It is smart to refrain from smart devices

Smart TV sets are listening to every word being said in front of them. Also do other smart devices that do take action or give you information based on voice input. These device don’t differentiate between a private conversation or a voice comment for them to take action upon. They will capture all nearby sound and conversations.

Also these devices tend to capture other information, like the music you listen to, movies you watch, could figure out when you are at home, do your dishes, go to bed, have sex….

All information so collected, including sensitive data, is then sent to servers and shared between the brand who produces the device as well with third-party services who do the data analyses.

To refrain: all your spoken words, conversations, include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third parties, where you have absolute no control what happens with the data.

How would you feel if, day and night, there where a few strange people in you house listening to everything you said. And do with that information whatever they want to do with it. That would be an awkward situation, nobody would like to deal with.

I think its smarter to refrain from using smart devices, until they deal in a decent way with privacy.

Diffusion of Useful Knowledge

My desire for knowledge is intermittent, but my desire to bathe my head in atmospheres unknown to my feet is perennial and constant. The highest that we can attain to is not Knowledge, but Sympathy with Intelligence.

I do not know that this higher knowledge amounts to anything more definite than a novel and grand surprise on a sudden revelation of the insufficiency of all that we called Knowledge before — a discovery that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in our philosophy. It is the lighting up of the mist by the sun. Man cannot know in any higher sense than this, any more than he can look serenely and with impunity in the face of the sun: “You will not perceive that, as perceiving a particular thing,” say the Chaldean Oracles. Thoreau

Arrival/Departure to the US will require social media ID’s

“Please enter information associated with your online presence—Provider/Platform—Social media identifier.” But it will be an optional data field. Probably optional, since they have already access to the data anyway. Then not filling this optional field will make you look suspicious. What if you are not active on social media platforms ? Even more suspicious, since you are aware of the with these services connected privacy issues.

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/06/23/2016-14848/agency-information-collection-activities-arrival-and-departure-record-forms-i-94-and-i-94w-and

Should I do this?

Krakow
The typical human problem, and one whose answer religion aims to supply, is always of the following form: Should I do this? Should we do this? Should the government do this? To answer this question we can resolve it into two parts: First — If I do this, what will happen? — and second — Do I want that to happen? What would come of it of value — of good?
Now a question of the form: If I do this, what will happen? is strictly scientific. As a matter of fact, science can be defined as a method for, and a body of information obtained by, trying to answer only questions which can be put into the form: If I do this, what will happen? The technique of it, fundamentally, is: Try it and see. Then you put together a large amount of information from such experiences. All scientists will agree that a question — any question, philosophical or other — which cannot be put into the form that can be tested by experiment … is not a scientific question; it is outside the realm of science.
I claim that whether you want something to happen or not — what value there is in the result, and how you judge the value of the result (which is the other end of the question: Should I do this?), must lie outside of science because it is not a question that you can answer only by knowing what happens; you still have to judge what happens — in a moral way. So, for this theoretical reason I think that there is a complete consistency between the moral view — or the ethical aspect of religion — and scientific information. – Richard Feynman

Via: www.brainpickings.org