Slashdot Mirror
Feds Open 'Total' Tech Spy System
Diesel Dave writes "A Wired article reports: 'On Wednesday, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) will begin awarding contracts for the design and implementation of a Total Information Awareness (TIA) system...The Total Information Awareness program, with its ability to provide persistent storage of everything from credit card, to employment, to medical, to ISP records, is a recipe for civil liberties disaster unless there are provisions for citizens to find out who is looking at their records and to see and correct those records.' The foundation for the omnipotent National ID database has now been laid."
Sometime I want to be heard with my name, other times I'm quite happy to be very anonymous...
Just think about it, do you really want those horny 16 yearolds at the checkout stand to know who you are while you're picking up the tampons for your wife?
You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads!
Microsoft's passport system has been around for years.
"The Total Information Awareness program"
To me, that is Slashdot! I read it 20-50 times a day...
How much time before a company hires a hacker to get into the database and steal all this,a corporation's holy grail? I say a few weeks.
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
Oh, KARMA PLEASE.
Isn't the NSA already doing this? Isn't that what it's for?
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. " -Ben Franklin
So DARPA is taking a page from Google's book. Does the winner get $10,000 in cash, a VIP visit to the Pentagon in Arlington, VA and the possibility of running their prize winning code on DARPA's supercomputers?
(see subject)
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
There are companies that already hold much of this data about purchases. A company called Catalina Marketing who makes those little printers that print coupons when you buy things at grocery stores, or pet stores or whatever, already keep track of all purchases, including credit card numbers, checking account numbers, types of items purchesed, frequency, geographic locations, etc. All that data is searchable via a CRM system. Wal-Mart also has that system. People just need to learn that there is no "reasonable expectation" of privacy in any place outside of your own home. Unencrypted email has never been secure, it wasn't designed to be, ISP records are just as open. There never has been "privacy," so I don't know what most of the advocates expect.
I've seen it in the 70's with the notion of a Corporate Data Base, in the 80's with Enterprise Resource Management (ERP) systems, and in the 90's with Data Warehouses. It's nice to think of a single source of information providing all the answers, but it inevitably turns out too expensive to build and impossible to keep current. I see no evidence that such a system would have prevented the attacks on 9/11. But some IT infrastructure companies are going to get rich on this boondoggle.
As a professor of mine in college once said; "Computers make great filing cabinets, but lousy guessers."
It's like Terminator and the Matrix put together... just an early alpha version.
Question everything that you've accepted without thinking.
If the /. community objects to this, the solution is clear... we mount an open source bid for the contract, which should (as the product will be free as in beer) be guaranteed to win the contract on price grounds.
:-)
Then we just 'do a mozilla' and keep adding wonderful new features but never actually deliver the damn thing
problem solved!
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
people who live in the "boonies" or homeless people. There are so many US citizens all over the world who have so many different levels of technology and social involvement that they will never be able to get everybody. It will be very easy to avoid getting in this system.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
Intro: I saw "XXX" a couple of hours ago. I think it was intended solely as an action flick, but for a minute, let's pretend there's a message here. In this life we enjoy freedoms given to us by research and technological improvements, also a few of those freedoms are provided by the organization of government.
;-)
Many times we raise a red flag because of privacy issues, and I agree that the direction we (as a world) are progressing in is sad at times. However, let's put this in perspective for a moment. Regardless of your beliefs in a higher power or lower power, one thing is sure...does it really matter that the government knows what you are up to? Yes we live free lives and I know my concern is that perhaps, in the future I will want to do something underhanded and this system will prevent it...what fun would life be without the challenges? Our lives span only a minute on this world, live in your situation and make life a joy: you're the only one who can do that. You can make a case for any possibility, but does the existence of this database can't interfere with that!
By the way, do any of you really expect that the government will be able to implement this without people like us helping them? If you have a hand in it, you can control it
"Homeless people are not in our target market".
-- Terry
Remember folks, the only reason we don't live in an Orwellian nightmare world is actually because it isn't technologically feasible.
As soon as it's possible and practical, in the next few years, it will happen on a wide and broad scale. If it's unpopular, they'll simply not publicize its use. If a few innocents are harrased by it (activists, anarchists, pagans, atheists, and other similar unAmericans), you won't hear a word. If by some sheer coincidence it actually assists in finding a terrorist pre-crime, they still won't say a word.
And I'm sure they'll find a few other uses for it. I mean if you're commiting a crime, it's a crime, no matter what, so what's the problem?
(Hmm, Citizen #95235345 just bought a DVD-R unit and downloaded a copy of DeCSS. Set his Awareness Level to 15%, and send a copy of his Dossier to Media Control for further study. Excellent, we might yet meet our Enforcement quota this week!)
It really makes me feel fuzzy as hell when I think about where my hard-earned tax dollars are going to.
really fuzzy.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
open source is the answer?!?
sweet you want EVERYONE to have this? So lets say DARPA asks for a project to create a neutron bomb that fits in a beer (as in free) cup. Lets do it because we knoe we can do it right? Soem things are better off not done, Open source is not the answer, the real answer is just to say "No". Its like the D.A.R.E. program here in the U.S.A (drugs prevention program with kids). Just say no to allowing yourself to be turned into a celebrity. "Celebrity" you say? why yes. The only people who have such scrutiny are celebrity and polititians. And since I plan on having no fame (and realitively little money) why must I have to be put through the same scrutiny that they signed up for. The problem is that our polititains are used to no privicy and there for do not expect it. They don't see whats wrong with this stuff.
Spell Checked using CmdTaco's own personal Dictionary
It funny seeing how people react to the continuing encroachments on their freedom by their chosen government. This reminds me of an old Biblical story about King David ordering that a census be taken of the people (they were all willing participants). God got so pissed off at this blatant and fascist violation of freedom that he sent a nasty plague on them that killed close to 70,000 people. And David was a man after his own heart.
Moral: you already lost. If you have a social security number or driver license number or anything that allows the government to identify or control you, you are already living in a Big Brother society. Either you go along with it or you do something about it. Whichever you choose, you loose.
Sorry, but you are all like cattle, tagged with a number. You are not as free as you have been led to believe. No amount of prideful boasts about living in the freest country in the world will change that fact. You are a bunch of deluded slaves working for a central controlling government. And you are paying a lot more in taxes than you can imagine. It's sad.
... is a recipe for civil liberties disaster unless there are provisions for citizens to find out who is looking at their records and to see and correct those records.
Here in the UK we have the Data Protection Act, which all companies must adhere to if they store information about you on their computer systems. Amongst other requirements, it allows you (for a small fee) to obtain a copy of that information on request, and have it modified if it's not accurate. If this does go through, I would hope that the US provides something similar.
I went to the page the story links to, the anti-enumeration website.
I was expecting a well thought out reasoning why we should be avoiding enumeration, but instead what I saw was trife about how we're all going to hell if we have a numbering system.
oh dear, please, if someones going to post arguements against something, atleast base them in reality, rather then the rantings of a 2000 year old book.
how unfortunate.
There are government agencies, especially law enforcement, whose existence is threatened by this person. They have full access to the complete records of this persons life: medical problems, personal purchases, friends, lovers (including unmarried ones), etc. To silence this person, they will have the ability to make any embarrassing information public (none of which may even have been illegal). Even if the person has the strength of character to withstand this, the persons message will be lost under the media coverage of the scandalous aspects of this person's life: his pr0n preferences, former friends who turned out to be bad guys, extramarital affairs, etc.
This type of this has serious implications for free speech. Even if you are a nobody who will never have anything important to say and who has nothing to hide anyway, there are people to have something to say and have the right to keep the private aspects of their lives private while saying it.
tato (and tato only)
This post is strictly opinion, including the spelling.
After 50% of the population is behind bars for "crimes" we can then break out of prison, overthrow the goverment, deliberate for months and make the best goverment on paper that has ever existed, then wait for our great great grandchildren to ignore everything we've said, and let the cycle begin again.
*Hopeless-half-sarcastic-rant/cry for help*
No one should live in fear of their government.
Governments should live in fear of its people.
"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." George HW Bush
do you really want those horny 16 yearolds at the checkout stand to know who you are while you're picking up the tampons for your wife?
Just give them a tired smile and express your profound relief over having a couple of days off from your exhausting studly duties.
Why do you care what a couple of pimply faced kids think, anyway?
"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
Before the *DIS*information starts flying fast and furious (doh, wait, it already has!) I recommend everyone read BAA 02-08, the request for proposals for technology that will be transitioned into the TIA system. Here is the link:
http://www.darpa.mil/iao/BAA02-08.pdf
This BAA describes exactly what RESEARCH DARPA is looking to fund (emphasis on research: DARPA is NOT a procurement agency, and DARPA is NOT an operational agency). They are not buying off-the-shelf systems, and they are not setting up systems to spy on people. There is even a component to this BAA regarding privacy-protecting technologies.
It is worth noting that many of the problems for which this BAA is looking for national-security-style solutions are problems common to many organizations, as well as fundamental computer-science questions. Not the malevolent stuff that Wired and others would have you think.
Have you ever watched the news? Read a news paper? Taken US history 101? Corporations will be lining up around the block to do this. What has ever stopped a corporation from doing something profitable, but unethical? Answer: nothing, after they run the numbers and figure the profits are greater than the negative pr. Cisco didn't hesitate to take a multi million dollar contract to install a fire wall surrounding China... Despite corporate lip service, share holder value is the first priority. It's called Capitalism
To deal with your other statements -- just because I have a SSN and a credit card doesn't mean the government can track all my purchases. Ever heard of cash? If you really don't want someone to know what you're buying, just use cash. Just because I have a driver's license doesn't mean the government is tracking me everywhere I go. Whatever you say, we still have many freedoms that no other country in the world has.
I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
Actually... that quote is by Benjamin Franklin, not Thomas Edison. ( as posted earlier, and from this and most likely other websites.
And so we go, on with our lives
We know the truth, but prefer lies
Lies are simple, simple is bliss
Instead of shouting constantly "No!" to every system which in principle is meant to defend our lives, freedom, hence our very privacy as well,
we should instead demand thorough legislation so these databases would not be abused.
I think this protection of our privacy in anti-terrorism databases is worth an addition to our respective constitutions (indeed, it is not only the USA which is facing privacy dilemma - it is the entire free world!) of the caliber of an Amendement at least.
Do not forget, democracy is the best of all available political systems but it is also the most cowardous system when it comes to threats which would cost a lot of sacrifice to solve physically, as terrorism is.
The nice thing about Windows is: it does not just crash; it displays a nice little dialog box and let's you press 'OK'
Speaking of outsourcing, this kind of a plan gives ample opportunity for politicians, bureaucrats and police to outsource wrongdoing. Like we are now outsourcing torture to friendly Arab nations and outsourcing covert operations to Israeli and British intelligence. Mostly, they will outsource the abuses to off-shore dummy corporations funded through US intelligence, but domestic corporations that collect large amounts of data on US residents (note that it is now considered legit for phone companies to track and disclose everyone you dial unless you succeed in opting out, and no one knows what goes on inside lots of commercial software -- why does the MS Excel viewer make my internet connection so busy?)will likely get involved as well.
The best way to defeat this idea in the court of public opinion is to compare it with the fabled Mark of the Beast (666) from the book of Revelations.
"He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666" (Rev. 13:16-18).
Since the Religious Right is the Republicans bread and butter if they can be convinced that such a national database is a tool of Satan it will become too much of a hot potato for them to handle.
Lets see... what was the last major governemnt that:
Tracked information about all its citizens
Required you to carry federal identifiation whenever you left the house
Required "papers" for any sort of travel outside of your home town
And yet here in 2002, we as a nation seem to be jumping for joy that all these things are being talked about and implimented in our country. Yea, it's all supposedly for national defense, but Hitler started his reign by imposing all those rules and ideas for the good of the country. How far will we take it this time?
Why can't the Fed just look at the easy way out: stop imposing our will on other countries by military force. Just get out of the Middle East and let them fight it out amongst themselves. Problem solved.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
For anyone who hasn't realized it yet, we are currently in the golden age of information.
The ability of the common man to transfer data around the world is phenomenal right now. People can share media instantly. Transfer speeds are headed through the roof. More important though, is the fact that the governments of the world are not yet fully able to monitor and control this information. The internet is a wild and untamed beast that allows all sorts of politically 'sketchy' people to communicate. As soon as the goverments have build up the infrastructure to control the 'net, they will clamp everyone down. It's not a matter of 'if' but 'when'.
Enjoy the freedom while you have it. It may not be around much longer.
This excerpt taken from a paper written by Dijkstra in 1986 seems very appropriate:
"...society tolerates the computing profession because of its incompetance. It is our incopetence that makes us, though expensive, relatively harmless: were we as competent as we would like to be, we would offer the perfect implementation of the complete police state. We would be the darling of any dictatorship"
Food for thought.
This could be just what we need to convince the ignorant sheep out there that they need 4096 kilobit encryption. First place to start is E-Mail and instant messangers. Second place, whether it's legal or not, is the telephone system. That should put a spin on any TIA system. At least anyone that tries will be forced to concentrate effort on only pertinant information. When someone has to put down their donut and drive down to someone's house to spy on them, they can't be doing it to the entire world.
Hey, then we can block telemarketers and spammers because we won't have their key. Don't forget, you have to physically hand a key to someone in order for it to be truely secure, else you are trusting whoever you hand it to. This only needs to be done for personal calls/email. It isn't very likely that someone will use a business call against you.
Karma Clown
In the past it was possible to create an entirely new life. Criminals, debtors, or just people who wanted to start a new life could move to "The New World" or other countries and begin again. Now, your new home already has a pretty good idea who you are.
Until the age of direct deposit, it was possible to move somewhere new and get a job that you could be paid for the same day, paying cash for a room in some seedy hotel until you could get a better place. Now, it takes 2-3 weeks before you see your first paycheque, and most hotels require a credit card. Right away it is harder to move around, let alone reinvent yourself.
Let's look at the example of one famous head of state. He spent the first half of his life screwing around, doing drugs, getting arrested for drunk driving, and wasting Bush Sr.'s money. Suddenly he cleans up his act and buys a baseball team, becomes governor of Texas, and eventually President of the U.S. of A. Good for him.
Imagine this same kid 20 years from now. (Minus some of daddy's influence, perhaps.) Generally good kid gets into a bit of trouble when he/she is young, but cleans up and decides to get a job working for MS-AOL-Time-Warner-USA. (MATWU for short.) Person goes in for their interview, to face a series of questions, like a normal job interview. After doing quite well, the interviewer says this:
"You are very well suited for the job. I think you would make an excellent addition to the team. However your ethics do not fit with corporate guidelines. We notice that on your trip to Amsterdam you visited 3 hash bars in a 4 hour period, 1 strip club where you took part in two lap dances and consumed a good deal of alcohol. We also note that you visited Tokyo and stayed for 2 weeks at a VSP resort. Consorting with Vivendi-Sony-Panasonic, perhaps? I'm afraid we cannot hire you."
Who has never done anything they wouldn't want their prospective employer, prospective friends, prospective mate, or prospective client to know about?
What Future?
1. the use of ellipses in the middle of the teaser is deceptive. The passage after the ellipses beginning with "The Total Information Awareness program, with its ability to provide persistent storage.." up to the last sentence is not from Wired, but rather a quote from an EFF lawyer included in the piece by Wired.
2. While it's never wise to trust your privacy to anyone you don't know, much less the government, hysteria seems a but premature. This is clearly an R&D effort.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
To paraphrase the AC:
The only people who are worried about these types of programs are the ones with something to hide
The fact that an AC said this deserves either a +1 Ironic or -1 Ignorant. Unfortunately you didn't include any sarcasm tags to help us decide.
driver ;icense search
What's the best way to protect information?
Doesn't GNU FSF say it's decentralization of authority?
All this is really going to lead to is the temptation of abuse.....
Internal or ad-hoc identifiers are much worse than a public, well-designed system of national ID numbers. Among other things, if you don't know your secret government ID number or record locator, it's much harder for you to force the US government to comply with privacy regulations--even with a court ourder--they'll just claim that they "couldn't find the records" or that they "must have overlooked them" and get away with it even if found out. And if the government makes up their own internal system or uses social security numbers, you are much more likely to be the victim of identity theft or mistaken identity.
In order to protect our privacy, we need good privacy legislation that covers both government agencies and companies. And in order to protect our privacy, we need a well-designed system of national ID numbers--preferably numbers that are large and have a non-trivial internal checksum. Both of these would have to be decided at the ballot box.
The reason why this isn't going to happen is because the people in the US that are mainly concerned about privacy are also people with libertarian leanings. They just don't understand that the only way to protect privacy is through strong government regulations.
As I have said previously, the only problem with such a setup is imperfection. If the system were perfect, it would be excellent. But if it is imperfect, and beleived to be "reliable," then it shouldn't be in use.
Or at the very least, it should be treason for anyone but a sitting judge by writ to divulge the secrets of the database.
How else are you going to know what brand and size your wife should be wearing?
heh... hit the wrong link.. whoops.
"It's not like your minds are as open as the source you love..." - Me to the majority of Slashdot.
666 was the number of someone who was alive when the Book of Revelations was written. Probably some unsympathetic Roman, maybe Nero. He's dead now, so don't worry about him. If you just write down the symbols that the Romans used for numbers, DCLXVI, you get 666. If that's too simple for you, If the letter A is defined to be equal to 36 (=66), B=37, C=38, and so on, then: The sum of the letters in the word SUPERSTITIOUS is 666.
mkdir /treblejunkie /receipts /treblejunkie /medicalrecords /treblejunkie /creditreports /treblejunkie /phonerecords /treblejunkie /parkingtickets /treblejunkie /relationships /treblejunkie /dicksize /treblejunkie /favoritefoods /treblejunkie
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
(copying... copying... still copying....)
cp
There's how you do it. DARPA, please send me my check. You probably already know my address.
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
(nt)
Here's a lovely interview with Vice President Daddy Bush, circa 1987. He says Atheists aren't Americans, and he has more money than you, so he must be right, right?
Praise Jeebus!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are Atheists?
Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the Atheist community. Faith in god is important to me.
Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are Atheists?
Bush: No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?
Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on Atheists.
Term limits on government offices serve to limit the abuse of power. This concept no longer goes far enough to properly limit abuses of power. Power is now not only held by individuals, but by systems. It is not only government systems, but also corporations and political parties. Changes must be made in our constitution to add checks and balances for these new centers of power made possible by advances in technology.
Technology has enabled these systems to become effective enough to suggest some form of "term limits" now need to be applied to these systems as well as holders of government offices. These limits will not necessarily take the same form as term limits for individuals, but they are needed.
The instant it ceases to be possible for the people governed by a government to institute a new government, that government is destined to become corrupt. Naturally, though, a government wants to preserve itself, like any entity. That is one of the reasons why eternal vigilance is required to uphold the rights of the people, vigilance of foreign and domestic threats of those rights, including our own government. The U.S. constitution was written to include the concept of an impermanent government, but with advances in technology, term limits on individual office holders are no longer enough protection to prevent abuses of power.
Government systems, political parties, and corporations seem to be growing beyond individual control. It is obvious that the rules under which our society functions are now inadequate for the systems now working within our society. It is time to amend the constitution to add checks and balances for the new places where power is being concentrated. If these changes cannot be made through constitutional means, then it is too late for the U.S. government to self-correct and there will be dark days ahead for the U.S.
If this turns out half as bad as it looks, I'm all for a new American Revolution. Worked in 1776, I think it'd work now if we actually educated the public about this bullshit.
Go ahead and arrest me, Ascroft, you totalitarian son of a bitch, you'll have to do me like you did Padilla; have the military hold me in a brig without bringing charges, 'cause I a'int done a damn thing wrong. Or maybe I should just start looking around for another country. This country is great, but I'm starting to wonder whether the public at large is populated by morons or people too scared to come out of their bunkers. Freedom is something you have to want and want bad. It's incredibly delicate, and we're seeing it torn apart before our eyes. 1984? I don't think so. I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees. If America is populated by pussies, then just let me know and I'll find another place to live where they actually want their freedom. Sept 11 was an attack on our way of life. Judging by the way things have gone the last 11 months (patriot act, data mining, warrantless arrests, detention of American CITIZENS without a trial/lawyer/grand jury, etc) I'd say they kicked our asses. Cower in the dark if you like, but I will never call you a patriot. I was at the Statue of Liberty today, and it was still closed; you can't go inside. Why? The people of America are too scared to tell Bush to re-open it. What does it say when the people of this country are barred from entering our greatest symbol of freedom? What the hell does that say?
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
How does being an aethist make you unAmerican? I'd LOVE to hear your thoughts on this.
Read George H.W. Bush's thoughts; that's probably what the grandparent post was referring to.
The purpose of this is political control, not counter terrorism. Please see this for mroe background and very interesting info on the IAO symbol:
. ht ml#79173969
http://www.cryptogon.com/2002_07_14_blogarchive
Defensive, aren't you? Too defensive to note that the poster was attempting irony by subtly summoning the bogeyman of a right-wing Big Brother. Being an atheist surely is not unamerican, but neither is being religious, and in particular neither is being Christian. If you (and the poster you are replying to) had a more comprehensive picture of court rulings over the past 30 years, you would see that Christians have more to fear from undemocratic abuses of power than atheists or subscribers to other religions.
More people have DIED over religious wars than any political war..
From this comment alone, I'll peg you as a 19-21 year old, hot-headed undergrad who took two history classes, both taught by professors who advocate socialism, and you think you're being intellectual by stating that old canard with that kind of CAPITALIZED fervor, like you calculated it up yourself. In this you are hardly unique. You'll grow out of it.
Oh, and far more people have thrived in the propsperity of Western, Judeo-Christian societies than in any autocratically mandated atheist society.
taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
However, if you take the time to include the tens of millions butchered by prominent atheist Josef Stalin, and the tens of millions butchered by prominent atheist Mao, it turns out that atheists are responsible for so much more wholesale slaughter in the world's history that it's not even worth comparing to anything or anyone else.
DFL
Never send a human to do a machine's job.
I'm out of mod points. Good thinking here, deserves notice.
WWJD for a Klondike Bar?
HMM, wonder what RF engineer builds microwave devices operating at the VHF/UHF bands
"player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
What we do have is way too much cosmetic stuff that pushes the right-wing control agenda. Many arrests, deportations, and secret detentions, but few trials. Talk of a war with Iraq without Congressional approval. More Government secrecy about stuff that has nothing to do with terrorism. Plans for a huge internal security agency, something the US didn't need in WWI or WWII. Talk of using the military for domestic law enforcement. Warships for the Coast Guard.
Note what we're not seeing - competence at the top. Retired FBI agents write books reporting that FBI HQ is packed with bozos. (The field end of the FBI is generally considered better than HQ.) But there hasn't been a purge at FBI HQ, despite several scandals. Ashcroft is at best a lightweight, but he's still running the Justice Department. The head of FEMA was Bush's campaign manager. Cheney is still in office, despite the Halliburton scandals. These guys are not the team we need to win.
Sorry to break it to ya, but this has recently been proven an incontrovertible fact. By far the majority seems to agree that the USA is "one nation under God" - or if they don't agree, they're too scared to say so. Therefore, if you're an atheist, you can't be part of the nation, so you're un-American.
BTW, I'm an atheist, and not an American, but I live in the USA. I was rather disappointed to see the selfish "my religion wins because there are more of us than you" attitude that prevailed in the recent "debate". Tolerance and equality is well and good as long as it doesn't interfere with the national superstition.
P.S. the original post was making the atheist=unamerican claim ironically, as others have pointed out.
... birth will solve THAT niggly problem - and it WILL be illegal NOT to have it implanted. When all the outlaws have (implanted)chips, none of the (intrusive) chips will be outlawed.
((((Christians have more to fear from undemocratic abuses of power than atheists or subscribers to other religions.))))
you mean stuff like not being able to use government funds to further their religion, or have mandatory school prayer, or print the 10 commandments in public schools?
Boo fucking hoo.
At least the atheists want all religion OUT, instead of wanting theirs IN.
(sorry about the CAPITALS)
They don't allow MS to be the operating system its on. And the system is read only with no way at all in to the system. The prosecution of a programmer involved in putting a back door of any kind in the system. No BUFFER OVERFLOWS at all fhoddamit! |-\ Beat me! But I will never give up on my Country 'The United States Of America!" the best coutry in the world, not necessarily the purest people, but the best! Open Sourse Rulez!
Damn. That needs modded up, seriously. I'm ashamed to not have known about that paper before.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
Being un-American and American. Interesting concepts but are usually used in the wrong manner by people who just want to get their way. If god guided America he would be a Ferengi God, not a benevolent god. America contradicts itself so much. If they just followed the original amendments word for word. I mean they put the 1rst Amendment first because it is the MOST important.
/.ers should make our own party. Why not? Less corrupt. An occasional troll or two. I have seen less of them lately. We could turn this country around. It's not 1984 yet. There still is time.
Being un-American would be working against what this county is all about. I would never be thrown into our patriotism bull crap. Being un-American is being willing to give up liberties without a fight to insure the Majority's safety. THAT my friends is being un-American. Ever since we started this nation of ours we have had problems with contradicting ourselves. First with the slaves. They are only ½ a person. They don't get any of our rights. Majority rules is not how America was designed. It was designed to be Majority rule without infringement on Minority rights. And we have gone and done it over and over and over throughout our brief history. Home Land Security is un-American. Carnivore is un-American. WE ARE MOVING TWORDS THE WRONG DIRECTION PEOPLE! WE THE PEOPLE are letting the evil corrupt this government since day 1. Perhaps the founding fathers were right. We should leave the ruling of the government up to the intelligent. Obviously since we allowed the President to be elected by the people rather than the senate we have had disaster over and over again. We have a couple of good men. So did Rome's Emperors. Unfortunately we have had lots of Neros lately in all parts of the government. Men are not perfect, but we let the large group of people chose a dumb choice. Lets see... ballot... George Bush or Al Gore. Might as well read Jim Bob Joe as a candidate. The last 10 years have been a mess. It was no surprise to me that at 2002 we began a recession. I have been saying that we would enter a recession since 1993. I predicted it sooner though. And it was not caused by 9-11. It's like saying the Stock Market Crash caused the Great Depression. Things like this happen after large burst of growth. It is a natural occurrence of our economy caused by large amounts of greed. A miss management of money or total and complete greed, the kind of greed that you would sacrifice all your employees pay just to get another 5 Million this year. Our country has been misguided. I am not a politician. I would consider it an honor to be in the Senate. I would not like to take this course because not a lot of people actually listen and I'm not even 35. We let the scum of the earth rule our country. Why is this? We don't want the job. Let the people who want power have it. Somehow I think Douglass Adams was right about putting the Emperor of the Universe as a man who did not want the job. The good people don't want power. They want to make a difference. We as
Remember: Minority rule restricted by Minority rights.
==========
Sincerely,
Locke
- Government funds for religion? No thanks. The "religious wars" the previous poster was talking about (which he attempted to contrast with "political wars") came about because governments used the religions they sponsored and therefore controlled, as political tools. I'll take my religion "unestablished by congress," thank you.
- A moment of silence in the morning at school, while not something I lobby for or care much about, is so thoroughly unobjectionable that one has to wonder about people who call it an establishment violation.
- The Ten Commandments are such a vital part of the history of this world (whether you like it or not) that I find it amazing that I learned more in public school about the Code of Hammurabi, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the I Ching, and the Rig Veda than the Ten Commandments. This is also an indication of the hypocrisy of the "secularists," who are usually thinly veiled "anti-Christians," since things like Buddhism and Shamanism are usually A-OK in their world.
At least the atheists want all religion OUT, instead of wanting theirs IN.Would "wanting all religion OUT" mean not teaching about all those horrible "religious wars," or would the discussion be limited to "why religion is bad for children and other living things?" The very stance of non-religion is unavoidably confused with anti-religion, and all too often anti-Christian in particular, since Chrisitianity is seen as the "dominant paradigm" most worthy of subversion. And if you think that anyone religious who complains about the current state of things is asking to have "theirs IN," then you don't understand either religious people or the current state of things, or both.
The problem I was refering to when I said that Christians have more to fear about undemocratic abuses than atheists, comes from "fundamentalist secularists" who "want all religion OUT," which on its face is a limitation of the free exercise of religion. Wanting religion "unfunded" is fine, but wanting religious topics unexamined or entirely absent (i.e., OUT) from the public forum, is unwarranted secular extremism. Look, in the recent "pledge of allegiance" case, the plaintiff lied about his relationship with and representation of his daughter, just to get his judgment. Even if you agree with his claim, you have to recognize that he represents a tyrannical minority that is often getting its way. Many lawyers, and some judges, are pushing the point of view that students can't even speak or write about their religion in public school, even while they are given class assignments regarding other world religions, or that employees can't wear e.g., cross jewelry in the workplace, and so on. Yes I stand by the claim that Christians have more to fear about losing liberties than atheists do at this point in history.
taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
Freemen own weapons. Slaves don't.
End of argument.
What has ever stopped a corporation from doing something profitable, but unethical?
.
A lack of working willing to do the unethical?
A corporation is made up of people, if the individual people (or just enough to not make the task possible, heh) REFUSE to do something. . .
bah, a cynic would say that any population willing to build its own prison if paid enough money to do so damn well deserves to be imprisoned. . . .
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
The collected laws, regulations, edicts, etc. would fill several shelf-feet. It is impossible to know what all the laws are, and thus whether we are in compliance.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--and then you cash in on the guilt." -- Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
That's what we're facing today--a crazy quilt of random, conflicting, arbitrary, subjective laws.
Total surveillance is unlikely to lead to total enforcement because that might stampede the sheep. Rather, it will be used to cull the rams from the flock.
Gordon.
He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.
-- J.R.R. Tolkien
Kid (speaking into walkie-talkie): Cancel the operation! They have Tech Spy!
example.org - powered by Linux!
You fail to make sense.
How is it that wanting freedom as it was defined by the people who wrote our founding laws (as opposed to freedom(tm), a concept that continually proves itself flexible to a number of different viewpoints, so long as there are contributions behind them), an indicator for "undergraduate liberal because my daddy is republican"? Please, explain how the founding fathers were hippies that screwed everyone in sight, ate other deadhead's acid, and evaded MSG security so that they could Get Another Miracle.
-j, a cranky product of a small, liberal arts college that cost too much.to preserve
I forget what 8 was for.
If you look at the record in terms of what information was missed by whom, when, and why, it's pretty evident that little or NONE of it had anything to do with a LACK of information. Most of it was plain old incompetence, or a failure to allocate necessary resource. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that no information "TIA" system is going to do anything to solve that problem.
WARNING: Reading the rest of this message is inflamatory, and contraindicated where a lack of education and the in-ability to grasp abstract concepts involving self-dissassociation and viewpoint expression without personalization may produce strong personal actions (flamming) from consumption of the memes within. If this is the case, then there's no reason for you not to go elsewhere. In short, I'm sharing. Have lotsa fun or click "next message".
Today I had the joy of dealing with a check-out clerk at Toys R Us. They wanted my phone number because I was paying with cash--an archaic "loose cannon" of consumerism.
I'm the kind of creepy evil bastard that makes women nervous, and children cling to their mommies ;and as such I glared at the clerkdroid from beneath hooded brows(much more acceptable than using his head as a redecorating tool) and asked if it was necessary in order to make a purchase. They said "no", and had that Call Security! look. Hey, I can see Radio Shack keeping a record (probably at the insistence of the government and for convienience when the law comes asking about switches, transmitters, etc)..for all the McGuyver's out there, the Shack is like a candy shop for mayhem, but Toys R Us...shessh. If I had the time to convert (gaming consoles, insertable anthropomorphic toys, and buttloads of chinese plastic) things into weapons of mass destruction I'd probably shop elsewhere--the Defense Department.
I'm just about to the point where everytime someone who doesn't need my information starts asking for it I'm going to shift into full-on asshole mode and start sounding off with clever stuff, like:
I look forward to the day when people will start jamming on merchants who can't function without harvesting the customerbase for data-mining, aggregate info peddling, and affiliate deep-tounge kissing across the backend in some bid for the orgiastic-synergistic-ogopolistic golden ring that will somehow give them the gawd's eye view of the feeding-frenzy, button-pushing results of marketing and distribution that may someday grant them the winning formulary of sales on the scale that Disney has somehow mastered for delivering nearly worthless media.Better yet, when I'm collecting whatever I'll end up getting for retirement, I'm going to be one evil, mean, and nasty bastard...I'll have the time and the will to picket stores that practice this crap, sit in on juries, and vote...at least until I die from something like diabetes, alzhimers, or cancer. Until that happens, I'll relish the looks of concern, terror, and outrage from so-called public-servants and the merchant-enforcement goons (police). Hell, I might even come to enjoy the sensation of tear-gas...can't smell much now, and it'll really pay off when they start screwing with the crowd--a whole crowd of angry cat-food eating bastards like myself (prescription drugs necessary to sustain life don't leave much room for real-food and when you can't smell, the taste of most things isn't too bad). The way I see it, there's going to be more old pissed off bastards in 15 to 30 years than there has ever been before, so they better get their priorites eet (stuff like mandatory death sentences for picketing, inciting people to action, and free-speech; esp. in the public interest!)soon, and remember the German occupation of France--all the information was already there for the occupation forces of Germany to easily and effectively disarm and contain the citizens. What a great time-saver that was!
Whew!...where the hell did that all come from...and did someone spike my corporate swill of choice of the moment(diet 12939 is only $.28 a litre right now--we got a great big cola-war, keeping me up through the night...yeah! caffiene's got me running to the lou all the time tonite--cola war...).
Every new form of media has it's own Requirimento
The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.
The terrorism argument is a dummy - bull*.
Ask the Security Services in the UK and US to deny this:
Internet surveillance, using carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means e.g. face to face, personal courier or steganography.
Terrorists will have to do that, or they will get caught.
Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).
SURVEILANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - IT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA
This propaganda is for several reasons, including: making you feel safer - that the government are doing something and the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.
Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"
This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something.
It does not address the real reason why they want this information - they want a surveillance society.
They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy.
This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.
All your finances for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.
Do not believe the lies of Government - even more money spent on these measures will not protect you from terrorists.
P.S. On the Domain Name System, Corporations steal words that belong to everybody - abridging what words you can use - violating the First Amendment.
The Corporations illegally abuse and expand their brand using domain names - above all smaller businesses who use similar words - violating Competition Law.
The authorities LIE - they know how to make trademark domains unique and totally distinctive, as the LAW requires trademarks to be. Please visit the World Intellectual Piracy Organization - not connected with United Nations WIPO.org !
Did no-one else see the logo at DARPA's IAO website? Either the conspiracy is about to be exposed; or they're taking the piss ;)
"I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
so, like ... france (its fifth republic) is a tyrrany? damn ...
... it -has- been around for a long time, comparitively.
... we've not been around 7000 years yet. (just a reminder that this, too, is up for debate.)
there are lots of democracies/republics in this world. take a look at switzerland -- just how many national referendums can you claim we've had in the US? and i'd like to mention that in France, my vote for the president counts a whole lot more accurately than in the states (should i remind you of the florida incident?)
the US doesn't have the most fair government system
btw -- according to some
no really ... i mean, God can know each of us, know everything we do, but not the government? damn, what if i (an agnostic) want privacy from God? talk about dictatorial tyrrany ... i don't know what the PK is (assuming integer primary keys in the uber-universal database) to see my own records ... i can't correct any of them if i disagree with God's opinion of me -- and if He, the almighty, flags me as naughty and sends me to hell ... i can't even start a revolution! damn shame, that ...
The problem with this system is that it's one-way transparency. We are transparent to them (the people in power who will have access to this system), but they are not tranto us. If I can get a list of who has looked at my records, and then look at their records -- in the same level of detail that they gained about me -- then I won't have as much of a problem with it. Reciprocal transparency will make it more fair, and help alleviate abuses. If Senator Porkbarrel's office investigates me, and I can investigate them right back, then they might think twice about using it.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Interesting essay. It was written by Derek Copold. The A.C. poster probably got it from here.
Anyway, I don't think our govt is really worried about "lonely philosophers." Even in the book Brave New World, Watson was allowed to go into exile in the Faulkland Islands. And though Nietzsche may have recommended "turning inward", his most popular work begins with Zarathustra leaving his isolated mountain and attempting to share his ideas with other people.
Exactly how tyrannical things are going to get is anyone's guess at this point. The trends are certainly discouraging. But effective, appropriate forms of opposition will come from people (including a few formerly lonesome philosophers) who are willing to organize.
I don't share Copold's pessimism. Not only is "meaningful change in the world" possible, trying to bring it about is a hell of a lot more fun than the deep introspection Copold recommends.
----------
Manifesto for the Peoples of the Third Millennium
Silly AC, Communism is an *atheistic* religion. And Stalin and Mao - both good communists - were atheists (Stalin started out as a thelogical student, but changed sides).
DFL
Never send a human to do a machine's job.
They note 'bin laden' and just 'American Citizen'?
As the FBI agents crash the door, "Down on the
floor American Citizen; we have a warrant for
your arrest".
If there is a number and a time it can be traced,
and it WILL be. Sooner or later, someone is
going to have to justify what this costs, so
let's start looking for joe criminal, hmmm,
even joe maybe criminal... Sounds like a copyrighted tone on that cell
phone! Not just to you, but then back
to everyone else that called that number and
every number it called, and your ISP and their
system logs. Ashcroft's wet dream; in service
to corporate interests.
Our only hope is that these snoops keep running
Microsoft (There, worked in the obligatory bash)
Having looked briefly at it, however, I don't believe that IPD is a sufficient response to what I have been arguing.
What I have been saying is that atheism cannot make truth claims or claims about ethics. It cannot do so because of what it claims about the nature of man. Essentially a man is a glorified electro-chemical machine, according to atheism: based, that is, upon atheism's ideas about human origins.
But if this is true, then it is no more possible for a man to say "it's good to help the little old lady across the street" than for a pot of boiling water to do so. Boiling water doesn't make ethical claims: to even suggest otherwise is absurd. But if man really is nothing more than a glorified batch of incredibly complex chemical/thermal/electrical reactions/interactions, then it is equally absurd to pretend that man can say any more at all about helping old ladies than that pot of water.
If I asked you to inquire of a hurricane whether it is ethical to destroy property and human lives, you would probably laugh in my face. But the atheist, who says that man is - similar to that hurricane - nothing but a batch of chemicals mixed up in intriguing and highly reactive ways, nevertheless expects me to listen to him when he starts chattering about what's "right" or "wrong". I'm sorry, but I fail to see why I shouldn't laugh in his face, IPD notwithstanding.
IPD depends first of all upon the interaction of rational agents - but atheism simply demolishes rationality because of what it says that man is.
This is why I say that atheism reduces ethics to personal preference: because a bag of chemicals doesn't "do" anything. It doesn't think. It doesn't evaluate. It doesn't judge. It's impersonal. Thus, whatever it does is just that, and nothing more. What it does is what it does. The atheist, as a bag of chemicals, can't condemn what atheist bag of chemicals Stalin or Mao does, because bags of chemicals don't have an ethical sense.
Hint: the fact that man really does have an ethical sense ought to be a sufficient clue to you that atheism is a load of nonsense.
DFL
Never send a human to do a machine's job.
All EU countries have a similar act.
Here's a bit of a suggestion/challenge for all the EU /.ers. Call up your local council and find out who the Data Protection Contact Officer is and their address. Then send them a letter stating that you want to make a Data Subject Access Request. A lot of councils will do this for free but some charge a tenner. They then have 40 days from the postmark of your letter (send it first class else they migh try to get an extension) to send you a copy of all information that they hold on you in both electronic and paper systems (used to be just electronic but paper got added in 1998).
You will probably be very suprised by the sheer volume, if you're not then they're probably holding something back as councils hold a lot of data on their citizens.
Stephen
"Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
Who said Christians aren't a political party? I've lived in the southern U.S., and the amount of legislation there that is overtly Christian is disturbing. In a nation where most of the population, even government officials, are aligned to a religion, separation of church and state is really a myth.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
I believe those words were written to be interpreted in the era in which they were applicable - not in the era in which they were written. From this point of view, Roman numerals would be irreleveant, and ASCII (A=65,Z=90) would be much more appropriate (if we assume we truly are in the "end times"). Curious note: BILL GATES = 663 (+3 for the III = 666 -- his name is Bill Gates III).
Another curious note: suppose that retina scanning is the "mark on the forehead", and a fingerprint is the "mark on the right hand" (I know you don't "receive" either of those marks, but I am allowing for a less literal translation) I fully expect that these two boimetric identifiers will find wider usage as time progresses. Grocery stores in some locations are already using fingerprint scanners to identify people (described in a previous slashdot story).
Ask yourself - if a functioning ID system were in place, how much of a stretch is it before it is possible to control your ability to "buy or sell"? Granted, it would take a while to convince the general public, but in time, it can (and unfortunately, I believe will) be done. Perhaps they will say first, "we want to prevent terrorists from buying or selling", then "terrorists" changes to "criminals", and then "criminals" changes to "individuals that match criteria we select".
I also don't think the religious right will recognize the "mark" and defend against it. Perhaps I am pessimistic, but the Bible indicates that a great many will be deceived -- hardly possible if a majority recognize it for what it is. I believe those that truly recognize the "mark" will be a minority, and that you will recognize it not just because someone told you but because you came to that conclusion on your own.
Maybe I'm paranoid, but sometimes I like to think, "What if?".
At least the atheists want all religion OUT, instead of wanting theirs IN.
In the case of atheists, that's the same thing.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Presto, morals without a Divine Enforcer.
For my next trick, I'll prove how you can make crop circles without a UFO!
As for why you shoulden't laugh in people's faces, that's easy to prove. Try it as a regular policy, and it'll prove itself eventually. I suggest you get some life insurance to provide for your loved ones before you start, though. They'll miss your income when you're gone, but they probably won't miss your Mad logik skillz.
PS - The whole 'bag of chemicals' argument is so tired - It's not even an argument, or proof, it's an emotional appeal, a rephrasing of "What, you WANT to believe that you're not SPECIAL?"