Slashdot Mirror
Privacy Advocates Seek Regulation of Surveillance Tech Exports
Trailrunner7 writes: "The long shadow cast by the use of surveillance technology and so-called lawful intercept tools has spread across much of the globe and has sparked a renewed push in some quarters for restrictions on the export of these systems. Politicians and policy analysts, discussing the issue in a panel Monday, said that there is room for sensible regulation without repeating the mistakes of the Crypto Wars of the 1990s. 'There's virtually no accountability or transparency, while he technologies are getting faster, smaller and cheaper,' Marietje Schaake, a Dutch member of the European Parliament, said during a panel discussion put on by the New America Foundation. 'We're often accused of over-regulating everything, so it's ironic that there's no regulation here. And the reason is that the member states [of the EU] are major players in this. The incentives to regulate are hampered by the incentives to purchase. There has been a lot of skepticism about how to regulate and it's very difficult to get it right. There are traumas from the Crypto Wars. Many of these companies are modern-day arms dealers. The status quo is unacceptable and criticizing every proposed regulation isn't moving us forward.'"
while he technologies are getting faster, smaller and cheaper,...The status quo is unacceptable and criticizing every proposed regulation isn't moving us forward.
You said yourself you are in fact moving forward, which is what scares you. Don't try to mask attempting to stop or slow that motion as "moving forward".
That's something I cannot stand from politicians, the notion that locking things down is moving anywhere but moving closer to a static non-moving state (which is what government would prefer).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Once again the foxes want to guard the henhouse after they're caught with blood on their faces and paws, and feathers all over the ground. Why the hell would we want the government to 'regulate' surveillance tech when it is the most abusive offender? The only thing that would come out of this would be that the tech ends up 'reserved' for them and banned from use for everyone else.
dunno maybe its just me, but when floating around in space I wouldn't want a suit made of dark blue or grey with goffy swooshes on it, make that thing neon and coat it in a reflective layer so I light up like a road sign if the rope breaks
They should make the pilots wear tin foil to block the government mind control rays as an enhanced 'security'... Ya just never know...
You can't push back a turd. The technology -once it's invented and publicly known- will find a way to everyone interested with a big enough wallet. Drawing lines on a picture of the planet is not going to stop this, no matter how much laws you make up to try and do so.
You can keep the technology to yourself if you're a government secret agency and hope nobody finds out you have something, but if a commercial vendor comes up with a device or technology, it's out and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?