Slashdot Mirror
FBI Bugging Public Libraries
zamiel writes "Bill Olds writes in the Hartford Courant: 'I know my librarian, and I believe she would tell me if the government were tracking my computer use at the library. Don't you agree? No way. There's a gag order. When the FBI uses a court order or a subpoena to gain access to library computers or a list of the names of people who have borrowed certain books, librarians can't tell anyone - not even other librarians or you. They face a stiff federal penalty if they do. It's unfair that librarians should be placed in such a position.'" The American Library Association has a page with advice to librarians and links to previous news stories on the subject.
Those cranky librarians have been shushing people for years. About time someone shushed them back!
Best Windows Freeware
The same thing goes for Universities too. They used to have to tell you by law, now they can't. They also don't need a subpoena to monitor your computer use any more. I believe a court order will work which is easier to get than a subpoena. So add computer labs and dorms to list.
Thanks Patriot Act.
This was one of the nastier provision of the Patriot Act, and as I recall there was an uproar on /. when it first started getting press. <OB KARMA WH0REING>Related /. stories here and here.</OB KARMA WH0REING>
Time to return by copy of "Catcher in the Rye!"
Anonymous Cowards suck.
What is this...library... you speak of?
Is it anything like the Intarweb?
Everything will be used against you if they need someone to blame. Just pick the one with the most "X"s.
I have several books that might raise an eyebrow. One is "Blueprint for Black Power" Amazon inserted a small paper saying it was below their standards when I ordered it from them. But I couldn't find any visible damage...
This book is primarily about cultural phychology and has nothing to do with any radical movements or any such violence or the like. But I could easily be marked by one of the various government "plans" if they feelt the need over books like this.
This is garbage and we shouldn't allow this in a 'free as in beer' society.
What do they really expect to find? They already have shown they have enough information, but their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention. Perhaps some of the Arabs and muslims they so actively alienate could be of assistance...Only if they really cared about security would that happen!
... the barage of posts talking about constitional rights, the Bush Administration and, of course, the 569 jokes about the "terrorists already winnning". But seriously, does anyone thing they have an absolute Constitional Right to anonymity when they use the internet or check out books in the library?
I know that even posing the question is going to be seriously unpopular, but it should be asked.
Forget the whales - save the babies.
How I wish this was +1 funny instead of +0 JustPlainSad (but realistically, -1 OffTopic)
--
"Sure you can say that, we don't mind at all! What's your name, current address, social security number, and credit history?"
--fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
When I called my representative about the Zoe Lofgren bill (the one that restores some fair-use and civil liberties to individuals taken away by the DMCA) I got a response that he didn't support her bill. As a representative, shouldn't that be exactly what he supports? Restoring civil liberties to those he represents?
Soon enough, when enough of these freedoms are taken away, like the public unmonitored use of public libraries, then all of the so-called "public" institutions will be used less and less frequently by people who are concious about these things.
In the movie Seven, there was a great hubbub about tracking the use of library card-holders' reading habits. Now it seems that it doesn't need to be kept a secret, that they can and will do it, and that you can't find out about it. That's troubling.
Proof again that you can get anything passed if it has a snazzy acronym.
That and a president who implies that by challenging him or his cabinet you are voluntarily helping terrorists.
In all the news about the USA PATRIOT Act, I had no idea it was an acronym for:
the "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" (USA PATRIOT Act.) until I read the librarian guidelines. Call me s-l-o-w. I bet there is a full-time job to come up with those catchy titles. (I wonder what it pays)
What library's need to do is allow for anonymous checkout of books - providing the person leaves collateral of course.
When you return the books, you get the money back - just don't forget your receipt with matching barcode.
This is easy enough to fix - just burn all the books with questionable content. Might help to cut down on all of the mischief caused by those evil Harry Potter books.
Security first.
We just cannot let libraries protect terrorits. Imagine if a big "mushroom cloud" were to blow Washington, and we later found out that the author of this crime once borrowed a nuclear science book!
Science books and books with a bias against the US should also be banned. Anyone saying the opposite is against the Homeland Security!!
This is a questionable practice. It's nasty, and more than a bit frightening.
BUT, it's fairly understandable, as are its counterparts.
If an investigation into a robbery suspect led to a gun shop, should the gun shop owner be able to phone up the suspect and say, "Hey--the cops were asking after you."
Due to the nature of crime (criminals don't want to get caught!), the cops have to have a reasonable opportunity to work quietly, and in private. After an investigation has been concluded, THEN this stuff should be made public.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Yep, pretty much seems that way. Back to the FBI's old tricks like illegally monitoring the communciations of anyone they care to target. Back in McArthy's day it actually cost time and manpower so it was limited to famous,dangerous, or radical people. Today information tracking is so rediculously cheap that they can feasibly monitor some large percentage of the populations communications and even if they don't have the bandwidth to process it all they can store it for future use. I'm really not a conspiracy nut, but I do like to raise my voice when I see our liberties being needlessly trampled. I don't see my life becoming any more secure because the government can more easily monitor citizens conversations, they have and always will have the power to target criminals, now they are just grabbing for the power to use their tools against anyone. Maybe I should move to Canada, a federal judge there just threw out the evidence against 9 defendants that were caught importing 49Kg of heroin because he thought the RCMP had played too loose with their wiretap applications.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
We don't have no the FBI... We have the RCMP, and its unfortunate, but they waste time tracking who borrows certain books when they SHOULD BE investigating our Prime Minister and the millions of tax dollars that got funnelled to friendly Liberal supporters.
The legacy of our PM is broken promises... Case and point... GST and Free Trade...
NAPMFQ
Tournament Management Online &
That movie came out only a few years ago, and yet the scene would probably be meaningless today. It's funny how things change, and not necessarily for the better.
I work at a University computer department. A lot of my work goes into writing/maintaining the software that provides a three-way cross between client IP address, username, and timestamp for every use of our computer facilities (except staff and faculty workstations). These logs are regularly used as evidence in court and in pre-trial proceedings. IANAL, and I don't actually interface with the lawyers, but my buddies in the security group are constantly reviewing the login records at the behest of xxAA or FBI or whatever (they always play the cloak and dagger routine -- "need to know only!" *rolls the eyes*). Every login is preceded by "By clicking the button you agree to these policies" with a URL to the pages and pages of dos and don'ts, or else published everywhere around these workstations as dead tree reminders of "acceptable use". I can't speak for public libraries, but here at University we try to be lenient and let the students off with a "never do that again!" If they cower and tremble and repent of their evil filesharing ways, we let them off. Otherwise, they get a permanent "incident report" filed on their student record and get to take their song and dance to the VP of student affairs.
Which brings me to the point of, where's the right to privacy? Waived at the door, I guess, since apparently the presupposition is that by using your authentication to log in to these systems, you've agreed that you've read all these policies and have agreed to all these potential remedies against your violation of these policies. Any lawyers out there know if that holds water?
--
"Limited government" will always exceed its bounds
I find it funny that the person who always says this is an Anonymous Coward. Show yourself - unless you don't have anything to hide, of course.
When I was young, it was a great thing to go to the library once a week, get a stack of books, and read them through in the next 7 days. The star wars fiction series, Hardy Boys, Star Trek, The Odessey...
College libraries were awesome places. Places to hang out, maybe study a bit, meet young ladies.
Then I moved to Fayetteville, Georgia. Where the publicly funded library is run by the white hair Gestapo. The collection of books there is lacking. So you say, donate some? I did! I offered to donate 8 cases of books. Computer programming manuals, CS theory, even some copies of books I'v written or edited. Not 30 year old books, but fresh books. Books that a young teenager may not be able to afford to buy, but interested in reading. The offer was refused. No strings attached, just take them. No.
Would the old bags in Fayetteville let you know whats going on? No. Odds are THEY'LL call the FBI first.
Ok, thats my rant. If you are in the atlanta area, its worth the drive to the Georgia Tech library downtown if you really are looking for information. Georgia State's isn't too bad off either.
----- LoboSoft specializes in Digital Language Lab
If they want to monitor, lets give them something to monitor. Find out what books would trigger the watchful eyes, and go check out ALL of them, frequently. Have everyone else do the same. Overwhelm them with useless information. When everyone is on the list, there's no point in having a list.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
Simple solution... don't use public libraries. Don't forget to send a big thank-you note to your congressman.
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
With the influx of the library/patriot act stories on slashdot lately, im begining to think most of the readers are old, cranky, librarians.
- what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
The funny thing about this is that there is currently a public service announcement being aired now (I'm not sure which networks are carrying it. I do know, however, that the television station here at my school has been airing it every now and then) produced by a group that has some involvement with our government, that shows just this sort of thing happening, implied by context that it's "fictional". A sort of what-if scenario, reminding us of our supposed freedom.
What it involves is a kid asking a librarian for help finding some books. She explains that they don't have those books anymore, then guys in suits appear and presumably bust his inquisitive ass.
What's my point? I don't know. I just think it's a little bit creepy, with them saying that we should be glad to be American because shit like that doesn't happen, when in fact it clearly can and most likely does happen! The content of the ad does seem absurd: a kid getting hassled for just trying to read some books. But, it also seems like it's happening, so the fact that this ad lies to us about that is probably more absurd.
> What do they really expect to find? They already
> have shown they have enough information, but
> their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention.
I'd expect that they run your reading list against the following algorithm:
* If you read at least two "radical" books like "Blueprint for Black Power"
* And you read the Koran
* Then you are likely are guilty of the thought crime of "Thought Terrorist" so you need to be watched.
* If you are found to consort with others who have committed "Thought Terrorism"
* Then you and your consorts must be brought in for "questioning" until you confess your guilt or "prove" your innocense. It's not "innocent 'till proven guilty" since they already have "proof" that you and your consorts have engaged in "Thought Terrorism".
It's quite an effective strategy to deal with "underable elements". The "beauty" of it is that much of it can be automated and using Bayesian Filtering it can be made more accurate over time. There may be some false positives, but who cares? It's "for the greater good" and "we all have to make sacrifices to stop 'Terrorism'".
*shiver*
Is it not reasonable that the FBI, if it gets a court order, can bug a computer or a telephone? Is ./ really against bugging in any situation?
If such power is misused then it is cause of great convern, but the article provides no evidence that this is the case.
The author also seems upset that the library staff is not telling him. Well, it is pretty obvious that if you are going to bug something you can't tell the world what you are doing.
Tor
See also the article posted in September on this topic
What do you mean they cut the power? How can they cut the power, man? They're animals!
every society on earth has had to deal with terrorists at some time or another. There is no easy way to stop the threat that someone could unleash some plague, detonate some bomb or shoot unarmed people. The solution that the US has decided on seems to be surveilance of its own citizens and of anyone new comming into the country. For right or wrong this seems to be a decision that was reached by the people that were elected in the US by the people. The American people have become used to having alot of freedoms that most other nations on earth don't give to the ir citizens, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to due process of law, the right to have privacy in your home. These rights are granted to all in the US, unfortunatly this also means that they get granted to people who would attack the US from within.
Saying that your not a terrorist and that the FBI should not be monitering you doesn't work, how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking? What you are planning to do? Investigation seems to be a way that this can be accomplished but it means throwing away all the rights that the American people have lived so long with and have fought so hard to preserve, 2 wars and innumerable conflicts have been fought by the US to "preserve and maintain our way of life", you can't get rid of that and still call yourself an American.
Its a dicey issue to be certian, balancing rights with the need for the authorities to protect Americans from their enemies.
Think about it.
You ARE reading this as anonymous coward aren't you? Oh, you're not? Irony is funny, except when it's not.
I'm curious about how notable librarian Laura Bush would weigh in on the matters of the Patriot Act and such.
Many are complaining about the fact that the librarians can't disclose the fact that a persons internet use is being monitored. Duh, what do you expect, the FBI to "tap" the computers, but then have the librarians tell every user that their activities are being monitored? Now THAT would be effective (not saying that not disclosing is effective, but disclosing would be a joke on a Monty Pythonesque level).
Give it up folks, privacy in the information age is a dream and it's time to wake up. Everyone from the feds to that pimply faced kid next door can get into your life about as deep as they want to spend the time doing.
The Ad Council spot with the tagline "Freedom. Love it. Respect it. Cherish it." or some such, where a college age guy walks into a library and asks about the book he requested. "We don't carry that book anymore." is the librarian's curt reply, "But would you mind filling out this form, with your name, address, social security number?". Said college age dude backs out cautiously, "Um, no, that's okay, thanks-", turning around to find himself facing a couple of "agents". The spot ends with "What if you didn't have the freedoms you do now?".
And the same government that financed that Ad Council spot (naturally, who else would pay for such drivel, or require networks to air them), is doing exactly the same thing.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
It's a quote that is much bandied about in this day and age, but people like you should actually give it some thought if you can. Winston Churchill gave us this gem in 1940:
"Those who would trade a little freedom for a little security will soon find they have neither".
That one's for you, Sunshine.
-- Jude
(Not a coward, and not anonymous)
Audere est Facere
I am a network specialist at a very large public library system in the midwest with nearly 700 public PC's. We have had cases with law enforcement asking us for our proxy logs but have never been asked to actively monitor all PC's. There have been stalking cases, and death threats sent from our PC's and in those cases the only thing that we have been able to tell law enforcement is that they were sent from "this branch".
We definitely do not log peoples traffic nor do we have the storage space to do so. We have a snort box for intrusion detection that does only logging. We had logging enabled for http for a day and we used up all 200gb of space.
Who's the greater coward, the one who won't stand up for what's right even if a problem doesn't affect him directly, or one who will speak out against all evil?
Nice troll, but I'll assume that even you aren't stupid enough to actually believe this only affects criminals and terrorists. It affects the very system and society that has presumably provided you with safety and comfort since you were born. (I am, admittedly, making some assumptions regarding your history since you have the ability to post flamebait here -- you're apparently not living in a cardboard box in a country lacking any significant technology infrastructure, sanitation, etc.)
No Laughing Allowed!
Law enforcement has to have some particular reason to suspect YOU specifically before it probes through generally accepted expectations of privacy. The depth of the intrusion is propotional to the persuasiveness of the evidence. BUT NO FISHING EXPEDITIONS.
;-) Look what happened to the medical students in Florida, where even the traffic violation was a lie, disproved by videotape." Watch out for the next Eunice Stone, aided by fear.
The Patriot Act relies on a hysterical and ill-defined notion of a future terrorist threat to provide justification. This has been characteristic of many "emergency measures" in many countries over the years -- you know, we have to shut down the presses because it might cause trouble, etc. Now, it's been fairly quiet for over a year in the States -- when do you think they'll dilute the Act?
A recent example abroad -- the Russian gov't interfered with internet and print press in the wake of the theater hostage-taking crisis. Although antiterrorism was the justification, a good portion of this appears to have been to save face for the gov't. They politely call this censorship "media restrictions." (NYT 11/2) Good precedent?
Now, are we aiming to be more like the Russians, or more like us?
If we go to war in Iraq, we'll see even more severe censorship than in Gulf I (when they couldn't lay hands on Peter Arnett) and who knows what sort of internal investigations looking for seditious intent. How many people here will end up on the list? (Actually, with the increased use of sniffers looking for keywords in email and postings, you probably all are on the list.
I am a great supporter of our government, but stop snooping in our libraries, this is pathetic.
AMERICANS: VOTE TODAY!
Details from the ALA. FBI agents no longer have to show probable cause to spy on your reading list, which means people now have every reason to be afraid of reading the "wrong" books.
You're from a Muslim country, aren't ya?
The terrorists were able to falsify documents to get fake passports and drivers licenses. Library cards are by far the easiest piece of identity thing to fake. Do you really think that a terrorist that is here on an expired visa is going use his real ID (which either doesn't exist or isn't valid)?
"Oh, looks like Chuck U. Farly checked out another copy of 'How to bow up big buildings with farm chemicals.' Where does he live? 110 Up-Yours Infidel St., New York, NY? Book him, dan-o"
Meanwhile, somewhere on the other side of the country, little 4th grader Joey checks out 'How Power Plants Work" for a school project, and 10 minutes later the S.W.A.T. team is busting down his parent's door...
I wonder where our government will put the concentration camps.
-----
_______
2B1ASK1
Well -- I'm more than a little disapointed to see that (as of 2:30p CDT) There hasn't been a front page article reminding American Slashdotters to get out and vote today. With all of the politics that buzz around this site I *really* expected to log onto slashdot this morning to not only a "Hey USers, remember to vote today!" story, but also some tips about certain candidates -- etc ...
Perhaps this isn't the right topic for this gripe, but I guess if you're going to complain about an America-centric problem like the FBI tapping your library's computer, you should at least *try* to do something about it.
Just my two cents.
bemis
Why? Just because it has the work FUCK in it?
Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck? Fuck?
Praise librarians for believing in free speech.
This posting made possible by the ALA and all those library fines I've paid over the years.
Can the EFF get involved in this? It's a little outside of thier turf, as I understand it, but it's a worthy thing to combat or at least publicise.
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
I know all of this is stemming from the Gov'ts attempts at providing a 'Sense' of security, which we all know is next to impossible without erecting a 10 mile high wall around the US and shooting down any plane that comes over the wall (or anyone that tunnels underneath. These attempts at spying on the citizenry of the US is a serious afront to our freedom as a whole, at the expense of an ILLUSION of security.
All of these safeguards are merely illusions. The real indication that a terrorist cannot bring in a nuke into the country will be the day that illegal drugs can't get into the country. I don't see that happening anytime soon. Think about it, if I were a terrorist and had a large nuclear device i wanted smuggled into the US, I would contact a drug smuggler, they get literally 1,000's of tons of drugs into the US every year.
The day heroine is 1,000$/gram is the day we can expect a reasonable sense of security (from a nuke detonating in DC atleast).
--
Next thing: claiming and using your 5th Amendment rights will get you investigated further, because if you need to use the 5th, then clearly you did something wrong and we need to find out what that is!
Dudes, it's turning into "1984". Unelect the current occupants of office, it's our only hope.
We in Wisconsin have so little going for us, any publicity, good or bad, is needed.
Of course we do have Jeffrey Dahmer and Ed Gein. Oh wait.
"More organs means more human." - Zim
...would have approved.
Well, he would have been horrified.
No one's mentioned this yet, but in Amerika, it is Election Day.
Has everyone worried about AshKroft et al voted?
I know, I know, I'm preaching to the choir. Everyone on Slashdot that expresses their concern about an issue goes out and tells 100 people about it, and gets them all active in progressive change. Example: do you know who Maher Arar is?
I don't mean to get too bitter here, guys, but regime change starts at home. It's like the old Steven Stills song. If you can't have a system you love, umm, change the system you've got until it more closely resembles the system you'd love. =)
This absolute, knee-jerk libertine fascist reaction against any kind of reasonable investigations is what can eventually result in all freedoms being lost. The people the FBI is fighting are the people who would turn the US in to Egypt or Saudi Arabia where, except for the very rich, have the kind of rights we have here.
...because bin Laden is said to be a BIG Harry Potter fan.
Fancies himself to be Professor Dumbledore, my sources say. Professor Snape was lost in the attacks, happily.
Christmas comes early this year for the black hats! How many other gag orders like this exist under the patriot act? How many people are hindered in finding out if inquiries are coming from a valid source? How many shady groups are already using this enviornment of secrecy to reach thier nefarious ends?
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
...and if this isn't "stuff that matters" I forget what is.
Oh, it's election day, BTW.
Now those terrorists posing as librarians don't stand a chance, unless they can pin the blame on some poor fellow with a library card. I always thought my high-school library was weird, and they often use threatening tactics to get their books back. Now I can no longer chalk it up to an over-developed sense of possessiveness.
Think I am joking? Try to find an opinion of the court (not a dissent) that rested its argument upon either amendment... It may be the case that most cases based upon retained or reserved rights never get cert, but in practical terms these amendments are about as important to the current court as the third amendment. I have heard reasonable arguments made that the 13th and 14th amendments effectively gutted 9 and 10 when combined with the commerce clause after the various civil rights cases.
The spot itself is available at_ fr eedom/
http://www.adcouncil.org/campaigns/campaign_for
Click on Library (links on the right).
If security experts believe that a determined criminal's last resort for information would be the public library... too bad for all of us.
Our society is built on the trust that most of its members lead lives based on "acceptable" line of behavior. There is no way to enforce high security against determined individuals without changing the environment, at a high cost, both monetary and human rights wise. Such environments are prisons, banks, airports, etc.
The choice of a government to create conflicts and conditions which encourage the appearance of such "determined individuals" is a conscious decision to turn its citizens into hostages.
Unfortunately, I don't see a quick solution.
Maybe treat others with respect and/or leave them alone? Even that might not be a solution as it might be exploited as a sign of fear. I am not a politician and do not understand the rules in the battle for power. What I see is that a structure which was invented to support the best interests of "all people" is changing its function to support other entities by _exploiting_ "all people".
Now what?
I'd like to know why they actually think its necessary to track my books.
I'd find it hard to argue against this if there was a clear, valid reason. It still violates free speech, but so do a lot of things and there are good reasons, legality notwithstanding.
But this is just flat out pointless. Are they going to see that I check out a book on bomb-making? Why not just watch my purchases? They already do that, after all.
I just don't understand why it is useful for them to moniter this. If a suspected terrorist checks out a book, so what? A book on bomb-making doesn't make a bomb, it makes knowledge. You still need the materials, which are even easier to trace.
Secondly, if I were a terrorist, I'd go to the library and copy pages out of books with a digital camera or a xerox machine.
Yes, the library is a public place, but what I look at and what I check out is my private business, and unless I'm already under investigation, they have no right to this information. My email is as private as normal letters, phone conversations and even my private conversations with a librarian about my library searches. This practice needs to be tested in court, and it surely will not stand.
The FBI has consistently shown themselves to be tools of buearocrats and the current administration, and they must be held to a higher standard. They don't need this to fight terrorism, they need to work with other government agencies and quit being so damned arrogant.
It's true that the USA-PATRIOT Act has a number of provisions that are of questionable Constitutionality and dubious value to the War Against Terror (TM, Pat. Pending). However, this article (gratuitous link)is nothing more than gross conjecture without evidence. As we say down here in Texas, he's sellin' a whole lotta bull and not much steak.
It is illegal for a wiretap or datatap to be undertaken without judicial oversight and authorization (see United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972), holding "Fourth Amendment freedoms cannot properly be guaranteed if domestic security surveillances may be conducted solely within the discretion of the Executive Branch."). The expanded tap provisions of USA-PATRIOT allow for a greater level of secrecy to surround specific wire- or datataps (specifically, those approved by the special FISA court for national security issues), but federal law enforcement does not have carte blanche to go around randomly listening in to our conversations. In order for a tap to pass Constitutional muster, it has to be narrowly drawn. Setting up a general-purpose dragnet to pull in data from all library patrons, the vast majority of whom cannot legally be targeted by a FISA tap order, would get drop-kicked out of the most deferential judge's chambers. (Orrin Hatch's statement on FISA taps under USA-PATRIOT is here, and the ALA's interpretation of the Act is here).
The FBI does have expanded powers to grab library records, for purposes of domestic law enforcement as well as international espionage and terror investigations, but that's very different -- if no less disturbing -- than ongoing monitoring, and would be sufficient to trigger the librarians' circumspection. It certainly doesn't mean that the Feds slapped a Carnivore underneath the public terminal carousel.
"Freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more."
Freedom of speech, sure, your freedom to talk your head off on any issue. Seems the First Amendment is bypassed, though, by the current regime. You may have the right to speak, but they reserve the right to keep track of what you say and who listens to you. See any limitations on that in the Constitution?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The article even suggests the answer. It may be illegal for a librarian to tell you he or she's been visited by the FBI, but it's not illegal for one to tell you he or she hasn't been.
Start compiling a list of where the librarians answer like they're in a spy movie and where they go "huh?". Publish it. Ask for the official "we have not been visited by the FBI letter", if you can get it.
If you can find where there's light, the darkness will also be visible.
the records. There is no requirement or really, any need to keep records of who checked out what specific books. If you want to record how many times a book was checked out for stocking issues so be it, but if you don't have the info, the FBI can't really do anything about it can they. I can't count how many times this kind of issue has come back and haunted companies or institutions, if you have data, it can be subpoenaed. I do volunteer work for local libraries and we altered the system to only retain the name/library card # of the person who has the book, until it is checked back in, then we blank those fields and record the fact that it was checked out, and returned and was in use for the specific dates. This ensure they know which books are getting used for ordering purposes while removing the onus from the librarians. The local city attorney agreed with the policy change, I am not sure if the county was consulted. Given the nature of the backups and technology, I am sure the FBI could recover what they need, but they must do the work, not the librarians.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
is civil disobedience (barely).
Want to find out if the feds are monitoring a couple of people's book lists, or everyone's requests for a few books? Join me in padding our FBI files by checking out as many books as you dare on the subjects of:
Islam
Middle-Eastern history
Anything by Chomsky
1984 and Animal Farm
A People's History of the United States
then wait and watch for white window-less paneled vans parked on your street, with "Flowers By Irene" or "Two FBI Guys Pizza" stenciled on the side.
True terrorists - please continue your normal reading habits, as you may already be under surveillance, and any results under this system would only distort our survey.
Bad analogy.
And a misquote from the grandparent post: "Those who would sacrifice an *essential* liberty for temporary safety, deserves neither", the key words here being essential, for liberty, and temporary, for safety.
There is no such thing as permanent safety, no matter what the nanny state would have us believe.
And the context of essential liberty is intended to refer to those liberties that do not infringe upon the liberties of others, it is not intended to promote or justify anarchy.
A common misconception in most societies is the idea that we are granted our freedoms by law, when in fact, the opposite is true. Our essential freedoms have *always* existed, it is in the scope of law merely to protect them from those that would abuse them, and those abusers can (and often do) include the government and institutions we have in place to protect those freedoms.
I'd rather keep EVERY ONE of my *essential* liberties, even at the risk of a little less certainty in the public safety arena, for the very simple reason that those who would threaten that safety will not be hampered, IN THE LEAST, by any of the restrictions on my freedoms.
Nunc Tutus Exitus Computarus.
Hey, I know the answer to that one.. Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
we should just stop reading all together.
Given that:
* The FBI has recently begun an initiative to hire 600 new agents, as they are grossly understaffed.
* This initiative calls for massive amount of technical/computer agents, as the Bureau cannot keep them in employment due to corporations offering them triple their salary for less work, better hours, and a less stressful environment.
* Regional HQ offices group internet crime investigations in squads with embezzlement, insurance fraud, identity fraud, and other white-collar crimes.
* FBI field offices have, at best, two or three computer specialists who can deal with problems within the jurisdiction of the field office.
* White-collar squads have a four-month backlog of cases they need to investigate before moving on to cases that would come in today.
* For every computer-related investigation that comes in, a case comes in for insurance fraud, one comes in for public embezzlement, and one comes in for public bribery.
* Rating the above four case types by public profile and positive media exposure, computer investigations come as lowest priority. (While everyone loves seeing their city council members get arrested for accepting bribes, very few care if Joe Hacker is arrested for harassing a webiste the majority of America has never even heard of.)
Something tells me that, while this Act might indeed infringe on privacy rights, the FBI has better things to do than put taps on every computer in library in America. Further, they lack the manpower to monitor those taps or snoop public computers, given all the cases computer specialists are called on to handle. More likely, they will take advantage of this new "privelage" when they know the lead to be a solid one, and have reason to believe it will lead to an arrest.
Anyway, just my $0.02 USD.
"whole idea of things changing for the better came about in 1940's - 1950's America. Previously, everyone pretty much agreed that things were much shittier than they had been before......."
well, the 1930s were mostly about the depression and WWI so, it would be hard to get much worse for most people around that time.
1 2
3 4
1. Tools that help me see what others are up to.
2. Tools that prevent others from seeing what I am up to.
3. Tools that help others see what I am up to.
4. Tools that prevent me from seeing what others are up to.
Maybe we should promote laws that make everyone's activities transparent. We like 1 and 2, but reality is that it is either 1 and 3, or 2 and 4. And 1 and 3 promotes accountability while 2 and 4 is an "arms race" to see if one can remain hidden. If we could check and make certain the FBI was doing its job properly, it would reign in any questionable activities.
From the Supreme Court's opinion on Griswold v. Conneticut:
(emphasis mine)
Karma: Ran over your dogma.
PLEASE! Mod the parent up! So few people understand the meaning of the 9th Amendment, and as such this is a comment that is very valuable to this -- and any -- discussion of our rights!
Dudes, it's turning into "1984". Unelect the current occupants of office, it's our only hope.
That means one has to believe that the current occupant of the White House was elected in the first place. I, for one, don't. And if one accepts the fact that El Presidente came to power in a coup worthy of any third world dictator, then his current governments attacks on our constitutional rights are not all that surprising.
Turning into 1984? 9/11 was the day that 1984 became a reality. Bush got his Reichstag fire, and he has used it to his advantage.
The welfare of the people has always been the alibi of tyrants. - Albert Camus
This fiction brought to you by the United States of America. Just don't tell anyone you read it here.
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Didnt do too good a job of that, did he? :)
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Since it is all done in secret, and everyone who knows about it are forbidden to talk, how do you imagine that evidence of such misuse could be uncovered?
The issue is, at a minimum, that there is some kind of oversight from forces outside the FBI. The court order you mention would be a good such thing, but the FBI need nothing of the kind to do this.
Remember that the FBI under J Edgar Hoover practically ruled the US for decades, using information obtained through similar means.
It seems like every day I read an article somewhere about how *MY* personal privacy is invaded by our government. I take small solace in the fact that there are just too many people to watch and that I am still just a number. But for how long I wonder? How long before video cameras are plentiful enough, digital satellites can map the planet to superb detail, and computers can catalog the behavior of ordinary citizens with ease and extrapolate patterns of behavior from it. I use the library. I walk into stores where I'm video-taped. I read "controversial" material. Most of all, I wonder how much of that is already recorded about me somewhere that I don't know about.
"As far as I'm concerned, I prefer silent vice to ostentatious virtue." ~A. Einstein
You want to help people who defend your rights? Become a member of the ACLU
Call your mom.
Sure there is. Drop out of school.
Now that's not so difficult is it?
0110100100100000011000010110110100100000011000100
Not quite. It wasn't conservative Republicans *actually* crashing into the WTC and then Bush blaming it on terrorists.
May we never see th
You saw that spot? Would you mind filling out this form, with your name, address, social security number?
get into subpoenas envy!
"My subpoenas bigger than yours! nyah!"
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
This hipocricy is some of the reason why so many people hate the USA. On one hand you stand up for all these wonderful human rights and ideals, and then you guys seem to think that gives you the freedom to destroy these rights willy nilly.
Freedom of speech: See above thread. See DMCA. See just about anything else George Bush has done recently.
Democracy: Your 2 party (2 sides of the same coin) system is one of the most corrupt in the world. There's not much difference in Republican or Democrat, either way, some rich fuck will get in.
Right to bear arms: Look at the gun restrictions every state passes. You don't even have that anymore.
Equality of the sexes: I don't even know where to begin. USA style feminism set back women a hundred years.
Equality of races: Your entire country is one big slow-motion race riot. Try driving a nice car if you have dark skin. At least Indians aren't much of a problem because you've killed most of them already. Bastards. Basically if you're not white, you're FUCKED.
Gay rights: Unless you live in a gay ghetto like San Francisco, you're fucked.
Freedom to pursue happiness: Your governemnt and society pushes down poor people so badly, that they never have a chance to break out of it. And if you're poor, and you get sick, and you live in the USA, you're FUCKED.
Freedom to work: Government protection of workers is almost nil, and your unions are so corrupt they just forgot to rename themselves as "mafia". If you don't believe this, check into the Teamster's Union one of these days.
Freedom of Religion: Unless you're one one of the few state-sanctioned religions, you're pretty much screwed. You will be monitored.
Nice environment: Has your president done one single good thing to offset the many bad environmental things he's done already?
Peaceful country: I don't think there is any other mondern country that has had as many wars and foreign incursions as the USA. Not even the USSR. Your disregard for non-americans is legendary. I'm really surprised that it took till 2001 for someone to give the USA a black eye. By how you carry on, it should have happened decades ago.
You, the USA, SUCK. At least now with your current president, he's too dumb to keep up the illusions. Nobody else will fix problems for you, it's time you stood up and fixed your own damn country. The kind of posts I've seen on Slashdot remind me more of an oppressive dictatorship than the beacon of democracy.
It's only in your minds that the US was ever a free country. Your government has just been the best at fooling you.
Agent #1: You're under arrest
Librarian: Shhhh
Agent #1: You have the right to be silent
Librarian: Shhhh
Agent #1: Somebody shut that librarian up
Agent #2: Shhhhh
Agent #1: Not that way you idiot...
I'm glad a stupid law from DC has an exception in DC. I wouldn't want my representatives in DC to be subject to the same stupid laws as me. Funny how everybody seems to forget that before 9/11, there were FBI oversight hearings going on and they were being blackballed in the media.
Note to FBI: I haven't been to a library in a while so don't even bother.
Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
Republicans have never adopted deceit as their technique. Democrats have perfected it to a fine art. Hello?? Iran-Contra anyone??
.01% majority. Survivor! is a great example -- it's not just "reality TV," it's a pervasive cultural meme in America.
But I'm not here to play he-said she-said. Your post made a good point, but you're only half-right. In order to be more accurate, you need to make a few changes:
There is a reason all captains of industry, and rich people in general support the democratic and republican two-party system.
Look at the facts at opensecrets.org; the dems. and repubs. clearly play both sides of the field. It is not surprising that the two-party system works to perserve the dominance of the two-party system. Political Darwinism, if you will.
Just don't expect a viable third party anytime soon. The hand-in-glove operations of the media, the mega-corps, and our (s)elected leaders maintain the hegemony very effectively. The only challenge in the past 150 years has come during the Great Depression, when times were so tough that people actually contemplated a (gasp) third alternative!
You know, part of it is the way we are taught (by the media, maybe) to view everything in opposites. For example, "You are either with us or with the terrorists." Our legal system, too, is a two-party adversarial fight-to-the-death; not unlike Street Fighter II in its basic format (just add extra money for an "appeal"). This winner-take-all mentality is assuredly an American Way of Life at this point. Look at how the Electoral College works, with all 25 Florida votes going to a candidate who got a
Most other democratic countries form coalition governments, where the parties are forced to reach some common ground and consensus. Here, the wind starts blowing from a different direction every election cycle.
Yet, all this hubbub about the "differences" between the Democrats and Republicans pulls the wool over our eyes. How were the parties different on NAFTA, on bombing Afghanistan, or passing the DMCA? (They weren't.)
If you think that there's more than minor degrees of separation between the Republicans and Democrats, you need to take a healthy step back, my friend.
I am a librarian, and nothing pisses myself and my fellow librarians off more than the government, religious action groups, or any other group of ignorant fools trying to stomp on the very ideals that have made this country what it is. The problem is that over the past decade these groups have only increased in numbers. The Patriot Act (as if enforcing or acquiescing to such assinine acts is a show true patriotism...) is just the latest (and most visible) in a long line of such infingments upon our civil liberties. As you can see in the link to the American Library Association website, the ALA has numerous lawsuits pending against the FBI regarding such draconian acts. All of the librarians I know are violently opposed to this act. Those who aren't; how dare they call themselves librarians! WE are commited to the preservation of knowledge and making said knowledge available to the masses. Any attempt to censor what a person may choose to read or persecution (and that is exactly what this is) of a person for their choice of reading goes against everything we stand for. There are countless librarians out there who are fighting this tooth and nail, often at the risk of our own jobs, to protect the civil liberties these acts attempt to toss in the gutter. I for one can not believe the librarians mentioned in this article are not screaming bloody murder at this heinous act. If you are opposed to these "patriotic" acts which "protect" our nation from unsubstantiated threats (and I know most of us /.ers do) talk to your local libraian about what you can do to FIGHT, contact the ALA and see how you can help, write your local newspaper, and most of all CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE and tell them how YOU were NOT represented when this was passed.
This MUST be fought! This MUST be beaten! Otherwise we will lose much more than we have already lost.
"Librarians are the secret masters of the world. They control information. Don't ever piss one off."
-Spider Robinson
There is a concept of audience -- my home, my workplace, and the subway do not provide an appropriate audience for a variety of reasons that are specific to the particular audience in each venue. The audience here -- with over 400 comments -- has by its own actions clearly shown that Slashdot is the place to discuss it, your misguided notion to the contrary notwithstanding.
Again, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not really that stupid (although you certainly play the part effectively). The proper question is not how this is different, but how is this the same? There is obviously no valid analogy between the communication model of the phone system and the communication model represented by the publishing industry, the libraries as consumers of that industry, and library patrons as end-users. (This is not to imply that I agree with your other premise regarding the validity of wiretaps or their secrecy.)
As for how the chilling effect -- or lack thereof in the past, when we have been lucky enough to avoid it -- on research and publication would affect everything from the medical procedures used during your birth to the handling of your body after death, I will leave it to what I hope is a grain of intelligence to analyze that without playing stupid on the point further. It is fundamental enough to not warrant further comment.
No Laughing Allowed!
FBI directive No-1-Amendment:
This is done, acctually. A measure that was instituted in most circulation databases (Horizon, etc.) prior to the 9/11 hesteria. Law enforcment agencies trying to use patron's records against them in court is no new thing. Only the books which are currently checked out, any problem items, and any requests which have been placed and not filled are on a patron's record. As a book is checked in, the trail of it ever being on one's record dissapears. As a result of this preventative measure, not much information is still available. For the most part, law enforcment agencies are really reaching when they go to retrieve a person's library record to see what books they have checked out. Whether or not the FBI gains anything from such assinine seizures is unimportant, the acquisition of information on a patron's account is illegal and unconstitutional. PERIOD! Gag order be damned! In fact, I hope the FBI come walking into my branch asking for a list of records so I can tell them to sod off!
Thats like saying they arent checking what you read if they dont watch you check it out. Just becuase they go in and check the records doesn't mean its not going to show what you read.
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
Damn FBI .. Thank God I'm not American.
I believe libraries have a way around this though if they don't keep your borrowing habits stored any where. If they have this infomation, they have to turn it over, but I don't believe they have to keep this information at all if they don't want to. I know the library here is attempting to do that. Its easier to just not keep track of such information, than it is to try and provide it and deal with constitutional rights issues. IANAL(ibrarian) though.
Most other democratic countries form coalition governments, where the parties are forced to reach some common ground and consensus.
In most democratic countries there are more than two political parties. Also there are frequently sub-national political parties.Including those such as the SNP, who's platform is for Scotland to be the independent nation state it hasn't been for nearly 400 years. Nothing like this in the US, even in Hawaii.
Yet, all this hubbub about the "differences" between the Democrats and Republicans pulls the wool over our eyes. How were the parties different on NAFTA, on bombing Afghanistan, or passing the DMCA? (They weren't.)
The "War on (some) drugs" is also a common slashdot example.
If you think that there's more than minor degrees of separation between the Republicans and Democrats, you need to take a healthy step back, my friend.
Especially where you have so called "open primaries" where candidates for either party are picked by the voters for both.
you must be watching too much CNN. A good number of CEOs are democrats (ever heard of larry ellison?, and I don't believe there's a single american politician out there that doesn't receive PAC money from corporations.
In fact, as far as I am concerned, the only difference between the two parties is that the democrats act more hypocritically in denying that they are supported by corporations, when in reality big business drives politics regardless of what side of the fence you sit on.
"Teachers leave us kids alone
This is entirely too easy:
Republicans have never adopted deceit as their technique.
One word: Nixon.