Slashdot Mirror
2003 Privacy and Human Rights Survey Released
Privacy Digest writes "Out-Law.com, UK - Global privacy report is the most comprehensive ever . The Electronic Privacy Information Center and Privacy International on Friday released their sixth annual Privacy and Human Rights survey which claims to be the most comprehensive survey on privacy and data protection ever published. The report reviews the state of privacy in over fifty-five countries around the world. Key topics include Total Information Awareness, the public response to the U.S.A.-Patriot Act, traveller profiling, biometric identification, and other new technologies of surveillance. Privacy and Human Rights 2003: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments is available free online or it can be purchased from the EPIC Bookstore."
In soviet russia Human Rights survey YOU!
... the fact that the left-leaning pro-privacy folks at slashdot still need to refer to anonymous posters as "cowards"?
YOU INSENSITIVE CLODS!
I know this puts me in danger of being modded down.
But...
Privacy is not a basic human right. Not like freedom to not be murdered, beaten, or starved. There are a lot of human rights violations going on right now, but certain levels of tracking don't even show up on the human-rights-violations radar.
Sure, denial of privacy can reach extreme levels, to the point where it becomes a concern. But I think this report is a little knitpicky.
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
I seriously have to wonder how many more years it will be before this report will be merely a commemoration of lost history.
The average American consumer is still oblivious to the erosion of privacy that has occured over the last decade. Only radical action and broad support will stop this continuing trend.
-You may license this sig for only $6.99.
Mention the PATRIOT Act, not a word on the oppresive regimes of the Communist Chinese
RTFA!!!
You can't take the sky from me...
The timing of this is rather ironic as I read this morning that the CAPSII system will be coming online very shortly. I can't wait to see what color I am. What color are you?
It seems there's a chicken and egg senario concerning most government's and the rights given to citizens. Here in the United States the govenment is made up of elected citizens who are supposed to, ideally, work for us and pass the laws WE ask for. However, the relationship between the government and the people tends to get distorted through campaign contributions, the media, large corporations and wealthy individuals, etc... I'm not sure we've reached the level of security we want but I'm not sure it's worth our privacy. To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin: "Those who substitute Liberty for Security deserve neither."
"Terminate?"
"Terminate... with extreme prejudice"
Ah yes, the place all geeks pine for. Well, the government wouldn't do much intrusion simply because it wouldn't be funded. But private citizens would have access to all sorts of spying mechanisms. You would have to use anti-spying mechanisms to defeat it.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
er.. they have plenty about China and many other countries if you followed the links and read a little: http://www.privacyinternational.org/survey/phr2003 /countries/china.htm
I thought that in the US, it was the citizens that gave the government rights. Not the other way around. I'm so naive, aren't I?
Quoted from article:
In Russia (especially in Moscow and St. Petersburg) illegal collection and distribution of data on private persons and organizations is quite commonplace. Quite popular are databases on purchase/sale of cars, car owners, passport data and foreign passport data of Russian citizens, data on real estate (purchase and sale of apartments, their parameters, location and proprietors), databases of taxpayers, information about people wanted for crimes and those who have been previously convicted. CDs with such databases are easily available on the streets and the Internet. The CD can cost from USD10 to USD1,500 depending on the subject, amount and accuracy of the data. In the beginning of 2003 a mobile phone company Mobile Telesystems (MTS) suffered a massive security breach that led to the sale of CDs with MTS's entire database of several million customers. By law, MTS was required to share information about their customers with the police and government agencies. MTS claimed that the database had been stolen and that the company had started its own internal investigation without seeking help from law enforcement agencies. The company refused to provide details as to the results of this investigation. Widespread speculation and comments from an MTS spokesperson indicate that the data was leaked by a low-paid employee from one of these government agencies
New year Resolution: Don't change sig this year
There is still slavery in the world, I tell you I would be more apt to support groups like this if it didn't seem like they were just made to throw eggs at the USA. There are REAL problems in the world and we should address them, much of the drivel that is being spouted today is unhelpful. Also why is this news for nerds? Maybe it is stuff that matters? More like crap for lawyers and liberals.
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
I like the part about CAPS II may deny people boarding based on their composite score.
Scene from Soviet America, next year:
I'm sorry, sir, you are not allowed to travel. No, we cannot tell you why, that would be a violation of security; we can only tell you that you are not allowed to travel. Please return home and avoid transit. We will alert you in the future if you are allowed to travel.
The First Lady has said the best byproduct of ousting the Taliban from Afghanistan was the liberation of Afghan women. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the same thing when asked what the U.S. achieved in its war in Afghanistan.
If the liberation of Arab women is so important to the current administration, then does that mean we'll be invading Saudi Arabia next?!!!
"Global privacy report is the most comprehensive ever"
Hm.. is it just me or does anyone else find anything just a LITTLE bit ironic about those exact words..?
Think about it..
Hey may have been talking about the editorial comment and not the article.
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
...is massive privacy surveys. That and the Patriot Act.
There is still slavery in the world
yeah. it's called Tech Support.
er.. they have plenty about China and many other countries if you followed the links
It's much easier than that:
Report by China on Human-Rights abuses in the United States
"Friday released their sixth annual Privacy and Human Rights survey which claims to be the most comprehensive survey on privacy and data protection ever published. "
This means out of the 20 /. readers who actually take the tiem to read the articles, 15 just said fuck that!
"BEHOLD, CORN!!" - Dr. Weird, ATHF
Citizens have 'rights'. Governments have 'powers'. Good governments have 'just powers'. Bad governments just have power.
Just to get a more official view:
Quoted from European Convention on Human Rights (available in several languages)
Can some one please explain to me what is evil about biometric identification? If having a retina or finger print on my ID prevents people from pretending to be me, isn't that a good thing?
UNIX/Linux Consulting
Who gets to decide who deserves freedom?
www.theinquirer.net
>THE UK GOVERNMENT has announced plans to keep an electronic file on every child in England in a range of new child protection measures announced by prime minister Tony Bliar.
>The children's files together with their unique e-number will be managed by local authorities in a "local information hub". The file will contain the name, address and date of birth of each child, together with the name of the school attended and whether the child is known to such agencies as the police, social services or educational welfare. Where multiple agencies are involved the file will denote which one profesional will have overall reponsibilty
Yet again... launched to "protect" the children... and yet another place where incorrect information can have devastating consequences for the parents of a child if a mistake is made during data entry...
Teacher notices bruises on child's torso... entry in database... social services could now be investigating for child abuse when it could have been a simple injury from a fall... but the reason might not have been entered later after investigation by the teacher however that entry will be there forever... Same child misses school several days in a row for a perfectly valid reason some months later... yet again social services could put 2 and 2 together later on and make 5...
What's the bet's they'll try and fly this kite by saying "the innocent have nothing to fear"??? If there's anything to go by from previous cases... the innocent have everything to fear when social services get it in their minds that there could be abuse when there isn't...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Since when is common sense an invasion of privacy? Frankly, we should do a lot more of it. If you're a mid-eastern national here visiting or even a patriated citizen from the East, you must understand that you SHOULD be profiled. The fact that we are searching elderly women (causasion, black, etc.) is a mockery to logic. We know what the predominance of the terrorists look like and what they will likely look like should another attack occur. Therefore, only an idiot (Democrat? Liberal?) would hold PC over security...and they do...daily. JAV
EPIC and Privacy International are based in the US and UK, respectively, because most countries would shut somebody like them down.
One of the primary "selling" points of the Patriot Act was that it would be used against "foreign" suspects. However, to my knowledge, the Patriot Act has thus far been used primarily against US citizens (big surprise). Is anyone aware if the Patriot Act has in fact been used against a foreigner yet? And, if so, what the ratio of Patiot Act vs. Citizens and foreigners is?
Bot, I hope I don't make The List with this post. I'm sorry John, I didn't mean anything by it.
I've been seeing a few of your posts lately and I'm wondering:
1. Are you a subtle troll?
-or-
2. Is your spelling and grammar really that bad?
The best way to protect our privacy is to stop doing things that gives our government or entities like RIAA arguably "justifiable" reasons to strip away our privacy rights.
Doing illegal things lead to all of us paying the penalty by losing our rights. The more responsible we behave, the more rights we'll have. Pretty simple stuff.
if you were naive you would believe it
The real reaction to this act from conservatives is more interesting and diverse. Some share the views of Attorney General Ashcroft. Others oppose it just as strongly as the geek community -- many of the articles about the act on the conservative National Review site describe it with terms like the "so-called", "wrongly-termed" or "misnamed" Patriot Act. A director of the Cato Institute raised many interesting questions about the act, to which the Justice Department wrote up a reply.
Also worth looking at is the Justice Department's own Patriot Act Web site. From here you can view the text of the act itself as well as all the arguments for it and rhetoric used to justify it. A valuable resource for any of us trying to formulate counterarguments about why this act needs to go away.
You're leaving out huge chunks of "we the people" here, namely US residents who're not citizens of the US. This includes both people from the Indian nations, and spouses/children of US citizens holding a different (or no) citizenship. Many, if not most, of which are as American as apple pie -- certainly more American than US citizens like Arnold Schwartzenegger.
The US Constitution is very specific in not granting many rights to citizens that it doesn't also grant to the people -- about the only exception is participating in federal elections.
Regards,
--
*Art
This is the same administration that has been attacking health care and family planning for women both in the US and abroad. If liberation of Arab women is so important to them, what about basic needs and services for women at home?
And it's not a bad thing to be a liberal. :-) It's probably a good thing that conservatives and liberals are constantly fighting it out, lest we slide too far either way. Balance.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
To me, perhaps one of the biggest threats to privacy is something quite simple: an elaborate IP database cross-referenced with personal information found on the Internet. This is like getting someone's telephone transcripts. This information is available all over the Internet, but are there any known companies that are compiling IP Databases?
It seems unpolite to attack people that fund or have funded you :) Unfortunatly much of the terrorism that exsist would not just go away, I wish it were that easy, but if we show weakness there are people who will attack us. I don't think it is a bad thing to be a liberal, but the Hate the has crept into politics over the last 12 years is not helping us at all, I don't mind conservatives and liberals fighting it out, I just wish they would be the gloves back on...
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
Apparently you missed the part that said:
"The Federal Communications Commission issued regulations in November 1998 implementing the law.[2889] The regulations include several additional provisions including requiring that all mobile phone companies facilitate location tracking of users. Privacy groups challenged the implementation of the law in federal court and telecommunications companies, who argued that the regulations give the government more power than authorized under the law and the Constitution.[2890] In August 2000, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that law enforcement agencies must meet the highest legal standard before using these new surveillance capabilities."
Nothing to see here...move along...
(Sponsored by cheeseSource for President 2012)
If I read you correctly, then stating your argument in my own words, you're saying that in order to protect freedom, we must wield it responsibly and not do anything that shows we aren't worthy of that freedom.
Such a freedom is not worth squat. It can also be paraphrased "freedom of agreeing with the government", and is present in pretty much every state on this planet.
It is the freedom and right to do WRONG things that signify freedom. Not the right to follow the masses and do what you are expected.
OK, you've read National Geographics ;-)
That doesn't mean this report was written to throw eggs at the USA. Read the article instead of the \. comments. I know, less amusing in many ways, but still.
The USA scores badly on *some* points, better on others. It's still a pretty good country to live in compared to a lot of places in the world.
The real issue is, finding your government is messing with your privacy is like being underground and having your canary dying on you. It's a worrying sign, or it should be.
Instead of thinking "Hey, them's throwing eggs at our beloved nation, that can't be right", you might want to look at other countries and see where that kind of tinkering with basic rights brought them. And remember, it's mostly fellow Americans doing the "throwing", and my guess is they're just as proud of being a US citizen as you obviously are.
Apart from that, I agree, a lot of people have more pressing problems.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
"...If Parliament and the public at large have been slow to react, it is probably because for most people, most of the time, privacy is a pretty abstract concept. Like our health, it's something we tend not to think about until we lose it -- and then discover that our lives have been very unpleasantly, and perhaps irretrievably, altered. But though we tend to take it for granted, privacy -- the right to control access to ourselves and to personal information about us -- is at the very core of our lives. It is a fundamental human right precisely because it is an innate human need, an essential condition of our freedom, our dignity and our sense of well-being.
If someone intrudes on our privacy -- by peering into our home, going through the personal things in our office desk, reading over our shoulder on a bus or airplane, or eavesdropping on our conversation -- we feel uncomfortable, even violated.
Imagine, then, how we will feel if it becomes routine for bureaucrats, police officers and other agents of the state to paw through all the details of our lives: where and when we travel, and with whom; who are the friends and acquaintances with whom we have telephone conversations or e-mail correspondence; what we are interested in reading or researching; where we like to go and what we like to do..."
"... The truth is that we all do have something to hide, not because it's criminal or even shameful, but simply because it's private. We carefully calibrate what we reveal about ourselves to others. ... The right not to be known against our will -- indeed, the right to be anonymous except when we choose to identify ourselves -- is at the very core of human dignity, autonomy and freedom.
"If we allow the state to sweep away the normal walls of privacy that protect the details of our lives, we will consign ourselves psychologically to living in a fishbowl. Even if we suffered no other specific harm as a result, that alone would profoundly change how we feel. Anyone who has lived in a totalitarian society can attest that what often felt most oppressive was precisely the lack of privacy.
But there also will be tangible, specific harm.
"The more information government compiles about us, the more of it will be wrong. That's simply a fact of life...
"... The bottom line is this: If we have to live our lives weighing every action, every communication, every human contact, wondering what agents of the state might find out about it, analyze it, judge it, possibly misconstrue it, and somehow use it to our detriment, we are not truly free.That sort of life is characteristic of totalitarian countries, not a free and open society like Canada.
Again, this essay is well worth reading and sending on to others. Other than to Ashcroft and the TSA- don't send it to them, as they'd use it as an antiblueprint. "Don't track everyone all the time? OK, lets track everyone all the time." "Don't allow unsubstantiated data to influence how we treat people? OK, lets use any data available, true or not..."
Of course, the constitution only protects your privacy from government intrusion. But a right can be considered to exist without being legally codified. Suppose I steal your private correspondence and read your most personal thoughts. Or plant surveillance gear in your bedroom for my own malicious gratification? Wouldn't you feel that your rights had been violated?
Side note: screw the moderator who labeled this "Flamebait". I don't agree with this opinion, but it is an honestly-held one. Read the FAQ before you moderate again!
So I can turn around and give it to the RIAA. I love the RIAA so much, please give me all your cash. My password to / is "iloveriaa" Me email address is wakka_nakka_bakka@yahoo.com. Please SPam me with your $$$. The pass to the email is "password??". If you like it, then try it some more. The RIAA supports terrorism. These scientists support terrorism. The RIAA is the world's hero.
Yes, nothing is easy but when I see the U.S. doing things (torture, murder) that they castigate other countries for doing I'm not inspired to just go along simply because it's my country. One should clean one's own house first before criticizing a neighbor.
But all in all, a nice exchange with you. Let's leave flaming to...the flamers.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
This is a prior posting of mine that was received favourably :-)
Subject: Why I joined ACLU
I believe that we British should support the American Civil Liberties Union.
In fact - the people of ALL countries should - the ACLU are fighting for the Rights of everyone on this matter.
Liberty has to be one of the most important things in life. Well up there, behind health and safety of your family, must be the right to go about your daily life without being forced to live it under oppressive surveillance. For it surely is oppression - being spied upon by the authorities in all that you do. Knowing this information could be used against you, for any purpose they see fit. The so-called all-seeing eye of God over you - meant to instil respect of them and fear of authority.
It can be proven they use propaganda to deceive you into believing them. How?
Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:
Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.
Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!
Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (meaning, human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).
The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.
The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.
INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA
This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.
Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"
This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.
It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.
They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.
This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."
"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".
This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).
This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.
So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation?
It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they are.
As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.
Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens - rather than address their reasonable concerns.
The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.
They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are
I'd call Slashdot a right-wing community because it looks like most of them voted for Bush or Gore.
Yeah yeah, don't do anything serious with the results...
still, people get the government they deserve.
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
:-) Yes, I'm brown. No, I'm not a danger ... I just play one on TV.
Sorry - but the part they published on the US is not well crafted and old info. "Recent news reports indicate that John Poindexter will soon resign.[2912]" excuse me - Old john poindexter was out many weeks ago. Recent? Will Soon what? There is cursory mention of national ID's when months ago it was written into law that biometric driver's license info would become a phased in and in some cases mandated, becoming Federal Information. I'm sorry but if i was the proofreader for that document i would have ripped it to shreds and given it some teeth while i was re-writing it.
-=|hook
Well obviously everyone globally has absolutely no concerns over privacy since they took the time to fill out a survey.
heh...
Anyone born on US soil is automatically a US citizen.
Legal aliens (permanent residents) can apply for US citizenship once they have lived in the US for 5 years.
In light of all that, I have no idea what "American as apple pie" you're talking about.
Smart terrorists would not use computers they own. They'd use public library, college/university and other public access computers where there is little survellence(sp?) and few ways of confirming identity through the various techniques of "wire tapping" a computer ;)
Smarter terrorists would use no modern means of communications including telecommunication equipment.
Will all this survellence(sp?) stop stupid terrorists? Maybe, but the smartest and most dangerous terrorists will not fall for "bullseye" forms of communication.
Let me reiterate: I do not accept your definition that if it is taken away that it is a priveledge. There is no right that cannot be taken away (something I have shown). It is not from not *understanding* what you wrote, but I consider it false.
Rights are, rather, any power we have not ceded to the government. To reiterate, if we haven't given it to them, it's our *right*. This rectifies the error in my first post. It is also the manner in which our rights are understood in the Constitution, Declaration of Independance, and anything else operating under a significant philisophical influence from Locke. In contrast to your dollar bill analogy, take the opening words of the Constitution, "We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice..." The FF disposed of their own govenment and constructed a new one from scratch. How can they do this, unless of course, the government is a construct? We make the government, and what we don't give it, is still ours.
As an aside, you learned arithmetic because somebody taught it to you. Would you be able to count past "one, two, many" if someone had not taught it to you (math beyond that is not natural and must be taught), and could you daydream about all the more lofty things you no doubt have done without having been taught? We only know what we're taught, and even our daydreams and math are dependent on those, and without that, math wouldn't be here and daydreams wouldn't be able to conceive the things they do.