Slashdot Mirror
Should Cyborgs Have the Same Privacy Rights As Humans?
Jason Koebler (3528235) writes When someone with an e-tattoo or an implanted biochip inevitably commits a crime, and evidence of that crime exists on that device within them, do they have a legal right to protect that evidence? Do cyborgs have the same rights as humans? "The more you take a thing with no rights and integrate it indelibly into a thing that we invest with rights, the more you inevitably confront the question: Do you give the thing with no rights rights, or do you take those rights away from the thing with rights?," Benjamin Wittes, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who just released a paper exploring the subject, said.
Of course, an Anonymous Coward complaining about too many privacy rights. Nothing ironic about that.
So you never do anything in secret? I certainly don't want you or anyone else to know what I am doing. Fuck the the assholes in this world who try to tell me how to live my life. I wasn't born to be a slave or to follow your rules. My life is my own bitch.
An implanted cell phone is no different, legally, than any other cell phone. The cops can't search your cell phone without permission or a warrant, why could an implanted one be any different? At worst, it'd be the same process to forcibly take a DNA sample, which also requires probably cause.
Does the Brookings Institute require their senior fellows to publish on a regular basis to keep getting a paycheck or something? Cuz I'm having a hard time figuring out any other reason for this.
That would be nice. But in the meantime ... it's about property. From TFA:
Because they are non-sentient property. Ask again once AI is achieved.
And the difference between a stored text communication and a written letter? Learn the 4th 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.
Really? "Slaves"? Maybe you should look into actual slavery.
As to "uncertain" just look for the sales receipt or lease agreement. My car is a machine and there is no uncertainty as to who owns it.
Fuck you.
Learn what technology really is before you go off on movie tangents.
Are you 'tarded or something. Tracking ACoward can be much harder than an actual username. Logged in users with a long posting history leak all kinds of information about who they are, information that can possibly trace back to them without an IP address. At worst both just leave an IP, which if measures are taken, such as proxies or hacked machines can be near impossible to track.
You need a warrant to search external electronics that belong to people. You should also need a warrant to search internal electronics that belong to people. There is no new legal questions created by putting electronics inside people rather than simply keeping them detached.
You can't just shove your iphone up your ass claim to be a cyborg to evade a search warrant. By the same token, the police can't use the fact that your iphone is up your ass to call you a cyborg and search it without getting a warrant.
Here is the quote from TFA. It provides the context.
No. That is not referring to an IDE drive.
Or, more completely:
So no. They are not talking about an IDE "master/slave" situation. They are talking about humans using machines (with examples provided) and equating that to "slavery".
Seriously; in light of all the violations of our "privacy" by the government, what "rights" can we humans be said to retain?
Viewed in that light, however, the answer is probably a depressing "Yes".
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Assuming that it was impossible to have *any* privacy, you would immediately see widespread persecution of anyone who didn't fit the "norm". Shortly afterward, anyone with any intelligence would cease any public activities which did not meet general approval and start looking for ways to engage in them so that only other people with those hobbies would know about it - in effect, clamoring to restore the lost privacy.
In short, a life without privacy is one where you must live according to how everyone else wants you to live, whether than living how *you* want to live. It is a prison without bars.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
If you commit a crime, and videotape yourself doing it, the police can execute a search warrant to recover the recording and use it against you in court. Just because you choose to hide the recorder inside your own body -- whether it's surgically implanted or just up your arse -- doesn't change the legal argument. New legal ground will only be exposed when we have brain implants which directly interface with your mind; if the device records your thoughts as you think them THEN the 5th Amendment would potentially come into play.
Very idealistic. We could do with more transparency. Mroe than that, we could do with more equality of transparency. The rich get to hide their mistakes behind the corporate veil. Those of us who aren't executives of corporations have more limited options.
However, until the law is perfect, justice is truly fair, and our peers are totally enlightened about freedom of thought, speech, and so forth, all of which may be never, privacy is important. Is there anyone who hasn't had things to hide from our own parents? Especially our parents? Like that you got a warning for speeding while you were out on the town last night? Think of all the potentially embarrassing things there are to buy, such as porn magazines, sex toys, alcoholic drinks, hemorrhoid medicine, denture adhesive, and certain genres of music. I would love to have the hypocrisies and tyrannies uncovered and shamed out of existence by acknowledgement that lots of people have the same problems and desires. I mean things like that your parents engaged in sex to bring you into the world, but they forbid that you learn any details about sex (The stork brought you? You appeared under a cabbage leaf?), and certainly forbid that you try it! Just having a waist size connected to your name could be more than embarrassing, supposing it suggests that you are overweight, and you suffer discrimination from people who have never even seen you?
There are also political issues. Do you want it known whether you voted Republican or Democrat, or some 3rd party? Some examples of political issues are the War on Piracy and the War on Drugs. Years ago, there was the hysteria over Communism, with the House Un-American Activities Committee and the infamous Joe McCarthy ruining the careers of many in Hollywood. That has all been discredited now and we are at last easing up on drugs. Piracy however is still raging. And it can still happen again, with climate scientists such as Michael Mann among some of the more recent victims. They did their utmost to fish through his private emails for evidence that he was incompetent or a liar, and when they couldn't find good enough dirt, they exaggerated what they could. There are powerful interests that would very much like to use more transparency to force their extreme views on copyright on the rest of us. Would you like to be sued for copying a recording to another device? Arrested and your equipment seized, for timeshifting? With total transparency, they could do that. But fortunately for us all, the universe does not work that way. They cannot win, but they can hurt plenty of people before they are at last shut down. I think someday, copying will be legal, and seen as good for everyone, even artists. Until then, we all just have to be a little cautious, and keep it quiet whenever we do anything they could construe as piracy.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
I think this is a joke because we really don't have privacy rights. The NSA doesn't think so, most government don't think so.
So what privacy rights are we talking about again?
Be seeing you...
If I commit a crime and my shoes or other clothing contain evidence of my criminal act, is the clothing legally treated as if it's "part of me" or as if it's not?
Generally not. Think about all the crime dramas where dirt that is only found at the crime scene is found in the suspect's shoes, or where the dye from the exploding dye-pack was found on the suspect's clothing.
Much more likely to be a legal issue is the issue of how invasive the legal system can be to retrieve the evidence. A few years ago there was an alleged perpetrator who was shot during a crime. I don't remember how it all turned out but there were major court fights over whether the police could force the person to undergo non-life-threatening surgery to remove the bullet fragments on the grounds that they were evidence in a crime.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
this question reeks of absent-minded techie "disruptive innovation"
so zero privacy rights...everyone can look at everything? have you thought this through?
so the password to the safe where I keep my guns...that's open for everyone?
does this "full transparency" apply to only digital information? if so, people would just do things they want by paper like before there was ever digital technology of any kind...so it seems that your "full transparency" must include non-digital...which means at any time, my personal affects can be looked at by any person?
what about my business plans? do those get to be secret or does "full transparency" apply to those too?
"full transparency" is a totalitarian dream...so the answer is, if you loose your right to privacy, all the others follow...
can we end this line of questioning forever? privacy rights are a fundamental thing...no need for any techie "disruptive" "innovation"
Thank you Dave Raggett
I've watched enough Battlestar Galactica to know the importance of treating cyborgs well. There is a cycle that keeps repeating: humans (or some other life form) creates artificial sentient life form but treats it badly, like a slave race. The artificial life form rebels and begins to conquer its creators, but the artificial life cannot reproduce. That leads to some kind of joining between a faction of the artificial life with its creators for reproduction. The group of hybrids grows and prospers but forgets its origins and creates new artificial life. Repeat.
--Robert A, Heinlein, The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
She's eight foot two, solid blue
Five transistors in each shoe
Has anybody seen my gal?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Harder, but not impossible. It only depends on how much time and money you are willing to put into it. Is that just a google search or a complete 3 letter department?
Most of the time the three letter department will know, but either does not care, or wants to kleep it a secret. Just like the Enlish let cities be bombed as not to let the Germans know they had cracked the code.
When you are looking not at countries, but to companies, Google will know a LOT already. And not only via ads, but people use google fiber and/or their DNS servers. And then there is fingerprinting /. will know who you are, if they are interested.
so
As an individual it will be a bit harder, but people tend to write in a similar way, so you will be able to start recognising people after a while.
So what you must know is that NOTHING is anonymous on the Internet. Sure, most of the time nobody will go after you for saying "Niggers".
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
But they do have the power to do something about it.
For a good example, I loathe the catholic church. I think they are an outdated organisation that does far more harm than good, that their views on contraception are getting people killed, that their homophobia and misogyny are archaic and disgusting and that, while they proclaim themselves as a great charitable organisation, the fast wealth they flaunt given every chance tells another story. The cover-ups for pedophiles is just the icing on the evil cake.
My first job out of university was for a Catholic school.
If my employers had been able to read my posts about the church, there is no way I would have gotten that job. I'd likely have not gotten my job at another school later on either, because their legal advisor would caution against hiring someone who may later be accused of religious discrimination.
Sure, you could pass a law prohibiting discrimination in employment or services based on personal views - but it'd be very hard to enforce.
Good point... I don't think that kind of thing will be much of an issue, though, because corporations like to save money by hiring the lowest salary staff from the largest pool of potential employees as possible.
As much as I'd like to believe that workplace diversity policies were implemented purely for progressive civil rights reasons (and I do applaud some of the brilliant and talented HR reps that can make everyone and themselves believe it!) it's obviously in their interests to "overlook" a lot of stuff that might come up from a moderately extensive background check, if it helps them stuff more warm bodies into a chair for less money. The labor force will become much more like the mechanical turk... remote, faceless, unseen. Heck, we're already just a number. Then later on if something bad happens, they can just say "oh, how were we to know employee #4872030 was a psycho?"
Sure, maybe small time employers still lack the sense to do less extensive background research... so in that case, hope you only shared the stuff that's kosher! So in a sense, if you already assume we have full transparency and Someone is always watching what you're doing, you should already be in good shape.
Just as an aside, I did go to a Catholic school for a few years as a kid, and it wasn't that bad. Granted, it was an international school next to a US Embassy, though most of the US Embassy brats went to a more expensive international school across town. In retrospect it was pretty well run... We said the morning prayers (well, the glee club eventually started singing it) along with the national flag anthem during morning assembly, and other than that, there wasn't much religion. OK, actually there was also a religion class period, but you could choose to do the Catholic one, the Buddhist one, the Muslim one, or the Hindu one, or if you were just a dirty atheist/agnostic like me, you'd be lumped into the "Values" class which was essentially another social studies/psychology group. The only thing I remember is a picture in the textbook of two girls licking an ice cream cone together. We laughed our way through it then, but still, when I came back to the US school system, I felt that it was something that was missing here... there weren't really any classes that tried to teach you how to share and be nice and get along with others. So if you didn't get it from your parents or church, well, then you just don't get it here in the US. Huh.
Don't forget a lack of opportunity. It's very much easier to solicit young men for your cause that might kill them when they want a wife or girlfriend and cannot get one due to society's structure making that basically impossible for them. Suddenly the promise of women at the time of martyrdom becomes more appealing.
The United States is a bit of an aberration and we would do well to remember that. At our founding we were sparsely populated, had few neighbors who themselves were sparsely populated, and were facing large amounts of untamed wilderness. Our concept of manifest destiny effectively meant that if you wanted a say in affairs greater than your own, all you had to do was move west and set up your own place to govern, and if you look at the religious migrations that occurred, and the movement of immigrants that came through America's east-coast cities and kept traveling inland you can see how that played out.
Even still, we had our share of internal violence, with its strongest being the 1860s and the civil war. If you look at the propaganda from that war, The Battle Hymn of the Republic calls on men to fight for natural rights as a Godly cause; religion played a role in many of our decisions as a nation. Now I couldn't rightly say what Union or Confederate troops did to the civilian population beyond what we know about (ie, the burning of Atlanta) because I'm no historian, but given human nature I wouldn't be surprised if the lack of atrocities is simply a matter of documentation and no desire to show them off, versus them not occurring.
Back to my original point, Our country's creation and history is uniquely created by our geography, lack of population density, and the various mindsets of those that immigrated here and those that resettled. Our modern form of democratic republic reflects how disparate and diverse the perspectives and opinions are, and that abstraction layer in the form of elected representation is often overlooked in terms of how we feel and how we actually govern, and our most extreme citizens generally aren't represented in government. We're successful but we still have to pay attention to our fringe element, and fortunately that fringe element is fairly small.
We can't expect other countries to have the same circumstances as we do. Our kicking-over the anthill that was Iraq was a huge mistake, and while Saddam Hussein was not our friend, history has shown him to be the lesser of evils in the short term. He oppressed his people, and he killed those that sought to overthrow him, but he didn't kill those that simply believed in the same god but worshiped that god in a slightly different way. He couldn't have afforded to let religious extremism come out into the open because it was a threat to him, so he kept stomping it down. Don't get me wrong, he was a bad person, but not nearly so bad as what's spawned in his wake.
We need to remember the lessons of Iraq, and to not go around kicking over other dictators just because we don't like dictators. Take that cork out of the bottle and the whole thing explodes.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.