Slashdot Mirror


Endorse EDRI's Statement Against Data Retention

Ville Oksanen writes "Privacy International (PI) and European Digital Rights (EDRI) have published their joint answer to the consultation on mandatory data retention. The European Commission asked for public comments on a proposed retention regime across Europe between 12 and 36 months for all traffic data generated by using fixed and mobile telephony and Internet. As Statewatch puts it: 'This is a proposal so intrusive that Ashcroft, Ridge and company can only dream about it, exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act.' EDRI and PI are currently collecting endorsements from organizations and companies for their stamement here. This is unfortunately not enough to stop the process - expecially more should be done in the member states, which ultimately decide the fate of the proposal. So contact your local politicians today!"

55 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. So much for the internet liberating people by LucidBeast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The ability to record our movements, intrests, communications will in the future make it possible to really control the population from itself.

  2. "exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act" by l3v1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No surprise here. Seeing hoow privacy issues are sought to be handled in the US and how more and more of US (mal)practices come over to us (i.e. Europe) every day, there's nothing to be surprised at.

    What we need to do is hold our ground and not let these things happen. Same holds for software patents and the like.

    Freedom also means you are free to stand up and defend your rights. What we don't defend today may be lost tomorrow. And yes, that's too late. It's always easier [revent than to abolish later.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    1. Re:"exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act" by Moridineas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm glad you somehow managed to blame the US for this.

      Hell, nazism, fascism, dictatorships--did america cause them too?

      It's just complete nonsense to pretend that Europe (as if there was a European standard) has a perfect and completely enviable record of privacy, rights, etc. Britain for instance has more cameras per capita than any other country i believe? Germany and France both outlaw large degrees of expression, as well as historical collection (one e.g. -- nazi peraphanelia).

      The U.S. is by no means perfect, but just calm down before you go rabid anti-US.

    2. Re:"exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act" by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 3, Informative
      Freedom also means you are free to stand up and defend your rights.

      Unfortunately, not doing what the US wants you to do usually ends in a diplomatic riot or trade war. That is, if you're lucky. If you're unlucky the US will draft up some bullshit law ( The "The Hague Invasion Act", anyone? ) and "liberate" you from your vile and evil goverment that opposes your freedom*.

      The US goverment is filled with self-righteous morons who are full of themselves. They WILL try to screw over ANY country by any means possible, that doesn't do exactly what the US goverment wants them to do. That said, the bad name of the US is not set in stone. The people of the US hopefully can and will change this, somehow...

      * == Freedom as defined by Bush 'n co

    3. Re:"exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act" by Triskele · · Score: 2, Informative

      You may not understand this but we over here are glad that Nazis are proscribed and Nazi paraphenalia is banned. That does NOT limit our freedom of expression anymore than you are not allowed to incite murder. I wish you yanks would understand that.

      --

      --
      USA: home of the world's largest terrorist training camp.

    4. Re:"exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act" by Pantero+Blanco · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're going to have to explain to me how owning a Nazi flag or a German WW2 helmet has anything to do with inciting murder.

      Now, I could understand a law against pro-Nazi demonstrations that specifically encouraged people to kill Jews (which WOULD be inciting murder), but banning the possession or sale of anything related to Nazis goes far beyond that. Hitler isn't going to rise from the dead and turn all your children into Neo-Nazis just because a few people collect war memorabilia.

    5. Re:"exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act" by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Things got a little pissy in europe in the 1940s. Most reasonable people could care less whether someone is allowed to own a Nazi flag or not... it's that a nation might go too far in banning such things. The Nazis sort of proved they had no right to exist, but if the government doesn't like you, all they have to do is claim you're some covert neonazi group, and pretty soon all the same prohibitions apply to your group.

      Even here in the US, nazis are only protected in principle, not because the fuckhats deserve to be protected.

  3. Re:Just curious... by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since /. is US centric, and this appears to be an EU matter, why would they give a rat's ass what most of us have to say on the matter?

    For the same reason european /. visitors give a rat's ass about US matters?

    In this case, the reason might be: The US government might get ideas of going the same way if this proposal gets through.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  4. Re:Just curious... by geminidomino · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh, rest assured, I'm sure that US.government already has these ideas. My guess is their either waiting for the election to be over, or for the next crisis to shoehorn it in.

  5. Who will store all that data? by dUb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If that will come to happen, I will invest my money to all storage companies. Who can store all records of web, email and instant messenger logs? Is it user who is responsible to store all data (including spam email)? Or is it ISP's and teleoperators?
    That will be huge amount of data!

    1. Re:Who will store all that data? by leonmergen · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think it will be the same as phone companies today - "it's your own problem... and if you don't manage to store it all, we'll fine you!"

      --
      - Leon Mergen
      http://www.solatis.com
    2. Re:Who will store all that data? by marcovje · · Score: 2, Funny


      Or on the constructors that are going to build that HUGE building for the thoughtpolice where they analyse it all.

      I think I'll rename myself to Winston Smith, and apply.

    3. Re:Who will store all that data? by Rattencremesuppe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm also surprised. Last time I checked, the discussion went about storage of all connection logs, which would already require a huge storage. But storing all traffic data seems virtually impossible to me.

      Is it user who is responsible to store all data (including spam email)? Or is it ISP's and teleoperators?

      Last time I checked, the ISPs would be responsible. Thats why their organizations (bitkom et al.) protested against the law proposal.

    4. Re:Who will store all that data? by Anders+Andersson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The consultation document itself uses the term "traffic data", but nowhere do I see an explicit indication that this refers to the contents of messages. Instead, they seem to be talking about retaining connection logs also after they have been used for billing purposes. As far as I know, operators don't generally retain message contents merely for billing.

    5. Re:Who will store all that data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I'm also surprised. Last time I checked, the discussion went about storage of all connection logs, which would already require a huge storage. But storing all traffic data seems virtually impossible to me.

      10 years ago, you could store a megabyte for 1$. Today, you can store a gigabyte for 1$. Storing the connection logs for quite some time is already doable.

      In 10 years, you can store a terrabyte for 1$, and the costs of storing the connection logs will be trivial. Storing all voice traffic will be affordable, and storing all Internet traffic may be doable.

      In 20 years, you can store a petabyte for 1$. The cost of storing all voice traffic, globally, will be trivial. Storing all Internet data traffic will be doable; it may even be cheap.

      If we poo-poo the law proposals because it can't be done now, we will regret it when the laws become enforcable. It may take less than 10 years.

    6. Re:Who will store all that data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      unless the data will be stored to /dev/null.
      upon request, data for analysis can be taken from /dev/random

    7. Re:Who will store all that data? by retodd · · Score: 3, Funny

      Who can store all records of web, email and instant messenger logs? Is it user who is responsible to store all data (including spam email)?

      In other news, Google officials have asked that ISP's and mobile phone companies not use their Gmail service to store their traffic data.

  6. Re:Just curious... by Jugalator · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ah, I see it's still too early in the morning for me.. :-) Some wild misunderstanding going on there in my parent post. To give a more proper answer -- Slashdot is visited by heaps of europeans, so it could still be interesting for them (and Slashdot will with this article catch the attention of many europeans). I doubt they'll visit Slashdot looking for opinions though.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  7. Voters Rights by Un0r1g1nal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Isn't it amazing how all this crap gets put through, even though most of the voters are against the proposal the politicians that are supposed to be our representatives in parliment just don't care and put it through anyway.

    They keep up this illusion that we are a 'free' country, living in a 'democracy' but things like this just show how bad things really are. Used to be they would snoop and we all know they did, but they pretended they didn't for sake of negative publicity. Now they (the government) are showing how little the voters views really count. They don't need to worry about what we want, they just swing the terrorism card and pretend its all for our good, Big brother 'looking after our best intrests.' How nice of them.

    --
    If at first you DON'T succeed, Skydiving is NOT for YOU!!
    1. Re:Voters Rights by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The voters, unfortunately, will support absolutely anything that's going to be used against terrorists and/or paedophiles. They are not concerned about the small detail that it'll be used against everyone else too...

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:Voters Rights by KontinMonet · · Score: 2, Informative

      The European Commission is not elected. It is a body of (now since enlargement, I believe) of 25 good and highly trustworthy people (eg: Edith Cresson) who decide the laws of some 400+ million people. We don't get a say...

      --
      Did he inhale?
    3. Re:Voters Rights by rikkus-x · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just wondering if anyone has useful arguments against monitoring, ID cards, etc. which I can give to people who say to me 'I have nothing to fear, because I haven't done anything wrong'?

      When I tell them that the government makes mistakes, that the government may change to one who they don't like (and now have huge amounts of data on them), that they may be falsely accused of things they haven't done, they just look at me as if I'm a conspiracy theorist.

      Rik

    4. Re:Voters Rights by tymbow · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Politicians don't give two shits anymore. They read very little that it put in front of them and just vote whatever way they are told (if they even bother to vote at all). It is often left to the "left wing loonies" to delve into the murky depths to find the truth and unfortunately the main stream media always paints them as liberal pot smoking hippies so the majority of the public wont listen to their views. They are not always right, but we need a balance of the extreme left and the extreme right to find the right middle ground. More and more it seems the extreme right scare tactics are winning sway and no one seems to care anymore. Everyone just happily signs their rights away and doesn't think once about what they are doing.

    5. Re:Voters Rights by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The Brussels government is dominated by the Commission, consisting of people appointed by the state governments, and the Parliament, which is directly elected.

      Since the state governments are elected, this isn't quite as undemocratic as it might seem. It's still not great, but nobody in power really wants Brussels to have a real democratic mandate - that would seriously undermine the states' independence, and would also lead to the few votes of places like Ireland or Greece being swamped by the huge populations of Germany or Britain.

      If Brussels gets any more powerful, there really will be a need for democratic reform - an elected Commission, and maybe a directly elected President. But right now, the state governments will not allow such a rival powerbase. Real power is still in Paris, Berlin and London, and they're not going to let go easily...

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    6. Re:Voters Rights by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ID cards: Do they want billions of pounds/dollars of taxpayers' money spent on a system (and in the UK, we'll be paying something like 70UKP individually for a card) when there is no clear reason for doing so (first it's terrorists - despite there being no explanation on how it will help - then next minute it's to stop immigrants from getting a job)?

      Do they want to have to carry a card everywhere, and face fines, or possibly being detained until they can prove who they are, if they happen to forget one day, despite the fact they haven't done anything else wrong? (Nevermind the hassles if you lose your card, or have it stolen).

      Do they want vast amounts of personal information stored on that card, which could be read by all sorts of people (the Government, foreign governments, random dubious people with appropriate equipment)?

  8. technology by noelo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can't help wondering how they are going to implement this just from the related information point of view. Sure GSM traffic seems trackable via the standards IMSI/IMSE. But how are they going to relate internet traffic to an individual. The would also need to capture DHCP logs etc, etc. It might be easy to capture and store all the data but without something to pull it all together, its could be just a waste of hard disk space

  9. Possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is it even physically possible to store that much data?

    If I stop deleting stuff on my hard drive and archive everything i d/l, it would fill up in a month. Multiply that by 12 or 36 and then, am I supposed to buy a 12-36 harddrives with taxes?

    And that doesnt even begin to include all the voice traffic I'm responsible for and mountains of data I d/l via online gaming.

    I call bullshit, this is just some fascists wet dream.

  10. Old stuff, unfortunately by KontinMonet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Several years ago, I was up for an interview with a company in Holland who had already got a government (not EU) grant to start Internet snooping which they were intending to extend to SMS and eventually voice.

    And a lot of snooping already happens in the UK, plus we have more CCTV watching our every move than any other country in the world. This has, of course, dramatically reduced the amount of crime and petty crime we see and we must now be the most pleasant and safest country in the world in which to bring up children. It's getting so good, we will soon be emptying our prisons - which I predict will become quaint tourist destinations at which outsourced Asian tourists can wonder. We live in Arcadia!

    Oh joy, oh joy that we should have more snooping to make our lives so much better! We should do away with envelopes or sealed packages and ban curtains or blinds and have web cams in every room (discreetly pointed away from the toilet perhaps).

    We could, at last, realise the communist utopia of living like a termite colony. And look how efficient they are! The future beckons comrades, embrace, embrace!!

    --
    Did he inhale?
    1. Re:Old stuff, unfortunately by not_a_product_id · · Score: 2, Funny
      "pointed away from the toilet perhaps"

      Aha! So you do have something to hide!

      --

      ---
      We spoke for about a half an hour. I don't recall a thing we said. - Colorblind James Experience

  11. Who does something about it? by Kokuyo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm reading a lot of "We can't let that happen" on message boards when it comes to such things. As a non-American anti-Bush propagandist (yes, I like to be a shitdisturber ;)) I often rant and rage about the current state of the US. But now that the same stupid ideas hit my own continent I'm at a loss what about to do. What CAN we do? I'm really not the pessimistic type most of the time when it comes to personal stuff. But when it involves the gathering of the people I'm pessimistic like hell. Because I know that we almost can't change anything about this stuff. Let's be honest most of us try to survive. Not in the old fashioned "hunt for food" way but in a modern society where it's not only our body that must survive but our mind as well. Most of us try to stay the heck out of things that could get us in trouble (understandably). And most of us try to not concern ourselves with things we deem not so important. And this is "not so important" for a lot of people because "I'm not a criminal so why should this make me nervous". So my question to the /. community, which is a certain elite and not a gathering of your average Joe, what can we from a realistic point of view do? Is there a way to get your average Joe to actually write his political representative?

    1. Re:Who does something about it? by Rattencremesuppe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IMO, this law proposal will fail for simple economic reasons. If they really want it mandatory to store ALL traffic data, that would make internet infrastructure more expensive by several orders of magnitude. If business depends heavily on internet infrastructure, and it's several orders of magnitude cheaper elsewhere, business might go there instead.

      People will not be upset for being snooped on, but for having to pay too much.

  12. Re:Just curious... by bork.cc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just the small fact that the Internet doesn't know borders. Send mail to a European server? Buy something from a Europe over the Net? Your messages and transactions get stored. IIRC European ISPs are vehemently against this, for obvious reasons, and law enforcement isn't thrilled either. It's populist scaremongering politicians who are behind this crap.

    --
    bork.cc domain for sale. Offers to bork|at|bork.cc
  13. Concentrate on the next election... by thrill12 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...in the European country of your choice, too.
    The main driving force behind these kind of proposals are mainly the center and right of the political spectrum. Just as Bolkenstein (former comissioner and right wing liberal(dutch 'VVD')) introduced the dreaded software patents, so will other right winged.

    The amount of energy put into the actions to counteract the european legislators (just like the action against software patents) is huge, but in the end things usually pay off only half, or not at all.
    By using your right to choose and elect, and choosing based upon the decisions made by those politicians (pro- or con- the issues you are for/against) you can deal with this thing preemptively.
    In the meantime, try to live with the harsh reality but never forget who put this in your lap.

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
  14. Re:Just curious... by Incadenza · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since /. is US centric, and this appears to be an EU matter, why would they give a rat's ass what most of us have to say on the matter?

    Well, I thought the tag line was News for Nerds. Stuff that matters. Nothing about the US in there.

    Technology is trans-national. What happens in Taiwan will influence the prices of equipment in the US.
    The Internet and its legal framework are even more trans-national. When European sites store their visitors data, they will store US visitors too. When the US strengthens its anti-piracy rules, Australians take heed.
    Limiting /. to the US, what a silly idea.

  15. Re:Just curious... by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, I thought the tag line was News for Nerds. Stuff that matters. Nothing about the US in there.

    True, but MS has(had?) the tagline "Where do you want to go Today?" and they aren't a transportation company, so you generally can't go by a slogan.

    The FAQ,however, is a different matter entirely. That's where I got the carefully chosen wording I used in my question (obviously to no avail, given the mod down. Oh well.).

    Back on topic, though, I agree 100% that USians SHOULD be against this. What I have doubts about is whether the EU politicos care that we are, or even why they SHOULD.

  16. Re:Turns Out... by afd8856 · · Score: 3, Informative

    And he only missed by 20 years...

    --
    I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
  17. Woo hoo! by weave · · Score: 3, Funny

    Up to a 3 year retention on alt.binaries.* groups? Dudes, I am so moving to EU. Incompletes can bite my pale white ass.

  18. I process this traffic data. by egork · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh, Slashdot, and slashdotters... never read what is in the linked documents and you're just fine here :-)

    Now seriously, look what is in the proposal:

    Because of changes in technologies, business models and service offerings ... law enforcement authorities are concerned that some data may not always be stored by all electronic communications operators to the same extent as they were in
    recent years. These traffic data would hence not be available for these public authorities
    when needed.


    As a professional at CRM Data Warehouse I can only confirm that this data is being lawfully collected already and was collected since the long time. Where were EDRI looking at, all this time? ;-)

    The thing is Telcos do not have processing power and storage to store all the data they may not need at all, so they do not store anymore. That's what the proposal is about.

    This is my own opinion and not of my employer.

  19. Hmz lets do the math by Bluelive · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gigabit university connection. 1Gbit/sec is 3 Petabytes per year of storage or about 20000 large harddrives. Right, yup, impossible.

  20. It's nothing new, just Right Wing pressure by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It may be cheaper for some bussinesses to build their own private networks instead of using public internet for traffic. The regulators can do nothing with private networks.

    Here in Europe, underground people are already building their own high speed comm links out of reach of government, at least in big cities. I suggest you should do the same in U.S.A.

    --
    There you are, staring at me again.
  21. and in ten years by RMH101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    the bandwidth your average guy uses will be 100 times what it is today. you see my point?

  22. Some home truths.... by GuyFawkes · · Score: 5, Interesting


    Facts are these...

    The UK government is not alone Europe in being really keen on such ideas for some years now.

    Not a few weeks, not six months, several years, long before world trade centre stuff, well before osama was front page news.

    Note well, anyone who thinks "government" = bush or blair or labour or democrat of whatever is doomed before they start, government in the UK is the many tens of thousands of unelected civil servants who remain in office year after year after year.

    These are the corporate pen-pushers trying to carve out a piece of personal power and influence that are really behind all these schemes, and the ballot box will NEVER touch these people.

    Not that the citizenry as a whole will ever unite on anything like this, forget it, it won't ever happen.

    It is also a straw man argument to claim that such aims are impossible as there just ain't enough disk space on the planet, bullshit, it can be done pretty easy.

    Spool all smtp and pop traffic, being text based it will compress real well anyway.

    Spool all nntp traffic, when data gets to 80 days out strip out everything except the headers.

    Spool all http traffic, you only need to keep the apache server logs on a per individual basis anyway, except where keyword matches allow you to elect to store the entire page.

    Doesn't matter if this adds 50% to the costs for an ISP, because it will be added to ALL providers it will be in effect a tax where the cost is passed down to the consumer.
    Google and others offering FREE gigabytes of storage will also make a very strong weapon in the armoury for these people claiming that it is quite possible and economical to do.

    Scott Nealy said many years ago that the idea of anonymity on the internet was no more than a fiction anyway, so get used to it, little has changed.

    OK, so back in the real world, and speaking as someone who was once described on the front pages of the business section of the (London) Times newpaper as an "Electronic Guerilla" and as a self proclaimed anarchist and libertarian, it is cloud cuckoo land to thing that some popular peoples movement is going to stop this happening.

    I will offer you a simple proof of why this is so.

    Take slashdot itself for an example, a techies website if ever there was one, all the slashdot owners have to do is move from http://www.slashdot.org/ to https://www.slashdot.org/ and lo and behold all those records on government computers for that bit of the internet now hold encrypted data.

    Chances of this ever happening?
    Zero.

    Ok, so it is futile to talk about motivating the masses to move to pgp / blowfish / whatever encrypted communications... it will never happen, 95% of users can't even decide whether running bonzi-buddy is a good idea or not, and just click yes anyway.

    No, if you really want to break a system you must push WITH the flow instead of against it, you efforts will then be far more effective if you try to steer it towards self destruction, than if you just stand in it's path and try to stop it, whete it will simply crush you.

    No, EVERYONE should come out and start harping on about moores law and data storage densities and pence per terabyte etc etc, and push for ALL data, and I mean ALL data, not just TCP/IP of today, but emerging data such as TCP/IP telephony when BT and ma bell switch from switched networks, I mean ALL television programming, and of course I mean ALL CCTV or indeed any other form of surveilance "footage", yes ALL data, should be stored, IN PERPETUITY, and IN COMPLETE STREAMS, not every tenth frame, and not just headers.

    I also want ALL vehicles to be tracked 24/7 via, GPS / GPRS, and ALL CITIZENS TOO.

    We need to push for EVERY LAST BYTE to be stored in perpetuity, and we need to push for this by stating (correctly) that ONLY a full data stream tells the whole story.

    Once people start to get behind this idea as a meme and take it on board we then need to push the photos

    --
    http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
    1. Re:Some home truths.... by Perky_Goth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're crazy. Are you telling me the rich and powerfull won't get a free card out? You seem to forget that it happens in 1984, noone controls the elite.
      The thing is, the powerfull can pretty much disregard the law and it's consequences as is, they could pretty much buy out censorship of their crimes for matters of national security or some bullshit.
      And how would you feel if every desire you have is analised for its conformance with society, feeling that anyone could pick on you for every fault, knowing that your deepest feelings would be scrutinezed (sp?) by anyone.
      That is not a society a human being can live on. We were made to have privacy, it is part of our sanity check. I understand what you are saying, but that is giving up on the human race's ability to adapt and evolve. It's not acceptable.

  23. Retention means its on the Net already... by eWorks · · Score: 2, Informative

    Case in point, Robin Good writes "A yet to approved Senate bill would provide the ability to the US Government to basically put off limits all of the images coming off from research and monitoring satellites." http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2004/09/11/blin ded_skies_government_to_close.htm/

    "Nondisclosure of Certain Products of Commercial Satellite Operations," would exempt from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), unclassified, commercial satellite pictures bought up by the government, as well as "any... other product that is derived from such data.

    In simple words: forget public access to satellite data you have been viewing.

    So if you want to watch the weather tracking of hurricanes, subscribe to SETI or do independent research using satellite images you may not need to worry about their retention longevity. They just might not make it on the air to begin with.

  24. Information overload by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, one could expect better from the old continent. We have the perfect example of Stasi, East Germany political police that was so effective in gathering information... that it has rendered itself totally ineffective. Stasi maintained an extensive network of informants and in 1980's simply everyone in the DDR was under some sort of surveillance (either himself or at least his neighbor or someone in the family already was a paid Stasi informer). In 1980's Stasi knew everything about everyone exept just one thing - they didn't know what they know. When the Berlin wall fell down, many Stasi secret files were opened - to much suprise, many of them were opened for the first time. The network was just too huge to control itself anymore. The information flow jammed all the available channels. Since everyone was under surveillance, it was almost as if there was no surveillance at all. I thought this will be a meaningful lessons for all the powers that be... but it took roughtly 15 years for European politicians to repeat the same mistake. Oh well.

    1. Re:Information overload by egork · · Score: 2, Funny

      Since everyone was under surveillance, it was almost as if there was no surveillance at all.

      Oh, come on. Now we have SQL. :-)

    2. Re:Information overload by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The information flow jammed all the available channels. Since everyone was under surveillance, it was almost as if there was no surveillance at all. I thought this will be a meaningful lessons for all the powers that be... but it took roughtly 15 years for European politicians to repeat the same mistake.

      Of course they learned their lesson. Store it digitally, have a bunch of computers connect the dots. That way, you can run a huge surveilance operation with relatively few people on the job. The problem of huge paper archives was that it'd be a full-time job for half the people to control the other half.

      One might hope that they learned a few other lessons too, but I wouldn't take any bets on it. It is much the same as the US: "It is okay for us to do stasiesqe surveilance because we're the good guys". It is a slippery slope, and opposition is met with: "We're trying to fight terrorists/pedos/criminals/[enemy of the day], why do you oppose us?" I suspect initially many of those working for say Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc.etc. in the early stages were idealists, who thought they were doing good. Gathering all information, all power to them, because they were the ones most fit to wield it...

      Kjella

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  25. Ask them some questions by Quizo69 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here are a few questions to ask them:

    1. Have you ever gone over the speed limit in a car? Do you want to be monitored 24/7 so if you do, the government can simply issue you a remote fine?

    2. Do you mind having government cameras in your home 24/7? How about in your bedroom, shower or toilet? After all, you have nothing to hide. Right? If you don't want cameras in your home, you must be conspiring against the government. Right?

    3. Why is it that it's ok to have citizens watched 24/7, yet you can't see the footage and for some reason, no politicians seem to be surveilled?

    4. Why shouldn't the insurance companies know about your entire medical, driving and social records, all the time, so they can dynamically adjust your risk status and increase payments as necessary?

    5. Why do you need a secret ballot to vote for your politicians?

    6. Shouldn't the politicians be doing your bidding, not ruling you?

    1. Re:Ask them some questions by Moridineas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1. Have you ever gone over the speed limit in a car? Do you want to be monitored 24/7 so if you do, the government can simply issue you a remote fine?

      No, I don't want to be monitored, but..it WOULD be fair.

      2. Do you mind having government cameras in your home 24/7? How about in your bedroom, shower or toilet? After all, you have nothing to hide. Right? If you don't want cameras in your home, you must be conspiring against the government. Right?

      I don't see the connection between cameras in the house and a national ID card as an example. I guess it's a decent point, but a little alarmist sounding (conspiracy theorist like)

      3. Why is it that it's ok to have citizens watched 24/7, yet you can't see the footage and for some reason, no politicians seem to be surveilled?

      I don't like this argument either. Who would argue that it's not ok for the police to watch criminals? Likewise, if the police was watching you, would you want anyone to be able to download the video off the internet? I don't think so.. Likewise, politicians are probably the most recorded people around.

      4. Why shouldn't the insurance companies know about your entire medical, driving and social records, all the time, so they can dynamically adjust your risk status and increase payments as necessary?

      Would probably be more fair that way...

      5. Why do you need a secret ballot to vote for your politicians?

      That's a decent one.

      6. Shouldn't the politicians be doing your bidding, not ruling you?

      Hmm.. not sure about this one. I elect a politician to lead, not do my bidding. I don't really think that's the point of electing people to office.

    2. Re:Ask them some questions by ratamacue · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I elect a politician to lead

      No, you elect a politican to initiate force on your behalf. Anything your "leader" will do and possibly could do will be accomplished through force, not voluntary association.

  26. Contacting Politicians by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    So contact your local politicians today!

    I wrote a polite, finely worded letter to my local MP (Jim Murphy) in regards to the RIP bill a number of years ago before it was introduced within the UK - and I wasn't even given a response either explaining why the UK should go ahead with the RIP bill or discussing the points I made in further details.

    I do intend to write to him again regarding this, however I do not expect to receive a reply or any notification my letter has even been read.

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  27. What traffic data, and why? by Anders+Andersson · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This should be clarified. Gathering connection data vs. gathering "all traffic data" is a whole different story, both technically and ethically.

    It certainly is, and while maybe not every politician involved understands the distinction, I think it's explained reasonably well in the summary, right at the beginning of the consultation document:

    Citizens increasingly perform daily activities and transactions using electronic communications networks and services. These communications generate so-called 'traffic data' possibly including details about time, place and numbers used for fixed and mobile voice services, faxes, e-mails, SMS and other use of the Internet.

    The key phrase here is "generate", indicating that the communications generate traffic data, they don't constitute it. While we should be wary of covert attempts to spy also on traffic contents, this doesn't seem to be a case of such.

    Because sometimes, you don't even need connection logs for billing (consider "flatrate" connections, for example).

    Or, you run a free service of some kind, sending no bills at all. What about e-mail between students at different universities; should university mail server logs be retained as well under this regime? What about mail within the same university, or mail between staff members of the same company? The logs usually end up in the same files on the company mail server whether the mail is internal or external, and all their network provider sees is a stream of IP packets.

    It's like asking the power utility to make a note in their logs every time somebody switches on or off an electrical appliance in their home. I think that information might be just as useful in the fight against terrorism as two-year old traffic data is. If I can't get any sense out of all the junk mail sent to me by people I have never heard of, how could anybody else?

  28. Obligatory doom's day prediction again.. by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well well, just in case you didn't get it, some nutjob who calls himself John Titor claims to be a time traveller from 2038 claims that there will be a civil war brewing in the US of A in the 2004/2005.

    Also "predicted" (well, not really so since it is all history for him) the war on iraq.

    And a whole lot of other things.

    http://www.johntitor.com/
    http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

    Better educate yourself, it is just another "the end is nigh" message, but in the recent days I find myself more and more spooked by the events in the news.

    Looks like a police state is really coming to pass!

    Maybe it is really time to buy some really heavy armaments, and know how to use it well..

    It's in the 2nd Amendment!!

  29. copyrighteousness by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Personal info is implicitly copyrighted. It is published or transferred solely to a single counterparty, for a transaction of a single purpose, unless expressly specified otherwise. Copyrighted info cannot be distributed or retained beyond the completion of that transaction, whether successful or unsuccessful. Write your lawyers and political representatives. It's time individuals claimed our copyrights to protect our liberty with the force corporations have siezed theirs.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  30. Re:What are we talking about? by surprise_audit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was just wondering - do you think they are also planning on scanning or photocopying regular mail envelopes??