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."
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"
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?!!!
I consider myself a privacy advocate because I consider a high degree of privacy necessary for a free society. The reasons are too complex for me to convey clearly, especially in a slashdot post, but consider that people behave differently when they know they are observed. Would I be posting to /. if I had a camera behind me?
All "basic human rights" fall under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. So while privacy may not be itself such a right, I don't feel I can act freely when my actions are monitored.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
You do realize that when the extreme levels happen, and becomes a concern, it is more often than not too late to make effective change.
..an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure seems to ring pretty clearly here.
Then you won't mind your medical records becoming public information? It's being done right now.
Minnesota (and elsewhere) wants to make all medical information available in a statewide database. Who has access to it? Some say that the state will only allow access to statistics without any identification of the "patient". How long will that last?
The gov't isn't very secure. We all know that. Do you trust them? I barely trust the hospital. Who else gets this info? Insurance companies? Hospitals? Prescription drug companies? How about your employer?
What if the gov't sells the info? Did you ever get a sexually-transmitted disease in college? Did you ever imagine every blood test you ever took will be a matter of public record? Did they keep a DNA sample?
It'll be part of your state record. It'll follow you around for the rest of your life. Did you ever take a test for HIV?
How about a family predisposition for cancer? What are your chances of getting that next bank loan when the underwriter starts perusing your medical history.
Do you trust politicians? They just voted themselves a 4% payraise by hiding it in a Transportation bill.
-- No sig for you!
If your credit card number or password gets stolen, you can stop it and have a new one issued. If you fingerprint gets lifted and misused, what are you to do? Amputate your finger?
--
*Art
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.
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.
As a Canadian, I consider the Democrats to also be right-wing. I mean, it was the Democrats who wanted to drill for oil in Alaska (34 Republicans voted against the party line, but it's okay because 36 Democrats did the same thing!)
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience