I’m Robert Draper, a journalist, and my latest story is about how we’re all under surveillance. AMA!

There's been a lot of rumor going around about apps listening in to our conversations and displaying ads related to what we're talking about in conversation while our phones are locked. Has there been any evidence this is the case? Everybody seems to be talking about it, but I can't say I've experienced it myself or seen anybody test it.

No ironclad evidence yet, though the rumors do accumulate (including that we're being listened through our Alexa devices). I don't think there's any foundation to such rumors, but I also think it's worth being vigilant in re: such matters.

Do you already know what questions we are going to ask?

Nope, only as they come up!

In your opinion, do you think we're giving up too much for the sake of security? How do we strike a balance between all the cool things we can do with surveillance and all the creepy stuff that happens with it?

There IS no neat balance, and thus the need for dialogue on this is constant & ongoing. In ways Orwell never could've contemplated, there are remarkable humanitarian uses of surveillance, and it would seem to make little sense to deny society such technology (assuming we could even do so) purely for privacy concerns. On the other hand, we're not even talking about the implications of millions of private drones in the skies, or thousands of satellites in the heavens, watching us.

Who is more guilty of surveillance, the public or private sector?

"Guilty" being a loaded term, it's evident that private-use surveillance (ranging from CCTV's to drones to satellites) has now far out-stripped public sector usage. And therein lies the danger, since it's hard to know what company at any given time is monitoring to you, and to what extent, and why, and where (and for how long) the data is going. At least there are FOIA means by which to determine government surveillance.

Private sector by far, and/though the extent is far more difficult to quantify, as are the retention patterns...and of course therein lies the danger with commercial usage.

What color shirt am i wearing?

You're not wearing a shirt.

Are the urban legends about being watched through laptop cams, and/or having our phone calls recorded true in any way? What makes someone a “target” of surveillance?

Most urban legends have some basis in plausibility, and so do the ones you've mentioned. But as of yet, there's no evidence of our phone conversations being sweepingly monitored. (The NSA has that ability, but for a variety of logistical & legal reasons only does so in highly targeted cases.) As for targeting, the point of my story is that we're all potential targets--whether by looking suspicious in the eyes of law enforcement, or having some connection (direct or oblique) to a national security concern, or being caught in the gaze of privately-held facial-recognition device seeking to market merchandise.

What efforts are being made to determine if apps/devices are listening to us/recording us/ using cameras etc? And what would be the consequences if we find out its true?

I get A LOT of adds for things that I exclusively talk about and never search for on my devices. Like very specific and obscure items.

My guess is that you're getting those ads from data that's coming from your social media accounts (e.g. Facebook) or from online purchases, and which in turn is being sold to other private firms. That's a far likelier (and common) scenario than the possibility that you're being monitored actively through your iPhone.

Are they storing all our information? wouldn't that be, in essence, quite a bit wasteful (of space)? how much can they really store? from our search histories, downloads, conversations... they are all monitoring this right?

It IS wasteful, not to mention super-expensive, to retain bulk data indefinitely. And in fact it's for that reason (rather than civil liberties considerations) that, for example, intelligence agencies in the UK don't store everything on everyone forever.

I know a lot of people who write this issue off saying "I don't have anything to hide" - what is your response to that reaction?

I get that privacy sometimes seems like a triviality--or even a preoccupation of the affluent--in the greater interest of information-sharing. But at a certain point, we all need alone time, of our choosing. And the psycho-social implications of what happens to a community when it operates under the assumption that it's always being watched, for reasons not readily identifiable...well, it's chilling, right?

Is it just just the important people? Or is it normal everyday people too?

Depends on how you define "important," right? I was in a CCTV control center in the London borough of Islington and the monitors there were watching 2 guys on motorcycles who were "important" only b/c they were deemed suspicious, though throughout our surveillance of them they were only guilty of popping wheelies.

Obviously removing your online profile helps discourage data collection, but what about in every day life? Is there anyway to thwart the surveillance infrastructure, or are effective methods for us to fight back?

It's an exhausting cat & mouse game in which the surveiller is inevitably one step ahead of the surveilled. Yes, you can guard your privacy by avoiding the internet, avoiding public spaces, avoiding anyone with a smartphone. It's tough, in other words.

What do you think the next surveillance frontier is, both in the USA and outside of it? Is the US going to go the CCTV route like the UK? DNA collection on birth? Iris scanning for credit card transactions?

Well, in many ways CCTV's are the most antiquated manifestation of Big Brother...EXCEPT when the images are stored &/or linked with facial recognition technology that is then linked to our social media accounts and thereby used for marketing (or other) purposes. That's what smart cameras represent now: not just a single static image, but the ability to develop a dynamic, penetrating profile of the person being watched.

Has your research changed your opinion of state-sponsored solutions to humanity's greatest ills? You know the standard blah blah blah on any complainers list: welfare, inner city crime, police abuse, food stamps, political bribes, "know your customers", vaccines, health records, regulation X, regulation Y.

That's a great question. My research has certainly awakened me to a few things. First, that there are some really cool, legitimately humanitarian (and public interest) surveillance technologies out there. Second, that CCTV's do NOT, by any & all available evidence, deter criminality. And third, that while it's probably a fool's pursuit to think we can prevent government from utilizing cutting-edge technologies to combat crime & promote efficiencies, it's also dangerous to assume that such technologies will unerringly be used for benevolent purposes.

What inspired you to research and explore surveillance specifically?

Guilt, to be honest--by which I mean, guilt that I now live in a house with CCTV's posted all around it, and readily give up personal info to online companies like Uber, and offer up personal details on social media accounts, without asking myself how steep & slippery the civil liberties slope is that I've slid down. Other than during the Edward Snowden revelations, we've been remarkably supine when it comes to asking ourselves what has become of our zone of privacy. This story was my attempt to restart the dialogue.

Is there compensation for the questionably clandestine efforts to pilfer our private details?

Yes, in theory you can sue a private or public interest for invading your privacy, if you can demonstrate both a reckless or malicious intent and actual damage. That's a very high bar, however.

My name is zach draper! Are we related?

No doubt!

Should we be anxious? This stuff scares the shit of me. It’s one thing being controlled by our government but watched? Nope.

Yes you should be anxious! More on this soon.

Does covering your camera really protect your privacy from the FBI? Can't they still get tons of meta data from your companies like Verizon or Facebook?

Yes, they can! But it requires a warrant. And no, covering your camera does nothing but make you look paranoid.

Are we being monitored through the front cameras of our handhelds? And is there any channel through which the surveillance data has reached the dark web (and is for sale)?

As of yet, no: no one is looking at you through the front camera of your handhelds. Not even law enforcement or the NSA has that kind of capability. But it's a possibility about which to be vigilant. And no, bulk data isn't for sale through a particular channel--though some data as compiled by any number of retention groups is sold for commercial purposes.

If you can entertain a hypothetical question for a minute: with what your research and findings have shown you, what do you see/imagine that these levels of surveillance evolving into in the near future? And in the distant future?

Well, you can bifurcate that question into evolving technology and evolving concern over the deployment of that technology. This is a much longer subject than I can get to in depth here. But clearly the frontier that's upon us now is one in which we're seen, or in some other way identified, by Interest A, who then sells that information to Interest B, who may use that info however it sees fit and/or be hacked into by Interest C. In other words, a meta-proliferation of surveillance of which we can't possibly keep track.

[deleted]

Aliens exist?? Give me the evidence & that'll be my next Nat Geo story! You should care about mass surveillance if you care about having a private life, or care about being free from harassment by law enforcement or an authoritarian state, or simply don't wish to be pestered nonstop by private companies that use what they learn about you (without your permission) to bombard you with inquiries. Privacy is one of those elemental rights that has been documentably coveted since the dawn of time, in all cultures, but is particularly cherished once it's gone.

What's your opinion on the Obama administration using knowingly false Intel to wiretap and spy on the incoming Trump administration?

The words "false," "wiretap" and "incoming Trump administration" don't apply to Carter Page.