Slashdot Mirror
Smart Grid Could Pose Threat To Privacy
Presto Vivace writes "Brian Krebs of the Washington Post reports on a study jointly released Tuesday by the Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner and the Future of Privacy Forum. It seems that in the process of collecting all that feedback about energy use, utility companies will inevitably collect a great deal of information about us. From the article: 'Instead of measuring energy use at the end of each billing period, smart meters will provide this information at much shorter intervals, the report notes. Even if electricity use is not recorded minute by minute, or at the appliance level, information may be gleaned from ongoing monitoring of electricity consumption such as the approximate number of occupants, when they are present, as well as when they are awake or asleep. For many, this will resonate as a "sanctity of the home" issue, where such intimate details of daily life should not be accessible.'"
Personally - I really don't care what kind of dodgy information they could gleen from a smart meter. I only really care about the fact that power could (or will here in Oz) cost more.
Actually, I wouldn't have ANY problem at all paying a little extra for these meters (also here in Aus) if they used the data gathered to make a more efficient energy grid and this in turn helped us reduce emissions and made us more environmentally friendly. I would have very big problems with this if it was used to simply line the pockets of companies while not changing or improving in any other way.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Which is why we should err on the side of caution. People saying this isn't a big deal are considering one or two simple scenarios and deciding on just that basis. It's just as possible that someone will figure out a maximal way to exploit this particular data, one that affects a great many people and has more serious consequences.
When people first became concerned over medical records privacy, DNA testing was still so expensive that it wasn't used by any state law enforcement, even in rape or murder cases. The federal government was the only entity likely to pay for full testing, and at that time was only interested in using the tests in a handful of cases such as possibly identifying deceased heads of state after explosive assassinations. People argued about what could go wrong if the wrong people got access to medical records, and every time someone brought up the DNA testing aspects, they were told "That's not a realistic scenario - no crook is going to spend millions of dollars to match DNA samples to these records". The US began changing its medical records laws with the idea that those laws didn't need to consider DNA issues, and the resulting laws were dated by the time they were ratified. We're seeing cracks in them now, as they weren't designed to take testing cheap enough that insurance companies might opt to use it routinely, into account.
Arguing that detailed power usage isn't that significant an information source, as it can't be used to cause serious harm, (for the poster's definition of serious), is spurious. All anyone can really honestly claim is "I have thought a bit, and I haven't come up with a misuse I think is practical and that is all that bad, yet.". That's different from "I've thought about it enough, and I've identified all the misuses possible, I know for certain which ones are implementable even by a serious, well trained and dedicated entity with tremendous resources, and this is safe."
Who is John Cabal?
Why can't the power company provide the information the consumer needs, and the consumer has a controller in their house that manages appliances and electricity use (without data feedback)? I don't recall the gas companies asking for control of our thermostats, so why should this be different*? You could opt-in to have your controller send data to the power company (or have the meter reader get the data when he comes around), but there would be no NEED for the power company to get information back. The power company could closely monitor each block if they want more data on what areas are helping with the smart grid effort without concerns over privacy.
I've heard about the smart grid for years and I know I can't be the first to ask this- maybe I'm missing something?
*Brownouts would be the main reason, but if everyone is getting real-time cost information (and set their controllers accordingly), the power companies would see a much better response when they jack up the rates during peak hours. I expect the system will work a lot better once they have a proper feedback loop.
My webcomic
I don't think the problem here is the ELECTRICITY COMPANY knowing when you "leave in the morning and get home at night".
I think Token Criminal who is working with some hackers in Russia gaining access to these INTERNET CONNECTED Smart Grids is the real problem.
It's easy to accept "trade-offs" when you don't understand an entire scenario.
Stated like a true parrot.
1) Quit listening to the propaganda from the Big Brother, police state.
2) If you think that potent cannabis is something new, where have you been for the last few millennia? I remember Sativa strains from the 70's and 80's that were far superior to the (often) hydroponically grown strains of today. I hear crap like "It's not like the marijuana you smoked in your college days. It's worse than HEROIN now!" from police spokespeople and the like. Ignorance or malice... it's still false.
3) Cannabis does not have dangerous synergistic effects with alcohol. Maybe you'd peter out on drinking earlier in the evening but it isn't dangerously toxic. (unlike the synergistic effects of, say, barbiturates or tranquilizers with alcohol)
4) Cannabis does not cause psychosis. There are all kinds of studies with false correlations. Just because samples of schizophrenics and psychotics also tend to use cannabis and other drugs doesn't mean it caused, or even exacerbated the imbalance.
You really ought to get out more. Go to a place where a sizable portion of the population uses cannabis every day of their lives (like Canada, for example). They have jobs, businesses, families and homes. They aren't psychotic, they aren't driving dangerously and they aren't dead. Hell, I know people who have been smoking cannabis for over 50 years and it hasn't done them the harm that has been promised.
It's not completely harmless, but harmless enough that it doesn't warrant the prejudice that it gets.
Cannabis itself won't make a loser out of you... it's just that in America, they will see to it that it does.