[NVDucati]

Australia-news
‘Every message was copied to the police’: the inside story of the most daring surveillance sting in history
Billed as the most secure phone on the planet, An0m became a viral sensation in the underworld. There was just one problem for anyone using it for criminal means: it was run by the police..."

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/11/inside-story-most-daring-surveillance-sting-in-history?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1

[AzCal Retred]

So once again, if these master criminals were actually that smart they'd likely have day jobs. 

[Arschloch]

That's something the Swedish police did too with the help of Europol and FBI. If it had any positive societal effects is questionable. Some drug dealers were arrested, the average Joe might be baffled and wonder who else is reading his correspondence and for what goal.

Reminds me of their insane corporations where the psychotic "bosses" would secretely read everything anyone wrote to stay ahead of everyone and make sure everyone is "happy" when announcing a hair cut to their salary slip for the greater good.

[AzCal Retred]

Office bosses reading your e-mail? Perks of the job, company property, right? 

Except for that pesky anti-drug sales mission, mandated law enforcement part, identical. Sure. Electronic media is an open book to anyone with the tech to access it. That includes everyone from the Prince of Nigeria with his hand-crank laptop to the NSA, GRU, CIA, FSB, FBI, Facebook, and millions of other savvy net-wizard organizations. If you need secure comms, hand delivered messages are still tough to beat, just slow. Pagers are still available. Codes are popular. If my multi million dollar enterprize depended on secure comms, I think I could spend enough to find a way to avoid jail, then spend a bit more to prove what I thought I knew.

Radio KDKB had the "master criminal of the week" segment. It was pretty hilarious, full of people "too clever by half"...

[Arschloch]

Office bosses reading your e-mail? Perks of the job, company property, right? 

The worst pussies you can think of.  ...if a swedish corporate pussy says 2+2=5 and you reply maybe that's not correct you may get a date and her (his) phone number. You come to the meeting and you may find yourself surrounded by some arab securities and they will convince you 2+2=5.

No wonder they all believe any bullshit they are told and need Greta as their moral and spiritual leader.   

How about the police infiltrating their insane corporations instead of chasing and handful drug dealers.

[gizzo]

So once again, if these master criminals were actually that smart they'd likely have day jobs. 

What are you saying, being a police isn't a real job? 

[ideola]

Warrantless search & seizure.

Wars have been sparked over such things.

I truly feel bad for countries whose constitutions are not based in an acknowledgment of Natural Rights.

[AzCal Retred]

Some fact-based light reading vs. subjective opinion:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CONAN-1992/pdf/GPO-CONAN-1992-10-5.pdf

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/corporations-and-unreasonable-searches-and-seizures-does-supreme-court-s-decision-ri

https://www.workplacefairness.org/workplace-searches
Workplace Searches
Under the law, all employees have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" which prevents employers from searching employees wherever and whenever the employer wishes. What is considered reasonable depends on factors like the type of employment, whether there is evidence of misconduct, and the scope of the search. Employees have a greater expectation of privacy with respect to more intrusive searches, including searches of their bodies, clothing, purses, and briefcases. Reasonableness is determined on a case-by-case basis and will depend on the particular facts of a given search. If you think you have been subjected to an improper workplace search you should contact an attorney in your area to discuss the particular facts of your case and how the law might protect you. To learn more about workplaces searches, read below:
1. Why would my employer want to search me at work? Isn't that a violation of my privacy?
2. Is it legal for my employer to search me or search my belongings?
3. How does the Constitution protect public employees?
4. Under what circumstances can a public employer search an employee?
5. Under what circumstances can a private employer search an employee?
6. Even if an employee has notice of the search, is it still legal? What happens to the employee's right to privacy?
7. If I think I have grounds to sue my employer for a search that violated my privacy, what do I do?

1. Why would my employer want to search me at work? Isn't that a violation of my privacy?
In a perfect workplace, there would never be a need for employers to search their employees. However, employers have an interest in keeping their workplaces free from drugs, illegal weapons, and alcohol, and in eliminating any employee theft which may be occurring. Still, many employees believe that the law should protect individuals and their personal belongings from an employer's intrusive searches.
The courts have struggled to balance these competing concerns in a way that recognizes the legitimacy of both sides' interests. Cases involving the violation of privacy rights through unreasonable searches are often extremely factual and tend to be decided on a case-by-case basis.
2. Is it legal for my employer to search me or search my belongings?
The law generally states that employers must have a reasonable basis for a search, and the search must be confined to non-personal items. Searches of personal items, like handbags, generally cannot be searched unless the employer has a valid reason to do so.
The answer to this question also depends on what type of work is involved. Public (government) employees have a greater protection of privacy protections under provided by the United States Constitution. While public employees have the protection of the Constitution, at At least nine states (Alaska, California, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina, and Washington) have provided those same rights regarding privacy to private employees as well. However, iIn many states there are no laws that explicitly say what employers are and are not allowed to do when performing a workplace search.

Read the questions below to learn more about when an employer can and cannot conduct a search.

3. How does the Constitution protect public employees?
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated," has been extended by the U.S. Supreme Court to protect public employees against searches and seizures of themselves and/or their property. In order for you to be protected by the Constitution, you must demonstrate that the search the employer conducted was an invasion of your own reasonable expectation of privacy.
Your employer is not required to have a warrant or probable cause to conduct a search Probable cause means a reasonable ground to suspect that a person has committed or is committing a crime or that a place contains specific items connected with a crime for the search, which is required under the Fourth Amendment to obtain a search warrant. Your employer need only have a justifiable reason related to the nature of employment, such as an interest in promoting efficient operation of the workplace.
4. Under what circumstances can a public employer search an employee?
A reasonable expectation of privacy in the governmental setting usually depends on the office practices and procedures. The U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged that public employees have a heightened expectation of privacy regarding such items as purses, briefcases, and closed luggage brought to work.
Government employers can weaken your expectations of privacy by informing you that you do not have an expectation of privacy, or that your desks, computers, and lockers may be searched. However, while legitimate workplace policies or regulations can reduce your expectations of privacy, the government may not condition your job upon your willingness to comply with unconstitutional conditions.

Here are some of the factors that you as a public employee must consider in order to determine whether or not your governmental employer has violated your right to privacy:
Is there credible evidence of misconduct? For example, a tip by a credible coworker that an employee has engaged in misconduct may be enough for an employer to initiate a search.
Is the scope of the search limited? For example, the employer's search should be limited to locations where the item being sought is likely to be stored. One court upheld a search for pornographic pictures in an employee's desk, storage unit, and file cabinet, since those places were the most likely place an employee would store the photos.
Is the search of an accessible area in which the employee has a diminished expectation of privacy? For example, is the employer searching an area that is exclusively for the employee's own use, or do other employees have access to the area? One court upheld a search of a fire chief's office where official records and maintenance equipment were kept, holding that the chief's privacy expectations were diminished when others had the right to access items stored in his office.
Is the search for a limited purpose? For example, an employee who was on leave and asked to clear out his desk was determined not to have any expectation of privacy when a supervisor searched the desk for any remaining work-related items, and found a computer disk with incriminating information.
5. Under what circumstances can a private employer search an employee?
In order to determine whether or not your employer in the private sector has violated your right to privacy, there are several factors to consider:
What type of employment is involved? For example, an employer is permitted to search your clothing or possessions to determine whether there has been theft of company property, so in the retail environment, it is customary to check an employee's belongings to prevent theft of merchandise. It is less customary to do so in an office setting where an employee's access to easily concealed and/or expensive items is limited.
Is there a legitimate business reason for the search? For example, an employer has an interest in recovering an item that it believes to be stolen, or preventing workplace violence by ensuring that employees are not bringing weapons into the workplace. However, courts are more likely to find that an employer who engages in random searches without any reasonable suspicion that an employee has violated the law or any workplace policies is violating its employees' privacy.
What is being searched? For example, when employers have searched employees' locked file cabinets, desks, or personal papers, courts have found these items may be searched so long as there was authority to search. However, in a case where the employees were expected to pay for locks to guard their lockers, the court found that the employer had violated the employee's right to privacy by searching a locked locker. In that instance, the employee had a reasonable expectation of privacy.
For what is the employer searching? For example, if the missing item was a computer, the employer might be justified in searching employee lockers and cars, but not employees' purses, pockets, or clothing, since the item sought is too large to be concealed on the employee's body or in the employee's personal effects.
Back to Top back to top
6. Even if an employee has notice of the search, is it still legal? What happens to the employee's right to privacy?
Employers now typically safeguard their intrusive actions by announcing clear policies regarding random, unannounced searches. Although your right to privacy may be diminished when your employer gives you notice of a policy regarding searches, notice does not extinguish the right. Many courts find searches to be illegal, even with notice, when an employer has engaged in socially unacceptable conduct by demonstrating a complete disregard for the search's effect on an employee. This typically occurs with strip searches, as workers have a stronger privacy interest in their own bodies.

While private employers can compel, as a condition of employment, your consent or acquiescence to employer searches, a governmental employer could never condition your employment on your willingness to consent to an unconstitutional search.

7. If I think I have grounds to sue my employer for a search that violated my privacy, what do I do?
In this situation, it is important to consult with an attorney to determine what rights you may have. The violation of privacy rights through an unreasonable search is often extremely factual and tends to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Depending on the issue involved, you may need to quickly make a strategic decision whether to challenge the process in court. There may be fast-approaching deadlines, which will affect your legal strategy, so it is important to consult with an attorney immediately, to preserve the widest range of options for yourself.

If you are a member of a union and/or a public employee, you may also want to speak with a shop steward, union official, or other employee representative to discuss whether you may have grounds for a grievance or lawsuit.

[Hoiho]

Warrantless search & seizure.

Wars have been sparked over such things.

I truly feel bad for countries whose constitutions are not based in an acknowledgment of Natural Rights.

cough, US foreign policy, cough, decades of unjustified intervention, cough, oil wars - nothing to see here folks, move right along...

[tooseevee]

No wonder they all believe any bullshit they are told and need Greta as their moral and spiritual leader.   

           Is she a multi-millionaire yet? Just askin' 

[ideola]

cough, US foreign policy, cough, decades of unjustified intervention, cough, oil wars - nothing to see here folks, move right along...

cough...cuz the bad ol' US of A is the ONLY country in the world who has ever done such things and no other country in the history of mankind has ever done anything worse.

Gimme a freakin' break.

[Arschloch]

           Is she a multi-millionaire yet? Just askin' 

Who would care, a mud hut costs probably a million $$$ by now in Sweden anyway and anything else is causing climate change.

[Richard230]

Who would care, a mud hut costs probably a million $$$ by now in Sweden anyway and anything else is causing climate change.

Does Sweden still have enough water to make mud huts?  I wish we had that much water in California. We have to make our homes out of stacks of new "social justice" laws. 

[tooseevee]

Who would care, a mud hut costs probably a million $$$ by now in Sweden anyway and anything else is causing climate change.

        Ha   Perfect 

       
(Wish I'd said it first        )

[tooseevee]

Does Sweden still have enough water to make mud huts?  I wish we had that much water in California. We have to make our homes out of stacks of new "social justice" laws. 

         
       Yes. Kudos. And you're trapped there if you can't sell your house because it's valued at 2.5 million $ on the market now & almost no reasonable person with
that kind of money will EVER buy it etc., etc., etc..   


  PS: I know nothing of Richard's houseal sitchewayshun. Just making a point.

[AzCal Retred]

These are sorta "California" home prices, $380K, nothing too extraordinary. Owning a $2.5M USD house would likely be a sign your wallet has stretch marks and you've never missed a meal. No immediate life-threatening worries for that lucky fellow, just inconvenience. 

HOUSE PRICES IN SWEDEN'S 8 RIKSOMRÅDEN (NATIONAL AREAS), 2020. Nationwide house prices stood at an average of SEK 3,279,000 (€320,429) in 2020, up by 8.1% from a year earlier. ( about $380K)
Sweden's house price rises accelerating - Global Property Guide

In Sweden, the average household net-adjusted disposable income per capita is USD $31,287 a year, lower than the OECD average of USD $33,604 a year. There is a considerable gap between the richest and poorest – the top 20% of the population earn four times as much as the bottom 20%. Sweden - OECD Better Life Index

https://www.statista.com/statistics/526094/sweden-median-disposable-household-income/ ; ( Household income, About 490,000 SEK ) ( $56,000 USD)

[Richard230]

         
       Yes. Kudos. And you're trapped there if you can't sell your house because it's valued at 2.5 million $ on the market now & almost no reasonable person with
that kind of money will EVER buy it etc., etc., etc..   


  PS: I know nothing of Richard's houseal sitchewayshun. Just making a point.

It is a good point, though. My home cost $35K when new in 1971. Now homes in my area are currently selling within a week or so for prices around $1.5 million. Since I have my home paid off and my taxes are relatively low due to our Proposition 19 that froze property taxes in 1977 and then limited the rise in taxes to 2% each year, I am doing OK during my declining years.    But, since I don't want to move, the price of homes in the area is just a curiosity to me that I am having trouble getting my thoughts wrapped around.  Why would anyone pay that kind of money for a two-story ticky-tacky box in a state that wants to run your life for you? 

[AzCal Retred]

http://virginiafarmsforsale.net/property/wonderful-country-estate/

< $600K, 53 acres, 2,500 sq. ft. Cape Cod style home....and $900,000 in play money left over...deer & small game, good annual rainfall, enough elbow room to not have to see your neighbors, etc., etc... maybe within shootin' distance of the Bilgemaster... room for a barn to collect & restore old bikes...

[Karl Childers]

cough...cuz the bad ol' US of A is the ONLY country in the world who has ever done such things and no other country in the history of mankind has ever done anything worse.

Gimme a freakin' break.

As children in this country we are taught that as a nation we are better than that, as adults we find out we're not. It would be nice if we could change our ways and be the country we pretend to be. Another president like Bush Jr. (Cheney ran the show) or tRump and we will truly be up shitz creek.

[AzCal Retred]

There is a bit of truth in all of these quotes.

"What is history, but a fable agreed upon? " Napoleon Bonaparte

“those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.” Winston Churchill

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair

My favorite is this bit of sagacity: "It's the Golden Rule; them that have the gold make the rules." Johnny Hart

[gizzo]

http://virginiafarmsforsale.net/property/wonderful-country-estate/

< $600K, 53 acres, 2,500 sq. ft. Cape Cod style home....and $900,000 in play money left over...deer & small game, good annual rainfall, enough elbow room to not have to see your neighbors, etc., etc... maybe within shootin' distance of the Bilgemaster... room for a barn to collect & restore old bikes...

Holy crap. I'm looking for a farm (hobby size) and 600k is my kind of price range. That doesn't get you shit here though. That place looks magnificent. I'd buy that in a minute, if it was here.

[Richard230]

My favorite piece of legislative taxing advice is: "Don't tax me, don't tax you, tax the guy behind the tree." 

[AzCal Retred]

@ Gizzo, #20: That same spread in Arizona would be a lot more. It's the access to water thing, where it regularly falls from the sky, land prices for rural "paradises" seem to go down. Hawaii excluded, of course. Lots of folks that retired from our Laughlin powerplant moved to the Midwest/Mideast? Tennessee, Virginia, Oklahoma, Georgia, etc. for that very reason. No irrigation, belly high grass, trees, natural gas for heat in the winter, lots of game. A really nice place to land if you don't have to get up & go to work everyday. A bit of A/C for the humid summers, wood heat in the winter, a 5 acre pond to bring in the game & raise catfish, bass, bluegill & crappie in. 2-5 cows for meat, maybe 2 cows per acre there instead of the 20-50 acres per cow in Arizona. When the roads are iced up or maybe just mudbogs, you stay home & fiddle in the garage. If "pretty" isn't a priority for you, all that can be done at a much lower rate. Jump on the next flight over & spend a few weeks tootling around, your money is good here. 

[ideola]

@ Gizzo, #20: That same spread in Arizona would be a lot more. It's the access to water thing, where it regularly falls from the sky, land prices for rural "paradises" seem to go down. Hawaii excluded, of course. Lots of folks that retired from our Laughlin powerplant moved to the Midwest/Mideast? Tennessee, Virginia, Oklahoma, Georgia, etc. for that very reason. No irrigation, belly high grass, trees, natural gas for heat in the winter, lots of game. A really nice place to land if you don't have to get up & go to work everyday. A bit of A/C for the humid summers, wood heat in the winter, a 5 acre pond to bring in the game & raise catfish, bass, bluegill & crappie in. 2-5 cows for meat, maybe 2 cows per acre there instead of the 20-50 acres per cow in Arizona. When the roads are iced up or maybe just mudbogs, you stay home & fiddle in the garage. If "pretty" isn't a priority for you, all that can be done at a much lower rate. Jump on the next flight over & spend a few weeks tootling around, your money is good here. 

Agreed. I have something somewhat similar: 11 acres, 1 acre stocked pond, old dairy barn with lean-to converted to shop on the back. Sheep, horses, donkeys, chickens, and ducks (no cows, no goats). For what it's worth, chickens are way easier to raise and process than cows, and ducks are easier than chickens. Great source of both eggs and meat (although SWMBO will not allow anything we feed to be eaten, so ours are just lawn ornaments and pets). If I had a 53 acre parcel, I'd skip right past cows and go straight to Bison. One male, a couple of cows, save two calves for butchering at the end of the season, sell the rest off, and you'd be set for meat for nearly a year.

I'm stunned that that 53 acre estate in VA is only $600K. That is only marginally more than I paid for my 11 acres, and I bought it when the market was at the trough (2014). Just as a point of reference, ag acreage in most of the Midwest goes for ~$10K per acre, not including buildings and infrastructure. I'm stunned that it wouldn't be more in Virginia.

One add'l note for anyone seriously considering this path: make sure you understand taxation in the jurisdiction where you purchase, particularly property taxes. From what I understand, many eastern states like MD, VA, DE, CT, MA tax EVERYTHING annually that you own as property, not just the real estate. So if you bring in a fleet of hobby vehicles or farm equipment, it all gets taxed. Most states only tax at the time of purchase, with a nominal "road tax" as part of annual registration. Not so in the east.

On the issue of real estate taxes, I highly advise that you research public policy with respect to taxation, expansion, and development. Here in IL, housing values are flat or declining because they keep raising property tax by double digit percentages year over year. I'm zoned ag, so I'm somewhat protected from the direct impact of high taxes. But the declining property taxes of everyone else who are zoned residential due to over-taxation affects my property value too.

The old addage about real estate being a great investment doesn't apply here because the exhorbitant real estate taxes artificially surpress appreciation of property values. In other words, don't buy in IL. If it weren't for SWMBOs recalcitrance, I'd already be in Missouri. Consider that a pro tip.

[GlennF]

The main issue here with rates/taxes is when an area gets gentrified the existing locals can no longer afford to live there. 

Sure they can cash in and make a big profit and buy elsewhere but a lot of older people that have owned their house for 50 years and brought up a family there just want to retire in peace in their old family home,  not sell out to some developer and move because they cannot afford the rates/taxes on their house anymore.

[ideola]

...when an area gets gentrified the existing locals can no longer afford to live there...

In many areas yes, but unfortunately, that's not what's happening in IL. It's the opposite. In many cases, the annual taxes on home ammortized over 12 months have eclipsed the monthly house payment, not including homeowners insurance. When that happens, the houses won't sell because nobody that can afford it wants a shithole with a tax payment that's more than the house is worth, even as a rental property. There's a reason that IL leads the nation in population loss, and that's a big one.

[gizzo]

From what I understand, many eastern states like MD, VA, DE, CT, MA tax EVERYTHING annually that you own as property, not just the real estate. So if you bring in a fleet of hobby vehicles or farm equipment, it all gets taxed. Most states only tax at the time of purchase, with a nominal "road tax" as part of annual registration. Not so in the east.

Holy crap! So you buy a nice jacket and your land tax (I assume that's like our council rates here, money goes toward local infrastructure and board of directors corruption) goes up? Does it go down again to accommodate depreciation of your assets? Sounds like a freakin' nightmare. And puts some perspective into that obscenely cheap farm property. Thanks for the insight fellas.

[ideola]

Holy crap! So you buy a nice jacket and your land tax (I assume that's like our council rates here, money goes toward local infrastructure and board of directors corruption) goes up? Does it go down again to accommodate depreciation of your assets? Sounds like a freakin' nightmare. And puts some perspective into that obscenely cheap farm property. Thanks for the insight fellas.

Well, sort of...clothing is usually excluded as property, but big ticket taxable items like vehicles, RVs, UTVs, motorcycles, farm equipment, etc. are all fair game.

Also, pro tip: taxes always go up, they never go down.

[gizzo]

Unbelievable. 

It reminds me of a situation that used to exist in South Australia before I was born: Any vehicle whether in use or not had to be registered, even off road on private property or in storage. The way around it was to dismantle the vehicle. So for some time South Australia was a happy hunting ground for "barn find" project cars. But they're all discovered and gone, now.

[AzCal Retred]

We have 50 states, Ill-A-Noise is just one of many. For the fellow with cash that does his homework, there's always a deal. In Virginia in particular, where the listing was, here's some tax info:
https://www.centralvafarms.com/blog/2016/07/land-use-tax-assessment-in-virginia/

There are lots of rural folks living in the "sticks", most in a fairly low-budget manner too. Being a "gentleman farmer" is eminently doable, just do enough research to see if it's for you. Remember to factor in the "If'n Momma ain't happy, ain't nobody gonna be happy" consideration too. 

[GlennF]

Unbelievable. 

It reminds me of a situation that used to exist in South Australia before I was born: Any vehicle whether in use or not had to be registered, even off road on private property or in storage. The way around it was to dismantle the vehicle. So for some time South Australia was a happy hunting ground for "barn find" project cars. But they're all discovered and gone, now.

Whereas when I was a kid in NSW almost all farm vehicles were unregistered, tractors obviously never where, but that included a lot of the wheat trucks driven to the local silos during harvest each year. Nor did most people bother too much about truck licences.  These days most trucks are registered and the drivers licenced and log books kept, but you still see a lot of tractors, ag bikes and quad bikes on the road with no plates once you get out of town.

[gizzo]

Whereas when I was a kid in NSW almost all farm vehicles were unregistered, tractors obviously never where, but that included a lot of the wheat trucks driven to the local silos during harvest each year. Nor did most people bother too much about truck licences.  These days most trucks are registered and the drivers licenced and log books kept, but you still see a lot of tractors, ag bikes and quad bikes on the road with no plates once you get out of town.

Do you remember the days when you had to register your surfboard in NSW? 😂

[Hoiho]

Do you remember the days when you had to register your surfboard in NSW? 😂

Seriously??

[gizzo]

Seriously??

Yep.

[Hoiho]

Yep.

Were the breaks getting too crowded? Human soup?

[AzCal Retred]

Things should be getting less "competitive" for surfers:
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2021/03/09/alarming-decline-in-shark-populations-points-to-need-for-stricter-conservation-measures

[gizzo]

Were the breaks getting too crowded? Human soup?

Just a council driven cash grab, made easily enforceable at the time. Surfers were at odds with the cubbies, so council gave the cubbies (lifeguards) the power to confiscate unregistered boards. Caused a lot of drama at the beach and they gave up in about '67.

Way before I was born but a fun bit of local history.

[gizzo]

Things should be getting less "competitive" for surfers:
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2021/03/09/alarming-decline-in-shark-populations-points-to-need-for-stricter-conservation-measures

There’s plenty of Noahs around here where I surf....

[Karl Fenn]

Sad these master corporate criminals are spying on everyone these days, not to mention the data protection laws they breach every day shearing confidential data which is highly illegal, they have blatant disregard for their own laws point of fact and no judge will enforce them because they are bent and on the same payroll.

[Richard230]

Sad these master corporate criminals are spying on everyone these days, not to mention the data protection laws they breach every day shearing confidential data which is highly illegal, they have blatant disregard for their own laws point of fact and no judge will enforce them because they are bent and on the same payroll.

Well, I know one thing. Google seems to read every one of my emails and then sends me ads for any items mentioned in those private messages. I am not concerned about the NSA or the Russian security service knowing everything about me, but Google sure seems to do and they are not concerned about sharing their information with other companies willing to pay for it. All spy agencies have to do is to pay Google and I am sure they will be happy to share my private information with them. Who needs an expensive and dangerous James Bond, when all you need to do is to Google away? 

[Arschloch]

And the advertising is totally f#$ed up. Just because i buy a shaver, i don't want to see shaver adverts all over the place.

[Richard230]

And the advertising is totally f#$ed up. Just because i buy a shaver, i don't want to see shaver adverts all over the place.

I agree. That is one of Amazon's specialties. For every item that you buy you then get 10 ads for the same or similar items for at least the next month. 

[Hoiho]

It's called surveillance capitalism and it's been around since forever. Burn your computer/phone if you don't enjoy it.

[Richard230]

It's called surveillance capitalism and it's been around since forever. Burn your computer/phone if you don't enjoy it.

I prefer dropping them in my toilet. It creates less air pollution. 

[Arschloch]

It's called surveillance capitalism and it's been around since forever. Burn your computer/phone if you don't enjoy it.

That's great, since bots can do that idiot jobs maybe the psychotic nordic bosses can take a day off.