As someone who's worked in text analysis, I'm comforted to see this story told. It's what we should be talking about. Please take the time to read this full article, then go out and do something useful for our world, we're going to need it.
Sorry for the snark, but I call BS on glorification of a technology company that so far has not done anything but strip away almost everyone's privacy.
Like these 'potential' terrorists : "Nihilists, anarchists, activists, Lulzsec, Anonymous, twenty-somethings who haven’t talked to the opposite sex in five or six years."
There are some drug crimes which actually are terrorism. In Mexico, the cartels/Zetas/etc. are an existential threat, and that's spilling over. There are towns in the US where MS-13 is a locally existential threat, at least within immigrant communities. The drug gangs in the inner cities in the 1970s-1990s were, too. I'd be ok with some use of some military force (intelligence, or just straight up infantry and MPs) in certain counter-drug terrorism contexts.
(I say this as someone who is in favor of immediate legalization of MJ, and decriminalization of all other drugs, with extensive treatment available for addiction or sub-optimal drug use.)
I think you mis-interpreted what I meant. I don't think the article glorified this technology and that toward the last half it offered a balanced viewpoint. Regardless, I don't think we quite have to hit the panic button yet, but if we don't start actually improving our world by inventing technology to protect our human rights, they'll be gone before we even have a chance to really panic.
