Report: Raytheon built Minority Report-like system

Multinational defense contractor Raytheon has built a system that mines social networks to track user movements and predict future behavior, according to a report Monday by The Guardian.

The technology has not been sold to anyone, but it was “shared with US government and industry as part of a joint research and development effort, in 2010, to help build a national security system capable of analysing ‘trillions of entities’ from cyberspace,” said the report.

Called Riot, or Rapid Information Overlay Technology, the program uses the location data contained in photographs posted to social networks, as well as public data sifted from Facebook and FourSquare.

The technology is able to give its users a glimpse into the life of a person and their friends by displaying information in a spider diagram to aid the user visualize associations and relationships.

“The sophisticated technology demonstrates how the same social networks that helped propel the Arab Spring revolutions can be transformed into a ‘Google for spies’and tapped as a means of monitoring and control,” wrote The Guardian.

I know internet privacy has been a big issue for most people. Be it ad companies targeting you with specific ads, or federal agencies recording and viewing your person data.

But, Raytheon has been using a minority report style data collection system called RIOT (Rapid Information Overlay Technology)since 2010. Basically, they can data mine user photos by using the information provided through the EXIF file format of an image.

This allows them to keep a detailed log of all of your activities just by data mining photos and social networks, because the EXIF can pretty much tell the user the location of the image. Now, I've heard of instances of people spoofing the EXIF and it gives a false location, but most people aren't technologically savvy enough to do this. So I believe they can expand this project further by linking up with federal agencies, and other major social media to create the greatest information hub kept on US citizens. So far Raytheon claims they haven't sold this technology to anybody, but they have been collaborating with the US government since 2010.

Things will only get worse in my opinion, I feel like people don't really care anymore, they willingly post their information for all the world to see, and they can carelessly expose other people's data also by tagging people in photos, and sharing personal information over social media, so ATS, how do we combat a "pre-crime" system, and restore our privacy rights?

Source

I suppose I used the wrong words in the search, another user posted here: www.abovetopsecret.com... under a different forum, didn't give much of his opinion, nor did it generate any interest.

So I guess mods, do what you gotta do.

Can anyone else feel their rights flying through their clutches?

Originally posted by byGRACE
Can anyone else feel their rights flying through their clutches?

That is what is scary about this, they have been doing this for 3 years now (that they report), it could easily be longer. But I'm amazed people haven't raised this concern publicly, other than a news report. Now would be the time for transparency.

More perspectives/articles on this, including the Guardian one sourced:

www.pcmag.com...

www.guardian.co.uk...

Probabilities of outcomes may not always work in predicting future behavior. Things like insanity can make an individual next to impossible to predict and, even outside of insanity, a probability is still just a probability. There is no guarantee and even if a computer could be right 99 times out of 100 in predicting future activity, there would still be that one error in prediction.

Originally posted by WhiteAlice
More perspectives/articles on this, including the Guardian one sourced:

www.pcmag.com...

www.guardian.co.uk...

Probabilities of outcomes may not always work in predicting future behavior. Things like insanity can make an individual next to impossible to predict and, even outside of insanity, a probability is still just a probability. There is no guarantee and even if a computer could be right 99 times out of 100 in predicting future activity, there would still be that one error in prediction.

Insanity is a good random variable to throw it off. But overall a lot of people are very predictable. They can just monitor trends 24/7 and exhibit control over the ones that can be predicted.

They can use this technology to track public dissidents, and use that data to spread disinformation inside truth circles. The potential this technology possesses is scary, and should be kept on the front burner for further review.

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by WhiteAlice
More perspectives/articles on this, including the Guardian one sourced:

www.pcmag.com...

www.guardian.co.uk...

Probabilities of outcomes may not always work in predicting future behavior. Things like insanity can make an individual next to impossible to predict and, even outside of insanity, a probability is still just a probability. There is no guarantee and even if a computer could be right 99 times out of 100 in predicting future activity, there would still be that one error in prediction.

Insanity is a good random variable to throw it off. But overall a lot of people are very predictable. They can just monitor trends 24/7 and exhibit control over the ones that can be predicted.

They can use this technology to track public dissidents, and use that data to spread disinformation inside truth circles. The potential this technology possesses is scary, and should be kept on the front burner for further review.

I would be approximated as being a natural statistician (even aced all my stats exams when I took actual stats). I can predict how someone is going to respond to something to a fairly high degree of accuracy and to the extent that I've been "accused" of being clairvoyant when, in reality, it's all just based on predictability of outcome. However, people still, although infrequently, surprise me and that really drives home the fact that, a software program--without the concept of what it is to be human--may not be effective and may not realize that just because there is a 90% chance of someone doing a projected outcome at a 95% confidence interval, that still leaves a 10% chance of variability that that person will not do what is projected. That variability is what makes us human.

I agree that it could very well have uses in the spread of disinformation. It kind of ties in with another piece: www.gwu.edu... I could definitely see, based on both the Raytheon program and the ideas and concerns promulgated in the pdf, that it would be most likely used in the idea of "fighting the net".

Several companies have been working on something like this or have a version of it. Its one of those things where the "best of breed" of this kind of system is likely still being developed.

Social media has made it all possible. Its really kind of ironic. If "they" were to say, "Hey - let me follow you around all the time and take pictures of what you are doing and make notes about it so I can keep track of you." Then "We" (the people) would likely say "NO!"

But, they have said, "Hey - let me give you the ability to post where you are all the time, along with pictures and notes about what you are doing. That way all I have to do is collect it and read it to keep track of you." In this case, "We" (the people) have said, "YES!" and are posting our lives online as fast as we can.

That much info on everyone floating around out there... Governments and companies are scrambling and clawing as fast as they can to figure out the best way to gather it, process it and use it.

What did we think they were going to do when we gave it to them?

Originally posted by Frogs

What did we think they were going to do when we gave it to them?

I think a lot of people just remain ignorant of the fact that their data is being logged and tracked, in what I would assume real time.

On average, I don't think many people understand what it means when government can track your every move. They just think they are giving their info to google, or facebook to create a better user experience, when behind the curtains government is keeping detailed logs.

Originally posted by byGRACE
Can anyone else feel their rights flying through their clutches?

You mean when people update their Facebook to say where they are, where they work, who their family is and what they are doing... those people are entitled to privacy?

Originally posted by DaTroof

Originally posted by byGRACE
Can anyone else feel their rights flying through their clutches?

You mean when people update their Facebook to say where they are, where they work, who their family is and what they are doing... those people are entitled to privacy?

They may not be entitled to privacy according to some opinions, but really it's kind of messed up that people can't share their experience with family and friends without some company trying to cash in on invading their privacy.

See this is weird, because i watched this movie yesterday

and what this movie goes on proving, is a system like this DOES NOT WORK, and SHOULD NOT HAPPEN...

so yeah they're trying but if you watch the movie it can never be implimented because people can choose their own path

Originally posted by WanderingThe3rd
See this is weird, because i watched this movie yesterday

and what this movie goes on proving, is a system like this DOES NOT WORK, and SHOULD NOT HAPPEN...

so yeah they're trying but if you watch the movie it can never be implimented because people can choose their own path

Well, it may not produce the same results that were shown in the movie, but data mining can be used for a lot of other things. Mainly just a way for the government to keep real time information on it's citizens. All they need to do is follow trends, and they could use those trends to produce "false flag" operations of whatever they deem necessary.

Just having your data is already a win for the government, how they use it from that point has yet to be determined.

also, most sane reasonable people have deleted any social networking access years ago.... my friends and I havn't used facebook for over 2 years

Originally posted by WanderingThe3rd
also, most sane reasonable people have deleted any social networking access years ago.... my friends and I havn't used facebook for over 2 years

that saying you've got to be really stupid posting pictures or information that can be linked togather to involve you in a false flag event, or any kind of real trouble in that case


they deserv to be caught

Originally posted by WanderingThe3rd
also, most sane reasonable people have deleted any social networking access years ago.... my friends and I havn't used facebook for over 2 years

I personally deleted all of my social media, besides I was never really active with my information on those types of sites, I try to stay as anon as possible, but a lot of people still use these programs, and are constantly at risk of their data falling into the wrong hands.

that saying you've got to be really stupid posting pictures or information that can be linked togather to involve you in a false flag information they deserv to be caught

Well, it doesn't matter what the pictures might be, they can be manipulated and exploited to serve an agenda now. Everybody is guilty until proven innocent. Remember, data mining can go beyond what is shared through facebook and twitter. All of your activity can be logged by google, ISP, and cell phone providers. There is an all out assault on personal freedom, and it's being sold to the highest bidders.

Well there's an easy way around this. Either don't use social media networks, else be very selective on what you share.

I don't have a facebook. I have a G+, and it's simply there with basic information, and an occasional link to interesting articles.

I don't share pictures, locations, or anything else. It's just there for "show" for future potential employers, mostly. Some are now considering it a "red flag" if you don't have at least one social media account.

As ridiculous as it is, I fold to the extent of keeping a simple G+.

Originally posted by nomnom

I don't share pictures, locations, or anything else. It's just there for "show" for future potential employers, mostly. Some are now considering it a "red flag" if you don't have at least one social media account.

As ridiculous as it is, I fold to the extent of keeping a simple G+.

I've heard about employers seeing it as a "red flag" to not have a social networking site, and I personally think it's a load of BS. How you act outside of the workplace is none of their business, as long as the employee does their job, doesn't cause trouble for the company, I don't think employers should be spying on their employees on facebook, or any other forms of social media.

But, the other side of the coin says that they really shouldn't be posting stuff that a potential employer could see as harmful to their image. We are definitely living in interesting times to say the least.

reply to post by eXia7


It's not technically spying, or illegal, though I don't think it's much of their business, either.

Then again, it's almost like contacting a friend for a referral, only quicker, and 21st century-like.

The truth is that social media sites are more for data miners, than anything else.

You'd have to be rather naive and/or foolish to just blast your personal life on there. I was both at one point, so permanently deleted FB, and established the G+ acct with a professional image.

Meh! One good Solar flare, and all that stuff means nothing! And besides, with a government as monumentally incompetent as ours, why worry !