The fact that you allow another form of ID number than SSNs is a step in the right direction. As long as that policy is clearly communicated to the end users, it is the users own fault if their other private information is compromised. However, in most instances like the one you describe, there either is no other alternative identification number allowed, or users aren't told that they can use something else.
I agree that asking the government to protect my privacy is like asking a thief to guard my jewelry. However, arguing that since it won't be completely enforced and won't completely stop the issue completely is intellectually dishonest.
The first problem is that Congress itself has no enforcement capabilities. Those duties fall completely under the executive branch. If this law, or CAN-SPAM, or any number of other laws aren't well enforced, it isn't the fault of the law itself but of those enforcing it.
Second, CAN-SPAM was a poorly worded law that created more loopholes than it closed. Now, I haven't read the full text of this law, but from the provisions I have read about so far, it seems to have some good premises. The final document (plus any of the random signing statements that POTUS will probably add) will doubtless be different. But we can make that argument when the final version of the law comes up between the Senate and House. Until then, support decent legislation when you see it.
Why are you using SSNs and biometrics, you already have all the identifier you need in the biometrics. If you need to give the users something else to identify themselves with let them set a password or issue a unique ID of your own. Using something like an SSN that can be used for any number of other things is a privacy issue that needs to be stopped dead, now. Unless you are trying to keep track of every single taxpayer in America, there is no reason to use the number that was created just for that purpose.
Actually, in America, we already have that too. I have a bank account number, a mortgage account, credit card numbers, a number my employer uses, when I was in school I had a student ID, etc. The thing is, here in America, there is also this other number that gives a person just as much access to all of this information. If that were removed then, as the GP says, we wouldn't have nearly the issue we do today.
All 3 of [the laptops] have the exact same problem. I know it is not my electrical system, as this is a PC repair shop and we have everything tested and certified regularly.
I agree most people are not criminals. However, in the case I described, store employees saw the customer take the merchandise. The only reason nothing was done was because that employee wasn't the one manager in a couple thousand square foot store. I do not condone stopping random people just for the hell of it. But being able to stop someone from stealing when it is known that they were is a completely different subject.
The problem is that privacy, dignity, and all of that only apply to what the government can or cannot do. Same with free speech.
Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...
It doesn't say anything about corporations taking all the information they can, including surreptitious iris scans that pop advertisements. For that you need Congress to pass better consumer protection laws, and unless you live in California (where they go overboard with it), good luck with that.
I believe (but IANAPL) that that clause applies to patents for things that are either common (i.e. the wheel) or very similar to other patented works. It would not apply to something imagined in a science fiction novel/movie.
Sadly, this is true. I worked for a major clothing retailer for a while and one time a woman was caught by an associate shop lifting, another associate attempted to stop her at the entrance but she kept walking. Since a manager didn't see her put the item in her bag they let her go without calling the cops or anything for just this reason...
The problem is that the government isn't going to try to pass one law that removes all privacy, that will be too easy to strike down. What is more likely is that the government will make a small, innocuous move here, another one years later, and ten or twenty years down the line you won't know what it was like to not be able to travel privately... These little things will wind up nickel and diming our freedom away and by the time its done we won't know how to turn back. The only way to stop it is to keep it from starting (or at least from continuing...) If that earns me some tin foil headgear, so be it, but I would rather I and my son 60 years from now are free to wear that headgear.
I believe there was an if, as in "If people did intelligent things, stupidity wouldn't happen." I don't know if he would have been right, but its a happy wistful hope...
This here allows for you to be tracked in a fashion like never before.
How? Unless you have to swipe your ID before you enter the mall or grocery store, I don't see how the gov't can track you without some type of chip that transmits your grid coordinates embedded. When the Federal mandate requires those, I'll oppose it with you!
What if you had to show this ID for all transactions...even cash ones?
What if? What if they made you wear a helmet cam 24/7? What if the gov't uses these ID's to lock us all into communes where we grow our own food and run around naked? "What if's" don't mean anything to me. We're just talking about a nationwide standard for the ID's we already carry. Nothing more.
Also... that's why I do not belong to any grocery store "discount club plans" where you carry a card that allows you to get a special price for most of the stuff in the store. If a deal comes along that is too good to pass up, you will find me sign up under than name of "Bugs Bunny". So I understand your concern, but the gov't could do the same now with social security cards. Show me something new.
I don't know about where you live, but they already have those restrictions here in the midwest when you try to buy perfectly legal over the counter drugs that have psudophedrine (pardon spelling). I have also been against this since the beginning and have not bought products containing this even though my seasonal allergies are horrible. They already require proof of age when purchasing alcohol, its just one step further for the government to require keeping track of that information to "make sure the law is being properly enforced" or some such bs.
As far as your argument about social security cards go, I agree. They have taken those numbers, whose purpose was just to allow you to claim payments after retirement or disability, and done many horrible things with it. But that just underscores why creating a federal ID card is a Bad Idea. It doesn't mean, "Oh, we should let this go because they are already screwing us one way." If you want to fight for reform on the use of SSNs, I will happily sign on, but don't ignore new problems just because an old one isn't fixed yet.
It invades our right to privacy by requiring this card for any action we might take, thus allowing the government to track every thing we do. These will be required to purchase and use air plane tickets (and IIRC, bus and train tickets), when you use any government office, etc. And while this isn't part of the legislation (its only a matter of time), doubtless for most financial transactions such as new bank and credit card accounts, utilities, etc. Currently, no single government agency has the legal right to get this information without dozens of search warrants; once all of this is grouped together, one agency will have full, unmitigated access to do all the data mining they might want.
Now, you might say, "But thats not what this legislation is for, its to prevent fraud." The fact remains that privacy will be lost and we will face these consequences. Even if the current administration shows restraint with these powers (fat chance of that) others could in the future.
I see your point, but there is a difference between a device working on Linux because the communication specs are generic and working because specific drivers were created for the specific product.
One thing that might keep some companies from slapping their products with a "Works on Linux" sticker is the customer support, more than the driver development. Even if the company does join this program, they will probably be reluctant to advertise it too loudly as they still won't have the support staff to handle Linux users.
I can't count the number of times I have made a support call and gotten the question "So is your computer Windows or Macintosh?" "I run Linux." "What? I'm sorry, was that Windows or Macintosh?" "... Um, Windows...." (most often when dealing with DSL modem issues where the PC OS has no bearing on what is going on)
Actually, I do not want a full democracy (as some people think America has); I rather prefer the republic as it is designed (not the way it is currently implemented however). As someone stated earlier, people are stupid. The entire reason the Constitution made the Congress in two houses was to make sure no one mob would be able to have full control. The reason for the Senate was so that the minority would be given an equal voice (thus my chagrin at the talk last year of removing the filibuster ability...). The loudest voice isn't always the right one.
Now, as I mentioned, this implementation isn't working quite as well as designed. It has come to a point where rule by one large mob with voices in the right places is a possibility. Between corporate corruption, fundamentalist corruption, and lobbyists able to hide their every action, its no wonder they have broken the system to work for them and not the people it was originally designed for. Unfortunately, handing the reins fully to the people wouldn't help much because the media itself is what is being used for most of this corruption.
For the most part, man hours aren't wasted sorting coins. Most businesses can purchase very efficient coin sorting machines for not very much money. These take a total of 20-30 seconds to sort an entire register's worth of coins, thus far under 7 seconds. Most people can spend a couple dollars on a piece of plastic that will do the same thing, however not as efficiently nor as quickly. Examples.
You cannot raise enough food for a family of three (heck, you can only barely raise enough food for a single person) in an urban/suburban house. You can raise enough to suppliment, but to get enough food for a family, a suburban house will not cut it.
A primary and college education is necessary if you want your children to make more than $20,000 a year in an urban/suburban environment. This would be only barely above what is determined to be "Relative Poverty". Without a college education, especially in today's job market where working in retail practically requires some college, you are not likely to work at a job better than the corner gas station or Wal-Mart making minimum wage. Some parents might be fine with that, but most want their children to have a better life than the one they had.
This provision would not have, by any stretch of the wording, forced the registration of 'every little politcal blogger'. Drop the straw man routine, its not becomming. This provision would have required bloggers who are paid for their posts (not for advertisements in the sidebars, their actual posts. Newspaper and other media outlets have to say when a news article is paid for, do bloggers really want to be treated like other media or not?
Talk radio is opinion or entertainment - not factual... I agree, but tell that to the hundreds of thousands who listen to every word that comes out of Limbaugh's mouth as gospel truth and see how far it gets you; not to mention the "All Spin Zone" and other related bs.
Most people aren't savvy information consumers. They get their news from one source and accept it as, if not truth, not a lie.
Sites that lean one way more than another will often draw readers who lean that way and don't care about the other side and what they have to say. I don't know that telling those readers that they are reading an ad will do much, but at least the information will be put right in front of them
I agree, this isn't your old time newspaper, this is the internet where information is coming at you from all sides. I believe you should be given information on where this stuff is coming from.
I apologize that my examples are mostly of right wing programs, but those are the ones you hear about more and make very clear examples.
Only kids who don't get enough love an attention CAN be drawn out by a vector. The kid who is getting enough love and attention doesn't have the time for strangers- their time is taken up by their immediate family.
So you are advocating taking up all of your child's time so they don't have free time to spend online? These sites like MySpace aren't where kids go when they aren't getting enough attention at home. They go there to talk with their friends and share stories. They aren't there looking for someone to replace mommy and daddy, they are looking for other people who share their view, which, no matter how good a parent you are, won't always be you.
I can understand it to some extent- but I'd point out that if the choice is between a poorer education and a juvenile delequent, you're better off with the poorer education.
I'm not sure I understand this choice here. Does an abuse victim qualify as a 'juvenile delenquent'? The choice, as most people see it, is between a poorer education where their child won't have as many options and fewer chances for success and less time spent with the child, while still providing a happy and healthy household.
But for anybody with a college degree, then with careful savings there's room for everything.
Ignoring the rest of your somewhat racist statement... College debt is one of the most prevalent debts out there, it is the reason college graduates have to work 40-50 hours a week for 20 years.
As Zorin said, where did you find a house like that?! No where within 100 miles of a decent urban area has houses that large that cheap. I live in St. Louis, with some of the lowest housing costs of the nation and can't find something like that for less than $200k.
As far as home schooling, most parent's have no ability to match the quality of education from most private schools and many public schools on their own, with or without government grants. It's also not so much the "boogie-man" of good schools that has people trying to get into suburbian private schools, its the fact that most urban public school systems are poorly funded, score lower on placement tests, and have worse graduation rates than most suburbian schools. These are statistics that No Child Left Behind, if it had been written well and properly funded, should be fixing. But the fact remains that to get a quality, thorough education suburbian public schools usually are better than urban public schools.
Limiting debt is also becoming more and more of an issue. Yes, many people 'indulge' in things that they don't necessarily need. But there are also debts like college education (becoming more and more necessary, especially with the economy still in flux as it is) and the rise in house prices. Being able to raise your own pork, etc. is not an option when most of the population can't live on farms.
I am fortunate. I too have very little unsecured debt, and don't take other high interest loans. My wife is able to work part time from home and spend most of her time with our son. But we are barely making our finances, living in a $115k house just barely big enough for 3 people with a good car and $15k of debt still on that. But it is very tight. If my wife worked more we would be able to manage the finances more easily (many months we have to put some money on a credit card, to be paid off later in the month), and if we had another child, I don't see how we could make it. This isn't rampant consumerism, this is the reality of living in a urban to suburban area. Living in rural areas is not something most people can do, and if they did it wouldn't be a rural area anymore.
These predators don't just target children that don't get enough love and attention, they target any that they think that can be drawn out and will use any vector they can.
As far as the "Is it worth it" question; as far as I have seen (I haven't experienced this personally yet, my son is only 2), but sometimes its not about material wealth, often times parents are forced into situations like these just to keep a roof over their heads, food on the table, utilities running, and put their kids in decent schools. They are left with a decision of which is worse, a poorer education and more limited opportunities later in life or less time spent with the kids. This isn't true in all cases, but in most middle class situations I can understand it.
They aren't necessarily bad parents, unless you think that in order to be a good parent one must monitor their child's actions 100% of the time and be worse than Big Brother. However, this lawsuit is a sign of further poor parenting in that many parents are acting like its other people's jobs to be the parent of their child. In this case they expect MySpace to be the watchful parent that the litigants aren't. Good parenting would lessen the likelihood of a lot of these online pedophiles abusing victims, but not because they monitored their children constantly; it would be because the children feel comfortable talking to their parents about what they are doing. However, not all children, no matter how good the parents, are going to share their entire lives with their parents, nor are all parents going to make that level of excellence.
Most parents now have to work 50+ hours a week (with both parents working) to keep their children in good schools and pay all of the other things that need to be paid. That they aren't able to keep up with everything their children do isn't a sign of their quality of parenting, its a human limitation. But blaming MySpace is not the answer, and this lawsuit is incredibly stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact that you allow another form of ID number than SSNs is a step in the right direction. As long as that policy is clearly communicated to the end users, it is the users own fault if their other private information is compromised. However, in most instances like the one you describe, there either is no other alternative identification number allowed, or users aren't told that they can use something else.
I agree that asking the government to protect my privacy is like asking a thief to guard my jewelry. However, arguing that since it won't be completely enforced and won't completely stop the issue completely is intellectually dishonest.
The first problem is that Congress itself has no enforcement capabilities. Those duties fall completely under the executive branch. If this law, or CAN-SPAM, or any number of other laws aren't well enforced, it isn't the fault of the law itself but of those enforcing it.
Second, CAN-SPAM was a poorly worded law that created more loopholes than it closed. Now, I haven't read the full text of this law, but from the provisions I have read about so far, it seems to have some good premises. The final document (plus any of the random signing statements that POTUS will probably add) will doubtless be different. But we can make that argument when the final version of the law comes up between the Senate and House. Until then, support decent legislation when you see it.
Why are you using SSNs and biometrics, you already have all the identifier you need in the biometrics. If you need to give the users something else to identify themselves with let them set a password or issue a unique ID of your own. Using something like an SSN that can be used for any number of other things is a privacy issue that needs to be stopped dead, now. Unless you are trying to keep track of every single taxpayer in America, there is no reason to use the number that was created just for that purpose.
Actually, in America, we already have that too. I have a bank account number, a mortgage account, credit card numbers, a number my employer uses, when I was in school I had a student ID, etc. The thing is, here in America, there is also this other number that gives a person just as much access to all of this information. If that were removed then, as the GP says, we wouldn't have nearly the issue we do today.
The quote from the article is:
RTFA (I know, its Slashdot, but still) The article specifically mentions that his wiring is tested regularly and the problem is not in that.
I agree most people are not criminals. However, in the case I described, store employees saw the customer take the merchandise. The only reason nothing was done was because that employee wasn't the one manager in a couple thousand square foot store. I do not condone stopping random people just for the hell of it. But being able to stop someone from stealing when it is known that they were is a completely different subject.
The problem is that privacy, dignity, and all of that only apply to what the government can or cannot do. Same with free speech.
It doesn't say anything about corporations taking all the information they can, including surreptitious iris scans that pop advertisements. For that you need Congress to pass better consumer protection laws, and unless you live in California (where they go overboard with it), good luck with that.
Correction - One scan a day keeps the DHS away...
I believe (but IANAPL) that that clause applies to patents for things that are either common (i.e. the wheel) or very similar to other patented works. It would not apply to something imagined in a science fiction novel/movie.
Sadly, this is true. I worked for a major clothing retailer for a while and one time a woman was caught by an associate shop lifting, another associate attempted to stop her at the entrance but she kept walking. Since a manager didn't see her put the item in her bag they let her go without calling the cops or anything for just this reason...
The problem is that the government isn't going to try to pass one law that removes all privacy, that will be too easy to strike down. What is more likely is that the government will make a small, innocuous move here, another one years later, and ten or twenty years down the line you won't know what it was like to not be able to travel privately... These little things will wind up nickel and diming our freedom away and by the time its done we won't know how to turn back. The only way to stop it is to keep it from starting (or at least from continuing...) If that earns me some tin foil headgear, so be it, but I would rather I and my son 60 years from now are free to wear that headgear.
I believe there was an if, as in " If people did intelligent things, stupidity wouldn't happen." I don't know if he would have been right, but its a happy wistful hope...
I don't know about where you live, but they already have those restrictions here in the midwest when you try to buy perfectly legal over the counter drugs that have psudophedrine (pardon spelling). I have also been against this since the beginning and have not bought products containing this even though my seasonal allergies are horrible. They already require proof of age when purchasing alcohol, its just one step further for the government to require keeping track of that information to "make sure the law is being properly enforced" or some such bs.
As far as your argument about social security cards go, I agree. They have taken those numbers, whose purpose was just to allow you to claim payments after retirement or disability, and done many horrible things with it. But that just underscores why creating a federal ID card is a Bad Idea. It doesn't mean, "Oh, we should let this go because they are already screwing us one way." If you want to fight for reform on the use of SSNs, I will happily sign on, but don't ignore new problems just because an old one isn't fixed yet.
It invades our right to privacy by requiring this card for any action we might take, thus allowing the government to track every thing we do. These will be required to purchase and use air plane tickets (and IIRC, bus and train tickets), when you use any government office, etc. And while this isn't part of the legislation (its only a matter of time), doubtless for most financial transactions such as new bank and credit card accounts, utilities, etc. Currently, no single government agency has the legal right to get this information without dozens of search warrants; once all of this is grouped together, one agency will have full, unmitigated access to do all the data mining they might want.
Now, you might say, "But thats not what this legislation is for, its to prevent fraud." The fact remains that privacy will be lost and we will face these consequences. Even if the current administration shows restraint with these powers (fat chance of that) others could in the future.
I see your point, but there is a difference between a device working on Linux because the communication specs are generic and working because specific drivers were created for the specific product.
One thing that might keep some companies from slapping their products with a "Works on Linux" sticker is the customer support, more than the driver development. Even if the company does join this program, they will probably be reluctant to advertise it too loudly as they still won't have the support staff to handle Linux users.
I can't count the number of times I have made a support call and gotten the question "So is your computer Windows or Macintosh?" "I run Linux." "What? I'm sorry, was that Windows or Macintosh?" "... Um, Windows...." (most often when dealing with DSL modem issues where the PC OS has no bearing on what is going on)
Actually, I do not want a full democracy (as some people think America has); I rather prefer the republic as it is designed (not the way it is currently implemented however). As someone stated earlier, people are stupid. The entire reason the Constitution made the Congress in two houses was to make sure no one mob would be able to have full control. The reason for the Senate was so that the minority would be given an equal voice (thus my chagrin at the talk last year of removing the filibuster ability...). The loudest voice isn't always the right one.
Now, as I mentioned, this implementation isn't working quite as well as designed. It has come to a point where rule by one large mob with voices in the right places is a possibility. Between corporate corruption, fundamentalist corruption, and lobbyists able to hide their every action, its no wonder they have broken the system to work for them and not the people it was originally designed for. Unfortunately, handing the reins fully to the people wouldn't help much because the media itself is what is being used for most of this corruption.
Its not just Canadian actors. After NAFTA, all North American movie studios, actors, directors, etc. got screwed by Hollywood. Related article on NPR.
For the most part, man hours aren't wasted sorting coins. Most businesses can purchase very efficient coin sorting machines for not very much money. These take a total of 20-30 seconds to sort an entire register's worth of coins, thus far under 7 seconds. Most people can spend a couple dollars on a piece of plastic that will do the same thing, however not as efficiently nor as quickly. Examples.
You cannot raise enough food for a family of three (heck, you can only barely raise enough food for a single person) in an urban/suburban house. You can raise enough to suppliment, but to get enough food for a family, a suburban house will not cut it.
A primary and college education is necessary if you want your children to make more than $20,000 a year in an urban/suburban environment. This would be only barely above what is determined to be "Relative Poverty". Without a college education, especially in today's job market where working in retail practically requires some college, you are not likely to work at a job better than the corner gas station or Wal-Mart making minimum wage. Some parents might be fine with that, but most want their children to have a better life than the one they had.
There are many things wrong with this
I apologize that my examples are mostly of right wing programs, but those are the ones you hear about more and make very clear examples.
So you are advocating taking up all of your child's time so they don't have free time to spend online? These sites like MySpace aren't where kids go when they aren't getting enough attention at home. They go there to talk with their friends and share stories. They aren't there looking for someone to replace mommy and daddy, they are looking for other people who share their view, which, no matter how good a parent you are, won't always be you.
I'm not sure I understand this choice here. Does an abuse victim qualify as a 'juvenile delenquent'? The choice, as most people see it, is between a poorer education where their child won't have as many options and fewer chances for success and less time spent with the child, while still providing a happy and healthy household.
Ignoring the rest of your somewhat racist statement... College debt is one of the most prevalent debts out there, it is the reason college graduates have to work 40-50 hours a week for 20 years.
As Zorin said, where did you find a house like that?! No where within 100 miles of a decent urban area has houses that large that cheap. I live in St. Louis, with some of the lowest housing costs of the nation and can't find something like that for less than $200k.
As far as home schooling, most parent's have no ability to match the quality of education from most private schools and many public schools on their own, with or without government grants. It's also not so much the "boogie-man" of good schools that has people trying to get into suburbian private schools, its the fact that most urban public school systems are poorly funded, score lower on placement tests, and have worse graduation rates than most suburbian schools. These are statistics that No Child Left Behind, if it had been written well and properly funded, should be fixing. But the fact remains that to get a quality, thorough education suburbian public schools usually are better than urban public schools.
Limiting debt is also becoming more and more of an issue. Yes, many people 'indulge' in things that they don't necessarily need. But there are also debts like college education (becoming more and more necessary, especially with the economy still in flux as it is) and the rise in house prices. Being able to raise your own pork, etc. is not an option when most of the population can't live on farms.
I am fortunate. I too have very little unsecured debt, and don't take other high interest loans. My wife is able to work part time from home and spend most of her time with our son. But we are barely making our finances, living in a $115k house just barely big enough for 3 people with a good car and $15k of debt still on that. But it is very tight. If my wife worked more we would be able to manage the finances more easily (many months we have to put some money on a credit card, to be paid off later in the month), and if we had another child, I don't see how we could make it. This isn't rampant consumerism, this is the reality of living in a urban to suburban area. Living in rural areas is not something most people can do, and if they did it wouldn't be a rural area anymore.
These predators don't just target children that don't get enough love and attention, they target any that they think that can be drawn out and will use any vector they can.
As far as the "Is it worth it" question; as far as I have seen (I haven't experienced this personally yet, my son is only 2), but sometimes its not about material wealth, often times parents are forced into situations like these just to keep a roof over their heads, food on the table, utilities running, and put their kids in decent schools. They are left with a decision of which is worse, a poorer education and more limited opportunities later in life or less time spent with the kids. This isn't true in all cases, but in most middle class situations I can understand it.
They aren't necessarily bad parents, unless you think that in order to be a good parent one must monitor their child's actions 100% of the time and be worse than Big Brother. However, this lawsuit is a sign of further poor parenting in that many parents are acting like its other people's jobs to be the parent of their child. In this case they expect MySpace to be the watchful parent that the litigants aren't. Good parenting would lessen the likelihood of a lot of these online pedophiles abusing victims, but not because they monitored their children constantly; it would be because the children feel comfortable talking to their parents about what they are doing. However, not all children, no matter how good the parents, are going to share their entire lives with their parents, nor are all parents going to make that level of excellence.
Most parents now have to work 50+ hours a week (with both parents working) to keep their children in good schools and pay all of the other things that need to be paid. That they aren't able to keep up with everything their children do isn't a sign of their quality of parenting, its a human limitation. But blaming MySpace is not the answer, and this lawsuit is incredibly stupid.