Slashdot Mirror
FCC Wants to Track Wireless
pin_gween writes "According to an article on ZDNet, the FCC wants the ability to track Wi-fi accessible phones like the ZyXel phone. The FCC's June report talked about several ways of realizing a caller's location: 'creating an "inventory" of every Wi-Fi access point in the United States, engaging in "mapping and triangulation" of those access points, compiling an "access jack inventory" for wired VoIP users, or even mandating that Net phones include GPS.'"
The war on terror has claimed another victim.
mandatory ankle bracelets they can use to track you all the time.
Can I just ask one question? WHY? Is tracking wireless really necessary?
This is just yet another attempt to monitor what we're doing and where we are. Who says that the transmitter in the phones would only transmit the location?
"(As a side note, I think it's cowardly for FCC officials to refuse to have their names mentioned, but it was a condition of attending the event.)"
Yeah, if you cant stand in front of a conference type event that you evidently called for, and have the press print you as a source, I think thats seriously pathetic.
We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
This could be used as a tool for big brother, not just 911 calls. You are as naive as a child if you don't see the dark possibilities in this. The FCC commissioners probably only see a new toy to play with in this tracking technology, and have no concept of the monster they are creating. Those who will exploit it are counting on the FCC to not "get it".
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
If you compare what they're attempting and what they're saying, you'll find two different things.
If they were just trying to locate 911 callers, this could easily be done with a caller-enabled location system. When someone dialed 911, and only when someone dialed 911, it could report the location.
But what they're looking to do is much more. They want a system to enable law enforcers to quickly locate any individual person in the country. In other words, locating 911 callers is just a rather transparent excuse.
Do you know how you can tell that the federal government just wants more power to fuck with the commoners? Look at things like this, the USA PATRIOT Act and like the and tremble. The government talks about homeland security, but the borders are still open, we're still butt buddies with Saudia Arabia (mainly on the receiving end in more ways than one), the government pushes for things that mostly target the general public and the push is always for more and more power while *gasp* not doing anything consistently pro-security with it.
This is a good example of why I vote libertarian in every election. The government doesn't need to be able to track cell phones because it already has the powers it needs to control the influx of terrorists: deportation, border security and wire-tapping regular conversations. If our government cared less about not offending people and more about really using its basic powers first to fight major crime and terrorism, we wouldn't be wasting our time reading about this stuff.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
If the answer to the first question is 'no', the next question is "Is anyone getting sick of the lies being told by our governments as a matter of routine?"
Except it's a false dichotomy.
They want you to believe they need full-time, universal access to your location in order to locate you when you dial 911.
That's obviously false. They only need your location to be reported when you dial 911.
The way it should work:
1) your phone is able to determine its current location at any time
2) if you dial 911, your phone sends along its current location information
It's that simple. The idea that it's a choice between safety and freedom is a lie, and a pretty barefaced one at that.
The U.S. government engages in more surveillance than any other country in the history of the world. The U.S. government spends more on surveillance than any country in the history of the world, and U.S. taxpayers are not allowed to know true total amount.
The departments of the U.S. government such as the CIA and NSA and FBI function as a world-wide secret police. Sure, they have openly acknowledged purposes, but much of what they do and how they do it is hidden from U.S. citizens. There are departments of the U.S. government that do secret police work whose names are even secret. United States taxpayers are expected to pay, and vote, and they are expected to accept that they won't have the full facts of the activities of their government. United States citizens are not allowed to know enough to base their vote on the facts.
Historically, U.S. government surveillance has had some political or economic benefit for those who wanted the surveillance.
--
If you support dishonesty and violence, don't say you are Christian.
If you want to be located when you call 911, maintain a land-line. Where is the goddamn rocket science here, people?
You know what? If you don't have a land-line and you have to call 911 and can't speak...well, maybe you die. It happens. Sucks, but it happens. I hate this society...we've become obsessed with throwing huge wads of cash, effort, and legislation at the stupidest problems. 700,000 people die each year of heart disease; zero people a year die from terrorism. We spend billions on one, not on the other...and when Little Timmy dies because he choked on a marble 'cause mommy wasn't watching him, we get "Timmy's Law" which solves a Darwinism problem.
Please help metamoderate.
You are modded as funny and this would have been a great troll. But sadly, I think you are putting forth this argument in earnest. It is certainly an argument that is out there and is why many cities around the world have started putting cameras everywhere.
Where are all these terrorists? Can you show me convictions in a US court? I'd love to hear about some. And how does this capability make the US safer?
I'm sure quite a few of the 2 million people currently being held in US prisons thought the same thing. Perhaps you cannot imagine that there might be corrupt cops or the justice system might favor the white and rich over the colored and poor. The whole premise of this comment falls apart the moment you can no longer trust the justice system - and you are a fool if you trust ours.
The issue is not the nanny state. The issue is about a police state. It is why we have the Fourth Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
To recap, a system the FCC proposes violates the right of citizens to be secure from unreasonable searches. It is not based on probable cause and it is not particular as to what is being searched and why. In other words, it is unconstitutional. It is really that simple.
This is especially bizarre given they are calling for universal tracking -- they want to know where we are and who we are but they won't even let us know who they are, yet they speak in the name of the public! This isn't just ironic; it's downright Kafkaesque.