Surveillance in Washington DC And At Bookstores
dioscaido writes: "From reuters: 'Washington police are building what will be the nation's biggest network of surveillance cameras to monitor shopping areas, streets, monuments and other public places in the U.S. capital, a move that worries civil liberties groups, The Wall Street Journal said on Wednesday.'" Aragorn_2002 writes "I found this new article on Salon.com about how feds are subpoenaing book-purchasing records. Just imaging if they start to use DMCA and the new Anti-terrorist bill to subpoena someone buying books on breaking encryption." If you've ever ordered from Amazon, this might concern you. Update: 02/13 21:30 GMT by M : The full WSJ article is available on MSNBC.
Unfortunately, privacy is not a right that is explicitly enshrined in the Constitution. It is, however, the basis (on the grounds that it's an implicit right) of Roe v Wade. Which is why I support the "pro-choice" crowd.
Best Slashdot Co
What no one mentions much about 'Catcher in the Rye' is that it's actually a pretty strange little book.
It usually gets lumped together with serial killers and presidential assassins. That might be because not only is a good little book, but it's also a fairly short book. When you're busy destroying lives and gunning down politicians, I guess you don't have much time to sit down in your favorite reading chair and dive into Proust. So you look for short books. 'Catcher in the Rye' usually fits the bill.
Of course, these killers might also like other short books like 'Animal Farm' and '1984'. (And why do serial killers only like books on the boring old junior high reading list?)
Anyway, a couple weeks ago, I sat down in my favorite reading chair and -- for the first time in about 20 years -- re-read 'Catcher in the Rye.'
It's a disturbing book, no doubt. But it's disturbing because it's quite good and Salinger -- in this and his short stories -- is really an incredible stylist. But I wondered -- still sitting my favorite reading chair -- *why* everybody makes such a big deal about the book. Holden is messed up -- and paranoid or schizophrenic or maybe A.D.D. -- but why is this little book such a touchstone for the sickos in American society? I mean, is it because they -- in the best high-school book report sense of the term -- "identify with the main character?"
"Hey, I like it because Holden is me! I'm Holden! That's me!"
Anyway, I was thrown by how much I couldn't put my finger on the book. I'm someone who *does* sit down and read Proust and Melville and Faulkner and Pynchon and DeLillo and Cormac McCarthy (best American writer writing today, BTW) so I didn't expect to like 'Catcher'. But there's something really pretty unsettling in the way Salinger tells his story.
I *still* don't know why it is so identified with American wonkiness. Or wonkiness in the American psyche. Maybe we'll raid the latest den of religious extremists and, in order to get a better fix on the American psyche, we'll discover that they, too, have gravitated to Salinger's book and his short stories (which, IMHO, are even stranger than the book.)
But how come none of the wackos ever read Samuel Beckett? If there's anything that seems to model contemporary American isolationism it's Beckett. Sluggishness, lethargy, malaise. Isn't this what's wrong with American culture? We're mired in our own glorious narcissism? LOL.
Anyway, yes mods, yes, yes, yes -- this is off-topic. So, yes, call this off-topic and have a field-day modding me down. This post is an easy-target.