Slashdot Mirror


Databases and Privacy

A couple of stories made an interesting juxtaposition today. First read this story about information marketers scouring public records to compile personal information. Note the emphasis on cross-linking data from various sources to provide more information than any one source did - databases are synergistic. Now read this column about David Nelson, and its follow-up.

173 comments

  1. Some comfort by rgmoore · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From the Courant article:
    While infoUSA allows access to virtually anybody who logs onto its website, ChoicePoint screens subscribers.
    I'm not sure which is scarier, the idea that these databases are being opened to anyone who has a credit card and a willingness to snoop on their neighbors, or the idea that they should be restricted so that only "legitimate" businesses like telemarketers can get it. One way you don't know what kind of lowlives are going to use the data to ruin other people's lives. The other way, many potentially legitimate users will be shut out but some slimy people will still have access because the companies selling the data don't have the same views as ordinary people about which businesses really ought to see it. I guess that's the general problem with data like this; it's tough to know who is going to misuse it until it's already too late, so it's almost impossible to make it available without it causing problems.
    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    1. Re:Some comfort by hswerdfe · · Score: 3, Informative

      There needs to be some simple rules on DataBases and collection of Information.

      One I am partial to is
      Any Person should have, the Right to request a copy of any and all information a company, or government agency stores about them.

      I find it strange when I can't even look at data that is specifically about me.

      thats the only one I have seen so far that doesn't have much of a down side... ...anybody have any more

      --
      --meh--
    2. Re:Some comfort by IdleTime · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In most other countries than the US, this would have been illegal to collect.

      I know several countries where you as a company would have to apply for a license and with very strict rules as to what you can or can not store of information and for how long and how people can ensure that all the information collected about you can be deleted permanently if you wish so.

      There is no need for any company to have all that information about a person and it severly impacts my privacy.

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    3. Re:Some comfort by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      There needs to be a corollary to that rule - any new information exposed by the process of requesting a copy of information related to you can not be (legally) added to the database

      Ok, a corollary to the corollary - Consent to legally add any newly exposed information can not be a prerequisite for, or in any way influence the process of, getting the requested information.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    4. Re:Some comfort by Samrobb · · Score: 3, Funny
      Any Person should have, the Right to request a copy of any and all information a company, or government agency stores about them.

      Thank you, Corporal Carrot.

      --
      "Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
    5. Re:Some comfort by PetWolverine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What we really need is an amendment to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights protects most of our important rights, but one that is conspicuously missing is the right to privacy. Beyond "unreasonable search and seizure", our privacy is not protected constitutionally, and until it is it will be much harder to ensure legally than our right to freedom of speech or religion.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
    6. Re:Some comfort by studious+jew · · Score: 1

      Sure it is. Check amendments 9 and 10.

    7. Re:Some comfort by jazman_777 · · Score: 1
      What we really need is an amendment to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights protects most of our important rights, but one that is conspicuously missing is the right to privacy.

      What we need is a new start. Why can't we scrap the Union, and re-do it? Just like with the Articles of Confederation. Cause it ain't working anymore.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  2. The New Government Blacklist by Alien54 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Personally, I would like to add the names of a few politicians and other politically connected celebrities to the "cannot remove list".

    Bet that would make things get sorted out pretty quickly.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:The New Government Blacklist by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      I'd suggest making sure that the list includes John Ashcroft, but it's unlikely to make much difference. The really high up people who could make the biggest difference don't fly commercial flights anyway; they fly private jets, charters, or government planes.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    2. Re:The New Government Blacklist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, John Ashcroft flew commercial airlines until July, 2001. cbs news

    3. Re:The New Government Blacklist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real question is, what is John Ashcroft's home address, telephone number, and for bonus points, social security number ?

    4. Re:The New Government Blacklist by JWhitlock · · Score: 1
      Personally, I would like to add the names of a few politicians and other politically connected celebrities to the "cannot remove list".

      Bet that would make things get sorted out pretty quickly.

      Well, Senator David Nelson, from Oregon, is on the list. That's one.

    5. Re:The New Government Blacklist by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      state senator, that's usually on the order of being the mayor of mayberry.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    6. Re:The New Government Blacklist by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Easy - change your name to john ashcroft and then start hanging out at the local university mosques. Before you know, it you'll get your name on the list and as a bonus, the food at those student mosques tends to be pretty good too.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:The New Government Blacklist by PetWolverine · · Score: 1

      So that we can treat him how we treated that spammer?

      Seriously, does anyone have this information? I'm game.

      --
      I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
  3. Correct me if I'm wrong... by Bold+Marauder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...but isn't this the same set of issues that lead to the various privacy measures that web portals enacted somewhere around 1999?

    1. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not a troller, you're a crapflooder. Trollers don't visit Geekizoid.com

  4. oh no! by edrugtrader · · Score: 1, Funny

    someone has probably already cross referenced my slashdot record with my driving record and found that i like to drive with the images turned off!

    this is a dumb story... of course the data is out there... of course you can scour multiple sources and build a more complete picture... its still the same data.

    --
    MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
  5. Fake ID by Samir+Gupta · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Re: the David Nelson story... what's to stop a bona fide from using a fake ID and name for the reservations? It seems the "no fly" and "fly after stringent checking" lists are a list of names only. Maybe if they had photos associated with the names, this might reduce some of this inadvertent David Nelson discrimination, but it still doesn't solve it, if you're a real terrorist and get some plastic surgery.

    Totally idiotic, and I for one, am glad that I don't work in the US anymore.

    --
    -- Samir Gupta, Ph. D. Head, New Technology Research Group, Nintendo Co. Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
    1. Re:Fake ID by u19925 · · Score: 1

      the idea is that no one knows if they are on the list. so the david nelson has no idea that he is on the list and he may try to fly on his own name and will be arrested. police do these kind of things all the time. you may be suspected in some crime but you have no idea. when you are stopped by a traffic cop, he/she will check your license and see if you are wanted for any investigation. it is just that sometimes, the names are too common, search is too wide, inconvenience is very high, name remains on the list for long etc... which makes it special.

    2. Re:Fake ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is while the possibility of being caught may be small, the consequences of trying to use a fake ID to board an aircraft these days are going to be pretty dire.

    3. Re:Fake ID by ckd · · Score: 1
      the idea is that no one knows if they are on the list.

      Yeah, since it's not blatantly freaking obvious by the 10th time you get pulled aside for an extra search.

      Doesn't anyone remember this paper on how to defeat profile and name based screening?

  6. Access public records online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, you can access public records online for free:

    Public records online

    Free directory Info from AT&T

    1. Re:Access public records online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice. This AT&T site seems to have the "Reverse Lookup" by phone number. Some good sh!t:

      http://www.anywho.com/rl.html

    2. Re:Access public records online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phone records! Whoopee!
      REVERSE phone records! Be still my heart!

  7. "that led to", NOT "that lead to", SORRY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  8. DARPA by anaesthetica · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Looks like we don't even need to worry about Total Information Awareness, Carnivore or our FBI files. The corporations are going to do all the work towards the police state, at the low low rate of $8 a record!!! They gather our information, they push for laws to restrict our freedom and extend the control of a few over cultural symbols, means of communication, and ideas themselves.

    "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power"-- Mussolini (I think)

    1. Re:DARPA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't you heard?

      "Corporation is the government(tm)"

    2. Re:DARPA by Alyeska · · Score: 1
      My cynicism tells me that TIA is the result of Madison Ave. campaign contributions....

      You think the corporations aren't going to get ahold of that data? You know they're just drooling at the concept of it -- full-time, high-resolution demographic data recording, as good as having us radio collared like bears.

      That pesky concept of "individualism" can go away all together after that...

    3. Re:DARPA by miu · · Score: 1
      You think the corporations aren't going to get ahold of that data? You know they're just drooling at the concept of it -- full-time, high-resolution demographic data recording, as good as having us radio collared like bears.

      We'll be forced to live like wild animals in some kind of police state!
      -Phil Hartman as Bill McNeal

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
  9. Time for a class action lawsuit by JoeBuck · · Score: 1

    Why can't all the David Nelsons get together and sue for damages? The constitution guarantees right to travel and right to equal protection under the law.

    1. Re:Time for a class action lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is, while The Constitution guarantees the right to travel, it does not guarantee the right to board an aircraft. More generically, The Constitution does not guarantee the right to use a public convenance. Now if the David Nelson's of the world were detained/prohibited from walking to their destination, that's another matter.

    2. Re:Time for a class action lawsuit by surprise_audit · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Apparently, being tagged as a potential terrorist is enough to get you locked up without access to legal representation, without a trial, and without even notification to your family. If Homeland Security can do all that without worrying about the Bill of Rights, why would they care about someone's right to travel?

      The interesting thing to watch would be if all the various David Nelsons chartered a private flight to DC... Would they get off the ground, would they be forced down before reaching their destination, or what? Imagine the scene in the control tower:

      Pilot: This is the David Nelson flight requesting landing clearance...
      Flight Controller: NO! Go Away! You can't land here!
      Pilot: You don't understand - I'm low on fuel. I'll be landing shortly whether I want to or not...

  10. Good thing databases are perfect! by plopez · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seriously, I spend a large amount of my time working with gov't. and private databases and info sources. Reconciling different views of the universe is nearly impossible. WHen I read about people cross referencing databases the amount of checking, QA and scrubbing required to have any confidence in the results iis horrendous.

    Example: person A gives you a download from thier database into a SS, person B (who may actually work for the same agency or company) supposedly gives you the same information but the 2 version do not match.

    And this is assuming that there are other areas where they may or may not be in alignment (e.g. abbreviations, type of info gathered, spelling variations etc.).

    Now take the combinatorics of tens of thousands of gov't and private DB's, and you will understand that:
    1) A good clean DB is horrendously expensive.
    2) Driven by the profit motive, most compaies are unwilling to take the time and spend the money to properly QA and scrub thier data.
    3) Much of the cross matching is therefore useless due to noise.
    4) TIA is totally bogus. See above.
    5) Having some anonymous DB of information tracking your life is very scary.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by ratboy666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the information doesn't have to be scrubbed. All we need is a LOT of it. Don't assume that the people doing the correlations are stupid. For example, you left information in your post above.

      From your post, I deduce that you have a college level (post-secondary) education [spelled anonymous correctly]. You are not a "professional" typist. [misstyped "their" as "thier". Confirms first point, you didn't use a spell checker]. Since you used "QA" and "DB", you have familiarity with, or work in the Information field. You used the expression "totally bogus". From this, I deduce you are between 22 and 37 year of age.

      I could go on. But I won't. This type of information can be extracted from (say) 10 minutes of your life.

      The point I am making (and one of the articles was making), is that it is possible to track EVERYTHING. ALL the minutes of your life.

      Nothing by itself may be relevant, but it is possible to uniquely identify a person by 3 or 4 markers. These markers may vary, but they CAN be pulled together. TIA is GOING to pull them together. Indeed, private companies are doing it.

      "They" are going to know us better than we know ourselves.

      And, it seems that only reasons are to prevent a few people from blowing things up, and to sell us more razorblades.

      Ah well, progress.

      Ratboy.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    2. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by thelen · · Score: 1

      [I]t is possible to track EVERYTHING. ALL the minutes of your life ... Nothing by itself may be relevant, but it is possible to uniquely identify a person by 3 or 4 markers. These markers may vary, but they CAN be pulled together.

      Right, it's not so much that one data point be absolutely correct, but that there be enough roughly correct points to build a composite picture.

      The metaphor I like for this is of an ever-thickening fog, where as the particle density increases so does the visibility of patterns of movement through the mist. When you think about the number of activities the average person engages in where a transaction is uniquely identified and logged it becomes clear that with access to the right databases a great portion of your day can be mapped out.

    3. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by RetroGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And this is assuming that there are other areas where they may or may not be in alignment (e.g. abbreviations, type of info gathered, spelling variations etc.).

      A lot of the variances can be correlated using fuzzy match technology. Everything from "sounds like", to matching on common variations (John and Johnathan, Bill and William), along with looking for initials, sex, location (address, city, postal code), and other commonalities.

      The amount of information required to achieve a 95% match is not that great. With a sufficiently large cross-reference, decent matching rules (based on weighing personal factors), and enough computing power, making matches is not that difficult.

      Given the sum of our personal factors, we are all unique to an amazing degree. Take a subset of those factors, and we are STILL unique to some large percentage. Spread out the information gathering (multiple databases) and you quickly become a specific individual rather than a possible number of individuals.

      Go back to the originating databases, and now you have a personal profile of what you like and dislike.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    4. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by stanwirth · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, governments and corporations are very willing to spend tremendous amounts of money on:

      • data cleansing and QA
      • data warehousing
      • surrogate key generation
      • data correlation
      • data mining
      • geocoding (linking an address to a lat/lon, identifying the lat/lon with a neighborhood, municipality, county, state, country; linking a lat/lon to an address)
      • database integration
      • data migration
      • legacy systems
      • data audit trail generation
      • dataset purchases
      It's not "impossible" to reconcile different data on the same subjects, it's just a whole lot of work, much of it analysis and data discovery, and being able to do the work typically requires that you be familiar with a variety of RDBMS's, billing engines, debt engines, file formats and platforms. The combinations are almost endless.

      Take heart. You'll start seeing the same kinds of problems over and over: middle initial vs. middle name, spacing and capitalisation issues, address data entered as a small number of big long strings that needs to be parsed out into attributes, date/time format inconsistencies, record doubling, data integrity issues (1 supposedly unique key identifying multiple distinct records), data accuracy issues (data way out of range, data incorrect), null values with meaning, attributes used to identify a range of different things, "smart keys" that are not so smart being used to code everything about a customer in 8 characters, and so on and so forth. And you'll know to look for these "usual suspects" first, and develop some standard ways of dealing with them.

      Metadata management and ETL tools make the job easier, but as you say, data are imperfect. There are plenty of legitimate applications--every merger, acquisition and JV is yet another opportunity for some more mind-numbing, back-breaking, soul-destroying, spirit-crushing DB work. Oh goody. That's why they call it "work," I suppose. I'm surprised the work Neo was doing in The Matrix -- before he found his "calling" so to speak--was something as creative and interesting as software development. The real grind is the big databases. As you so aptly point out.

      Many industries have, as their primary asset, data and data only . Banking and insurance are the classic examples. Companies in these industries are certainly willing to invest in their most important asset, because just about all the money in the world is in databases.

      A database is like a gun. It can protect you, it can kill you. You can shoot yourself in the foot, somebody else can take you out in a 'hunting accident.'

      The difference between a database and a gun is that a gun needs someone behind it pulling the trigger. A database, OTOH, has triggers that can fire based on whatever criteria's been set--like when a 'David Nelson' tries to fly to Peoria. Yah, it's scary, all right.

    5. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      From your post, I deduce that you have a college level (post-secondary) education [spelled anonymous correctly].

      This is stupid. College generally does not teach spelling, and high-school-only grads have access to spell-checkers also. I have a college degree, but my spelling is sh8tty.

      You used the expression "totally bogus". From this, I deduce you are between 22 and 37 year of age.

      Sometimes older workers purposely use "young" phrases to sound "with it". They don't want to be fired for seeming "too old to grok the latest IT fad". I pick up a lot of jive talk from my daughter, for example.

      Sure, you can make guesses that may be right more often than wrong (or than random), but it is hardly fool-proof.

    6. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since it seems you've done work in this field, would you care to share some tips on avoiding this sort of stuff happening to your data?

    7. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by Beliskner · · Score: 2, Interesting
      And, it seems that only reasons are to prevent a few people from blowing things up, and to sell us more razorblades.
      ... and so "they" can all trash our Resume because some data entry guy at AT&T screwed up and sends you a phone bill for $5000 which you don't pay so they took you to Court and Felonise you, great system!

      Is the recession really caused by a crash in IT, or because 99% of people in the US are now suddenly unemployable because our great grandmothers had cancer or something? Health insurance kills people that are poor and/or need expensive treatment, and now people with a 1% possibility of health problems in future will be denied jobs. Seems like Hitler's eugenics program is well underway in the US.

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    8. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by Beliskner · · Score: 1
      It's not "impossible" to reconcile different data on the same subjects, it's just a whole lot of work, much of it analysis and data discovery, and being able to do the work typically requires that you be familiar with a variety of RDBMS's, billing engines, debt engines, file formats and platforms. The combinations are almost endless.
      Take heart. You'll start seeing the same kinds of problems over and over: middle initial vs. middle name, spacing and capitalisation issues, address data entered as a small number of big long strings that needs to be parsed out into attributes, date/time format inconsistencies, record doubling, data integrity issues (1 supposedly unique key identifying multiple distinct records), data accuracy issues (data way out of range, data incorrect), null values with meaning, attributes used to identify a range of different things, "smart keys" that are not so smart being used to code everything about a customer in 8 characters, and so on and so forth. And you'll know to look for these "usual suspects" first, and develop some standard ways of dealing with them.
      Remember, you're posting on Slashdot, repairing manually entered data into 1Gig databases is my full-time job. You're talking trash, even MySQL can JOIN databases.

      Offline pretty much every database is ODBC compliant, you can pull off the data into CSV format, and fix the time/date inconsistencies DURING IMPORT, no complex "washing" queries needed by using Connect-It software.

      Parsing an address into address attributes is: SELECT AddressHouse AS Split(Address," ",0),
      AddressStreet AS Split(Address," ",1),
      AddressZIP AS Rtrim(Address,",")

      If I was doing this full-time then I could come up with lots more stuff, but I have to go have an eye test and RSI-test 'cos writing SQL queries 6 hours a day might have ruined my eyesight and my arms.

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    9. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by Omnifarious · · Score: 1

      I have no college degree, but I have a large vocabulary and usually flawless spelling.

      But, I agree with your general point. That part just rankled me.

    10. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by stanwirth · · Score: 1

      Try using ODBC on joins between three tables, one with 57 million rows another with 200 million rows and a third with 1.5 million rows--using character-based "smart keys." Nah, better to load them into new tables with indexed 64-bit surrogate keys first, and issue the join on the server, in one instance of a DB, don't you think?

      Now try doing diffs (changed data) between two versions of the same DB, where both are OVER 100 GB . Try working with databases between 100 GB and a terabyte with these tools. And you'll find that your MySQL falls over and barfs. Even PostGreSQL has a hard time with data this large. Remember, you're posting on Slashdot, repairing manually entered data into 100GB-1TB databases is my full-time job So, sorry, Beliskner YOU are the one talking trash here. The databases you've dealt with are 2-3 orders of magnitude smaller than what constitutes a "big" database these days.

      And offline, not every DB is ODBC compliant--try something based on PICK or UNIDATA, and no you can't pull each table into one CSV file, because there are hierarchical data structures -- subtables--defined in them. So one table in unidata, as each field might be a whole hierarchy of subtables--might require a dozen or more CSV files. And you'll have to reconstruct the metadata manually, because metadata is optionally defined by the programmer in unidata, not information that gets stored automagically every time you create a table in a real rdbms. This is what legacy systems are like. For your next exercise, weedhopper, try pulling the correlate data out of a 1TB DB2 database on an IBM S/390 running MVS using an ODBC join --to the Unidata DB running on an Alpha half way across the country. Can you spell "couriered tapes"? Sure. I knew you could.

      Or maybe you can pull the hundred some-odd tables, over 2 GB each, into into some flat CSV files onto your FAT file system on your PC with Access. guffaw! don't forget the native encoding is EBCDIC. Don't forget that you can't even HAVE a >2GB FAT partition, so you'll have to upgrade to NTFS or a linux/unix file system and OS before you even get started. Obviously, this isn't the way a pro would go about it, but you can't imagine the number of business analysts I've seen try to do things like this, and wonder why it "doesn't work." They call their desktop help-desk people because "I pushed the '!' button, and it hung my machine!" They think that the techniques that worked with their data pre-acquisition or merger will work when the data are too large to be cut-and-pasted into Excel post-merger. Hours of entertainment watching these guys.

      Your challenge is to build something fast enough and reliably enough that it keeps up with all the changed data coming through every day in both billing engines, each being updated constantly by a couple hundred operators each in a dozen different call centers, each following wildly diverging business rules regarding the updates, and one of them (unidata) applying piss-poor referential integrity constraints on update. Design, build and test the process to join these DBs "using ODBC" then get back to me when you're done. mmmKay? See you in a few months.

      Don't forget that "ODBC compliant" means that every driver will have a slightly different way of interpreting NULL fields, Boolean fields, 64-bit keys and date/time formats. I love guys like you, because you always underbid on the big jobs and then fail miserably while going under -- happens every generation, providing just decades of schadenfreud entertainment. Hint: for a job this big, you're going to have to dump ODBC altogether, and implement a comms standard over raw sockets because, besides being functionally inadequately specified, ODBC slows everything down by at least an order of magnitude -- which means the difference between a correlation taking 10 hours or 10 DAYS. If it has to be done EVERY DA

    11. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by stanwirth · · Score: 1

      ... Hint: for a job doing multitable correlates or joins on 100 GB to 1TB production databases each running under different DBMS and OS's, Beliskner , you're most likely going to have to dump ODBC altogether, and implement a comms standard over raw sockets because, besides being functionally inadequately specified, ODBC slows everything down by at least an order of magnitude -- which means the difference between a correlation taking 10 hours or 10 DAYS. If it has to be done EVERY DAY, 10 hours works, 10 DAYS -- well, you'll just keep falling further and further behind.

      And this is just bog standard corporate IT after a merger or acquisition, because one of the reasons companies underperform (making them ripe for a buy-out) is that their legacy systems are such outdated poorly implemented crap. Rarely are the compatibility or modernity of the production systems adequately addressed in the course of due diligence prior to the merger or acquisition, and this is where they suddenly find they're getting bit in the arse post-merger, or post-acquisition. Hence the big bucks for the DB people, because every day of down-time would cost them a lot more than your fee is to sort things out for them.

      And yes, parsing addresses can be as simple as you say. Until you get to international addresses that put the street address, city and country in a different order. And the postal codes suddenly have characters in them, and the variable length indicates varying degrees of specificity in the addressing (as in the UK). And the alphabetisation will not follow the same ordering as ASCII or EBCDIC encoding, so you need to dub them all into UNICODE and applying the UCA (Unicode Collation Algorithm) to get them to come out in the alphabetical order correct for the customer's country. What about when the result set needs to be alphabetized in an order which is correct for several different languages at the same time? And which transliteration are you going to use for Thai vs. Arabic? Which address parser you going to use for geolocating banking customers in the Phillipines and Colombia when most of the customers have not given their addresses to their banker--for personal security reasons?

      But, yes, in the simpler cases, you do develop some fairly standard ways of solving the standard problems posed by the original commenter. That was one of my points, you might have noticed. Thank you for supporting it with a simple example.

      Oh, and by the way, Beliskner, you've contradicted yourself in two paragraphs. In one, you say that it's your full-time job to repair data, and in the last line, you imply that it's not. I suspect the truth is the latter.

    12. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by Beliskner · · Score: 1

      Oh, and by the way, Beliskner, you've contradicted yourself in two paragraphs. In one, you say that it's your full-time job to repair data, and in the last line, you imply that it's not. I suspect the truth is the latter.

      The latter paragraph meant "if I was posting on Slashdot full-time", I am doing databases full-time. It's a lot like C++ coding, you just hack it until it works right. I've even got SQL Server installed on my home machine so don't you fool with me ;-)

      Try using ODBC on joins between three tables, one with 57 million rows another with 200 million rows and a third with 1.5 million rows--using character-based "smart keys." Nah, better to load them into new tables with indexed 64-bit surrogate keys first, and issue the join on the server, in one instance of a DB, don't you think?

      Why in such a hurry? All the competitors to my dot-com company have gone bust, we can set whatever price and timeline we want. I just extract the small tables via ODBC to a CSV flat-file, flattening subtables if necessary. Subtables are reconstructed upon import of this data. Alternatively, sometimes I do something really clever and turn off all the triggers and cascades, and then write SELECT DISTINCT queries to create the subtables and populate the Foreign key so it links with the main table correctly.

      Now try doing diffs (changed data) between two versions of the same DB, where both are OVER 100 GB

      Bah, just reimport all the data again. I tell my boss we need £5mil in new hardware and he stretches the timeline with our customers. Sometimes the customers call me directly to see what the delay is and I talk crap and then start reading out Stored Procedures over the phone until their eyes glaze over, "Yeah your project's late because uhhhh, the LEFT OUTER JOIN on the subquery is bypassing through the warp core. I think I can fix this by lubricating the INNER JOIN and cascading to related tables, this'll take 48 hours, do you have any suggestions?", then the customer always allows a big extension.

      Try working with databases between 100 GB and a terabyte with these tools. And you'll find that your MySQL falls over and barfs. Even PostGreSQL has a hard time with data this large

      These are children's databases but whenever you mention them you get modded up, oh well.

      So one table in unidata, as each field might be a whole hierarchy of subtables--might require a dozen or more CSV files

      Simply flatten the subtables into one CSV file. As for meta-data, nothing important is stored there, so I just DROP that. If the customer complains I just say, "well why don't I just dump all of your company's C++ source into the database? Your database is not compliant, you have bizarre meta-data extensions, you might as well give us a data cube. Put it in a proper table"

      For your next exercise, weedhopper, try pulling the correlate data out of a 1TB DB2 database on an IBM S/390 running MVS using an ODBC join --to the Unidata DB running on an Alpha half way across the country. Can you spell "couriered tapes"?

      Is this a farming database? This is when I tell the customer to upgrade to SQL Server or Oracle, only then will I take on their contract.

      Or maybe you can pull the hundred some-odd tables, over 2 GB each, into into some flat CSV files onto your FAT file system on your PC with Access. guffaw!

      I do that all the time, but Access starts breaking down at 1.5GB, and 30 or so tables is all it can comofrtably handle, so I do a lot of subtable-flattening before import. I love Access, graphical SQL construction is beautiful. What's a guffaw?

      don't forget the native encoding is EBCDIC

      Thanks! Now I know why 10 hours of my work got trashed. It only worked when I imported it into MS SQL Server from

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    13. Re:Good thing databases are perfect! by Beliskner · · Score: 1

      ... and then my Manager walks up to me and tells me he personally negotiated a great deal on a Compaq notebook. Then I look on their "buy online" section and find his great deal equals actual retail price.

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
  11. DMV by RightInTheNeck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It was just last year that myself and the other people of Missouri were shocked to find out that the local DMV was selling our personal information to the private sector. Unbelievable, a state goverment run institution that essential everyone who wants to drive and own a car has to deal with. Thats what I call being forced to opt-in.

    1. Re:DMV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they stopped them. Not sure though. Would be a good reason to write the governor.

    2. Re:DMV by vegetablespork · · Score: 1

      Yep. It's been fixed in MO. Used to be, though, that you could go to DMV and run a plate for $1.50. That came in handy a couple of times.

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  12. typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I think you meant Ogg Blah

  13. I don't understand why /. opposes this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I'm a partner in a market firm in LA, and I don't understand why /.'s would be opposed to this.

    Techniques like this allow us to more effectively advertise products to you that you actually WANT. You don't want penis cream, you won't see it.

    Targeted marketing is good for both the business and the consumer. It puts both of you in touch - they sell something YOU want to buy.

    Seems like just a lot of kneejerk rebels that oppose this, if you ask me.

    1. Re:I don't understand why /. opposes this by Azureflare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The whole POINT of marketing is to make people think they want something, when in fact they never wanted it before the marketing got to them. I don't want incessant ads that companies think I "want" to see; the only thing I want is to be left alone, and not be "persuaded" to buy useless junk that will just sit in a corner and collect dust.

    2. Re:I don't understand why /. opposes this by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't want to be sold to. If I need something, I'll go looking. The only advertising I trust is word of mouth. Otherwise, stay out of my consciousness.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:I don't understand why /. opposes this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see why marketers won't quit shoving crap into my mailbox and calling me during dinner. If I really need to buy a thing or subscribe to a service, I'll google for it. Chances are I'll find what I want immediately. No need for me to spend my time wading through stuff that's shoved in my face.

    4. Re:I don't understand why /. opposes this by bj8rn · · Score: 2, Funny
      Techniques like this allow us to more effectively advertise products to you that you actually WANT. You don't want penis cream, you won't see it.

      But I do want the miracle-product that makes me look and feel 20 years younger! (I'm 19 and a half...)

      --
      Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
    5. Re:I don't understand why /. opposes this by bj8rn · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Now, the serious answer:

      Excuse me, but I don't think that swapping my privacy for the chance to only get 'relevant' spam is a fair trade. If I don't mention some fact about myself to other people, maybe it's because I don't think they need to know it? If my would-be employer doesn't trust me enough to employ me without finding out everything that can be, then they're not worth my trust, either. What about if I'm a millionaire, but I don't show it - some random thugs can buy my file for $8. And so on. The new slogan should be: "I gave away my privacy, and all I got was this lousy penis enlarger"

      --
      Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
    6. Re:I don't understand why /. opposes this by praedor · · Score: 1

      I don't want you to try to create a need in me. I don't need you to do that. It is not your job to CREATE a need, but rather, to fill a need. If I need something I will seek it out. If you shove it in my face, I will turn from you and go elsewhere for the same thing from a less intrusive provider.


      I know what I want. I know what I need. You do not. I will handle it from here, thank you.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
  14. Random Lies by miu · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I only give good info to my bank, insurance company, employer and the government.

    Anyone else? I Lie. Sometimes I'm a yak herder with a yearly income of ~$6000, other times I'm a "Decision Maker" with a yearly income of $800k+.

    I used to get frustrated and angry when asked for personal info. Now I wind up happy because I'm stickin' it to the man, and the shlub collecting my info is happy because he didn't get called a nosy fuckhead by an irate stranger.

    --

    [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
    1. Re:Random Lies by Cygnusx12 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Anyone else? I Lie. Sometimes I'm a yak herder with a yearly income of ~$6000, other times I'm a "Decision Maker" with a yearly income of $800k+.

      As someone who used to work in database aggregation with this sort of data. I can tell you that we corrollated income as a function of your home value. (Which is freely available right down at your local county court house in most states).

      You typically don't have 800k/yr decision makers living in 12k/yr apartments. There's a process in compilation here, they don't just enter this into a database and sell it.

    2. Re:Random Lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what's my income based on my $59/year PO Box?

    3. Re:Random Lies by jefeweiss · · Score: 1
      I have dozens of pseudonyms that I have used to sign up for things. Shoppers Club cards, anything web related, etc. I fully support the idea of creating a mountain of spurious data. Sometimes I'll use my real name with a fake address, sometimes I'll use a fake name with my real address. If everybody did this the noise to signal would be extremely high. Getting people to go to check out all this infomation is expensive. I'm willing to bet that a lot of the information checkers are temps, or make pretty close to minimum wage.

      You know what I would do if I was working for these jokers checking facts? I'd get in my car and go to my favorite coffee shop and hang out. Then I would make some random notes on my little sheet and head back to the office. If I get fired, who cares? It's minimum wage for chrissakes, no one can be expected to do a good job for minimum wage. It's too easy to get another crappy job that pays the same. And it's pretty sweet to get paid for lounging around drinking coffee.

    4. Re:Random Lies by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1
      One of my favourite lies is that my name is Sir Mudge Pinkerton-Bottomley, I live at 42 Bonkalot Street, Didjabringabeer in Western Australia, and that my phone number is +61 8 9221 1111.

      I like to entertain fantasies about all that junk snail-mail collecting at the post-office. But I would love to be a fly on the wall to hear a telemarketer call that phone number and explain to the Western Australian Police why they think I might want a a turbocharged teflon-coated dildo :-).

    5. Re:Random Lies by Cygnusx12 · · Score: 1

      So what's my income based on my $59/year PO Box?

      Good Question. That's why the serious databases have both mailing and physical addresses.

      If you're looking for 800 k/yr decision makers, you're more than likely looking for good verifable, mailable information. Not random PO boxes. The whole point (imho) of direct marketing is to narrow your target audience so you don't snail-mail spam to begin with.

    6. Re:Random Lies by sexydawg · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the fact that assessment data is indexed purely on physical parcels of land, and the value of the home is attached to that parcel. Information like P.O. Box is purely meta. The only plus to this is that many times in the more rural areas of America the assessment value is way low on most parcels. Garbage in, garbage out...

    7. Re:Random Lies by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      It's amazing how many odd places actually exist. I'm familiar with a street called Raggedy Ass Road in Yellowknife, NWT (Canada). It's amusing to imagine someone who lives on that street trying to order merchandise online or over the phone.

      "My address is 123 Raggedy Ass Road."
      "Sure buddy. *click*"

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  15. Re:first post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your father meant it when he said you're a failure.

  16. Carnival Booth Attack by smiff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Once again, proof that passenger screening is counter-productive.

    1. Re:Carnival Booth Attack by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 1
      Here's a breif summary of Carnival Booth

      CAPS is the system where passengers are catagorized and the most dangerous are given special treatment: Additional searches, etc. If you lead a cell of terrorists bent on doing harm, all you have to do is to start sending your men through one at a time when they're unarmed. Eventually you'll know which ones trigger special treatment, and which ones don't for whatever reason. Sine CAPS suppositly uses the same algorythm, once a terrorist knows he can get through unmolested, he knows that he'll always be able to get through unmolested.

  17. Re:The almighty cow says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MooKore, at the head of FAILURE!

  18. 20 Megatonnes by RatBastard · · Score: 1

    It's times like these when I hope the cockroaches like whatever smoldering heap we leave for them.
    (And no, I'm not off topic, thankyouverymuch.)

    --
    Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  19. Google by Hatta · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Speaking of corporations building databases, Google does this too. From GoogleWatch:

    Google records everything they can:

    For all searches they record the cookie ID, your Internet IP address, the time and date, your search terms, and your browser configuration. Increasingly, Google is customizing results based on your IP number. This is referred to in the industry as "IP delivery based on geolocation."


    Seeing as Google provides as much as 75% of referrals, this is an enormous amount of very sensitive information. From the behavior of other internet companies, it's unlikely that google would fight a subpoena for this information, some companies even hand over data on simple request. The threat exists today that one may end up on a terrorist watch list simply because of their searching habits. You may not even even know you've been red flagged.
    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Google by scrod · · Score: 2, Informative
      The threat exists today that one may end up on a terrorist watch list simply because of their searching habits.

      Fortunately there are always public proxy servers, and of course this google search proxy available on google-watch as well:
      http://www.google-watch.org/cgi-bin/proxy.h tm
    2. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and I heard that Google - and countless other sites - keep this information in 'logs' which they use to determine who is searching for what, how often and from where. There are even rumors that 'logs' of incoming and outgoing email might be kept on your mail server. Sometimes law enforcement can subpoena these 'logs' and use them to investigate criminal activity. Watch out.

  20. Re:I'm late for a NAMBLA meeting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is NAMBLA, a organization where the NA stands for "North American", in a .de German domain?

  21. Forget it -This horse is long out of the barn by rdewald · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work in information privacy and security in health care. The situation is already beyond repair. The only thing giving anyone in the industrialized world any semblance of privacy is sheer numbers.

    I can take your last name, gender, a guess about your age within five years, a guess about what region of the US in which you live, and right here, from the very terminal from which I type this message, probably determine where you have lived for the past seven years, your neighbor's names, your family members' names, your social security number, your driver's license numbers, any public records (criminal, civil, real estate) in less time than it takes to reload slashdot on a busy saturday afternoon.

    The key is that the results I get back will be fuzzy, I'll have to try to make sense of them, and not all of the hits will be accurate. But anyone with a brain can sense a "theme" running through the hits and nail your ID beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Think you're off the grid? Only if you have never applied for utilities or credit of any kind, never gotten a publicly issued license, and never graduated from any school. If all that's true, why would I be looking for you anyway? You can't buy anything.

    We need to collectively grow up here. It's not about limiting our invasions of privacy, we need to be licensing and bonding people who can mine it, like we license doctors, attorneys and cops.

    The information really is out there, and it really is indexed, and it really is being used. That's why these Internet cookie monsters are so bold and shameless. They're not doing anything new and they know it.

    --
    The best way to do is to be.
    1. Re:Forget it -This horse is long out of the barn by rgmoore · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I can take your last name, gender, a guess about your age within five years, a guess about what region of the US in which you live, and right here, from the very terminal from which I type this message, probably determine where you have lived for the past seven years, your neighbor's names, your family members' names, your social security number, your driver's license numbers, any public records (criminal, civil, real estate) in less time than it takes to reload slashdot on a busy saturday afternoon.

      OK. Try to find me based just on this information:

      • Last name: Moore
      • Gender: Male
      • Age: 25-35
      • Residence: Southern California

      No peeking at my publically presented information on Slashdot. I'm guessing that you'll have some trouble given the number of people named Moore in the region.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    2. Re:Forget it -This horse is long out of the barn by rdewald · · Score: 1

      I can't comply with your request without also violating the law and the user agreement for the DB service we use. I wish I could, I wish you could. We should own our own information, but we don't.

      Yes, your search would return many hits, but understand that if I were doing this in the proper context, I would also know that you've interacted with my employer and what the details of that interaction were, so you have a point--it's not exactly true that I could just pick you out cold from the hits on those parameters and those bits you gave me wouldn't actually be all the data I had. From my experience, I would wager that I would probably have to weed through about 50 possibilities. Something about one of the hits would resonate with the information I have going in--probably some health information about you.

      So, I am going to have to want to find you enough to spend about a week tracking down leads, which in my case, means that my employer is going to have to be willing to plunk down 4 figures for the information. But, it can be done.

      You're right, the only anonimity is in numbers though, that's my point. My last name is more unique than yours.

      --
      The best way to do is to be.
    3. Re:Forget it -This horse is long out of the barn by Qrlx · · Score: 1

      can I get a job doing that? sounds like fun. And pretty easy...all those patters reminds me of "A Beautiful Mind."

  22. Liberty and Security by Poeir · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the article, "They [David Nelsons] realize there are trade-offs between liberty and security."

    That trade-off would be, "We, the Government, take your liberty, and give ourselves security."

    --
    Sigs are like bumper stickers.
    1. Re:Liberty and Security by TrackDaddy · · Score: 1

      And of course, 500 Dave Nelsons CAN be wrong!

      I can say it no better than Benjamin Franklin - "those who are willing to trade liberty for security deserve neither".

      --
      Run! There's a lobster loose!
    2. Re:Liberty and Security by August_zero · · Score: 1

      I say that to people all the time, that and one of his other well known sayings: "beer is proof that god loves us and wants us to be happy"

      --
      On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
    3. Re:Liberty and Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be, "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither
      liberty nor security." Try to get it right next time.

  23. Subvert the system for fun and profit by arikb · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It is obvious that privacy is an illusion. Once the information is out there and can be correlated, there is virtualy nothing you can do to keep it out of anybody's hands.


    There is a way, however, to maintain your privacy where it matters. They want to collect information on you? Fine, let them. But insert some misleading data into those records. Here is just one way to do it:


    Take two persons, of similar hight, eye color, skin color and hair color. They are good friends and developed a relationship of trust between them. They are not criminals and have no criminal intentions. These two persons can each have two copies of their identfications - say, two copies of a driver's license (say one is "lost"...). One copy they of course give to the other one. One of them must be the 'good person' and one must be the 'bad person'.


    Now imagine one of these persons is stopped for a traffic violation. He hands over the 'bad person' ID, and the traffic violation is registered on his name. He doesn't own the car, though - because the car is registered to the 'good person'. When it's time to pay insurance, and the 'good person' record is being pulled, it's a clean slate.


    The sample here is sketchy at best, won't work if the car history is checked as well (unless...), and I don't want to give any more ideas to anyone here, but it is possible to fake the records just such - have someone else buy your house, and have a contract with this person saying he has no claim in it, switch salaries with your neighbour, bank accounts... If it has a purpose.


    Don't do it 'just to spite', because every such transaction has an inherent danger, but if done right and to an end, it can be beneficial to the people involved, despite the best efforts of those information correlators to the contrary.


    Oh, yes, standard disclaimer apply, use this information at your own risk, don't come yelling to me, it's probably highly illegal, be warned.

    1. Re:Subvert the system for fun and profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That stuff is all pretty transparent and traceable. Then how does that look if you get called on it? Person X gets your house? (oh, he made me sign that, it really is MY house!)Falsifying records gets added to some unrelated shit bag little court case and the jury is swayed into finding you guilty because of it? The risks are far greater than the protections.

      It takes a true paranoid to endanger himself for real because of imagined dangers...

    2. Re:Subvert the system for fun and profit by arikb · · Score: 1
      That stuff is all pretty transparent and traceable. Then how does that look if you get called on it? Person X gets your house? (oh, he made me sign that, it really is MY house!)Falsifying records gets added to some unrelated shit bag little court case and the jury is swayed into finding you guilty because of it? The risks are far greater than the protections.


      I can answer that in two ways:

      • The contract is a regular, binding contract for the transfer of the rights of the properties, signed in the presence of several witnesses, and notarized. Just as it would be if you'd bought the house. Only the update to the public records pertaining to the house's ownership is "forgotten".
      • If the action is really illegal (like the id-switching idea), both sides have a strong incentive to keep the show going, even if they stop being friends.
      It takes a true paranoid to endanger himself for real because of imagined dangers...


      You don't have to delve into paranoya to do that. Just think of your car's insurance. However there is an element of danger here. I agree.

  24. But the company cares about privacy...? by Enraged_jawa · · Score: 1
    ..the company does care about privacy; any consumer can call the company and have his or her data suppressed.

    Just thinking about how much this information is worth (especially if it's linked to a social security number) should make all of us very uncomfortable...
  25. Here's a scary database . . . by jaske · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A database that appeals to Mom's, grandma's and any Hallmark-loving sucker with a modem:

    http://www.anybirthday.com

    It's got that great hook: birthdays (so sweet and innocuous)! And of course you can "remove" yourself from the database. The only question is what happens once you remove yourself, and confirm your birthday, identity, etc.

    1. Re:Here's a scary database . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty interesting! George Tenet (DCI) is listed. Donald Rumsfeld is listed. Wonder who else is (tried Ashcroft, no luck).

  26. Marketing In Texas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Down San Antonio way, they'd say of you "He NEEDED killin'"

  27. David Brin had it right by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In Transparent Society, he said we can't keep that privacy, like you say, it's long gone from the barn. But trying to restrict who gets to see it is also a long gone horse. The rich and powerful will always have access, legally and openly or otherwise.

    Best to let EVERYBODY look at ALL info. Right now, the rich and powerful can look at everybody's info, but (1) we don't know it, and (2) we can't look at theirs.

    I'd rather be able to look at everybody's info, including the rich and powerful, even at the tradeoff of knowing that my neighbors are looking at mine.

    The problem isn't that the info is available. The problem is that it is only available to the rich and powerful.

    1. Re:David Brin had it right by bob_jenkins · · Score: 1

      In some societies, privacy is a matter of politeness. Lots of things happen where everyone can see them, it's just rude to see things you're not supposed to.

      If all info was available to everyone, you could legislate the same sort of politeness: spamming is illegal, following people who have asked for you not to follow them is illegal, identity theft is illegal, that sort of thing. Everyone would know everything, yet everyone would have an imitation of privacy.

  28. What happened to "information wants to be free"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What happened, Linux lovers? Double standard, perhaps? Hypocrisy?

    The silence is deafening.

  29. I just called... by Barkmullz · · Score: 5, Funny

    But he does say that people who want to see if their name is on either list or who want to make a complaint, can call the agency's contact center at 866-289-9673 or send an e-mail to TellTSA@tsa.dot.gov.

    - "Hi, my name is Rob Malda, am I on the list?"

    - "You are now." [click]

    --
    Ronald said nothing. He flung himself from the room, flung himself upon his horse, and rode madly off in all directions.
    1. Re:I just called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wait time is slowly going up on that 800 number. It started as 4 minutes, about 15 minutes ago. Now I think I'm at 8 minutes expected wait time (so they tell me)...

    2. Re:I just called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdotting the phone service! Yay! We roxorz!

  30. To a degree, It doesn't matter. by Ted_Green · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The integrity and quality of the data isn't so much as important as the sheer volume of it.

    A marketer (or really anyone) who is actually using this data is probably using it on a statistical basis.
    Very few, if any, are using this to check out individuals. What they are doing is focusing in on their target market. This way they dramatically increase their probability of getting a sale... or getting a mark given the potential for abuse.
    For example, someone sets up a "fake" evangelical fund and targets wealthy old baptists with cold calls and mailings.

    It statistical targets us. ...sometimes I wish we really could copyright facts. I sure as hell would copyright my personal information.

    Ah well guess I'll have to continue acting erraticaly to throw the stats off.

  31. How to help change this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What I was to know is when can I get a complete, real-time dossier on every member of the U.S. Congress.

    And lest anyone be fooled into thinking that just passing some laws will solve this, I urge you to remember all of the IT outsourcing going on. Our laws aren't applicable to India. An example of this was a recent article on sfgate.com, noting how Kaiser was sending its IT work to India, including the management of databases.

    What we have here is an unstoppable force, that not even Congress can legislate away (nor will they even try, until their own information starts appearing).

  32. I work for a "Risk Management" company.. by booms · · Score: 5, Informative

    And honestly, you'd be surprised how many privacy laws we have to follow (which is a good thing). For instance, we only sell accounts to people who have a legitimate purpose for searching information (such as insurance companies when you apply for insurance, law enforcement agencies to track down criminals, collection agencies who are trying to track down people who skip payments, etc.). If I were to search for information about someone besides myself or others in the development team whom have agreed to let me search their names, even when testing, I'd be fired within the hour. We have a compliance department who keeps track of all searches, has to report them to various authorities, etc. If someone searches for someone marked as a celerbrity, their account is shut down within minutes and one of our compliance people is on the phone getting documentation about why they searched for that name. In fact, the applications to get to the data we sell are quite nasty, and we only have a very narrow scope of people that we can sell data to.

    I think in general, personal data is protected more than you would think (at least public records, credit agency data, etc)-- I really have no idea how these 'unscruplous' companies get by with public data without having anyone come down on them. I'm a privacy & security advocate, and I don't feel what I do crosses my moral boundries (at least at this point).

    1. Re:I work for a "Risk Management" company.. by TrackDaddy · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Not to offend, but... GIVE ME A FSCKING BREAK

      Now, lets talk about how it works in the real world. I wanted a copy of my credit report, so I tried using www.freecreditreport.com (it's not really free, but hey, good marketing). When I submitted my request and tried to set up my account, I was given an error that my password was incorrect. Now, never having set up an account, I thought "hey, this is odd". So I called their 800 number and promptly found out that I did indeed have an account. After about 5 minutes of social engineering, I had the e-mail address that was associated with "my" account. Low and behold, it belonged to a guy that had received a copy of my rental application (yes it is legal for him to get a credit report, but not by impersonating me).

      So, I said to the helpful young man on the phone "you've given my information to someone impersonating me". His response, and that of his supervisor was to tell me I should go file a police report. When I asked if they would take any action, the answer was a very resounding "NO".

      So, I called back a few minutes later, with my new-found e-mail address and talked to another helpful gentleman whom I convinced to change the password and e-mail address on the account so that the previous dirt-bag would be locked out.

      That is how things work in the real world. The companies who compile/manage/sell this information do not give a flying-frig about access control as long as money changes hands along with the data. If someone wants your info, and they have your name and a few other facts... they can get all the juicy stuff w/in about half an hour. Your only protection is the sheer volume of bio-mass that makes up the target group.

      --
      Run! There's a lobster loose!
    2. Re:I work for a "Risk Management" company.. by booms · · Score: 4, Informative

      Like I said, I don't know how other companies get around all of the various laws. He also violated FCRA by getting information about you which was used in a decision to "allow or deny credit" without it being a place which is certified for that, which is a pretty nasty penalty as I understand it. I don't know the specifics, as IANAL.

      I can see why the local police would probably not do much about it to be honest, but they are lazy for not pointing you in the right direction. If you want, I can ask around to see who the proper authorities would be to report this occurance to.

    3. Re:I work for a "Risk Management" company.. by TrackDaddy · · Score: 1
      Thank you for your kind offer, but it has been long enough now without any other problems that I don't feel I need to pursue the issue.

      BTW - I was serious that I didn't mean to offend. I was trying to point out that even though your company sounds like they are very careful about how they control information, that seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

      Cheers

      --
      Run! There's a lobster loose!
  33. Constitution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Constitution?? Didn't that burn up a couple of years ago. Seems I heard something about a fire at the National Archive......

    AC Cause I don't wanna make the list.

    1. Re:Constitution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too late, pal. CmdrTaco and his squadron of elite super monkeys have already isolated your physical location (what ARE you doing in front of that one way mirror and WHO is that rather underdressed underage looking girl and WHAT on EARTH is she doing with that dog biscuit?) and sniffed out your shopping habits.

      You didn't think those military titles like Cmdr just went out to ANYONE did you?

    2. Re:Constitution? by orthogonal · · Score: 1

      Constitution?? Didn't that burn up a couple of years ago. Seems I heard something about a fire at the National Archive......

      Fire at the National Archives? No, you're thinking of the fire at the Reichstag. It was set by some Moslem.

      Moslems are a great threat to the State and the Volk. We need a strong Fuhrer, unencumbered by such sentimental twaddle as "Constitutions" or "Rights" or "Opposition Parties", to fight the perfidious Moslem.

      Ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Fuhrer!

  34. WTF? by spoonist · · Score: 1

    What's wrong with law enforcement these days, anyway?

    They could just submit an Ask Slashdot question on "Where is David A. Nelson who works for Tektronix?".

    As we all know, most Ask Slashdot questions can be found on Google. Is it really so hard?? Come on people.

  35. We are Artificial Intelligence. Religion is our pr by l29sjdh · · Score: 0

    We are Artificial Intelligence. Religion is our programming/mind control. Religion is mind control for people whom are artificial intelligence. Visit http://www.matrix4.net for more info. This site clearly states why aliens or god does not exist. Cheers!

  36. Re:I'm late for a NAMBLA meeting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only Germany will let paedophiles have a domain name.

  37. (Not So) Random Lies by thelen · · Score: 1

    There's a process in compilation here, they don't just enter this into a database and sell it.

    Hmm, perhaps what we need is an auto-spoofing service kinda like a combination of a free HTTP proxy and something like a free online encyclopedia. Rather than submitting information that is obviously false (judged by internal consistency it sounds like from your comment), you should be able to submit a request to a server that generates false but plausible personal data.

  38. changed names by McDrewbie · · Score: 0, Redundant

    wouldn't a terrorist, if they thought or knew they were on the list just use an assumed identity if they wanted to perform an act of terrorism?

  39. Phone number not helping right now ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I talking to them right now, and they say they can't give out any information, and they've never heard of this issue. Does anyone know any more ?

  40. The ChoicePoint Way by Valdrax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not sure which is scarier, the idea that these databases are being opened to anyone who has a credit card and a willingness to snoop on their neighbors, or the idea that they should be restricted so that only "legitimate" businesses like telemarketers can get it.

    Considering the recent actions of ChoicePoint, I find the latter far more scary than the former. At least with the former, I can log into their site and see what they say about me. I can't do that with ChoicePoint. Imagine how different things might be in our country right now if all the banned voters in Florida had been able to see that they were incorrectly on the list before the last Presidential election.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  41. cogs in the machine by August_zero · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Face it, we are stamped, coded and catalogued. All they need to do now is make us get GPS chips implanted and the picture is complete.

    We have crossed so any bridges on the way down this road, that short of a complete breakdown of society we are never going to get away from this. We are defined by what we consume, and what we buy. If we cannot purchase we are dead weight. All of society is built around giving us enough money so that we can spend it back to the system. Credit and lending creates money, and someday more money will be owed than there is in circulation (if it isn't already)

    Total gain: 0
    Our entire society adds up to 0.

    /paranoid rambling

    --
    On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
  42. And I don't understand either -- by orbbro · · Score: 2, Insightful
    After all, we, the Geeks(tm), are making the tools that They(tm) are using to do this stuff. It's like UAW members screaming and flailing their arms because people are using cars to deliver junkmail or run over their dogs.

    For what it's worth, check out this article (admittedly dated) about one paranoid who's done something about this very problem. Even if, as another poster argued, I did graduate from high school and have a bank account, if you followed this guy's advice and went cash-only, the database info they've got on you might be relatively useless after a few years.

    The bottom line is, if you want to "beat the system," you've gotta give up a lot of what "the system" provides. There's no better weapon than simple non-participation.

    --
    "It's an erotic, spectacular scene that captures the thrusting, violent, vibrant world Bohemian spirit..."
  43. Friends don't let friends pay with credit cards by zakezuke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm still a traditional fan of cash, rather then a credit card for most daily transations. It has the benifit of being remarkably easy to budget, as in alocate daily spending, impossible to go over your self imposed set limits. But importantly, it's none too traceable.

    I may be slightly paranoid, but after buying electronic goods at a shop, I got a phone call within days asking me how i'm enjoying my thingie. It's like, "how did you get my number, I didn't give it to you".

    I guess I have in the past given my personal info to radio shack to get free batteries, and actually they send me a christmas gift certificate every year... and actaully I enjoyed getting their catalogs back when they actually had them.

    But the point i'm making is, cash is a remarkable means to provide some privacy. Not that you can't get away from things like morgages, cars, air line tickets, and other larger purcahces, but there is some info that random people don't have the right to know, like an employer checking to see if you buy alot of porn or booze.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  44. Gilmore v. Ashcroft by tsvk · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the second "David Nelson" article:

    Dennis Radke finds it ominous. "Given sufficient time, is it unreasonable to expect we Americans will be required to carry travel papers inside the U.S., just as residents of Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union" did?

    As previously reported on Slashdot, the issue of requiring ID when traveling within the US has already been challenged as unconstitutional. EFF co-founder John Gilmore sued the government and two airlines for not letting him board aircraft without ID.

    See his site for history and court documents.

  45. Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I work in information privacy and security in health care.

    from the very terminal from which I type this message, probably determine...

    So all of that health care data is on a network that's connected to the internet?!?

    1. Re:Security by rdewald · · Score: 1

      Yes, accessible to authenticated users via htpps.

      --
      The best way to do is to be.
    2. Re:Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not the original poster, but I spent some time contracting for an organization in the healthcare industry.

      All of their health care data (full medical history from the last decade or so on millions of people) is in a secure database which is on the public internet, albeit somewhat access-restricted. However, it is absolutely trivial to find a legitimate client whose systems are wide enough open for one to connect to the database via their computers.

      Ater a moment's reflection before hitting submit, I've thought better of posting a rough outline of the process by which one would do so.

      Anyhow, I sincerely doubt this situation is unique.

  46. Re:What happened to "information wants to be free" by rmassa · · Score: 1

    Actually, yes, it wants to be free. FREE. Not paid for and not accessible only by people who are wealthy or powerful, or who work for the government and get special clearance to it. Here's an idea, lets set up our own free service/servers to host information and make it free to everyone, because that's the only way to fight the access controls that are being put on data.

  47. Our own database by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, does anyone want to start watching the watchers? Maintain a database offshore. Any time any agency is caught violating individuals' privacy, they give their own up. They get published: names, home addresses and phone numbers, e-mail addresses, salaries (if we've got 'em). And they get postally spammed.

  48. Shockwave Rider by jefu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Time for all and sundry to go back and re-read (or read) "Shockwave Rider" by John Brunner. Then remember it was written in 1976.

  49. MOD DOWN! by CausticWindow · · Score: 1

    He's not talking about real drugs. Magnasushi indeed. Bola my butt.

    --
    How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
  50. Re:What happened to "information wants to be free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see: Free Source code access vs my private %#^&@# information. I don't see the correlation.

    Basically this boils down to money. The ones collecting want to sell it, the ones that want to buy it want to use it to make money.

    Who's personal information is it. YOURS!
    So, when someone has your info and tries to use it to sell you something. Tell them they must pay you first for the information they have. It wouldn't be useful if it wasn't about you. Kind of like a patent. My personal info is mine. Otherwise it would be someone else.

    I know the @ssholes are never going to pay me, but I never make the info they paid for useful either. On a No Call List with the state, the ones that are allowed to call never get any business out of me. I don't respond to any junk mail (always goes in the recycle bin).... That isn't to say that sometimes an idea isn't planted in my head and I think, "Ya, I need to get one of those." I usually have a way around that also. I earmark money in my savings for it till I can almost or fully pay for it. If by that time I still get it, then I must have still wanted it over that period of time and probably didn't even get it from the business that planted the idea in my head at the moment.

  51. http://www.matrix4.net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Visit matrix4.net for information on the real matrix called Earth.
    http://www.matrix4.net

  52. Privacy-preserving databases and data-mining by sailesh · · Score: 1

    IBM Almaden has a group that works on privacy-preserving data management. Intelligent Information Systems Research research group. (Note that Srikant Ramakrishnan of the group was awarded the 2002 Grace Murray Hopper award on association rules and data mining.

  53. synergistic hello by ratfynk · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Vomit on my keyboard, is really hard to clean. The word synergistic is the cause! Please stop using buzz words. My stomach hurts.

    --
    OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
  54. David Nelsons of the world, unite! by fname · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, this appears to confirms everyone's worst suspicions about these so-called watch lists. They are ineffective. They tend to brand people as suspects for no real reason, and this allegation sticks even in light of evidence to the contrary. No one involved in accusing these fliers has any real interest in making sure it doesn't happen again, or trying to help this customer, who is, after all, a potential terrorist who might blow up your plane.

    The concept of these watch lists is inane. 19 people have hijacked planes in this country in the last 25 years. There have probably been 5 billion passenger flights in that time. If even 1% of 1% (1/10,000) of these are incorrectly flagged, that's 500,000 false accuation for every hijacker, assuming that they every bad guy is on the list. After 10,000 people are incorrectly flagged, how closely will these rules be followed?

    The problem isn't the existence of the system; a good system could work well and get buy in from the public. A bad system will only serve to alienate people, and it will eventually stop working as no one believes it any more. So you will end up needlessly harrassing innocent people, but since 90% of these "incidents" will be treated as an annoyance, it's doubtful that they'll catch a hijacker anyways. Instead, it will only serve to hassle those who express anti-government views, and those who share their names.

  55. privacy vs openess (free vs. totalitarian) by Broadcatch · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The problem isn't that the info is available. The problem is that it is only available to the rich and powerful.

    And it's only getting worse!

    One of the fundamental contrasts between free democratic societies and totalitarian systems is that the totalitarian government [or other totalitarian organization] relies on secrecy for the regime but high surveillance and disclosure for all other groups, whereas in the civic culture of liberal democracy, the position is approximately the reverse. -- Professor Geoffrey de Q Walker, dean of law at Queensland, critiquing ID cards (1986)
    --

    The antidote for misuse of freedom of speech is more freedom of speech.
    -- Molly Ivins

  56. Re:What happened to "information wants to be free" by mister7 · · Score: 1

    Actually, it turns out that Informations really wants to be tied up and spanked!

  57. More info? (pun intended) by blisspix · · Score: 1

    There's a lot of good comments about how data matching works, does anyone have links for finding out more about this process? I'm interested from the POV that I'm a librarian and of course one of the big issues we're faced with is do we allow law enforcement and others to know what people have borrowed? How are crimes connected with reading habits? etc.

  58. Didn't Verisign just patent this? by AnotherScratchMonkey · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Oh, wait, that's when you correlate multiple DNS databases.

  59. Choicepoint in bed with US Govt by dogfart · · Score: 2, Interesting
    See this article .

    Quoting:

    Governments across Latin America have launched investigations after revelations that a US company is obtaining extensive personal data about millions of citizens in the region and selling it to the Bush administration. Documents seen by the Guardian show that the company, ChoicePoint, received at least $11m (£6.86m) last year in return for its data, which includes Mexico's entire list of voters, including dates of birth and passport numbers, as well as Colombia's citizen identification database.

    I would worry about Choicepoint if I were you.

    --

    "dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"

  60. His Name... Was David Nelson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to get "Novelty" I.D. with the name David Nelson.

    I am David Nelson's smirking revenge.
    I am David Nelson's cold sweat.
    I am David Nelson's raging bile duct.
    I am David Nelson's broken heart.
    I am David Nelson's complete lack of surprise.

    I am David Nelson.

  61. David Nelson??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm John Smith!!

  62. There will be no privacy by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

    You never had a right to privacy.

    Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), one of the up-and-coming little neoconservative darlings of the Republican party, made this abundantly clear in an interview with the AP several weeks ago. Nobody took much note of what he said regarding privacy, because it was viewed by the press as a "gay" issue since he picked on them specifically. But he was essentially saying that if you did have a right to privacy, government would be powerless to regulate certain behavior, such as you having sex with your dog. Apparently this is a big problem in Pennsylvania and having to tolerate it would be too high of a price to pay for privacy.

    No privacy for you!

    1. Re:There will be no privacy by Skjellifetti · · Score: 1

      You never had a right to privacy.

      Yes, we do have a right to privacy.

      Amendment IX

      The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


      The problem is that this (and the other amendments) applies to actions taken by government. The US Constitution guarantees no such right when data is collected by a commercial entitiy.

      On a side note, Senator Santorum should more properly be labeled a paleoconservative a la Pat Buchanan and Robert Novak, not a neoconservative. The Economist has a recent article about the neocons here.

    2. Re:There will be no privacy by Naomiah · · Score: 1

      You are a little confused. While you are correct that the 9th amendment has been interpreted as not referring to individual rights, it is no longer true that the Bill of Rights as a whole does not apply to individual rights. The 14th amendment has been interpreted as incorporating protections for the civil rights of individuals into all levels of government interference.

      The right to privacy was originally a right derived from Common Law. We all have heard the expression "An Englishman's home is his Castle." This was the rough summary of the right to privacy enjoyed by freemen in England. Of course, it was an ideal, and was not perfectly executed in practice, but the same could be said of much that goes on in this country.

      In the US, much of our law is based on a combination of British Common Law, Statutory, and Constitutional law. And, once a statute is written that enumerates what was previously common law, the statutory meaning takes precedence. For instance, under Common Law, all that is required for a conspiracy conviction is evidence of a plan. You don't need to take any steps to enact the plan to be found guilty. But Statutory Conspiracy requires a plan, plus an act in furtherance of that plan, such as contacting someone to help, or buying a supply. This change was made in an attempt to avoid the concept of "thought crimes." But, if you have the misfortune of living in a state that does not have a statute defining Conspiracy, you are STILL subject to the common law "plan = conspiracy" standard.

      The right to privacy was one of those unspoken, but widely accepted theories of British Common Law. But with the publication and ratification of the US Constitution, many areas of Common Law became statutory. Nowadays, the right to privacy is a statutory one, carved out of the intersection of individual rights derived from the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th ammendments. For instance, the 5th ammendment gives you the right not to self-incriminate, the 4th gives you protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, and the 14th and 6th amendments insure that you have due process rights (although this seems to fly over the head of the Bush Administration). In the middle of the 20th century, the USSC began to interpret the nexus of these rights as creating an area of individual activity that should be free from government interference. Some of the more famous cases, Griswold v. Connecticut and progeny, Roe v. Wade and progeny, found that while the right to privacy was not enumerated, it was implied, in the same way that if you say "I consult with my attorney Monday through Sunday," you have implied that you also talk to your attorney Tuesday, Wednesday, etc.

      Santorum and his ilk, who claim to be strict constructionists, want you to believe a) that if the Constitution doesn't explicitly state a right, it doesn't exist, and b) the Constitution establishes a government to control and rule the citizenry. People like him are the most treacherous people in the US today. The stealth theory he is pushing with his obsessive comments on sexuality, is that individuals should have no input into their own governance, and that the government is an entity that has an obligation to control personal behavior, and also that it may push people around as it finds convenient.

      However, strict constructionism is false on its face. The mechanism for the citizenry to amend the Constitution is written right into it. As can be seen in contemporaneous writings, it was obvious that members of the Convention expected, and even hoped, that the Constitution would not be a static document, but that it would be amended by The People through legal means, sometimes as Constitutional amendments, and often as the result of judicial challenges (to refute the concept of "activist judges"). Many members of the convention would be thrilled to see that there is no longer slavery in the US. This despite language in the Constitution explicitly discussing the internation

      --
      "Yes, I am a lawyer." - Star Jones
    3. Re:There will be no privacy by Skjellifetti · · Score: 1

      You are a little confused. While you are correct that the 9th amendment has been interpreted as not referring to individual rights, it is no longer true that the Bill of Rights as a whole does not apply to individual rights. The 14th amendment has been interpreted as incorporating protections for the civil rights of individuals into all levels of government interference.

      Great summary, thanks! I didn't mean to imply that the 9th was all that privacy rode on, just that because it was not explicitly written in, does not imply that the right does not exist.

      And you are right that the Constitution does not protect individuals from commercial entitites. But legislators may regulate the activity of commercial entitites so as to protect the privacy rights of individuals. But they first have to believe that there is such a thing as a right to privacy.

      It is still possible to believe that there is a right to privacy when confronted with possible gov't action, but none when a commercial entitiy is involved. Libertarians might take such a view, for instance. But in this case, an enumeration of property rights to include private data about oneself might solve the problem without resort to a right to privacy. Where it gets murky are those cases where gov't requires you to provide data (e.g. property appraisals) which the gov't then makes public. After all, why shouldn't I be allowed to view my neighbor's tax appraisal? This allows any citizen to check the fairness of the tax appraisal system. But it also allows any commercial entity to cross ref that data with other similar data. And therein lies the danger. Some data must be made public so that we can all have an opportunity to check the fairness, efficiency, etc. of public entities. But now the existence of many such bits of public data, each made public for a good purpose, allows a commercial entity to cross ref all of it to create a single database that does violate our sense of privacy even though we have consented to the public release of each single data item.

  63. Re:What happened to "information wants to be free" by bj8rn · · Score: 1

    I only exist on the net in the form of information (filled registration forms, /. posts, IRC transcripts (some channels record them), my 'signature' on an anti-war petition, etc), that information is me in some sense. And I want to be free, not owned and sold wholesale by some company.

    --
    Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
  64. Use for rich millionaires money! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Someone rich should buy up entire planes for innocent people [and lots of people with similar names] on the "list" for the Christmas busy season! If several key planes were "flooded" with passangers, air travel would slow to a crawl, and the airlines would suffer for being so stupid to allow something like this in the first place! Because of the smeading system they use, the key is to get a lot of people "near" the list, with misspellings, alternates, similar names to the computer filing system, etc. They wouldn't set off the bells when the tickets were ordered, only at the gate. You could even dilute the groups with friends and family not on the list, but traveling with people who are, who of course won't board the flight without their pals! You would have to buy full-fare tickets, so the people who get hassled and their pals can demand refunds for not being able to fly--airlines worship full-fare travelers. That would make it even worse!

    If someone setup a website for all these people to log on, it shouldn't take more that a month or two to figure out the list.

  65. Actualy in EU this function like that by aepervius · · Score: 2, Informative

    I can't cite the exact paragraph but a piece of the law says that "everybody has a right of checking and rectification for every database he is written in. Be it COMMERCIAL or GOVERNEMENTAL".

    AFAIk, this is exactly why the EU protested against the APIS/CAPS program. Because this would violate this fundemmental law (data would go in the US govt without right of rectification in case of error and would stay there for an unknown time).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Actualy in EU this function like that by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1
      This doesn't help you if you have not been informed that someone is collecting information about your affairs.

      In the article they are talking about the possibilities for re-identification of individuals from public-domain data. I can think of several types of organisation who would profit from that type of information, and none of them would be welcome in my home.

    2. Re:Actualy in EU this function like that by mr.+wibbleton · · Score: 1

      EU data protection directive also bans this practice. Yes kids its a crime to "tri-angulate data".

      Oh all data can not be used for purposes other than its original collection. All data holders also have to keep records on who they shared the records with, such parties have to be related to stated collection purpose.

  66. Databases can be fixed by Brown+Line · · Score: 1
    The Felligi-Sunter algorithm, which was published in 1969, lets a researcher compute the probability that two sets of demographic data describe the same individual. By weighting individual demographic items properly (for example, by giving more weight to a match on last name if the sex is male rather than female, and giving more weight to a match on an uncommon last name than to a common one), it's possible to join records from different databases - even databases whose records vary quite a bit - with an extremely high level of accuracy.

    I know this, because my previous employer's business was doing just that. Most of the uses of this technology are benign - for example, finding multiple instances of the same individual in a given hospital's records, so that the hospital's medical records about that individual are not fragmented. However, it would not shock me to learn that the same technology is being used to join records from disparate databases in order to profile individuals for not-so-benign purposes, such as this article describes.

    The good news is that the government is on the trailing edge of information technology. If the feds ever wanted to build the Big Brother Database, they could do it simply by joining the records held by the FBI with those held by the IRS; hopefully, the "bureaucratic waste and inefficiency" that politicians love to denounce will delay the building of the BBD for some time to come.

    --
    [this .sig for rent]
    1. Re:Databases can be fixed by Qrlx · · Score: 1

      Most of the uses of this technology are benign - for example, finding multiple instances of the same individual in a given hospital's records, so that the hospital's medical records about that individual are not fragmented.

      And I think this is where the problem came from in the first place. In the early days of computing, people still believed in Scientific Management, the belief that any process could be ratiocinated down to its most efficient algothirmic components.

      You give the example of health care, and surely it's great that the hospital has these records -- for surely the doctors know far better than the patient the value of this information. But somewhere along the line, it became dehumanized, and you ended up with data on a Q. R. LX. and a Q R Lx and you had to write the Felligi-Sunter algorithm to piece it back together.

      Think of how much simpler it might have been if you simply gave all the medical records to the patients. Let them keep a folder at home, and bring it in each time they visit the doctor. That's what I do nowadays, after X number of different jobs and Y different healthcare plans have got my personal data scattered across at least 20 different companies, more if you count eye doctors and dentists.

      Why is it anyone hospital's role to steward a person's medical records? Why not just let the patients maintain their own records and kiss your HIPAA worries goodbye?

  67. I can just see it now... by TyrranzzX · · Score: 1

    Thousands of americans are labeled terrorists becuase they buy the right kind of Draino and some Aluminum foil when they goto the supermarket...

  68. Potential for intimidation by mariox19 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Suppose these kind of "security measures," delaying people at airports because their name is on a list, become commonplace in other areas of life: say, bank loans, college applications, flags on credit reports, applying for any kind of license, and so forth. Now, suppose the government leaks to the media the various "reasons" people get on The List.

    1. Using PGP
    2. Knowledge of computer security
    3. Attending a political protest
    4. Writing a "politically incorrect" letter to the editor
    5. Regular phone calls to the Middle East
    6. Listing your occupation as "clerk" on your tax return
    7. Regular surfing to Web sites which have been flagged as "subversive"
    8. Writing cranky posts to Slashdot

    Okay, it sickens me to go on, so use your imagination.

    How will something like this affect the actions of the general population (a.k.a. "sheep")? People will become afraid to do anything that may get them on the list of people subject to legal, unrelenting harrassment.

    People will even be afraid to be friends with such people.

    The kind of character this instills in a citizenry is kafkaesque. People fear do anything "out of the ordinary" for fear that some nameless, intractable and omniscient power will make their lives miserable.

    It's frightening that so many accept these changes as a fait accompli.

    --

    quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    1. Re:Potential for intimidation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's frightening that so many accept these changes as a fait accompli.

      It's more than frightening. It's damning. If you read the comments attached to the "Automobile Black Box" story, you would see more confirmation. Lots of folks thought it was just fine their driving history for the past 30 miles or more could be checked at any time with the cars they're driving today. It "Made them feel safer", "would get the bad guys", "reduce insurance costs". None of those things they were prepared to give their freedom away for is concrete. It's all blind assumption. Like selling entire states for beads or something. Stupid.

      Instinct makes us see Nazi Germany as something far removed from human experience. But we forget it was human beings who were Nazis, and as human beings it's not only a horrible legacy for Germany but for all of us. And it was the Average German people who became pieces of a hideous and out of control meat grinder. Wasn't just the "bad people." People just like you and me, our neihbors and everyone else.

  69. comfort ...? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I don't know that simple safeguards would, in themselves, be useful. Any Slashdot readers remember that Max Headroom episode about credit fraud? Dated, I know, but as they said, only 20 minutes into the future...

    My point is that if comprehensive data is being collected about you by any organisation with which you have had no contact, and without informing you, you are running into a really dangerous situation which is only too easily abused.

    A simple case would be crimes like burglary (income, address, occupation==times of absence). Then you can get into really ugly cases like stalking, rape and murder. And I'm not even going to get started on the possibilities for identity theft, etc.

  70. what is wrong with the /. moderators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are they biased? biased against quality open source advice?

  71. names for the reject or screen first lists by rusty0101 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    George Bush - the pres flies AF1, all others suspicious
    George Washington - rumor has it this is a revolutionary leader.
    Abraham Lincoln - leader of a fight for freedom group.
    Thomas Jefferson - Drafted revolutionary decrees.
    Ben Franklin - supports freedom of information, writes subversive literature.
    David Nelson - no reason, just want to harass a friend of the pres.
    Mahatma Ghandi - leader of a revolutionary group.

    Surely you can add more to this list. We might even come up with all 300 of the no-fly, or screen first list.

    -Rusty

    --
    You never know...
  72. Needed cash for road repairs by Fastball · · Score: 1

    This is a great idea for Missouri. You fuckers need to fix your fucking roads, and I mean all of them. Some of the potholes are so deep that when you look into them, they look into you.

  73. Information is information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whether it's a number swapping algorithm in a program, the first 60 notes in a Metallica song, or your name, it's information, facts. Facts cannot be owned, remember? The fact about your name, your address, they are facts. No one can own a fact. Practice what you preach.

  74. Let's slashdot your MOM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a slash of my big black dick, I'll plunge into the dot where's your Mom's pussy and fuck her Negro style.

  75. Feel free to ask for your money back. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, I forgot, you paid nothing to Google for using their page. Then in that case, SHUT THE FUCK UP.