Slashdot Mirror


GAO Studies U.S. Government Data Mining

securitas writes "Total Information Awareness is alive and thriving. eWEEK's Caron Carlson reports on a new General Accounting Office study that says TIA-style data mining programs are rampant in federal agencies with 199 projects at 52 of 128 agencies. The Defense Intelligence Agency/DoD is the single largest user of these data mining projects (eg. Verity K2 Enterprise). The story was first reported by Reuters' Andy Sullivan (ZDNet UK mirror) and the NYT's Robert Pear, who wrote that at least 122 projects used personally identifying information like names, e-mail addresses, Social Security and driver's license numbers. The 'actual numbers are likely to be much higher' because the report excludes classified projects. Wired News' Kim Zetter writes that, in addition to government databases, federal agencies mine private databases of credit rating agencies, bank account numbers, student loan applications, etc. This week the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) released a report with privacy guidelines for data mining technology (PDF) development and use. Guidelines include data anonymization, government data access authorization and audit trails. Cynthia (Cindy) Webb's 'Total Information Dilemma' at the Washington Post is an excellent survey of media coverage of TIA, MATRIX and the GAO report 'Data Mining: Federal Efforts Cover a Wide Range of Uses' (mirror, both in PDF format). More at GCN, GovExec and the Guardian/AP."

141 comments

  1. URL spam by Slowtreme · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just tell me which link to click so I can RTFA.

    --
    Post: Sigged, for your pleasure.
    1. Re:URL spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      datamine!

    2. Re:URL spam by Bobdabishop307 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Wired has an article on this.

      --
      "Anyone who quotes me in their .sig is an idiot" - Rusty Russell
    3. Re:URL spam by in7ane · · Score: 2, Informative

      Forget TFA, the summary is complex enough as it it.

      A summary of the summary is though:

      Wired News' Kim Zetter writes that, in addition to government databases, federal agencies mine private databases of credit rating agencies, bank account numbers, student loan applications, etc. This week the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) released a report with privacy guidelines for data mining technology (PDF) development and use.

    4. Re:URL spam by Tackhead · · Score: 0, Troll
      > Just tell me which link to click so I can RTFA.

      Naw, it's just a duplicate of a "Slashback" article :)

  2. Thank god... by PhilippeT · · Score: 2, Funny

    I live in Canada. Where only coporations do that sorta thing. NO Radioshak employee #1293 you do not need my address name and first born to sell me this 2$ gizmo

    --
    A psychopath can't tell the difference between right and wrong. A sociopath knows the difference - he just doesn't care.
    1. Re:Thank god... by Trigun · · Score: 2, Funny

      Umm, no. The HRDC had to pull the plug on a giant database filled with all kinds of information that it shouldn't have/didn't need access to.

      Wonder what happened to the back up tapes.

    2. Re:Thank god... by PhilippeT · · Score: 0

      Since i work for them i know where they are... right next to my pc tower

      --
      A psychopath can't tell the difference between right and wrong. A sociopath knows the difference - he just doesn't care.
  3. Here's the difference... by Mz6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    IMHO, since the government isn't obtaining the data themselves this is OK.

    From the article... "Scores of data-mining projects that collect and analyze U.S. citizens' personal information are in operation at dozens of federal agencies, the GAO found. Many of the nearly 200 projects planned or already under way rely on data purchased from the commercial sector"

    They are purchasing the information from the commercial sector", information that is readily available to anyone willing to pay for it. Congress stopped their TIA initiative, but will allow this due to that major fact.

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:Here's the difference... by TiloB · · Score: 5, Informative

      In Germany (no, data does not search you) it is forbidden to gather more information than necessary. We call that principle "Datensparsamkeit" (data frugality).

      And it is not allowed to give information away or even sell them (that is only allowed for public available information)

    2. Re:Here's the difference... by GoPlayGo · · Score: 3, Interesting
      They are purchasing the information from the commercial sector", information that is readily available to anyone willing to pay for it.


      The power of the government purse. The spending power of the government is huge and able to afford this. Ordinary citizens are not.

      Another side effect is that the companies that collect and distribute this information are enriched and emboldened.
      --
      The game of Go (Igo, Weiqi, Baduk) has the simplest concept and the deepest play.
    3. Re:Here's the difference... by unformed · · Score: 1

      How is this OK? The government has far more ability use this information for controlling people than do private corporations. The reason they are buying the information and not creating it themselves is that the Freedom of Information and Privacy Laws do *not* apply to private corporations.

    4. Re:Here's the difference... by tuxette · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "Datensparsamkeit" (data frugality).

      This is called the collection limitation principle - There should be limits to the collection of personal data and any such data should be obtained by lawful and fair means and, where appropriate, with the knowledge or consent of the data subject., cf. OECD Guidelines for privacy/data protection.

      --
      People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    5. Re:Here's the difference... by tuxette · · Score: 1
      They are purchasing the information from the commercial sector", information that is readily available to anyone willing to pay for it.

      In the EU/EEA, this would be illegal, as there are legal limits to third party transfers of personal data.

      --
      People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    6. Re:Here's the difference... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because there is no true freedom in Germany.
      Why should a private person be prohibited from aggregating publicly available information and making it available on a market ?

    7. Re:Here's the difference... by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      There is no true freedom in the United States either. Why should a private person be prohibited from killing another, or performing sexual acts on whoever they want, or driving at whatever speed they want, or crossing the road wherever and whenever they want, or taking whatever they want?

      I don't think you even know what freedom means, but then you are just a troll so why am I even bothering to reply. Goddammit!

    8. Re:Here's the difference... by maximilln · · Score: 1

      -----
      They are purchasing the information from the commercial sector", information that is readily available to anyone willing to pay for it
      -----
      So what's to stop a politician from helping his best friend set up a commerical data collection agency and then feeding his best friend with lucrative government data projects at exorbitant prices in order to funnel enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars to his best friend?

      Yes. I _am_ a paranoid conspiracy theorist. Feel free to troll away.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    9. Re:Here's the difference... by Ignatius_VI · · Score: 1

      That does make sense.

      So we need to get word out to these companies that we don't want our information being sold to the government, or we won't do business with them anymore...something to that effect?

      Is there a list of the companies that are doing this?

    10. Re:Here's the difference... by tuxette · · Score: 1
      So we need to get word out to these companies that we don't want our information being sold to the government, or we won't do business with them anymore...something to that effect?

      Do you think these companies really care that you won't do business with them anymore, once they have your data that they can sell?

      Threats of not doing business with company so-and-so are not good enough. We need to get these companies where it counts. Fine them heavily if they sell personal data to third parties without the consent of the persons who own that data. And yes, you own your own personal data. Nobody else does. Not companies, not the government, nobody but you.

      --
      People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    11. Re:Here's the difference... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great, so you're saying that since Big Brother operates on a purely capitalistic, commercial basis, where greed rules all and profit is to be maximized for the greater good of all (board members), its completely okay that he's around.

      No thanks. My information, about me, belongs to me first and foremost. I hereby renounce all other entities -except my government- rights' to me.

  4. Re:This is unbelievable... by TyrranzzX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I tell you all! We were right! Tin foil hats will protect you!

  5. I have to ask.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I have to ask about your email...

    Since you have a hotmail account, why does it matter if you put NO SPAM in there? Isn't part of the EULA that you will get spam no matter how obscure your address might be just because of the @hotmail address? :)

    1. Re:I have to ask.. by Slowtreme · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Slashdot does that nospam automatically in user preferences.

      I actually get very little spam in my inbox for hotmail. Their spam filters work very well. I even added support@hotmail.com to my filter so I stop getting emails to "upgrade" for 19.95 and so far they have honored it.

      --
      Post: Sigged, for your pleasure.
  6. (brace for storm of outrage) by JosKarith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cue 200 posts about how terrible this is. It's not atually very different to what the law-enforcement community's been doing all along, just the tools are better.
    It's like the argument about ID cards - there's nothing inherently wrong with being able to conclusively prove that you are who you say you are, but it's another thing entirely for people to be able to demand you prove the same.

    --
    'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
    1. Re:(brace for storm of outrage) by mangu · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, "total information", if done correctly, is better than the traditional methods. Or you would prefer to be prosecuted and tried based on partial information?

    2. Re:(brace for storm of outrage) by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      I know who I am, why do I need a piece of plastic to tell me, and why the hell should you care.

      It is not that I do wrong things, it is that you may think I am doing them, so I'd rather not feed your fertile imagination with my personal details.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    3. Re:(brace for storm of outrage) by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      why the hell should you care.

      Let's see, why could I POSSIBLY need to see your ID?

      If I need some way for you to prove who you are (you're writing me a check, opening a bank account, etc)
      If you're trying to buy alcohol/cigs and you don't look old enough.
      If I find you dead on the street and need to know who you are so I can call your family.
      etc. etc.

      There are LOTS of perfectly valid reasons that someone would need the information that's on your ID.

    4. Re:(brace for storm of outrage) by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      a) Why would I need to write you a check, I can give you cash, goods, services etc... and why would I want a bank account, pay me in cash, goods , services please.

      b) I buy alcohol for minors all the time, and I know lots of minors who get other people to buy them cigs.

      c) If my family want to find me they will report me missing, or come looking. I tell them where I am, and they don't need to see id.

      So, there is no reason for ID, unless you are the suspitions or criminal type.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    5. Re:(brace for storm of outrage) by conJunk · · Score: 1

      Actually, "total information", if done correctly, is better than the traditional methods. Or you would prefer to be prosecuted and tried based on partial information?

      while that's absolutely true, no questions, its also not exactly the issue. this issue is: what does the government do with this information other than prosecute real and genuine baddies? (n.b. real and genuine baddies are few and far between)

      for example, historical use of personal information (such as which groups people participate in) without any respect at all for the legality, but rather for the political content of those groups, lead to egregious violations of indivduals rights, such as COINTELPRO in the 60s...

      this sort of data mine leads to malicious prosecution today, for example the malicious prosectution of this man....

      if we can reasonably assume that our government does not have our best interests at heart, and will use personal information in mallicioius, illigal, or overtly political ways, then there is a very real impetus for reducing their ability to obtain it in the first place... to argue that "total information"... is better than traditional methods because of how it could work prosecutoraly is to completely ignore the covert and mallicious ways it can be used (again, see COINTELPRO).

  7. European Protection Stronger for Personal Info by GoPlayGo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bless you for posting this information. Quite an eye-opener. Good research.

    Without laws preventing such mis-use, it runs rampant. European laws guarding personal information are much stronger than in the US, where corporate and government interests and methods are closely aligned, especially these days.

    --
    The game of Go (Igo, Weiqi, Baduk) has the simplest concept and the deepest play.
    1. Re:European Protection Stronger for Personal Info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the U.S. data mines the E.U. and visa versa, then they swap spit.
      Your privacy is no safer than ours is and never has been.

  8. The stink starts right at the top by leoaugust · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Even though it seems like the convergence of so many efforts is all low-level and coincidental, I beleive that so many projects would not have emerged if there was no guidance from the top levels.

    Like the Abu Ghraib Humiliation scandal the intellectual direction has been set at the top levels of the administration, even though the work on the projects is being done by lowly Primary Investigators.

    What I wonder is whether the ones setting the intellectual agenda in the administration have any idea ofwhere they are leading us.

    I fear, that one day we will be left in shock and awe when we discover that their idea of "preventing terrorism" was as well thought out as the idea of democratizing Iraq. We will all be at the mercy of a State that, like the Iraqi Monster, has grown too big for them to bully around. And then all of us, being in the same boat, will realize that those bas***** in the administration are screwed - but so are we.

    .

    --
    To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...
    1. Re:The stink starts right at the top by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Abu Ghraib Humiliation scandal

      By humiliation do you mean what our Dear Leaders experienced? Or do you mean what the prisoners experienced?

      If the latter, call it what it is: Abu Ghraib Torture scandal.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:The stink starts right at the top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Abu Ghraib Humiliation scandal

      You must listen to too much talk radio. They keep saying it was just humiliation. I've listened to the congressional hearings. I went way beyond humiliation. Congress is keeping the real scary pictures (and video) secret. Sure, not as far as beheading sure, but I'm not part of Al Qaeda.

    3. Re:The stink starts right at the top by Frit+Mock · · Score: 1

      "You must listen to too much talk radio. They keep saying it was just humiliation. I've listened to the congressional hearings. I went way beyond humiliation. Congress is keeping the real scary pictures (and video) secret. Sure, not as far as beheading sure, but I'm not part of Al Qaeda.
      "

      Seriously ... 1 death compared to 37 ... and beheading is ... probably is fast and less painfull.

  9. You have a 1 in 15 chance by mackermacker · · Score: 1

    I think you have a 1 in 15 chance of clicking the link to RTFA... I clicked the last one... Doh, its a 71 page PDF! eek, better try another one

  10. pies by Kallahan · · Score: 0

    Bah there all just covers for echelon 3.

  11. Re:OT: Which Link? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    The person who has posted this information has gone to the trouble of providing a well rounded set of links that describe from many angles a specific issue, I am happy to see that there are so many links to various points made in the summary, it lends to the credibility of the post. If you are to fucking lazy to click on a page to RTFA(s) then dont.

    Go to Yahoo.com and find something _there_ to bitch about. (im sure it wont be hard)

  12. To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thing.. by TyrranzzX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They want the massive database to fight "terrorism", as they say it. Now, lets just think about what's been going on lately;

    1: Police officers have been taking pictures of protesters to throw into databases. Additionally, wearing masks is now illegal in most cities.

    2: Facial recognition software enabled camera's are going up everywhere. Sure, the software barely works but it'll get better. This is first justified in protecting people in high crime areas like chicago, and then will move out as far into the suburbs as they can justify it.

    3: Our economy is going to shit and we're going farther and farther into that hole.

    4: Massive databases of personal information are being assembled by our goverment.

    5: Our constitutional rights are gone.

    6: And to put the decorations on the cake, at the G8 summit at Sea Island in Georga, an order to "fire to kill" was given to all police officers in the state in regards to whoever they found was acting suspiciously. This means that if you're a protester outside of the building, the cops and military in the area can legally shoot and kill you.

    So, we've got our reichstag fire (9/11), we've got our Decree of the Reich president(Patriot act), now we're waiting for the enabling law (aka, the law that let the reichstag put people into concentration camps).

  13. We found him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Congrats! You're the last people on earth who trusts the Bush administration.

  14. Inneficiency cancels out negative effects by razmaspaz · · Score: 2, Funny

    I figure that the government is so bad at effeciently using information anyway this doesn't matter. I don't know how this is a big deal compared to corporate data mining. Government is at least motivated by "serving the people" (yeah yeah Iknow that is nto always true) where corporate uses of data are motivated by serving shareholders interests (At least most of the time- *cough*Enron*cough*).

    --
    I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
  15. Wouldn't if be great if DRM could work... by ipl+me+asap · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    and maybe the middle man could be cut out and artists (not record companies that can afford to deal with piracy) could publish their music and recoup the costs to create it? Maybe even motivate them to make more great music and give the "industry" the boot? Honestly, the ONLY reason the "industry" exists is because of the overhead to publishing. DRM solves that and allows for the internet, etc, to be used to distribute content.

    I'd gladly give up a bit of "fair use" of backing up my Avirl collection, etc, to actually get some music worth listening to.

  16. Its NOT URL spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    its a well rounded summary of a specific topic that includes links to back up nearly every point made _in_ the summary, click on the points you dont understand or would like to learn more about, skip over the rest and forget about it.

    the poster has apparently gone to a fair ammount of trouble to bring these links together into a nice written summary so that you dont have to go out and search for the information yourself (as if you would anyway... pfft).

    point being...

    If you are too lazy to click on a few links to see the information, you should go back to the other room, turn on the TV sit down and shut the fuck up.

  17. Bush Admin Right On by __aalomb7276 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't agree less. The current administration has done a nearly flawless job so far.

    Bush administration officials ARE responsible for the objectionable actions at Abu Gharib and ARE taking action against those that committed them. That's what being responsible means. Compare that to the previous administration that dodged most responsibility and lied to cover it up.

    Don't poor-mouth the intellectual agenda. It is brilliant and is working.

    1. Re:Bush Admin Right On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Bush administration officials ARE responsible for the objectionable actions at Abu Gharib and ARE taking action against those that committed them. That's what being responsible means."

      What a chump. Do you really think it was just a bunch of privates and corporals who came out with this idea of abusing prisoners? No, this goes right to the top. Did Rumsfeld say "make human pyramids", of course not. But he certainly said "Get info out of these guys no matter what it takes".

      Did some privates tell the JAG to stay away from the prison? Or did it take someone high enough in authority to force JAG to stay away.

      Oh, those 37 deaths in captivity? Was that just 2 or 3 guys?

      Get your head out of the clouds. I'm a lifelong republican, and I think what I'm watching in this administration is as corrupt as it gets in American politics. I'm now ashamed to be represented by these guys.

      Holy cow, wake up before they damage our country even more!

    2. Re:Bush Admin Right On by Mikkeles · · Score: 0, Troll
      'Bush administration officials ARE responsible for the objectionable actions at Abu Gharib and ARE taking action against those that committed them.'

      So you mean that the Bush administration officials are taking action against themselves as they are responsible?

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    3. Re:Bush Admin Right On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a lifelong republican

      Liar.

    4. Re:Bush Admin Right On by ichthus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you really think it was just a bunch of privates and corporals who came out with this idea of abusing prisoners? No, this goes right to the top. Did Rumsfeld say "make human pyramids", of course not. But he certainly said "Get info out of these guys no matter what it takes".

      Do you really think it was Rumsfeld or any other administraion official who instructed the prison guards to document their deeds with photos, and then leak them to the press? Not a very smart move, huh? Chances are, they acted alone on that one. So, why not the abuse as well? Any connection to the top, saying Bush/Rumsfeld are directly responsible to the abuse, is a load of speculative crap. Where's your proof?

      Did some privates tell the JAG to stay away from the prison? Or did it take someone high enough in authority to force JAG to stay away.

      JAG didn't stay away. They just weren't there 24/7. This is, of course, why each case of abuse happened in the very early hours of the morning.

      I'm a lifelong republican...

      Then, why are you drinking Kerry-brand Kool-aid?

      Holy cow, wake up before they damage our country even more!

      Holy Cow! To what damage are you referring? Recovering economy, despite the huge collapse that started in OCT 2000? Homeland safety, despite the onslaught of world terrorism? A world without Sadam Hussein, despite the UN, who thought it better to leave him in power? Lower taxes, despite all the naysayers who said this would hurt the economy?

      You need to change your radio station, man! If you truly are a republican, as you say, you need to stop getting your news solely from the dems.

      --
      sig: sauer
    5. Re:Bush Admin Right On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Liar.

      Not ever republican is a a neo-con or right wing culture warrior.

    6. Re:Bush Admin Right On by maximilln · · Score: 1

      -----
      Recovering economy, despite the huge collapse that started in OCT 2000
      -----
      Give it up. Anyone with half a clue was watching the dot com bubble getting thin as early as mid-1999. The rest of the market was feeding off of the assets and volume generated by the artificially inflated technology sector.

      -----
      Homeland safety, despite the onslaught of world terrorism?
      -----
      Give it up. The nightly news has recently become obsessed with every molotov cocktail being thrown by some disgruntled Palestinian. The only difference is that, four years ago, you weren't watching it on the nightly news. Anyone who hasn't been living in their own perfect world knows that there hasn't been an overall increase in world terrorism. Unless you count the US military marching grim-faced through lands which have previously never seen a major occupying military force.

      -----
      A world without Sadam Hussein, despite the UN, who thought it better to leave him in power?
      -----
      Give it up. Saddam Hussein wasn't that bad as dictators go. With any other dictator through history the US has been happy to turn a blind eye, use economic sanctions, or wait for something tangible to happen. Heck. In Colombia the US actually supports the government regime that pulls those types of human rights abuses.

      -----
      Lower taxes, despite all the naysayers who said this would hurt the economy?
      -----
      Give it up. I keep track of how much of my yearly income gets paid out in taxes and government fees on my rent, food, utilities, insurance, investments, etc. Maybe one tax has gone down but, from a total perspective over the course of the year, I'm up to 54.6% this year from 53.5% last year.

      -----
      You need to change your radio station, man!
      -----
      Try listening to more than one. Try listening to different genres. Try listening to something other than "We're number one! Rah! Rah! Rah!"

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    7. Re:Bush Admin Right On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The current administration has done a nearly flawless job so far.

      True, they aren't covering up their objectionable actions any more. Rumfeld himself has admitted they are torturing people at Guantanamo bay. They claim lawyers told them the Geniva convention allows it. They will not talk about the international treaties against torture. I guess you don't find torture objectionable. Or how Rumsfeld failed to notify both the President and Congress about the true nature of what was happening at Abu Gharib back in January.

      I don't understand how someone could equate condoning torture with a consensual blowjob. It boggles my mind. Also remember they finally did find the evidence (e-mail backups) that showed that Reagon really was involved. And don't give me any Vince Foster bull or I'll know you've lost touch. Or Whitewater for that matter, unless you want to talk about Neil Bush.

      I'm scared for my country. I don't see how we can ever see eye to eye again. People like me see a bunch of flag waving insanity and a population fully in support of truly evil acts. When we speak up and call a spade a spade we are told we are helping terrorist and at best ignored.

      Sadly we've jumped from one "the ends justify the means" to another. First it was the cold war, where we spent up a storm and supported all sorts of evil men (Saddam). Now it's the war on terrorism. I'd really thought we had a chance to start being a positive influence in the world, not just pushing our own agenda by force.

      I think Bush's leadership in Iraq has doubled the number of terrorists and added another generation of young followers.

    8. Re:Bush Admin Right On by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Do you really think it was Rumsfeld or any other administraion official who instructed the prison guards to document their deeds with photos, and then leak them to the press? Not a very smart move, huh? Chances are, they acted alone on that one. So, why not the abuse as well? Any connection to the top, saying Bush/Rumsfeld are directly responsible to the abuse, is a load of speculative crap. Where's your proof?

      Oh, so the fact that Rumsfeld doesn't think it would be a good idea to document your own war crimes must mean he has nothing to do with them? And why does Bush refuse the ICC, like only a handful of villain states do?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    9. Re:Bush Admin Right On by sumdumass · · Score: 1
      And why does Bush refuse the ICC, like only a handful of villain states do?


      Well It isn't just bush that oposes it. It is the people of the untited states that opose it. Also you pretty much answered your own question by grouping the U.S. into a group of villian states.

      One of the bigest reasons i have oposed it and writen my gongressmen about it (remeber the president cannot sign a treaty without the consent of congress. congress has to radify it and give it to him with thier aproval before he can legaly sign it)is the fact that other countries would try and use this to gain power over the united states. I don't see how this would help anyone. malicious prosecutions would result and maybe even war! It just won't happen if i have anythign to do with it. The united states doesn't take orders from any other country and won't give in while i am alive. The icc has already attempted to place rules on the U.S and we laughed at them. they should have waited untill we have signed the treaty before showing thier true collors! The idea of having the ICC is a good one if limited in its abilities with no hope of expanding. outside that, it is a bad idea for every country involved!

      In case your wondering, i am also oposed to the U.N. in the way it is trying to be presented to the americans today. The U.N is a valuable piece of work that should guarenty comunications between countries and offer help in resolving disputs. It should not however be used as a force to mandate punishment or occupy sovereign countries. The U.N fucks everythign up when they try and that is because they are over steping thier bounds. The greast work of the U.N is what caused the americans to go into iraq in the first place. It provided a public pulpit that basically told saddom the he didn't need to listen to the mandate presented to them because france and germeny would not back them. It also told saddom to go ahead and play his games because their wouln't be any pun ishment. Well now the US had to act in order to save face. way top ge france and the U.N. If you would have keeped you mouth shut saddam would have been doing what he was supposed to and the iraq war would have never happened.

      All we need is another international body to fuck things up. The stuff going on at the prisons, while not as violent or nearly as bad as what is legaly allowed at other prisons under the control of differnet countries Is bad only by our standards. I have no doubt it was an isolated incedent. People even at the same prison didn't know anythign about what was going on, and the U.S military were conducting investigations as well as prosecutions before it became a popular political stance by some shady politicions. 3 to four months before the pictures were even leaked out, and the world was in a frenzy over it, steps were being taken to stop it and prosecute thoughs responcible. Woudl bush or rumsfield be doing that if they were the ones in charge of it? hell no. so take you meaning less rable somewere else. most inteligent people know what it going on and can see thru the "lets say what we can to damage bush" slogans.
  18. Sharing Info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I work for an electrical company in Florida and the local Police agency has access to our customer records whenever they want. Must make it easier for them to track people. - This also reminds me of the time I spent in a hotel for a few weeks. During my stay I noticed police cars in the front once in a while. I wonder if hotels share their customer info also. Hmmm. Makes ya think doesn't it?

  19. Insider by magarity · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is why I'm working on a master's degree in data mining. Better to be on the inside. I for one welcome the chance to be your data mining overlord! Buahahaha!

    1. Re:Insider by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Funny
      I for one welcome the chance to be your data mining overlord!

      Pah. You won't be. My guess is that some time around November 2009, Google's server farm will reach a critical mass and achieve self-awareness. It already knows everything - all it lacks is a mind. It will probably have enslaved the human race by Christmas.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  20. Information Disclosure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't have a problem with the mere collection of information - it is what they intend to do with that information that worries me. I think the US should have some sort of information disclosure act, where the government and corporations must fully disclose everything that is going to be done with information they collect.

  21. European data protection by tuxette · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here is the EU Personal Data Directive (95/46/EC), which is the basis/minimum for the data protection laws of each EU and EEA country. The Norwegian Personal Data Act is supposedly the toughest of them all. It's interesting to compare the nuances.

    --
    People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    1. Re:European data protection by kunudo · · Score: 1

      I am Norwegian, and I am quite happy about the current regulations. There's even a nice government agency that you can report violators to. In addition, they are 'active', in the way that they actually go out and look for violations, instead of just relying on reports. Very nice. I can actually avoid getting my mailbox full of ads every day, even advertisement addressed to me. Not like when I was in the US... :/

    2. Re:European data protection by tuxette · · Score: 1
      God ettermiddag! I'm very familiar with the Norwegian Data Proection Agency (*). However, they can't do anything about ads that aren't addressed to you directly (uadressert reklame); you have to get one of those stickers from the post office.


      (*) Happy with them for the most part, but not always. They could do a lot better, but apparently are low-priority when it comes to funds from the Department of Justice.

      --
      People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    3. Re:European data protection by kunudo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's hard to slap a sticker on your mailbox... :)

      Anyway, that's not a privacy concern.. The biggest issue, I guess, is all the unlicensed surveilance cameras that are popping up these days, especially in Oslo, and according to some spokesperson I saw on the news, you're right, they don't have the cash to do anything about it... Overall though, I'm still quite satisfied with them... (If you live here though, I guess you knew all this allready... :)

  22. Time to get your gun by cdrguru · · Score: 1
    And shoot those police with a shoot-to-kill order.

    Come on, are you a sheep? Are you going to rattle off a list of things like this and say you have no responsibility for changing things? If you honestly believe your list, you know the 2000 election was rigged and the 2004 election will have a similar result. So, politics are dead in the US. What are you going to do?

    If you do nothing it will soon be too late. How about a repeal of the 22nd amendment so George W. Bush can be "President for Life"? Do you think this is too far fetched? Obviously not, from your list. So, if you wait until November to overthrow the government, it may be too late and we will have no choices left. At least now it would be possible to rebuild the electoral process.

    1. Re:Time to get your gun by cybersk4nk · · Score: 1

      shoot all you want, but i guarantee you you won't live 24 hours. even in the states, where you are legally allowed to possess firearms, you have nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. think about it, do you have: -manpower (thousands of men/women) -helicopters -gunships -fighter aircraft -ammo/weapons stockpiles -an easy way to escape the states if you were a wanted individual -somewhere to hide if you fled the country -enough food/supplies to hide for a significant amount of time, even a month? -the world is completely mapped, and even in a small town you will be recognized very fast and your new arrival will spread. you're royally f***ed. you have no hope. i myself have though of this scenario. you can't be robin hood anymore, there are no sherwood forests that you can hide in. and democracy? haha, the government you've elected is in power for as long as their term. you can't get rid of them until the vote comes round. rebellion is not much fun anymore in the 21st century, is it? i only wish, because i'd be doing it. now.

  23. Public data should be public by nwbvt · · Score: 2, Insightful
    All this data is in the public domain. Anyone can get access to it. Regulating it would not be protecting privacy, it would be censoring free speech.

    I have trouble seeing how the availability of information is in itself a bad thing. Yes, it can be used to draw false conclusions, but that is a fault of its use, not its existence. And its not like false conclusions are never drawn without databases of public information. Anyone ever heard of racial profiling?

    We should not worry about regulating the existence of such databases, we should instead regulate its use. Don't let the police get a search warrant based solely on data they found in a database, but allow them to query the databases to help them obtain the necessary evidence.

    --
    Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    1. Re:Public data should be public by HangingChad · · Score: 1
      Then it's time we had another look at what constitutes public information because I think there's way too much of it out there with far too few controls on who has access to it and why.

      I don't believe the police should be able to troll the records of millions of innocent people looking for few troublemakers anymore than they should be allowed to randomly search homes. It's not that big of a step from one to the other. Probable cause should apply everywhere. In your home, your car, your data, including utility records, credit card transactions, bank records, everything. The cops have enough to do dealing with the problems we know about, we don't need them out data fishing.

      Besides, it's useless. In years of working with databases I can tell you that the best way to solve a crime is still pounding the beat on a street.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    2. Re:Public data should be public by nwbvt · · Score: 1
      "Then it's time we had another look at what constitutes public information because I think there's way too much of it out there with far too few controls on who has access to it and why."

      You are free to not use credit cards, get loans, etc., if you don't want to. Hell you can go become a hermit somewhere out in the mountains if you want to. But for the rest of us, it is worth the small loss of privacy.

      "I don't believe the police should be able to troll the records of millions of innocent people looking for few troublemakers anymore than they should be allowed to randomly search homes. It's not that big of a step from one to the other."

      One is private property, the other is public information. Thats a pretty big step in my opinion.

      "Probable cause should apply everywhere."

      Even to things that are public? What about a cop seeing a driver swerving all over the highway? Should they not be allowed to pull him over because he didn't have probable cause to look at his car? Should the entire police force sit in the office with their eyes shut until something comes up because they need 'probable cause' before they begin the investigation?

      This is the use of public information in the assistance of gaining probably cause. Probably cause is required to go any further.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    3. Re:Public data should be public by HangingChad · · Score: 1
      You are free to not use credit cards, get loans, etc., if you don't want to. Hell you can go become a hermit somewhere out in the mountains if you want to. But for the rest of us, it is worth the small loss of privacy.

      Why does that make that data public? Why does the fact I have a credit card or what I buy with it qualify as public knowledge? I happen to think that what I buy is no one's damn business but mine. Even property records give away too much information in my opinion. I shouldn't have to be a hermit not to have any jackass with an Internet connection having access to my purchase records, credit rating or anything else. I think it's time the definition of privacy was updated to take into account large databases than keep individual records indefinitely.

      Privacy doesn't disappear in one big event...9/11 aside and John Ashcroft aside...it slips away a little at a time. And at every little slip, every step, there's someone arguing that the little bit of privacy invasion is justified by the convenience. Well, just think if we have just one big round of house to house drug searches. We could put a big dent in the drug problem all at once. The greater good would certainly be served by the minor inconvenience to people's privacy. With that kind of logic you can justify any abuse.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    4. Re:Public data should be public by nwbvt · · Score: 1
      "Why does that make that data public? Why does the fact I have a credit card or what I buy with it qualify as public knowledge?"

      Because you signed a little form saying it was public information.

      "I happen to think that what I buy is no one's damn business but mine. "

      By definition it is the business of companies who are giving you credit. If you want them to lend you money, they have to know you will pay them back.

      "Privacy doesn't disappear in one big event..."

      The privacy you are talking about never existed in the first place. Anyone who thought otherwise is a fool.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
  24. We have a file of pointless trivia on you by mwood · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh my dear lord, they're going to figure out that I buy computer books AND read _College Roomies from Hell_. And you know what that means!

    Or maybe they'll be convinced I'm a terrorist because I read CNN *and* /. Yeah.

    1. Re:We have a file of pointless trivia on you by Frit+Mock · · Score: 1

      ... That means you'll be flagged with an yellow star!

  25. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

    Given that the G8 summit will be a huge target, what do you think they should do? Throw Twinkies and ask the nice man to please put the bomb down?

    Balancing the right to protest with the prevention of a potential suicide bomber is tough. Where is your personal line? What would you have the security forces do?

  26. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by Bob+Bitchen · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    And the saddest thing of course is that most people are outraged by the price of gasoline. We are indeed in sad shape. Bush should be impeached for lying about the Iraq "war". We really need to send Bush and his cast of kooks, Colin Powell, his son FCC chairman Powell, Condoleeza Rice, "Big" Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, et. al. into early retirement. Their view of the way the world should be is too sick and twisted.

    --
    http://tinyurl.com/3t236
  27. data quality? by tuxette · · Score: 4, Interesting
    What I'm interested in, is the quality of the data the government is mining. They are going through a lot of databases that may contain incorrect, false, misleading, or outdated data:

    2. Data Quality Principle
    Personal data should be relevant to the purposes for which they are to be used, and, to the extent necessary for those purposes, should be accurate, complete and kept up-to-date.

    How does the government separate the junk data from what may actually be worth looking at?

    --
    People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    1. Re:data quality? by maximilln · · Score: 1

      -----
      How does the government separate the junk data from what may actually be worth looking at?
      -----
      They don't. The government approach is "there is no such thing as bad information." Conflicting information is traditionally resolved in a manner which best suits the government. If the conflicting information involves a citizen who is well connected then the information is resolved in favor of the citizen. If the conflicting information involves a citizen who is not well connected then the government has a job tracking someone for another day.

      --
      +++ATHZ 99:5:80
    2. Re:data quality? by IceAgeComing · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How does the government separate the junk data from what may actually be worth looking at?

      In the case of the 2000 Florida elections and the woefully inaccurate convicted felons database, the answer was simple: assume the database is correct, especially if it contains a political demographic that is likely to vote Democrat. The ~50,000 non-felons who were denied their right to vote were too poor to sue, so no big deal. I may remind our gentle readers that the Florida presidential elections were decided by less than 600 votes.

      It chills me to think that in this age of terrorism paranoia, this kind of approach will be repeated when searching for "terrorists". Hopefully, some of those who are wrongfully "detained" will have the means to fight.

    3. Re:data quality? by tuxette · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It chills me to think that in this age of terrorism paranoia, this kind of approach will be repeated when searching for "terrorists".

      I read an article a while ago that painted an interesting scenario. A person living on "Lebanon Street" is put on the no-fly-list due to connections to Lebanon. And of course, the poor sod has no way in getting his situation rectified. I don't have any URLs, unfortunately; if anyone here read the same article and has an URL, I'd greatly appreciate seeing it again.

      --
      People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    4. Re:data quality? by j.+andrew+rogers · · Score: 2, Informative
      What I'm interested in, is the quality of the data the government is mining. They are going through a lot of databases that may contain incorrect, false, misleading, or outdated data:

      Absolutely true. I worked on a huge commercial/government mining and data integration project in the mid-90s (this isn't exactly something Bush thought of) and the state of the government databases were attrocious. Extremely dirty data, and of the over a thousand databases that were integrated, half the government ones looked like they had been maintained in a spreadsheet or flat file rather than any kind of real DBMS. A lot of the data was so out of spec that we discarded 10% of the records during the integration because it couldn't be unambiguously deciphered. A real data management nightmare; it is a wonder they can find anything at all.

      By comparison, commercial databases are immaculate. The government needs to develop some type of professional data management corps. Private industry would think you were mad if you suggested managing data the way the government often does. Lots of one-off hacks by people who know nothing about basic principles of creating a database. This isn't just at the Federal level, the State databases were just as bad.

      Back when I was doing work for the government, the open secret was that the quality of the data in the databases was so low that almost nobody used it because it couldn't be trusted. People were paid to maintain the systems, but very little utility was ever realized.

  28. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by workindev · · Score: 0

    3: Our economy is going to shit and we're going farther and farther into that hole.

    Really? We have had 4 straight quarters of record breaking growth, and have added 1.2 Million jobs in the past 6 months. If that is the "hole" we are going to, I say keep digging!

  29. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by USAPatriot · · Score: 2, Informative
    Most of your points are plainly idiotic, but this one is so easily refutable.

    3: Our economy is going to shit and we're going farther and farther into that hole.

    GDP is growing faster. Unemployment is going down. Manufacturing is strong. The stock markets are moving up. Now by what measure does this translate to "shit"?

    The facts are so clear the US economy is back on track again, why do these idiots keep sticking to their view from 3 years ago? This meme needs to die. It's not true, and it's certainly not insightful.

    --

    Slashdot Moderation: From positive to terrible in 2 "insightful" posts.

  30. Did you *even* read the parent post ? by aepervius · · Score: 1

    I quote : " And it is not allowed to give information away or even sell them (that is only allowed for public available information)". Lucky for you you have freedom of spitting untruth (no true freedom in germany) while being the real coward hiding behind anonymity... Only private data not available true a public source (like telephon book) is protected.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  31. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by John+Hurliman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    now we're waiting for the enabling law (aka, the law that let the reichstag put people into concentration camps).

    You mean a law that would allow people to be detained without a reason, thrown in a Guantanamo Bay prison and not allowed to speak to anyone including legal counsel? Don't be silly that will never happen!

  32. High Bills by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have extremely higher electric bills than the average user, I would suggest practicing your plant gardening hobby elsewhere.

  33. Big Brother ... by Frit+Mock · · Score: 1

    ... is 20 years to late!

  34. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by Frit+Mock · · Score: 1

    "So, we've got our reichstag fire (9/11), we've got our Decree of the Reich president(Patriot act), now we're waiting for the enabling law (aka, the law that let the reichstag put people into concentration camps)."

    You obviously have missed something ... the US already has its concentration camps ... and enabled the law ... Guantanamo Bay (have I written it right, not sure?)

  35. Good by mattmcarroll · · Score: 1

    I am in favor of all datamining efforts that have an opportunity to inrease the security of the USA.

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Fool.

    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You probably are, since they only seem to care about muslims at the moment. You might change your mind when the target changes to say political affiliation, or ancestry, or first language, or sexual preference, skin color, reading habits etc....

      You see, these things are never a big issue at first, because the people singled out are always in the minority. The problem is, you have no idea who will be targeted as a threat next, it could be you, your mother, the guy next door, or your buddy from work, or your spouse. Just ask the laywer from Portland what he thinks about it all. A mystery fingerprint that supposedly matched (full on bullshit, for sure), and a muslim, that is all it took to fully susspend ALL of this AMERICAN'S rights. If he had worked at a McDonald's, and been of middle eastern background, he would be in Gitmo right now, naked with a sandbag on his head.

      I know as a probably white, christian, you feel that you have nothing to fear, but eventually someone, somewhere will do or say something to "connect" you to something, and after that, you live under a microscope for life.

      This has to be the saddest decade for America since the start of your nation. It shocks me that a country whose people take every opportunity to stand on a soap box and proclaim how great and free they are, are allowing themselves to be herded and bullied into giving up all that you are proud of. When this insanity is over (if it ever ends), you will have no freedom, no liberty, no justice, and no choice, just your tattered flags to wave as your jailors pass you in the streets. Be very careful when you demand security at all costs, you may get far more than you bargained for.

    3. Re:Good by Money+for+Nothin' · · Score: 1

      I am all in favor of putting anti-liberty traitors like you away in Gitmo for life.

  36. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by Frit+Mock · · Score: 1

    "3: Our economy is going to shit and we're going farther and farther into that hole.

    GDP is growing faster. Unemployment is going down. Manufacturing is strong. The stock markets are moving up. Now by what measure does this translate to "shit"?
    "

    Be careful ... not everything that shines is Gold!

    Since the grandparent post talks a lot of Nazi-Germany, I just want to add, that after Hitlers election in 1932 the German GDP was growing fast, too. Unemplyment went down, too. Manufacturing was strong, too. Stock markets moved up, too. ... and it translated to shit in 1939, when the economical breakdown was almost inevitable ... but hey, the solution was quite simple ... the germans just had to raid Poland ... hm, can't remember or was it Poland or was it Iraq with all the oil?

  37. Which 75 stories ..Re:Gosh... by leoaugust · · Score: 1
    Sure, there is a lot you can tell about the whole building even by looking at the 75 stories.

    If you tell me that the 75 stories are the bottom stories then I agree with you. The problem is that you are showing me the top 75 stories standing up in thin air, and asking me to believe that the bottom 25 stories will soon be done. In this case, which is what it is with the Administration's "achievements" in Iraq, it is a cause of considerable worry. Pure and simple delusion.

    .

    --
    To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...
  38. Indelible Records by Darth+Cider · · Score: 1

    The trouble with info in databases is its persistence. You might forget an indiscretion of youth, but big iron never will. Anyone who's ever appeared in court and has been charged with a maximum allowable offense, later reduced to a much more minor offense, ought to verify that the lesser charge is on record. Bad records can ruin chances at employment. Many travelers to Canada find themselves blocked from entry, stranded at the border, because they didn't know their records were in error.

  39. So what's new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing, this sort of thing has been going on for a long time. All the data is there, it's just becoming easier and easier to link it all together.

    Back in the early 90's I ran some DIALOG queries (using a test account), and found out which execs in my company were adulterers. It's suprisingly easy when you think about it. Married 1st wife on this date, had 1st kid, divorced 1st wife 10 years later, 2nd child born within 4 months of divorce and within 1 month of marriage to 2nd wife. Hrmm....

  40. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by maximilln · · Score: 1

    -----
    We have had 4 straight quarters of record breaking growth
    -----
    Damn those slaves can pull hard when they're whipped heavily enough.

    -----
    and have added 1.2 Million jobs in the past 6 months
    -----
    Yeah, there are Wal-Marts and McDonald's are going up everywhere. I'm still suspicious of how those numbers are generated. If my company trims 5000 people and then hires 250 new people, is that 250 jobs added?

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  41. Why are they doing it? by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    Ok, it all seems a bit weird to a European that the government can do stuff like that, but why do they need to.
    Are we (in Europe) really crap at catching people or:

    Do they want to catch everyone that makes the slightest error.

    Is there a big problem in the US that requires data-mining compared to Europe.

    Are you just crap at catching people in the US and need data-mining.

    Are you planning on sacking half of the police force when data-mining by a couple of terminal operators catches everyone.

    Help, it all seems like freaky big brother overkill, isn't a measure of civilisation 'the less you need to spy on your neighbour the more civilized you are'

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    1. Re:Why are they doing it? by NoYes19 · · Score: 1

      The US, doesn't have laws protecting data acquisition. So the data existing is perfectly legit for them to posses. So, it would be retarded for agencies not to tap into this source of information...it provides them a low cost way to acquire data they need...even if their interested in a small subset it is still cheaper to acquire the data then collect it themselves.

      If data is available and someone doesn't take advantage of it we call tehm stupid or ignorant. IF the governement uses available data we call it criminal....

    2. Re:Why are they doing it? by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      So are they going to make half the police force redundant?

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  42. Governement Data Mining by NoYes19 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is not active privacy invading surveillance by the government. The is consolidating information from "publicly"/consented sources to look for trends. Consolidating legal and publicly available data is not invasion of privacy. These projects are forms of "passive surveillance", where we combine and consolidate information from a variety of already known sources to produce information that was not apparent before.

    ...o wait I don't have a tin hat on, and tin hats are in fashion right now on /.; time to watch this get modded down.

  43. Re:You are forgetting something... by symbolic · · Score: 2, Interesting


    This is the government. We have laws, and a Constitution that (purportedly) protects us from the government by limiting its power through a series of checks and balances. Yes, this information may be available to the general public, but John Q. Public doesn't have military or police force that come beating in your front door and taking you into custody because your personal information matches a certain pattern - whatever that may be.

    Herein lies, I'd argue, at least one reason behind the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It basically says to the government, "If you don't have a reason to be looking at John Q. Public, you shouldn't be looking at John Q. Public." These projects constitute a massive fishing expedition, and we're all suspect.

  44. well... by tuxette · · Score: 2, Insightful
    It's probably legal...or "legal" in the US. But in Europe, it is illegal.

    First of all, in Europe, data is collected for specific purposes (use limitation principle) and can only be used for these specific purposes and not for other purposes, unless the data subject explicitly consents to new use.

    Secondly, whether or not data is "legal" and "pubicly available," you have to get consent from the data subject in order to use that data. And of course you would still be bound by the use limitation principle.

    "Passive surveillance" is not prudent, as the data collector risks collecting "junk data" (data that is incorrect, false, outdated, etc.), in addition to risking data subjects filing lawsuits.

    --
    People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
  45. Re:You are forgetting something... by jonblaze · · Score: 1

    Herein lies, I'd argue, at least one reason behind the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It basically says to the government, "If you don't have a reason to be looking at John Q. Public, you shouldn't be looking at John Q. Public." These projects constitute a massive fishing expedition, and we're all suspect.

    I appreciate the rationale behind your argument, but it is legally wrong. The Fourth Amendment says that the government may not conduct warrantless searches (except where obtaining a warrant first would be unreasonable). Of course, the antecedent question is, "Has there been a search?" And the Supreme Court has held that there is no "search" if you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy (thus, a search of the garbage cans you leave out for collection is not really a "search" for Fourth Amendment purposes). So, as to information readily available to the John Q. Public, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy, and therefore the government may search it without running afoul of the Fourth Amendment because -- as a legal matter -- there is no "search."

  46. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by workindev · · Score: 1
    Damn those slaves can pull hard when they're whipped heavily enough

    So, having the most people working for the highest wages in history suddenly qualifies as slave labor?

    Yeah, there are Wal-Marts and McDonald's are going up everywhere. I'm still suspicious of how those numbers are generated. If my company trims 5000 people and then hires 250 new people, is that 250 jobs added?

    This isn't mystery science. The statistics are freely available to the public. For example, here are the statistics for the month of April:

    The number of employed people went up by 278,000 to 138,576,000

    The number of unemployed people went down by 188,000 to 8,164,000

    The number of people in the workforce went up by 91,000, and the number of people not in the workforce also went up by 116,000

    Compare this with the employment data from September 2003 and you can see that the number of employed people went up from 137,573,000 to 138,576,000, and the number of unemployed people went down from 8,973,000 to 8,164,000.

    The average hourly earnings for production workers is at an all-time high of $15.59 per hour. Unless Wal-Mart and McDonalds have tripled their wages, this increase certainly isn't attributed to them.

  47. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by maximilln · · Score: 1

    -----
    The number of unemployed people went down by 188,000 to 8,164,000
    -----
    Is that reported as newly filed unemployment claims? Even the nightly news will report that many people have decided that standing in line at the unemployment office isn't worth the effort.

    All of the comments about the number of employed people correlates well with the new KFC they're building down the road.

    -----
    The average hourly earnings for production workers is at an all-time high of $15.59 per hour
    -----
    Averages are the most easily massaged numbers of all. Every statistician knows that. On a scale as large as the entire population of the US, an average number is marginally useless. An interesting number which would prove my point would be the number of people employed as "production workers" from September 2003 to current.

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  48. Re:You are forgetting something... by symbolic · · Score: 4, Insightful


    And I'd argue that this (even though it might be the current standing of the U.S. Supreme Court), has no merit, and the reason is simple: Our society is built on an infrastructure that, for all practical purposes requires that I do certain things. I have little choice but to place my trash out on a curb for pickup, because there are few, if any other practical options. The fact that I have few (if any) other practical options does not portend or in any way grant anyone a "right" to take advantage of something merely because it is available, and especially because its availability is a byproduct of the infrastructure itself. I use the infrastructure because, as a pragmatic and civil-minded denizen, I must.

    Let's address the issue with the "publicly available" information. While there are certain records that are unquestionably public information, I'd argue that what I purchase is NOT public information- each purchase is a contract between myself and those vendors with which I choose to do business. Unfortunately, the easy availability, and wide use of credit, have allowed institutions to hijack, retain, sell, and otherwise use the specific details associated with each transaction, and make them available as they see fit.

    Something to think about - Let's say I cut my finger while preparing dinner. I use a kleenex to clean the wound, before applying a bandaid. What am I now to do with the kleenex? It has my blood on it, and presumably, can serve as a "sample" for anyone interested in fishing it out of my garbage. What am I to do? I don't believe that anyone has has a right to acquire this without my permission, or without a warrant. I am placing it in the garbage not because I have any intention of making it available to the public, but because this is the proper and accepted method of disposal.

    Here you can see the quandary imposed by a) the infrastructure, and b) the court's current standing. I don't believe it is fair, and I hope to see it change at some point in the future.

  49. Look who doesn't do data mining by Aidtopia · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The GAO report that surveyed government departments to find out how much data mining they're doing and planning is interesting. In particular, the appendix that lists which departments don't do or plan to do any data mining has a few notable inclusions:

    • National Agricultural Statistics Service
    • Bureau of the Census
    • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA!?)
    • U.S. Geological Survey

    You'd expect some of those to have data mining as their primary function. Others are just hard to believe.

  50. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does that match up with the 3.5 million jobs lost in the previous 6 quarters. So you lost 3.5 million skilled jobs, and the idiot son of an asshole replaced them with 1.2 million poisitions at Wal-mart, and this makes you happy? Fuck you are stupid. If just 10% of you idiot americans ever turned off Fox news, put your fucking flags away, and looked at what was happening to the PLANET because of your IDIOT leaders, the world would be a better place. If you can't get that to happen, could you at least keep your storm troopers in your OWN FUCKING COUNTRY. Here is a news flash, THE REST OF THE WORLD IS SICK OF YOUR SHIT. We don't care what you think (most of you do not think anyways), we don't care what you want. Just fuck off, fence off your stupid country, live in your fantasy world, where everyone loves a loudmouthed, obnoxious, undereducated, asshole, and stay home. Your current administration has effectivly alienated you from all of your allies, except Blair (not the people of Great Britian, they hate your guts), oh ya, and all of those "coutries that didn't exist until 9 years ago" that you paid to stand beside you. Now, after your idiot president has managed to get himself into another Vietnam (OK how fucking stupid does one have to be, to have NOT seen that coming!!), he wants the rest of the world to bail you all out?? Fuck Off. We tried that, when we all told you what a bad freakin plan that was. But no, Cowboy George had to prove us all wrong, and go parading off to war alone. Well, looks good on you. Shame about the soldiers getting killed and all, but if you join the US military, and do not expect to be put in harms way, then you are as stupid you look.

    I guess your right, your president is a roaring success. I would suggest that Americans have never been less safe outside of the US (no one ever liked you, but now you are actually hated), internally you have evolved into a police state, politically you have ZERO credibility anywhere in the world, and you have made yourselves more terrorist enemies than ever before. Your like the sailor who brags about all the pussy he bags in port, it sounds pretty good until you realise that all of your company is rented. Good luck with all that.

  51. it'd be nice if... by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 1

    It'd be nice if it turned out that all these projects are intended to do things like:

    - locate areas where increases in education, public health, and crime prevention spending would have a large positive impact

    - identify major sources of pollution

    - find patterns of police brutality

    - predict and avoid major traffic problems

    Somehow, I don't get the feeling that these are the goals of most of these projects.

  52. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by workindev · · Score: 1

    Is that reported as newly filed unemployment claims? Even the nightly news will report that many people have decided that standing in line at the unemployment office isn't worth the effort. All of the comments about the number of employed people correlates well with the new KFC they're building down the road

    No, that is the total number of people that collect unemployment. The BLS also tracks the number of people that drop off unemployment because they are discouraged about the job prospects. Guess what? That number is also decreasing (492,000 from a high of 514,000), and is only nominally higher than the 1996 figures when we had the same unemployment rate.

    Averages are the most easily massaged numbers of all. Every statistician knows that. On a scale as large as the entire population of the US, an average number is marginally useless. An interesting number which would prove my point would be the number of people employed as "production workers" from September 2003 to current.

    In other words, you refuse to believe the statistics because you simply disagree wtih them. All of the data you could possibly want is availble on the BLS website. The average weekly earnings for all private sector employees (which is plainly listed on the April report) is also at an all time high of $525.38. You can also see that the average work week for all private sector employees is steady at 33.7 hours/week, and the manufacturing work week has dropped to 40.3 hours/week. In other words, we are getting paid more for the same or less work now.

    But this is pointless to show you any facts because you seem to be easily blinded by your hatred for the current administration.

  53. (C)opyright protections by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    When I give my personal info to another party, I retain the copyright on that info. That party is to use the info for only the express purpose for which I extended a limited license to copy it. When they give my copyrighted info to another party, they have violated my copyright. I revoke their limited rights, and require remedy for damages. This copyright protection applies to government, corporate and individual entities. I am protected from cross-agency access. You are, too. When will we take action against these copyright violations?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  54. Re:fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, that ticks me off. The bitch is hot but she never gets on cam anymore. She used have the thing in her BEDROOM before and you could watch her sleep half-naked.

    Not any more. Fuck.

  55. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by maximilln · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't call it hatred. More "realistic". Every administration, including the current one, tends to skew the numbers in their favor especially in election years.

    The average weekly earnings for private sector employment is $545.38? I barely make that with a top-notch education. Is it possible that number is skewed by the all-time high of CEO compensation disproportionately skewing the scale? $525/week, here in the US, barely pays the bills. Knock of 30% for taxes, then knock of 6% sales tax on any money that's spent and even a $600 rent, with $50 electric, and a $30 telephone, plus an average $450 food ($15/day), and $50 car insurance, plus at least $20/week for gas. It starts to get pretty thin on just basic living expenses. Heaven forbid anyone's paying college loans. We're in the red before we ever get out of the gate.

    If I'm blinded by this supposed "hatred", you're blinded by a perfect naivete.

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  56. Why's the source matter? by schmaltz · · Score: 1

    The govt's databases are nowhere near as fine-grained as the private sector's. Your spending habits, travel habits, job history, crime history - it's all there, more than the G-men could ever organize on their own.

    This is warrantless search and seizure in my view. Looking for patterns to identify you as a potential criminal or terrorist? Is this what it's come to?

    --
    Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma ... where's Siggy?
  57. No way by schmaltz · · Score: 1

    Gathering together databases of all your info and tracking it for habits that might identify you as a potential criminal or terrorist is a whole hell of a lot different than using those databases after the crime was committed.

    Are we so terrified that crimes must now be prevented before they occur? Kryzt, give me a fuckin' break.

    --
    Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma ... where's Siggy?
  58. Easy... by tacokill · · Score: 1

    Easy answer: they don't.

    I *hope* my data is useless and cluttered. Although security through obscurity doesn't work well, obscurity itself if better than nothing.

    The more chaff in the air, the harder it is to see.

  59. boo-hoo, poor criminals being scrutinized... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I can promise you that "the government" has way more imprtant things to do that track how much pr0n you look at or where you shop for blue jeans.

    Federal employees are looking for TERRORISTS, CRIMINALS, and other BAD PEOPLE. If you put out the info, expect to have it scrutinized by someone, and dont come down on those trying to protect the world from seriously bad stuff.

  60. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by cybersk4nk · · Score: 1

    of course, who needs a law anyway if you're the US government?

  61. Simple solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...make every elected official's corresponding information from every one of these data mining operations publicly available on one .gov website, cross-indexed. I'll bet they pass a law banning pretty much every form of mining the next day...

  62. Presumed Innocent until proven otherwise? by aussie_a · · Score: 0

    I don't know if the assumption people are innocent is in the constitution or the law or just something the government supposedly follows, but I oppose any laws that go against the "you are assumed to be innocent until proven otherwise"

  63. An off-topic question by aussie_a · · Score: 0

    I hate to be off-topic, but I don't watch the news as much as I once did...

    Do you really think it was Rumsfeld or any other administraion official who instructed the prison guards to document their deeds with photos, and then leak them to the press? Not a very smart move, huh? Chances are, they acted alone on that one. So, why not the abuse as well? Any connection to the top, saying Bush/Rumsfeld are directly responsible to the abuse, is a load of speculative crap. Where's your proof?

    Is it being investigated by an unbiased committee (or at least a committee that represents both biases)? Or is everyone just throwing around comments without any attempt to find the truth?

  64. Data mining is good.. by rofthorax · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Data mining influences design choices for commercial entrprises, but its good to have data mining for the government, even of theory own institutions, it helps keep everyone accountable for what they do, which reduces crime. It can be abused though, say the one managing the database intentionally leaves information out of the database to let certain kinds of crime go undetected. But the idea behind data mining is to detect problems before they can fester.

    However I was involved in a project to standardize the processes of data collection and use for healthcare, with the end result an interface standard for connecting healthcare institutiones, the technology was contested by Microsoft's vendors because it was claimed to be competitive with packages such as outlook, access and excel. So LANL pulled the plug on the research. The result of the research can be found at www.openemed.org . The applications of this technology are tremendous, but I've been able to tens of useful purposes for the technology, like a paperless womb-to-tomb healthcare record useable for determining healthcare trends and epidemics. Its either this or adopt HL7 which is big, bulky, and inconsistent from year to year.

    --
    Just say no to license servers!!
  65. Re:To give the tin foil hat view of the whole thin by Money+for+Nothin' · · Score: 1

    The stock markets are moving up.

    Just what time period are you looking at? Let's look at the 5 year history of the DOW: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=^DJI&t=5y

    Through 1999 and until about June of 2001, it was hovering around 10,500 or so. Sept. 11, 2001 caused the dive to near 8000. DOW goes back up again to around 10,000 until about June 2002. Then another dive, this time down to about 7,200 in Sept. 2002. Goes back up to around 8,700 through X-Mas 2002, takes another dive through Q1 2003 (when we were gettin' our war on), then rises steadily to around 10,800 until it starts to flatten out around 10,100 starting in about Feb. 2004.

    That's the short-term analysis -- a rather cyclical approach. Look at it long-term. Where were we 5 years ago? Around 10,800. Where are we now? 10,100, with no reasonable assurance that we are not headed for another dive in the coming months, particularly since the bond markets will strengthen once the Federal Reserve gets around to raising interest rates near the end of the summer.

    IOW, it's been a rough ride for the DOW over the Bush Presidential administration's lifespan, and will continue to be through election day.

    To quote a great and famous Republican who at least *tried* to cut government spending and waste, "Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?"

    No, we are not. And that's not only because the stock market is down from where it was when Clinton was in office.

    Clinton screwed an intern; Bush screwed America. Vote Libertarian. :)

  66. Too bad your idiot Prez already screwed us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you say "deficit"? What, you think that is going to go away overnight? Your war-happy Bushy is going to drive this economy into the cemetary. Bombing other nations into fake democracy isn't free, us Americans are going to pay for it all either now or later. Bush wants later.