Pentagon Soft-Pedals Total Information Awareness
PizzaFace writes "Congress was concerned that the Pentagon's 'Total Information Awareness' program would invade citizens' privacy, so it gave the program the red light until the Pentagon addressed Congress's privacy concerns. DARPA, the Pentagon technology agency that brought us the Internet in more innocent times, showed its Total Marketing Awareness by renaming the TIA program, 'Terrorism Information Awareness.' The gist of its report seems to be that data may be collected from everyone, but it will only be used against evildoers. You can read DARPA's report and a background story from the Washington Post."
What they are trying to do is make us believe that this is a feature, and not a bug? Are members of our government actually human? Or is this a ploy to steal all of our freedoms right out from under us. Next thing I know I'll be sitting alone in my room afraid to say anything because they might be listening. My TV will always be on because there will be no way to ever turn it off, and my name will be changed to something lame like Winston.
Remember that it's the State who will define who an "evildoer" is, and what constitutes "evildoing".
Doesn't matter what it's called, Orwellian surveillance systems will always be a gross breach of a citizen's right to privacy, and will always be open to abuse by those in power.
but it will only be used against evildoers
You don't say. Whom did they intend to use it against if congress hadn't stopped them? Anyone who changes sides because of an argument like that deserves to be deported to a police state where, of course, all laws are for the good of the people, too.
While they're at it, maybe they should change the logo as well to something less sinister, and appoint someone who is not a convicted criminal to run it.
If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
but it will only be used against evildoers
Should the government be trusted ? I don't think so, given this and this I don't think their history is so clean.
oh yeah, that whole arresting thing is going out the window too. It's become unfashionable to arrest people, now you just throw them in a cell forever in connection with another case, one which you are not required to mention.
The phrase, "May you live in interesting times" never sounded so scary...
Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
Africus aut Europaeus?
Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if, behind the scenes, DARPA says something like "well, members of Congress will, of course, be exempt!", at which point Congress will immediately approve it.
I really wish, in this race to the bottom, some country would get there first in time to allow other countries to finally figure out that shit like this is really a very bad thing. But it looks to me like all of the countries are more or less operating in lockstep with each other, so they'll all hit bottom at about the same time.
Still think I'm full of shit when I say that the world is going to turn itself into a police state and that the end result will be a stable form of government capable of lasting thousands of years?
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
This is 1984 coming 20 years later than planned. What a horrible, horrible government.
Personally, the following bugs me a little bit:
*snip*
oversight board composed of senior representatives from DoD and the Intelligence Community, and chaired by the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics).
*/snip*
How about some civilians or "average joe" types to be appointed to that oversight board? The composition of this "oversight" board seems to be all intel and DoD guys... a bit too much agency inbreeding there. How about a joe citizen to give some civilian "little guy" perspective?
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
You know, shortly after the main conflict in Iraq recently resided, there were lots of news reports stating just how much information Saddam Hussein's regime kept on the populace. One of the soldiers was quoted as saying, "Jesus, they've got files on everybody! The whole freakin' country is in here!"
Do we really want to be like Saddam Hussein's Iraq, or Nazi Germany, or Stalinist Russia for that matter? Subtracting privacy almost never adds security. Even if you watched everyone, all day, everyday, there'd be shit that slips through the cracks. Just look at how often Palestinians suicide bomb Israelis...and Israel brags it has the most stringent security in the world.
dont get me wrong, im far from the ancient european critising the USA.
But there are times when living in the UK is sooo much more attractive than living in the US, at least we have a strong Data protection Act that gives us access to any information gathered by us.
And shamefully (being a privacy crusader myself) have even been put off travelling to the USA now as my information is already passed to airport security (my name, visa card number, what meal i had on the plane (true) etcetc) before the place has even had time to taxi down the runway.
I know that this will be flamed or trolled out becuase of the patriots within the slashdot crowd or i will have many responses based on the, but we are America and better, but bear in mind this is not supposed to reflect on the nation as a whole (paranoid although it is) or the poeple just a simple statement based on the privacy of the people.
A
Kingdom of Loathing (www.kingdomofloathing.com) Addicted is me
Welcome to the nightmare...
One has to assume that any politician is always seeking as much power as possible. It is not even a criticism - political systems specifically select those individuals who want power and are good at accumulating and trading it.
It's always cute to see how people are surprised when their "democratically elected leaders" turn out to have just the same tendencies as self-elected tyrants and dictators.
I believe the current tendency towards a centralization of power in the US is a self-defeating gambit, pushed by Ashcroft, but against the deeply ingrained beliefs of the political wing that put him into power, which has always distrusted big government. The attempts to turn "terrorism" into citizen control is a bit sad, really, since the minority views of the right-wing consituents in the US depend for their very existence on a open-minded and liberal democracy. Today, a register of information on everyone. Tomorrow, a national policy on morals. The next day: revolt from the conservative right-wing and fragmentation of the Republican party.
The point of democracy is not to elect the best leaders - this is a laugh - but to allow every policy, no matter how "vital to the State's interests" to be debated. Eventually such instruments will become the subject of discussion (allow 5 years for the Sept.11 trauma to wear off), and someone, somewhere, will be elected on the basis of protection of privacy. At which point we will see a swing back to smaller government and dissolution of the more blatant links between business and power.
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
Even in the time we live in now, you will still hide behind other people's problems instead of facing your own hard truth. It's the american way isen't it? If someone does it worse, it makes you feel a whole lot better about yourself dosen't it?
That's why americans don't want to help themselves, that mentality has seaped in so deep it won't come out.
Someday you will realize that there will always be someone worse off than you, no matter what, wasting your time pointing out other people's problems won't get you anywhere. And continuing down that path will eventually lead you to being worse off than everyone else. Seems like my theory is in the process of being proven with the path of the US. Always saying "It's not that bad, look at them they are far worse" and bam, another liberty gone.
Great Minds talk about Ideas.
Average Minds talk about Things.
Small Minds talk about Other People.
Seems that everyday the scale keeps weighing down towards the latter.
Posting useless rant since 2003.
Yes, I'm well aware the US is and historically has often been far better than many other nations in its treatment of people. That still doesn't make it exactly exemplary. Perhaps you think when it comes to mistreating its citizens, anything the US does is Ok as long as it doesn't exceed that done by some other nation, but some of us envision a somewhat higher standard.
BTW, the hair-splitting over the definition of "native Americans" is a crock. Like it or not, there were non-European peoples here thousands of years before Europeans arrived, and attempts to downplay that fact by saying they weren't "native" (only in the sense that human beings as a biological species didn't evolve here; their cultures and languages did) smack of an intent to reduce or dismiss the legitimacy of their claims. And what else should one call them? If mere accuracy is your goal, you should note "Indians" is profoundly less accurate than "native Americans."
Why not? Really? Are you serious?
Let's look at it like this. "Terror" is not a crime. "Terrorism" is not even a well defined act. When a person commits a "terrorist act," it could be a shooting, or a bombing, or a hijacking, etc. It's only someone's assessment of the motivation to commit the crime that labels that crime as "terrorism." So how is the database going to be limited to terrorists, or even potential terrorists, when all you need to have is a gun or some explosive material? That's a pretty wide group of people in the U.S.
And don't forget that drugs support terrorism. And don't forget that people with large amounts of cash are considered drug dealers. So if you carry large amounts of cash, you are supporting terrorism. So you're in the database simply because you cashed your paycheck and you don't like banks.
Terrorism can be redefined at any time. If you have private software on your machine which could have illegal uses, perhaps you're a terrorist. If you give to the wrong charity, maybe you're supporting terrorism. If you travel to a country "on the list," you're tagged as statistically more likely to commit a terrorist act. If your telephone records show calls to Colombia, you might be a terrorist. If you purchase a copy of the Koran, you are a potential terrorist. If you vote for the "wrong" party or person, you're a terrorist suspect.
THAT'S WHY NOT.
I don't think the post was anti-American. Americans who care deeply about the country and their freedoms have a strong interest in making such comments and observations. Perhas you think we US citizens should just lie down and take whatever the government or the prevailing social climate dishes out, but speaking as an American who is grateful for the freedoms guaranteed me and who cherishes the country's stated ideals, I'm very interested in seeing those freedoms and ideals preserved, and quick to criticize whenever I see those freedoms and ideals assailed or ignored, as has happened from time to time, whether you care to admit it or not. I strongly suspect the original poster ("Innocent times like the good ol' 50s," etc.) feels the same way.
I'm sorry if this upsets some people, but I have to say it.
There are things worth sacrificing human lives for. Liberty is one of them. I know that goes against every value we Americans have developed over the last 50 years, but it's true.
Given the choice between living in a country where I have a chance of being shot, bombed, gassed, anthraxed or otherwise killed by terrorists, or a country where some government agency records my every word and deed and carries people it considers "dangerous" off in the middle of the night to secret trials and secret prisons, I'll take the terrorism. Accepting a little personal risk is the least I can do to respect the memories of people who died to establish a nation of relative freedom.
TIA may put a damper on terrorism, it may not, but either way I think the cure is worse than the disease.
0 1 - just my two bits