even be "friendly fire." You might even be taking out some of your own people. They've said, okay, we've got a way around this. What we're going to do is we're going to use artificial intelligence. The drone doesn't just pick out, Oh, this is a human. I'm going to attack that person. It looks at the uniform. It looks at the helmet.  It determines which side they're on.  If they're wearing an American or Chinese uniform, whatever, it might be programmed for it again. It goes into the area, it finds a human and identifies them as the enemy. Then it goes in and hits them and blows up, killing that person. That's one way that they are looking to use drones. The other way is pretty scary. It's, you can defend yourself against a drone, like that. You've got a drone coming. You're probably going to be able to hear it. Obviously, it depends. That drone gets close. I don't know if you've ever had the kids playing with drones, flying them around you, or you've done the same thing. You can always hit it out of the air, can't you? If you're military and you have a rifle in your arm, you can just use the rifle and play a little baseball with that drone. There's some interesting stories of people who've been doing that already. What happens if we're not talking about a drone, we're talking about a drone swarm. I don't know that you could defend against something like that. There have been studies that have been done. So think, you think there nobody's really working this suit? No, they sure are. What's going to happen? Well, the Indian army is one that has admitted to doing tests, and they had a swarm of 75 drones. If you have 75 drones coming after you, let's say you're a high-value target. There is no way you're going to be able to defend yourself against them unless you can duck and cover, and they can't get anywhere near you with their high explosives. The Indian army had these Kamikaze-attack drones. They don't necessarily have to even have high explosives on them. This is a new interpretation under Joseph Biden. Mr. President of the Pentagon's rules of use of autonomous weapons. We've always had to have "meaningful human control." That's the wording that the Pentagon uses meaningful human control over any lethal system. Now that could be in a supervisory role rather than direct control. So they call it "human on the loop" rather than "human in the loop." But this is very difficult to fight against. The US army is spending now billions of dollars on new air defense vehicles. These air defense vehicles have cannons, two types of missiles, jammers.  They're also looking at lasers and interceptor drones, so they can use the right weapon against the right target at the right time. That's going to be absolutely vital here because it's so cheap to use a drone. Look what happened. What was a year plus ago now? I'm trying to remember, Central America, Venezuela, somewhere in there where El Presidente for life was up giving a speech. I'm sorry. I didn't mean that to be insulting, but that often is what ends up happening. A drone comes up, and everybody's thinking: Oh, it's a camera drone, wave to the camera thing. It got very close to the President and then blew up. On purpose, right? They were trying to murder the president. That's a bad thing. He was okay. I guess some of the people got minor injuries, relatively speaking. When we're looking at having large numbers of incoming threats, not just one drone, but many drones, many of those drones may be decoys. How cheap is it to buy one of these drones? Just like the ones that were used in China over the Olympic stadium, where they were all controlled by a computer. You just have these things, decoys. All you need is a few of them that can blow up and kill the people you want to kill very concerning if you ask me. We're paying attention to this, as are other countries as they're going forward. We're going to talk about building your privacy risk tolerance profile because if you're going to defend yourself, you have to know what you're going to defend against and how much defense do you need? Hey, we take risks every day. We take risks when we're going online. But we're still getting out of bed. We're still going into the bathroom. We're still driving cars. How about your online privacy risk tolerance? What is it? Hi everybody. Thanks for joining me. We all take risks, and it's just part of life. You breathe in air, which you need. You're taking the risk of catching a cold or the flu, or maybe of having some toxic material inhaled. We just don't know, do we? Well, on any given day, when we go online, we're also facing risks. And the biggest question I have with clients when I'm bringing businesses on or high-value individuals who need to protect themselves and their information is: okay... what information do you have that you want to try and protect? And what is your personal privacy risk tolerance? So we build a bit of her profile from that, and you guys are going to get the advantage of doing that right now without having to pay me, my team. How's that for simple? First of all, we got to understand that nothing is ever completely safe. When you're going online, you are facing real risks, and no matter what people tell you, there is no way to be a hundred percent sure that your data is going to be safe online or that your individual personal, private information is going to be safe while you're online. And there's a few reasons for this. The most obvious one, and the one we think about, I think the most has to do with advertising. There are a lot of marketers out there that want to send a message to us at exactly the right time. The right message, too, obviously? So how can they do that? They do that by tracking you via Google. So Google that's their whole business model to know everything they can about you and then sell that information. Facebook, same thing. Both of those companies are trying to gather your information. They're doing it when you are not just on their sites, but when you are on other people's sites. Third-party sites are tracking you. In fact, if you go to my website @ craigpeterson.com, you'll see that I do set a Facebook cookie. So I know that you're on Facebook and you visited my site, and you might be interested in this or that. Now I'm not a good marketer. Because I'm not using that information for anything, at least not right now, hopefully in the future, we'll start to do some stuff. But that's what they're doing. And the reason why I don't think it's a terrible thing don't know about you. I don't think it's bad that they know that I'm trying to go ahead and buy a car right now. Because if I'm trying to buy a car, I want advertisements about cars and I don't want to advertisements about the latest Bugatti or Ferrari, whatever it might be. I want a Ford truck, right? Just simple something I can haul stuff around. You already know I have a small farm, and I need a truck because you need one. I'd love to have a front loader and everything too. Those costs money, and I ain't got it. So that makes sense to me. And now there's the other side, which is the criminal side. And then there's really a third side, which is the government side. So let's go with the government side here. In the United States, our government is not supposed to track us. Now I say "supposed to," because we have found out through Edward Snowden and many other means that they have been tracking us against the law. And then they put in some laws to let them do some of it, but our government has been tracking us. And one of the ways it tracks us is through the "five eyes" program, and now that's been expanded and then expanded again. But the five eyes program is where the United States asks the United Kingdom. Hey, listen. Hey bro. Hey, we can't, and we're not allowed to track our citizens, but you not us.  How about we have you track Trump and his team? Yeah, that's what we'll do. So there's an example of what evidence is showing has happened. So they go to a third-party country that's part of this agreement,d where all of these countries have gotten together, how signed papers and said, yeah, we'll track each other citizens for each other. And that way, the United States could say, Hey, we're not tracking you. And yet they're tracking because they're going to a third-party country. And the United States, if you are going out of the country, then again, they can track you. Any communications are going out of the country. So that's the government side. And then, of course, there's governments that track everything. You look at China and how they control all of the media. They control all of the social networking sites. They basically control everything out there. We have to be careful with all of that stuff because it can and will be used. And we've seen it has been used to really not just harass people, but do things like throwing them in prison disappear them. Look at what just happened in China, with the head of China's biggest company, basically the Amazon competitor over there. And he disappeared for months and then came back, just praising the Chinese Communist government and how great it is to have all of these people over there. Just telling them what to do and how to do it. We obviously don't live in China. We obviously, I think, have oligarchs nowadays. We have people who are rich, who are running the country. They're giving money to campaigns. They get the ear. You have seen all of the bribery allegations against the Biden crime family, or his brother, his son, other members, himself as well, based on a hundred Biden's laptop. So I don't trust the government for those very reasons. The hackers, let's get into the hackers here. When it comes to hackers, there are, again, a few different types. You've got hackers that are working for governments. And what they're doing is in the case of a small government, like North Korea, they're trying to get their hands on foreign currencies so that they can use those currencies to buy grain, to buy oil, coal, whatever it is they might need to buy. You have governments like China and Russia that are trying to basically run World War three. And they're out there with their hacking teams and groups and trying to figure out how do we get into the critical infrastructure in the United States? Okay. So this is how we get in. Okay. We're in over there. So if we ever want to shut down all of the power to New York City, this is what we do. Now, remember, that's what happened back in, in when was that 2004, I guess that was, yeah. I remember I was down in, I was heading actually to New York City and then all of a sudden, all of the power went out. That apparently was an accident, but it didn't need to be an accident. There are all kinds of allegations about what actually happened there. But that's why China and Russia are trying to get into our systems. And then they obviously want to play havoc. Look at the havoc that was caused in the US economy by this China virus that came obviously from China for Huan. If they wanted to shut down our economy, they now have proof that's all it takes. And they are working on the genetics of some of these viruses over there in China. And they're trying to modify the genes, and they are running experiments on their troops to enhance them, to make these super soldiers that maybe, need less sleep or less food are stronger or et cetera, et cetera, they are doing that. So China is a real threat in just a number of different ways. What would it be like if they could shut down our banking system or make it, so we don't trust it anymore? Okay. That's part one of your Personal Privacy Risk Tolerance Profile. Stick around because we're going to talk more about this and what you can do to help you have privacy. What is your online personal privacy risk tolerance? It's going to vary. I help high-value individuals. I help businesses with this, and now I'm helping you as well. So let's get into part two. Craig Peterson here. When people ask me, what should I do? That is a very nuanced question. At least it's very nuanced to answer because you could say something like: if you want to be private, use Signal for messaging and use Tor for web browsing, that's fine. And it works in some ways and not in others. For instance, Tor is a web browser that is like a super VPN.  It is set up so that you're not just coming from one exit point, you're coming from a whole bunch of different points on the internet. So it's hard to track you down. The problem, however, with Tor is the same problem that you have with VPN services. And I talk about this all the time. VPN services do not make your data secure. It does not keep it private. And in the case of VPN services that you might get for free or even buy, and also the case with Tor. Using those VPN services that can make you less secure again. Why did Sutton rob banks? He robbed banks because that's where the money was, where he is a bad guy going to go. If they want easy and quick access to lots of peoples. Private information? They're going to hack a VPN server aren't they? Yeah. And if they can't hack the VPN server, why not just have server space in the same data center that VPN provider is renting their space from and then hack it from there, try and get in from there. Or maybe get into the service; the data centers will logs or the VPN servers logs, because even when they say they don't log, they all log, they have to log, they have to have your information otherwise, how can they bill you? And the ones that say we don't log, which are those people are "lieing" by the way. But those guys that have these VPN servers and they're trying not to log, they're trying not to log where you're going. They get fooled all of the time as well. Because their servers have logs, even if they're deleted and disappear. So I just wanted to make it clear that you, I, if you have a low risk tolerance, when it comes to your privacy, Tor is not going to do it for you. VPN services are not going to do it for you. You have to look at all of the individual things you're doing online and then decide based on those. What is it that is the most. Beneficial for you in that particular case. Okay. So Signal, I brought it up. So let's talk about it for a minute. Signal is the messaging app to use bar none. Signal is encrypted and do, and it is known to be highly secure, which again, Doesn't mean it's a hundred percent, but with Signal, you can talk to people on other platforms. You can have a Mac and talk to somebody on a, on an Android or a windows device. But another consideration is who are you talking to? If you're talking to other people that have Macs and you don't want your information to get out, but you're not horrifically worried about it, right? You want it to be private. You want end to end encryption. You're better off using iMessage on your Mac. If you're on Windows or Android, there are not any great built-in messaging apps. WhatsApp. If you listened last week and I've got it up on my website, WhatsApp is not great. They claim it's not horrible, but why would you use it if there's a question use Signal instead. All right. So there's just a lot to consider when we're talking about it, but here is your big bang for the buck thing. That you can do. And that is use password manager. Now we talked about how Google Chromium Google's Chrome and of course now Microsoft edge. Actually it was the other way around Microsoft edge came up with it first and now Google's adding it. But Edge has this password manager built-in. That's all well and good, but I don't know, trust those. I use a third party password manager that is designed for password management and that's all the company does. They're focused on the security behind it, which is why I recommend 1Password and lLastPass. 1Password being my absolute favorite. Use those password managers. That's the biggest bang for your buck if you have a low tolerance for your information, getting out. All right? Now that will help to enforce good password habits. It will generate passwords for you, both of those, and it'll generate good passwords and it'll keep them for you, which is really great. If you don't want to be tracked while you're browsing online, you can use an ad blocker. I have a couple of webinars I've done on that. If you want a video of one of those webinars to go through that talks about these different blockers ad blockers and others. I'd be glad to send you a link to one of them, but you're going to have to email Me@craigpeterson.com. And I will send you a link to one of those webinars I did on that stuff. No problem. But some websites are going to break when you use an ad blocker. So sometimes you have to turn it off and you have to turn it back on. The ones I tell you  how to use and how to configure, I actually show you a step-by-step we walked through it. Those allow you to turn off that particular ad blocker on an individual site that was broken because of the ad blocker. So pretty straightforward. You don't have to remember to turn it all on and all off. All right. Now studies are showing that people are concerned about their privacy. In fact, I believe last I saw said that I think it was about 70% of Americans believe that their smart phones are being tracked by advertisers, and the tech companies provide them with the information.  May, 2020 Pew research report talked about this, but 85% of consumers worry, they can trust corporations with their data. So what do you do? Because. Most people don't have the support or the tools. They don't have. I have the money, they didn't get a big inheritance. They're not a high value individual that needs my help and can afford it -- where we go through everything that they do and make sure they have the best solution for each thing, including banking, including going online and trading stocks, all of that stuff. You gotta be very careful with all of that stuff.  I'm really sad that I have to say this here, but there are no online privacy solutions that will work for everybody. And there are no solutions that work in every situation either. So what you need to do is understand what you care the most about. And I think for all of us, what we should care the most about is our financial situation and anything associated with that: our intellectual property, if we're businesses, our bank accounts, all of that sort of stuff is stuff we really should be concerned about. And that means you need to watch it. Make sure you're not sharing stuff that you really don't want to share. Okay? So even privacy experts like myself, don't lock everything down. We locked most of it down. Particularly since we have department of defense clients, we have to maintain a very high standard. All right. Stick around and visit me online. CraigPeterson.com. Make sure you sign up for my newsletter. You'll get all of the latest news and the tips I send out every week. I don't want to leave you hanging. We're going to get into a few more things to consider here, because obviously we are going to share some of our personal information. So I'm going to tell you how I share my personal information and it might be a bit of a surprise. Hello everybody. Thanks for listening. We all enjoy products and services, and that's what I'm saying. When when I talk about security experts, we don't lock everything down. I've used 23 in me. I did that thing, of course, I'm sending in my DNA. That's been an issue in some cases, but that's what I did. I use these online map programs. I use Google maps. I use weighs more than Google maps. I use Apple maps cause I'm trying to figure out how do I get to where I want to go in a reasonable amount of time. But what I do is I lie about the answer to the security questions. Okay. I don't want them to know my dad's name. My mother's maiden name, the street. I was, I grew up on my first school, my first car, none of their business. Because it's a lot of that information is actually publicly available. How many of us on LinkedIn have right there in our profile? Yeah I went to McGill university or I w I grew up here's pictures of my childhood home, and that picture has GPS coordinates in it. So if we use the real information. We are giving away way too much. I use a little phrase I coined here, which is lie to your bank. And you might remember. I did a show on that sometime ago. And the idea here is in your line to the bank about your financial situation, it's nothing like that. You're lying to your bank about this personal information. They don't need to know these personal questions. They give you for their security questions. It's really important to understand all of this stuff. Okay. For instance, this is Jennifer Granick, she's at the ACL, you and she said her dad died recently. And the accountant said it's really important to report the death to credit companies because the answers to many of the security questions are on the public death certificate. So answers to security questions really can be a nightmare, but that doesn't mean you have to give them the right answers. So for instance, I found a site online. I should try and dig that up again, but it generated fake identities. And I had a generate like 5,000 of them for me thinking, okay, they might go at some point and it even generated fake social security numbers, fake phone numbers, names, addresses, everything, everything you'd need for a fake identity. And the idea here isn't to cheat anybody out of anything. The idea is, Hey, Mr. Website, you don't know, you don't need to know who I really am. So on some websites, I'm female some websites I've, I'm only 30 years old on other websites. I'm 80 years old. It doesn't matter. You can call it a lie if you want. But in reality, you're just trying to keep your information straight not and another advantage. Of these password managers. Cause you're trying to keep your information straight, right? It's hard to remember a lie and you have to tell a lie to enforce a lie. You're not, all that stuff your mother told you. And she's right about that too, by the way. But if you're using a password manager, what I do is I create a unique email address. In fact, my email addresses are extremely unique, so I'll use a plus sign as part of my email address and my mail server knows. Oh, okay. That's just Craig trying to track who is using. That email address. So I'll have Craig plus YouTube for instance, or@mainstreamdotnetorcraigpeterson.com. I actually have a whole bunch of domains that I use as well. And if you want a secure email service have look at proton mail. They're actually very good from a security standpoint. So there's nothing illegal about giving them this information. Yeah. You're lying to them, but you gotta keep your lies straight. Another reason to use a password manager because I have the password manager generate my. My password I put in the email, which is unique for every website I go to, I never use that same email address twice if I can avoid it. And then I, and I use aliases too in my email server. And then I go and in my notes section for that website in my password manager, I put in the answers to the security questions and I just make stuff up nonsensical stuff. So it's asking what my first car, it might be a transformational snooze. There you go. I just made something up. So I'll put those notes into my notes in my password manager and save them. So if I ever have to do some sort of a recovery with those guys, it's going to be simple. Because I just look in my password manager, I got to go in there anyways to get my password right. And my email address or username to login. And there it is, there's my security questions. And then the password manager, cause I'm using one password. It has a little database, it keeps and everything in there is encrypted. And the only way to decrypted is with my password, my one password, that's it. You only have to remember one password and that's the password to one password so that you can decrypt that little vault of a database of all of your information. So I have, I bought a, I think it's a 30 plus character password I use for one password because yeah, I'm a little bit paranoid about all that sort of stuff. So that's a really good way to be able to keep your information safe. I talked last week about a friend of mine. Whose wife went on Facebook to get some help, some tips on selling her investments investment anyways, and the disaster. That was okay. So a lot of people have regrets about what they've posted on Facebook, and there's a really cool thing out of CMU. Carnegie Mellon university, where these, how many, it's six guys and gals. They put together this special report. I regretted the minute I pressed share a qualitative study of regrets on Facebook. Very interesting. So they looked at all of this stuff as best they possibly could. And what did they find? Some examples, just think for yourself what regrets you might have. I know friends of mine in the grads that they have had. But there are a lot, so they go through privacy risk. I can send you a copy of this article if you're interested. It talks about their methodology. They analyze comments on the New York times website and others Craig's list to regroup people. They, so they've got all of the stuff. Here you go sensitive content. Number one. So alcohol and illegal drug use. Think about that. Think about your employer, your next employer or the police. They got a report on you. Oh my, this is a bad person. So they go onto your Facebook page and they find. Oh, photos posted from a party with some very non unflattering photos in it. And even maybe mentioning a illegal drug use, what it thinks is going to happen. How about if you get stopped at the border coming back from Canada, Mexico, Europe. And they decide to do a little deeper look into you and they find this stuff online. The next one sexual content, you can imagine what that is. Think of a Congressman from New York, in fact, religion and politics apparently is one of the things people have regretted posting online, profanity and obscenities, personal and family issues. Working company here, negative or offensive comments it's arguments, lies and secrets, venting frustration, good intentions intended purposes. I didn't think about it. Hot. State. Yeah. Oh, my this thing just goes on and on, but keep all of this in mind, when you are trying to keep your information private, whether you are a business or an individual, you have to have eternal vigilant watch when your emotions are high, right. It's like drunk dialing. Don't do it. Or your emotions are high. Something's been going on. Don't put it online. So that's I think a real good bottom line about your. Personal privacy, risk tolerance profile. Okay. Be very careful. , don't put stuff that you don't want other people to see. It's not true that once it's out on the internet, it's there forever. It's not true that once you've posted it, it's there for anyone to discover. None of that's true. Not at all. Okay. But be very careful cover up your laptop cameras. In fact, in the improving windows security course, I go into this in quite a bit of detail, what you can do, what kind of cameras you can and should use, what sort of microphones you can or should use. Many people just cover up the laptop cameras with the sticky note. When they're not using it disable automatic image loading in your mail program. That's important. I do that as well, because that image that's in the email is usually being used to track you. It's really that simple. You've got new privacy laws in many States and in Europe, they are really not going to work or help you with your privacy, except with the really big companies out there. So keep all of that in mind. All right, everybody.  I want to encourage you go to Craig peterson.com. You'll see all kinds of great information there. You're going to be able to also listen to my whole show, pick up all the little training tips and even find out about the courses that I'm offering. Craig peterson.com I guess this is a little bit of good news. If you're a home user, not a business or some other organization, like a state or County or city office, but we've got some breach numbers that have just come out for 2020. We're going to talk about right now. Hi, everybody. Thanks for joining me.  Of course you can always go to my website. Yeah. Pick up all of the podcast in case you missed something today or another week, you'll find them right there@craigpeterson.com. You can also sign up for my email list and we're going to be doing a couple of different things here. I think in the near future, we're going to be sending out some reports that we made as part of the security summer thing I did a couple of years ago and each one of these reports and there's 30 something of them. Some of them are like five to seven pages long, but it's checklists of all the security things you should be worrying about. Now, if you are home user, you'll find a lot of these to be interesting. But if you're a business person, you work in an office, you help to run an office. You own a business. You need to make sure you get all of them. So make sure you are signed up Craig peterson.com and we'll be glad to get those out too. Plus we're also going to start something new every week. I usually have six to eight, sometimes as many as 10 articles in the week. I spend hours going through finding what I think are the most important things that interest me as well, but that I think will interest you guys. I put them in an email, it is it's not very long, but it's just a few sentences from each one of the stories and I have a link to the story as well, right there.  I'm going to start sending that out as well to everybody cause some people want my actual show notes. We're going to have the newsletter once a week. Then we're also planning on having a little video training as well. So it might just be straight, like straight audio. That's part of a video, but it'll be training on a specific security task or problem that's out there.  Then the course improving windows security. It's been taking us a long time. Blame it, mostly on me. Karen's also busy with babysitting grandkids at least a couple of days a week, and I'm trying to run a company as well. So it's, forgive us, but it is taking some time, but you're going to love this. I think it's turning out really well. I am about halfway done with the final edits. So I'm recording them. We go back and forth. They ended up recording them twice so that we get all of the points I wanted to cover into them. Karen's come up with a whole bunch of great screenshots and other pictures to go in with it so it's not one of these death by PowerPoint things. And we've got 21 different talks, if you will, on locking down windows and I go into the why's as well as the hows. I think that's really important, because if you don't understand why you're doing something. You're much less likely to do it. I picked that up from Mr. Tony Robbins, none other, the Anthony Robbins man. It's been over 20 years. Karen and I went to an event he had down in Boston and this was one of his firewalk or events.  We actually got to walk on hot coals it was the weirdess thing ever. Karen was totally freaking out and I was just, wow, this is going to be weird, but we both did it. It was phenomenal. Cause it of gave you an idea of, even if you have this mental block that you can't do something you probably can. We actually did and nobody's feet were burned or anything. It was real coals. It was real hot. They were really red. It was really something that at the very end they had a grass, a little square. Grass, maybe two, three feet by three feet and they had a hose running onto it. So you'd walk over it all. Then you'd just walk in on the grass and the idea there being, if you had any hot coals stuck to your foot. You probably didn't want those just stay on your foot. You'd probably want those, they get put out and taken off, so that's where that did. Anyhow. One of the things I learned from Tony was you need to have a strong reason why. We see this all of the time, Stephen Covey, if you read his stuff, you know it as well, you got to know why you're doing something. When it comes to computers and technology and security, you need to understand the why. Because it isn't just a rote thing. There are so many variations on what to do, but if you understand the why you're doing it, then I think it opens up a whole new world. You can explain it to your friends. You can help them understand it because finally you will understand it.  You'll be more motivated to do the things that you should be doing because you know why you're doing them, what it involves, what it's going to solve for you. This should be a really great course. And I spent some time in it going through the whys, give you some examples of problems people have had and what that solves. It's available hopefully here within a couple of weeks, man. I thought I'd be done by the end of January and here it's looking like it'll be the end of February. But be that as it may, keep your eyes out. If you've already emailed me to let me know, you're interested. That's great. I've got you on a list. I'll have to try and send out an email this week or sometime soon to let you guys know about it that we've got it ready for you?  We will have already for you, hopefully with the next couple of weeks. So that's that I'm told different way of doing things that's me. I like explaining things I've been told I'm good at it. So let's I think a good thing too. I started out the segment by talking about this probably good news for end users. Because in 2020 breaches were down by 19% while the impact of those breaches fell by nearly two thirds when we're measuring it by the number of people affected. Now, of course, if a company is breached and organization is breached, it's counted as one. One person, if you will affected, obviously it can affect a hundreds of thousands, millions of people, depending on what happens like a breach of Equifax. Are you counting that as one or you counting that as 300 million? Because that's how many records were stolen? I'm not sure it doesn't say it doesn't go into that much detail, but because the number of data breaches went down and the number of individuals affected by the data breach is plummeted. It's telling us something, then that is okay. That these hackers have moved away from collecting massive amounts of information and are targeting user credentials as a way to get into corporate networks to install ransomware. We've got even more news out this week about the solar winds hack. We talked about this before, and this is a company that makes software that's supposed to help manage networks, which means it's supposed to help make those networks safer. No, as it turns out, they weren't making it safer and it looks like maybe four years bad guys were in these networks that. We're being managed by solar winds, not with software, right? It's not as though solar winds was managing the network is solar winds sold software services so that you could manage your own networks or in many of these cases, they were actually managing networks of third-party businesses. I do work as well for high valued in value individuals, people who have a high profile that need to keep all of their data safe and they are constantly being gone after. They're trying to hack them all the time and the way they're trying to do it. And I talked about this really the first hour today is by this password stuffing thing. So they're trying to get in and they were successful and now it looks like it wasn't just Russia. Apparently China knew about this hack potential knew about this bug and was using it. And apparently it also was not. Just solar wind software. Now they're blaming some of this stuff on Microsoft office. If you have an office three 65 subscription, apparently they were using that to get in. So the bad guys are getting very selective. They want to go against companies and organizations like government agencies that have information there's really going to help them out. That is absolutely phenomenal. So these are stats from the identity theft resource center. And I was thumbing through as I was talking here. So it's saying that more than 300 million individuals were affected by data breaches in 2020, which means they must be counting the people whose. Information was stolen, not just the people that were hacked but it is a huge drop 66% over 2019. And the number of reported data breaches dropped to about 1100, which is about. 20% less than 2019. So it's good. It's bad. I think the mass data collection thing is over with now. They're not as interested in it, but they are very interested in strategic attacks as opposed to just these blanket. Let's grab as much data as we can because they want to get it into these government networks, which now we've, we know they've gotten into. And then you've got this double extortion thing going on with the ransomware, where again, the going after businesses and people who they know can pay. So that's good news for the rest of us, right? The home users. It's not good news so much for some of my clients, that's what we take care of. That's why we get paid the big bucks. Now how that works. Downright stick around. When we get back, we're going to be talking more about the news this week in particular, of course, security, Facebook and their Supreme court stick around. We'll be right back. The United States has a Supreme court. Our States each have their own Supreme courts. In fact, there's probably Supreme courts all over the world. But did you know that Facebook now has something that people are calling a Supreme court. This is interesting. Craig Peterson here. Thanks for joining me. I'm not sure if you've seen this or not, it's very small and it's designed to go into your car and then it will hook up like Bluetooth to your car. It'll use your phone for data. So the data is going back and forth from your phone over to them. They're a little device and that way you can talk to it and you can play music, whatever you'd like to listen to right there from your Alexa. People have been complaining about Facebook and what they've been doing for years. One of the things people have really been complaining about lately is how Facebook has been censoring people, particularly according to them anyways, conservatives.  I've certainly seen evidence of that. No question don't get me wrong, but there's also left-wingers who are complaining about being censored. Facebook decided it needed to have its kind of its own version of Supreme court. You see what happened? Bins is you have a post on Facebook that is questioned. And usually what has to happen is somebody reports it to Facebook as being off color or whatever it is, the reporting it as. And if two or three people report it, then it goes to the moderators. That same thing is true for some of the artificial intelligence. Some of it's reviewed by moderators as well. Here's your problem. Particularly when it comes to conservatives because you post something conservative on Facebook. And if you are noticed by some of these liberal hacks that are watching Facebook accounts, they will gang up on you. And they use these bots to pretend that there is incredible. Rage that there are hundreds of people who are very upset by what you just had on Facebook. When in reality, no, one's upset and they're just trying to shut you down. And there might only be two or three people who actually know about it, but they'll use these kind of artificial intelligence, bots to flood Facebook with complaints. And they're doing that on Twitter. The left is doing it all over the place. So what happens next? The big challenge for Facebook is there are 2.7 billion users. Can you even wrap your head around a number like that? That is just massive. So they've got 2.7 billion users, and now, obviously not everybody's on every day. But some percentage of them. And I've seen it's in the hundreds of millions posts every day on Facebook and they log in and look around. Facebook only has 15,000 moderators. So for 2.7 billion people, 15,000 moderators just isn't a lot. And the other problem is that the moderators are suing Facebook. And they came up. This was about a year ago. With a $52 million settlement with moderators and the moderators are saying, Hey, first of all, we're crazy overworked. And then secondarily, we've got PTSD. Post-traumatic stress disorder. And they're saying that they have this because of the stuff that they've had to see, they alleged that reviewing violent and graphic images, sometimes stuff. My gosh, I might've gotten mentioned here on the air, but they had to view these. For Facebook. And they said, this just led us to PTSD. I can see that particularly since they have to have so many every day. So many of these different posts that they have to look at. And they are clocked and they are third-party contractors. They're just, all this stuff adds up. Doesn't it? Moderators who worked in California, Arizona, Texas, and Florida from 2015 until last year, every moderator will receive a minimum of a thousand dollars as well as additional funds if they are diagnosed with PTSD or related conditions. So they're saying there's about 11,000 moderators that were eligible for this compensation. But this is a very big deal. It's difficult. How do you deal with that? They've got now 15,000 moderators who are reviewing the posts of these 2.7 billion users. There is a little bit of an escalation procedure, although it's a very difficult and because there are so many people who are. Complaining and trying to take care of everything. It is a very tough situation, really for everybody involved. So they've decided what Facebook needs Facebook's decided this themselves is they've got to moderate themselves a little bit better, and the way they are going to do all of this moderation is they're going to have this kind of Supreme court that supervises. All of the moderation going on within Facebook. So they call him the new to an oversight board and. Obviously with just one board, without very many people on it, it is only going to be able to handle a small number of cases. So they have been paying attention to some of the cases. And they're trying to set precedents that will be followed by the moderators and millions of other cases. It's basically the same thing that the U S Supreme court does, where they review cases that come up from the federal district court. They can have cases that are coming up from individual States as well. And then they set standards and, without going into all of the detail of disputes between district courts, et cetera, we'll see what happens in Facebook, but lower courts are treating these us Supreme court. Rulings and dicta as binding precedents for everything in the future. So it's not easy to do in our courts. We're certainly not great at it. And there are a lot of complex procedures. And even if you're talking about moderation where you bring a moderator in. And there are some standards for that in disputes between businesses where you'll pull in a neutral third party. And they'll just usually split things down the middle. But those are going to be difficult for Facebook to put in how they reviewed five decisions. These are pretty substantive. Sixth case apparently became moot after the user deleted the post. We have an uprising and Miramar right now. You might've seen it on TV. If you're paying attention. I know a couple of channels have been talking about it. But this is an interesting problem because the military has overthrown the potentially properly democratically elected government. What do you do if there is massive cheating going on in the election? We faced that question here ourselves. In Miramar, they went ahead and the military took over and imprisoned the president. There was a post talking about that and talking about Muslims in France and China. Another one about Azerbaijanis. I don't know if you've seen what happened with Armenia and Azerbaijan and lots of history going back there with the Soviets and they created this whole problem because they didn't like the Armenians, but anyways, of all of these five, they disagreed with the lower moderators opinions and they overturned them. I think it's really good. I looked at these cases and I was shocked. I think they're doing the right thing here. Isn't that weird? Hey, you're listening to Craig Peterson right here on news radio. Visit me online craig peterson.com. Hey, did you know, there is a war, if you will, between Facebook and Apple? It is getting nasty. What's going on over there. That's what we're going to talk about right now. Your privacy, Facebook, Apple, and Android. Craig Peterson here. Thanks for joining me. My golly. You know what I think about Facebook when it comes to privacy, right? Facebook and Google. I think Facebook is worse than Google, frankly. They just don't respect your privacy. They will go ahead and look at anything that they can get their hands on. We'll at that point, just go ahead and pull it together and sell it to anybody that's willing to pay. I am not fond of that. And I think you can probably guess why, and I doubt your fond of that at as well. You're not fond of that either. Apple did something. If that has really upset. Facebook and Zuckerberg has been making a lot of noise about this, but Apple announced plans about a week ago to finally roll out a change that they were putting into place in iOS 14, which is the operating system for the iPhones and iPads that Apple has. They had announced that they were going to add it the late last year. And there was huge pushback from Facebook and a few others as well. What's going on here? Bottom line is that Apple is trying to force. Apps to be transparent. What privacy do you have? What data are they taking? And in the case of iOS, as well as Android and windows and Macs, there has been the ability for certain applications to be able to look at other apps that are on the device. And by doing that, it can get data from it. They can figure out who you are. They can give a unique fingerprint based on what apps you have and what versions they are. They're pretty clever what they've been doing in order to harvest your information. Now you might have noticed if you go in. To the app store that there's been actually a big change already. This is the Apple app store. If you go in there and you pull up an app, any app, so let's pull up Facebook and then in the app store, and then you click, obviously on Facebook, you scroll down the app store page about Facebook. And partway down, it already has privacy information. You want to click on more info project early if it's Facebook, because it doesn't fit on that homepage for the Facebook app. And it will tell you everything. Everything that Facebook wants access to. Now, some of it's self-reported by the app developers. Some of it is stuff that happened. Figure it out either electronically or by getting people involved. I would like to think that when it comes to something as big as Facebook, they really are going that extra mile. And making sure that yes, indeed, this information is valid, it is what it is. They may not, and I'm not quite sure, but look at all of the stuff Facebook is gaining access to with you. So that was a bit of a hit people were pretty excited. Oh, wow. This is great. And although Google doesn't do what we're talking about here quite yet, I'm sure they will be not in the way that Apple is doing it, but because remember Google makes money off of you and your information, Facebook makes money off of you and your information. So if you want privacy, you cannot use Google products like Android or. Chrome. And if you want privacy, you can't use Facebook. So it's as simple as that. Of course, the big question, and we talked about this earlier in the show is how much privacy can you expect? How much do you want? What's legitimate, right? All of those types of questions. So what Apple's doing now is they said that in early spring of 2021, they are going to release this new version of iOS. And here's what happens. They've added something and this is according to a white paper and Q and a that Apple sent out. They added something called app tracking transparency, and this is going to require apps to get the user's permission before tracking their data across apps or websites owned by other companies. Under settings user will be able to see which apps have requested permission to track so they can make changes. As they see fit. You might have noticed that already under settings, like you can look at the microphone settings, it'll tell you. Okay. Here's the apps that I have asked about microphone and you can turn them off. Here's the apps that have asked about the camera. You can turn them off. So they're adding more functionality. They also, in the FAQ, they said that app developers will not be able to require users to allow tracking in order for those users to gain access to the full capabilities of the app. Now, you know how I've talked before extensively about how, if it's free your, the product. So what Apple is doing is they're saying, Hey guys if the user says, no, you can't try it. Track me across apps. No, you can't get it. This privacy information, which Apple's letting you do, they cannot Labatt automize. The app is what it comes right down to. So it was in September last year that they first said they were going to do that. Then they delayed the implementation of this tracking policy. So the businesses and app developers could get more time to figure this out. One of the things that I think is fascinating here is what Facebook's doing with fighting back. Oh, and by the way, Apple has not just gotten complaints from Facebook. There are other marketers and tech companies that frankly it makes Apple more vulnerable to some of these antitrust investigations that have been. Started really against some of these big tech companies. Although, I don't really expect much to happen under the current administration in Washington because frankly, big companies love big regulations. Because they can afford to comply with them, but startup little companies who are competitors of theirs cannot afford the lawyers for the paperwork and everything out. I look at the CMMC, we do a lot of work for DOD department of defense contractors, where we secure their networks. We secure their computers, we secure everything. We put it all together. And we also, for some of them there's guys, there's a 50, $50,000 upcharge for this. And that's because we're cheap. Believe it or not, it is a lot higher for other companies do it, but we do all of the paperwork, putting together all of the policies, all of the procedures, what they have and. Auditing everything for them. And we're talking about a case and a half of paper thinking of the big cases of paper, right? 500 sheets and the ream and how many reams in a box? 10 20. I'm not even sure, but literally cases. And we. Printed it up, we wrote it all up, printed it all up, delivered it to a client just a few weeks ago. And it was a huge box of three inch ring binders. It was all in and they didn't all fit in there. They're the big guys in the department of defense probably love this because they, they pay a million million bucks to the people, the generate the paperwork for them internally. And they know the little guys can't afford to have full-time paper pushers. And so that's why, even though we're talking about months worth of work, why we charge 50 grand, which is a heck of a lot cheaper, believe it or not. And it's a huge discount for us. So I don't expect that the fed you're going to come up with a solution. That's truly going to help the little guy here, but Apple's announcement praised by privacy advocate nonprofits as well. And Facebook apparently has been buying full page newspaper ads claiming it's going to hurt small businesses in a way it will cause it can make advertising. Just a little bit harder. And apparently also Facebook has decided to rewrite its apps. So no longer even requests to access, cross app access to your personal information. Welcome back. We're going to wrap up, talk a little bit about Comcast data cap, and some of these SolarWinds hack victims that didn't use SolarWinds, and ransomware payoffs have surged, even though the number of people affected has gone down. Make sure you get on my email list so that you get all of the important news. You're going to get some of this little training I'm doing and the courses that we've developed. The only way to do that is to go to Craig Peterson.com/subscribe. That's how you get on those lists and I'm not sitting there and pounding you or anything else, but I want to keep you informed. So there you go. We're probably going to increase our volume from one email a week to three, so that we can provide you with a little bit more training. I want to keep these down to something that just takes you a few minutes to go through, but could save you millions of your business and tens of thousands, your retirement, if you are a home user. So make sure you are on that list. Craigpeterson.com/subscribe. Comcast. I know many of us have Comcast, I certainly do, is imposing data caps on many people in many parts of the country. That includes people to the South here, Massachusetts residents. What do you think they're doing down there? The state lawmakers have proposed a ban on data caps, a ban on new fees, and a ban on price increases for home internet services. The idea from their standpoint is we have a lot of people who are working at home because of a lockdown. What are they supposed to be doing? I'll take my daughter, one of my daughters, as an example, she's working at home. She used to work in a call center she'd go in every day. Now she's working at home. Are they paying a wage differential for her? Are they paying for electric bill? They're not even paying for the phone bill or the phone. She has to provide her own phone. She takes inbound calls for a call center. Can you believe that? It's just amazing what's happened. The company is saving just a ton of money because people don't have to go into work. You can bet they're going to dispose of some of this space that they've been. What's happening here, we are using more bandwidth than we've ever used because more people are at home and it isn't all business related many are watching Netflix or you've got Netflix on in the background while you're working on stuff. It's just so common to do that. What data caps are doing is they say you can only use so much data a month. Then there's usually a penalty of some sort. In Comcast case, they said for the first quarter of 2021, I believe is what they had come up with. We'll just warn you that you go over your data cap then they'll charge extra. I have a friend who has Comcast and he said, I think it took him like three days before he went over the data cap. That's not long.  It's because they're streaming TV. They've got kids working from home. Then you've got meetings that they're going to, that are now streaming. So I can see this, but from Comcast side, they now have to handle more data than they've ever had to handle before. Because we are using it, like for my daughter, she actually has a cell phone, but all of the calls are routed over the internet. Cause her cell phone hooks up to the wifi in the house and the calls come in and go out via that wifi.  It goes through the internet, it goes to her phone carriers network. Then it goes to the call centers network. So there you go. What does that need? That needs to make sure there's no jitter. You don't want voice packets to be dropped because then it sounds terrible. It's very obvious when audio is dropped. I don't know if you've noticed if you're streaming something from one of these online streaming video services, but sometimes. It will hiccup a little bit, but have you noticed that with the smaller hiccups, the audio is fine and the problem is in the video. Now they do that for a couple of reasons, obviously video uses more bandwidth than audio uses, but the other reason is people tend to get more annoyed by audio fallout and audio problems. Comcast is saying, Hey guys, look at what we have to do with our networks. We have to expand them. We have to increase them. Now I've got to bring up again the Biden administration because of what they're planning on doing with this fairness doctrine on the internet. What they're planning on doing is saying, Hey, Comcast, just because this person uses five terabytes of data a month, you should not be charging them more than grandma that uses 10 gigabytes a month. Thousands of times more bandwidth requirement, you're not allowed to bill them differently. Cause a bit is a bit which is absolutely insane. I don't know how they can justify this sort of thing. So what's going to happen is you get companies like Comcast or other internet providers who are going to say. We are not going to invest any money into expanding our capacity because we can't charge for it. Doesn't that make sense to you? It makes perfect sense to me. By getting the FCC involved, it's just going to be crazy. Ajit Pi resigned when President Trump was leaving, he used to be the chairman. He actually had a head on his shoulders, but these new people President Biden put in there, it's insanity what they're trying to do with our networks. It's going to make it much worse. Comcast is putting data caps in. You hit the data cap it, they're just going to slow you way down. That happens too, with a lot of our cell phones, our cell phone carriers, if you use more data than they've allotted to you, they'll drop you back. So most people have 4g. Yeah. Okay. Your phone's 5g, but really guess what? You're not getting 5g. It's very rare unless you are on on the T-Mobile slash Sprint plan. T-Mobile more specifically because nobody else has the coverage that T-Mobile has for 5g. So you're using 4g LTE, you hit your data cap. They're going to drop you back to 3g, which is really slow comparing the two together, all the three of them, frankly, but it's very slow compared to a 4g LTE. In mass, by the way, I should mention Verizon files and RCN. Do not impose the data caps. It's just our friends at Comcast that are doing that Vargas and Rogers. They let a group of 71 different Massachusetts lawmakers who urged Comcast to halt the

The future of privacy begins with the current state of surveillance. The 21st century practices of US intelligence agencies push the technological, legal and political limits of lawful surveillance. Jennifer Granick is a civil liberties and privacy law expert with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who is the perfect guide to how the system works and the technological and political means we have to defend our privacy. Jennifer Granick fights for civil liberties in an age of massive surveillance and powerful digital technology. As surveillance and cybersecurity counsel with the ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, she litigates, speaks, and writes about privacy, security, technology, and constitutional rights. She is the former Executive Director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society and also former Civil Liberties Director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Her book American Spies: Modern Surveillance, Why You Should Care, and What To Do About It won the 02016 Palmer Civil Liberties Prize for scholarship exploring the tension between civil liberties and national security in contemporary American society. An experienced litigator and criminal defense attorney, she has taught subjects like surveillance law, cybersecurity, and encryption policy at Stanford Law School.

Over the next month, states will start to loosen their COVID-19 stay-at-home restrictions. Some of us will return to work, gather in small groups, and maybe even dine at a neighborhood restaurant. But what will it take to keep us safe and prevent new spikes in infections? Many experts say we will not be out of the woods until there's a vaccine, but how would a national vaccination plan even work? At the same time, technological solutions are being proposed, especially related to contact tracing, the process by which public health officials can map and anticipate the spread of a virus, but technological solutions raise a whole host of questions on their own regarding privacy and civil liberties. Today we're joined by professor Michele Goodwin, the founding director of the center for biotechnology and global health policy at the University of California Irvine school of law, and ACLU staff attorney Jennifer Granick who leads our work on surveillance and cybersecurity. For more on this topic, check out Michele Goodwin's interview on Slate's Amicus podcast: https://slate.com/podcasts/amicus/2020/03/law-of-pandemics-coronavirus. And, read Jennifer's article on Apple and Google's Coronavirus tracking proposal: https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/apple-and-google-announced-a-coronavirus-tracking-system-how-worried-should-we-be/.

The ACLU has been more visible in recent years, which is a great thing. Whether it's fighting the US government's Muslim ban or working to end the suffering of young immigrants at our borders, the ACLU has played a big role in the defense of American Civil Liberties and been a champion for their mission in digital media across the United States.Our next guest is working behind the scenes to protect us in this modern world. As Surveillance and Cybersecurity Counsel at the ACLU, Jennifer Granick works on Government Surveillance and Speech and Privacy in its technology division. At the core of what she does is fight against the intrusion of technology, surveillance and search when it infringes on our basic civil liberties. This covers everything from if Ring doorbell cameras should be accessible to police investigators to whether immigration officials should be able to access social media accounts.Follow us everywhere @TheWebbyAwardsKeep up with David-Michel @dmdlikesOur Producer is Terence BrosnanOur Editorial Lead is Jordana JarrettMusic is Podington Bear Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Your personal and business details are valuable and under threat. In this episode Robert & Kim talk to Jennifer Granick, author of “American Spies,” about who is stealing your privacy, how they’re doing it, and what you can do to fight back. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On International Women’s Day, we’re highlighting the stories of several incredibly talented women in tech policy. They discuss what brought them to tech policy, and what drives them on this career path. Featured in this episode are: Gigi Sohn, a Distinguished Fellow at the Georgetown Law Institute for Technology Law & Policy and Mozilla Policy Fellow; Michelle Richardson, Deputy Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology's Freedom, Security, and Technology Project; Dr. Betsy Cooper, executive director of the Berkley Center for Long-Term Cyber Security; Cathy Gellis, lawyer with a focus on Internet issues; Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel for the ACLU; Carrie Wade, Director of Harm Reduction Policy and Senior Fellow at the R Street Institute; and Tiffany Li, resident fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project.

The controversial memo prepared by Rep. Nunes (R-CA) hasn’t left the newscycle since its release on February 2. Berin recorded this special episode from the Bay Area and is joined by Jennifer Granick, the “NBA All-Star of surveillance law,” and the Surveillance and Cybersecurity Counsel at the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. Jennifer breaks down FISA, the authority that allowed collection of the information used in the memo, and the intricacies of the infamous memo.

What's stopping the American government from recording your phone calls, reading your emails and monitoring your location? Very little, says surveillance and cybersecurity counsel Jennifer Granick. The government collects all kinds of information about you easily, cheaply and without a warrant -- and if you've ever participated in a protest or attended a gun show, you're likely a person of interest. Learn more about your rights, your risks and how to protect yourself in the golden age of surveillance. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Qu'est-ce qui empêche le gouvernement américain d'enregistrer vos appels téléphoniques, lire vos e-mails et suivre vos déplacements ? Très peu de choses selon Jennifer Granick, conseillère en cybersécurité et surveillance. Le gouvernement rassemble tout type d'informations vous concernant, et ce gratuitement et sans mandat. De plus, si vous avez déjà participé à une manifestation ou à une exposition d'armes à feu, vous êtes sûrement déjà considéré comme suspect. Découvrez vos droits, les risques auxquels vous êtes exposé et apprenez à vous protéger à l'ère de la surveillance.

O que impede o governo americano de gravar seus telefonemas, ler seus e-mails e monitorar sua localização? Muito pouco, diz a consultora em espionagem e segurança cibernética Jennifer Granick. O governo reúne todos os tipos de informações sobre as pessoas facilmente, de forma barata e sem autorização - e se você já participou de um protesto ou de uma feira de armas, é provável que tenha sido espionado. Saiba mais sobre os direitos, riscos e como se proteger na idade de ouro da espionagem.

¿Qué está impidiendo que el gobierno estadounidense registre sus llamadas telefónicas, lea sus correos electrónicos y supervise su ubicación? Muy poco, dice la consejera de vigilancia y ciberseguridad Jennifer Granick. El gobierno recopila todo tipo de información sobre usted de manera fácil, barata y sin una orden judicial. Y, si alguna vez ha participado en una protesta o ha asistido a un espectáculo de armas, es probable que sea una persona de interés. Aprenda más sobre sus derechos, sus riesgos y cómo protegerse en la época dorada de la vigilancia.

What's stopping the American government from recording your phone calls, reading your emails and monitoring your location? Very little, says surveillance and cybersecurity counsel Jennifer Granick. The government collects all kinds of information about you easily, cheaply and without a warrant -- and if you've ever participated in a protest or attended a gun show, you're likely a person of interest. Learn more about your rights, your risks and how to protect yourself in the golden age of surveillance.

미국 정부가 여러분의 통화를 녹음하고 이메일을 읽고 위치를 추적하는 것으로 부터 우리를 보호하는 장치 같은 것이 있을까요? 감시 기술 및 사이버 보안 전문가 제니퍼 그라닉은 거의 없다고 합니다. 정부는 저렴한 비용으로 영장도 필요없이 당신에 대한 정보를 쉽게 얻을 수 있습니다. 그리고 혹시라도 여러분이 시위를 했거나, 총기관련 박람회를 다녀왔다면 여러분은 그들이 찾는 사람일 수 도 있습니다. 이 감시의 황금시대에 여러분은 여러분 스스로가 가진 권리와, 여러분이 잃을 수도 있는 것들, 그리고 스스로를 어떻게 보호해야하는 지 알아야 합니다.

In the post-Snowden era, we don't have to tell you how important it is to stay engaged with (and vigilant about) the surveillance state in America. Jennifer Granick is the Director of Civil Liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, and author of the new book American Spies — and this week she joins us for an in-depth discussion about the surveillance state today. Of course, shortly after we recorded this podcast, the NSA made major changes to one of its surveillance programs, so Jennifer returned to record an addendum examining this latest news, so make sure you listen to the end!

Keeping our private information away from hackers and spies is a growing concern for many Americans. In the Future of Everything radio show, Stanford bioengineering Professor Russ Altman discusses how to keep our data safe with Jennifer Granick, Director of Civil Liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School.

The Future of Everything with Russ Altman: "Jennifer Granick: ​Our digital fingerprints are everywhere. How do we protect ourselves?" ​In the Future of Everything radio show, Stanford’s Russ Altman and Jennifer Granick discuss cyber surveillance, hacking, security, and American civil liberties. Aired originally on SiriusXM on February 11, 2017 Recorded at Stanford Video.

Jennifer Granick, director of civil liberties at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, talks to the FT's Hannah Kuchler about government surveillance in the US after the Snowden revelations, and how it could all change under a Trump administration. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Our guests are New York Times technology reporter Brad Stone and Electronic Frontier Foundation civil liberties director Jennifer Granick, parents of twins. Spend: superflykidz - handmade superhero capes Save: Redbox - rent movies for $1/day. Give: GreenSearch Audible Pick: ScreamFree Parenting: The The Revolutionary Approach to Raising Your Kids by Keeping Your Cool by Hal Edward Runkel Hosts: Megan Morrone and Leo Laporte Guests: Brad Stone and Jennifer Stisa Granick Full show notes available on Megan's blog, JumpingMonkeys.com. Bandwidth for Jumping Monkeys is provided by CacheFly. The Jumping Monkeys theme is by Paul Minshall.

A talk show on KZSU-FM, Stanford, 90.1 FM, hosted by Center for Internet & Society Resident Fellow David S. Levine. The show includes guests and focuses on the intersection of technology and society. How is our world impacted by the great technological changes taking place? Each week, a different sphere is explored. This week, David interviews Jennifer Granick about defending hackers and other people changed with computer crimes and/or violations of the law.

The simple decision by a researcher to tell what he or she has discovered about a software product or website can be very complicated both legally and ethically. The applicable legal rules are complicated, there isn?t necessarily any precedent, and what rules there are may be in flux. In this presentation, I will use Cisco and ISS's lawsuit against Michael Lynn (from Black Hat 2005) and HID's cease and desist letter to IOActive (from Black Hat 2006) to discuss major intellectual property law doctrines that regulate security research and disclosure. I will give the audience some practical tips for avoiding claims of illegal activity.

The simple decision by a researcher to tell what he or she has discovered about a software product or website can be very complicated both legally and ethically. The applicable legal rules are complicated, there isn?t necessarily any precedent, and what rules there are may be in flux. In this presentation, I will use Cisco and ISS's lawsuit against Michael Lynn (from Black Hat 2005) and HID's cease and desist letter to IOActive (from Black Hat 2006) to discuss major intellectual property law doctrines that regulate security research and disclosure. I will give the audience some practical tips for avoiding claims of illegal activity.