The recent revelations about the NSA’s technological surveillance of American citizens have caused many in the US and overseas to question their level of trust in the US government. The German government and citizens have been particularly vocal about their skepticism of US surveillance practices.  The issue is coloring the recent election season, as the media outlets post encryption techniques and question the use of US based social networking sites. Given the country’s history, it is understandable why they would be particularly attuned to fears of a “surveillance state”. Compared to American data privacy laws, which are few and fragmented, Germany has a single data protection act enforced by 17 state supervisors dedicated protecting individual privacy.

These fears have led to an increased distrust of US technology.  The German Ministry of Economic Affairs has become uneasy over the security of the Windows 8 operating system, particularly in the Trusted Platform Module which is being built into an increasing number of windows PCs.  The TPM chip collects cryptographic data stored for Windows BitLocker, has total control over what programs can and cannot be run on the PC, and even allows remote administration of the device.  What is most striking is that the system cannot be overridden through the operating system.  Fears abound that this technology would allow for an even greater level of secret surveillance, one which PC users would be unable to escape.  Apart from fears of state surveillance, having such a chip raises confidentially issues, should third parties find a method of exploiting the system.

Image provided by windows.com

In the wake of Edward Snowden’s release of info on top-secret NSA spying programs, his reported encrypted email service is now shutting its doors rather than, allegedly, complying with U.S. government requests to release confidential information.  Silent Circle, an encrypted email, phone, and text service, reportedly used by not only Snowden, but by the rich, famous, and very private, said it would no longer provide its email services, but would continue to provide its phone and text services.  Lavabit, a similar encrypted email service, also appears to be additional Snowden collateral damage, shuttering its doors in the wake of government requests.  You can check out messages from the founders on their homepages here- Lavabit, Silent Circle.

These takedowns come on the heels of Freedom Hosting, which provides various anonymous services through the Tor network (one of privacy enthusiasts favorite tools), being shut down.   Although the Freedom Hosting takedown appears to be directly related to the site’s hosting of child pornography and its founder reportedly arrested, the FBI has been implicated in infiltrating Freedom Hosting with the use of Malware.  More info from Wired available here.

Whether you think Snowden is a traitor or Jason Bourne (so say young people according to Sen. McCain here), the repercussions for his release of classified info do not appear to be waning any time soon.

Still want the best encrypted email out there?  Check out this post by Extreme Tech.

What about the best encrypted cloud services, you say?  LifeHacker out of Australia has some great recommendations- including ways to encrypt your current non-encrypted more mainstream services (eg dropbox, box.net, SkyDrive, etc.) here.

The popular music streaming website Pandora has recently been gathering support for its proposed Internet Radio Fairness Act, which is meant to change how much internet radio platforms must pay in royalties.  Pandora states that they pay over 50% of their revenue in royalties, whereas satellite and cable music platforms only pay 7.5% and 15% respectively.  The difference, according to Pandora, is due to the discrimination against online media inherent in the royalty system.

However, Pandora’s bill has received staunch opposition from artists, who claim that the bill would substantially reduce what they receive for each time one of their songs is played.  David Gilmore, Roger Waters, and Nick Mason (the surviving members of Pink Floyd) recently posted a statement railing against the bill, claiming it would represent an “85% pay cut” for artists.  What’s more, they claim that Pandora has been deceptively seeking artist support for their bill by couching it in terms of internet freedom, without giving mention of the effects it would have on artist’s royalties.  See the link above for Pink Floyd’s full statement.

The internet places a massive amount of information at our fingertips, and it can seem at times as if, with the right Google search, we can learn anything.  Until relatively recently, this freedom of knowledge was limited to what the curious web surfer was willing to teach themselves.  Information was out there for discovery, but there were few way to find instruction, and even fewer ways to have one’s work evaluated.  Frequently, the best one could hope for was to find a “how to” article written by some hopefully reputable source.  Recently however, the MOOC (massively open online course) threatens to make formal instruction available en masse to all those seeking it.

MOOCs are web courses accepting tens of thousands of students at any given time being taught by some of the most distinguished professors the world has to offer.  For those interested in free distribution of information, MOOCs represent a huge step forward.  Theoretically, anyone in their living room could receive the same instruction as a freshman at Harvard or Yale.  However, as noted in Douglas Belkin and Melissa Korn’s New York Times article “Web Courses Woo Professors”, many professors at less renowned intuitions fear the possible effects which MOOCs would have on their livelihoods.  If everyone can receive an Ivy League course experience for free, who would choose to attend their local university?  As of yet however, MOOCs suffer some serious limitations which keep local university enrolment stable for now.

A. J. Jacobs wrote about his MOOC  experience in an article entitled “Grading the MOOC University.”  He found that MOOCs lacked many of the core aspects which people seek in traditional college classes.  Most notably, there was almost no student to teacher interaction by which a student could get his questions answered.  It is not surprising that one on one time would be scare when the students outnumber the professor by thousands to one.  Additionally, assignments were limited to computer graded multiple choice tests and peer reviewed projects, both administered through the honor system.  While these limitations far from render MOOCs useless, they at least must be surmounted before the formal university system has anything real to fear.  It is more likely that MOOCs will supplement rather than supplant formal education as the concept progresses.

Image provided by Northeastern University Graduate School of Engineering.