Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Your Rights Online

"They Are Watching Everyone" 166

Posted by jamie from the black-market-is-everywhere dept.
A Moscow Times story shows us what happens when privacy protections are few or ineffective. A Russian private-eye firm has bought a $50,000 black-market database "on 140 politicians, journalists, businessmen and criminals," and is now publishing it. Why? Because "we want people to know the spirit of the KGB is alive ... the telephone tapping and surveillance of hundreds of Russian citizens indicates that the country is under a microscope and that this microscope is more intense than that of the KGB/FSB." One woman whose phone conversations were bugged by the free-lance spies says: "Soon, we will look back with nostalgia at the times when we were only listened to by the KGB and not by God-knows-whom, by anybody." Hyperbole? Perhaps. Fortunately, this could never happen here.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

"They Are Watching Everyone" More

"They Are Watching Everyone"

Comments Filter:

  • Technical solutions to technical problems (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It's really very simple. We don't bother hassling Congress because it's pointless; you really think that Congress passing a law against snooping will stop the NSA and other TLAs from doing so? Nope.

    Instead we work on technical solutions, like widespread encryption, which cure the problem once and for all. Relying on politicians to protect your privacy is really, really dumb.
  • ...correct me if i'm wrong...

    You're wrong. What you're talking about would be a form of key escrow, which some agencies are eager to establish but which is still, in the general case, a threat rather than a fact.

    Consider: when you generate a PGP (or GPG, or whatever) private key, you're doing it yourself, and you don't send a copy of it to anyone.

    Now, if the crypto you're using is very lame, I suppose there might be a "master key" or small set thereof that could decrypt any message encrypted using that lame technique. But that would become obvious upon analysis, and open-sourced software especially wouldn't be around very long before someone noticed such a glaring flaw.

  • Actually, considering what we do know about Echelon and whatnot (it gets posted on slashdot enough, that is), I think that was sarcasm.

    At least, I hope that was sarcasm...

    Anyhow, I'll just go home and watch Big Brother, content in the fact that no one is watching me..... Is that a two-way mirror?
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].

  • It's been shown that treatment programs work much better for curbing drug use than law enforcement does for preventing it. We can send millions of dollars and tons of equipment all over South America, but that isn't going to change a thing. All it does is help continue to create the artificial scarcity that makes drugs so profitable in the first place, which encourages more people to get into the business. Then there's all the corruption that it creates, even in our own military, police forces, and government. We need to quit trying to prevent the drugs from coming in and work on education and treatment. These are the most effective ways we have of dealing with the problem. Hopefully if we, as a country, ever get our sh|t together and tell the politicians to give up this never-ending "war," we can get some of our liberties back as a side-effect. I doubt they'll give up their new-found power easily though.

  • Beware (Score:1)

    by Frodo ( 1221 )
    I'd not take everything Russian press says at face value. Most of Russian press serve interests of some polical and/or financial groups or individuals, and there's almost no "independent" press as such (well, almost the same is true for any other country, just in Russia the phenomena is more developed and accepted). This means the whole story can be invented by someone just to put a needle in the butt of some politician or political group. Gathering "kompromat" (compromising materials), both true and outright false, and publishing it on various media is very common, as well as concept of "informational war", such as launching on a controlled TV channel programs entirely dedicated to bashing owner's political enemies, and "profiling" news items to represent them in a way most harmful to one's political enemies.

    So when you base your privacy efforts on some information from Russian press, beware. This could be just a move in someone's information war, and you'll be just a pawn in this game.
  • For a more pervasive example of observastion, take a look at the grocery 'Club Cards' that are becoming popular. These cards allow the stores to attach names to the lists of purchases made. There is nothing to prevent them from selling this information to insurance companies and marketing companies

    Great, just what we need: more conspiracy theories.

    There is nothing stopping them from doing this now with your credit card number, your account number scanned from your check or if you're so paranoid you always pay with cash, even from the security cameras snapping your picture and comparing it with some sinister database with the intents you describe.

    The tools already exist for them to do this, let's not freak out when something new comes along with just as much potential for evil big brother spying.

    If your local supermarket is really doing this kind of thing to you, shop elsewhere. I think it's a pretty silly thought, myself.

  • What happens when they outlaw the technical solutions?

    --

  • Did you read what my message was in reply to? "We don't bother hassling Congress because it's pointless..."

    --

  • When snooping becomes this easy and cheap and undetectable, it will be pervasive. Older generations will shudder in fear, but kids will grow up knowing their every move is recorded, whether in public or private. In a generation, it will be accepted and expected practice. I personally both dread it and look forward to it. Dread because it's not what I am used to, anticipate it because one of the causes of so much inequity in the world is the rich and powerful having access to information that the poor and weak don't. But if you can bug them as easily as they can bug you, power shifts. No longer will the powerful get away with crimes that their victims are punished for.

    I disagree. Privacy costs. There are real, dollar savings I pass up by refusing discount cards. I can afford this now, but I know a lot of people for whom $20 or even $5 saved at the supermarket *is* a big deal. This is what's happening today.

    In the future of (even more) pervasive surveillance, it's simply going to cost more to keep one's privacy; most won't be able to afford this, but I guarantee you, some will. You won't be getting snapshots of what Bill Gates or Gee-Dubya are buying at the supermarket. They don't have to go to the supermarket for themselves so their data trail is diffused.

    Proponents of the "Transparent Society" are deluded if they think everyone's going to have the same access to information AND the same lack of privacy.

    -Isaac

  • Am I correct that the NSA is part of the Executive branch of the government?

    I wonder if Congress doesn't have some sort of check or balance to reign in the NSA.

    My biggest concern is that these intelligence community agencies are getting more and more power. I fear that eventually if nothing is done to curb the NSA's power, we're going to wonder how nice the Russians had it under the KGB!

    Don't get me wrong, I don't think the NSA is as powerful or as ruthless as the KGB was WRT th the general citizenry, it's the slow erosion of rights over time I'm concerned with.

  • My parents are US citizens working in Moscow and my mom has told me that several times she has picked up the phone to find it dead. When she asks if she has called the correct number she gets a responce "Certinly Not" in a perfect birttish accent. They have also said that they feel that the house is bugged to the point where my father will not discuss goings on in the office at home.

    I have to say that when I went there you are under a lot of scuritny. It is not uncommon to be followed wile walking down the street or to have people watch you out of the corner of their eye.

    On the lighter side, Moscow is one fun town to party and I very much liked the females. :-)

  • Re:Optimism at work (Score:3)

    by jamiemccarthy ( 4847 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @09:48AM (#950897) Homepage Journal
    "Fortunately, this could never happen here"

    Irony, of course.

    Jamie McCarthy

  • We keep using the illegal technical solutions, and give a big hearty "fuck you and your immoral laws too" to Congress/Parliament/Knesset/Duma/etc.
  • The easiest way to get laws passed in the US is to show the lawmakers how they are affected by them. Case in point: your video store records are more protected than your financial information, because about 15 years ago a politician was publicly embarassed when a newspaper got a list of videos he/she had rented.

    So what to do about it? Well dig up dirt. Compile it. Share it. Let the world know Richard Nixon's social security number [totse.com]. Find out exactly what George W. Bush had for breakfast, and call him on his home phone number to let him know. Let the politicos understand why privacy is important and they will make the laws.

    If we don't get privacy from them, why should they get privacy from us?
    --
  • This database is created by private company (MOST), not KGB/FSB. However, many of this company employees are former KGB officers. The head of the company, Mr. Gusinsky, is now taking heat for this and some other activities he was involved in. Unfortunately, any attempt to curb him is interpreted as an "attack on free speech" in US media.

    So I guess, goverment is not the only organization that is after your privacy. Of course, it could never happen in US. Yeah, right.....
  • This kind of attitude is not going to help at all.

    Doing nothing will most certainly not change anything. We don't need to prove that. At least makeing an effort has a chance.

    Wait until encryption is outlawed because people are utterly passive about how the country is run. Then see what happens.

    There is no fallback method you seem to be advocating. You must be active.

    Woz
  • This will happen here regardless of laws passed, and, just as in Russia, it will be the private sector doing most of it. The private sector's scale of operations will dwarf any goverment snooping.

    Why? Because microtechnology will make it possible and incredibly cheap. Look at the micro air vehicles in development - only a couple of inches wingspan. Cameras the size of buttons. Microphones much smaller.

    I expect that within ten years you will be able to buy cameras and microphones by the bucketload. It will come down to the Diamand Age fluff floating thru the air.

    There is a difference between recording and broadcasting, though. I also expect that almost all recording will be done for review purposes, like black boxes in airliners -- something happens, you review the record. There will be so much recorded that actually watching it will be boring beyond belief.

    When snooping becomes this easy and cheap and undetectable, it will be pervasive. Older generations will shudder in fear, but kids will grow up knowing their every move is recorded, whether in public or private. In a generation, it will be accepted and expected practice. I personally both dread it and look forward to it. Dread because it's not what I am used to, anticipate it because one of the causes of so much inequity in the world is the rich and powerful having access to information that the poor and weak don't. But if you can bug them as easily as they can bug you, power shifts. No longer will the powerful get away with crimes that their victims are punished for.

    A very concrete example was Rodney King being beaten by the L.A. cops -- and video recorded. That recording was the beginning of the end. That's why so many cop cars now have video cameras -- to protect the cops from the citizens. A delicious harbinger of things to come!

    I think physical crime will drop dramatically, because it will be so easy to find out who did it. Proof might be harder due to the ease of making false recordings, but anonymous email to friends and family of the accused will be rampant.

    --

  • Fortunately, this could never happen here.

    Fat lot you know, Jamie.

  • I've said it before, and I won't say it again since it's obvious. Insert randomly bad data to make it not profitable to continue data collection.

    Swap Stop&Shop cards with buddies at the water cooler - send them cross-country - best still, make up a fake identity which only buys vice-foods, and watch those pre-approved credit card offers roll in for your imaginary friend.

    Get a PO box. It's not a big help, but it's another level of indirection that an automated system has to filter. I have one. 99% of what I get there is junk, and 99% of that is from Micros~1 because I registered a few products..

    Put spider-poison in your web page. A bunch of interesting words, and counter-referencing URLs in an HTML comment do wonders - but also confuse worthwhile serach engines. YMMV.

    Encrypt. Even if you have nothing better to do it with but ROT13.

    Why not IP6? Do you really have to ask? Whom would it inconvenience?
  • Your phone may not be tapped, and no one is bouncing an IR laser beam off of your living room window, but if anyone in the US thinks they are not under a microscope, they are sadly mistaken.

    You have a credit card? You use it? You're profiled. Your spending habits drive the issuing of credit and the supply of goods to your geographical area.

    You have a wholesale club or grocery store card? You're a statistic. Your nutritional habits are monitored by your friendly neighborhood grocer, and your area is blanketted for health risks based on this information.

    You have medical insurance? You're analysed for risk, allergies, immunizations, tests. Ever have a VD test? Pregnancy test? Cancer test? Those premiums just don't want to drop, do they? Doctors don't release your personal information, that would be unethical. HMO's are just protecting their investment.

    You have a car? Then you not only have a license and registration, you also have insurance. You buy gas with on credit? If you buy a lot, your insurance premium reflects that you drive a lot. You must inform the DMV within 2 weeks of changing residence, but it's ok, since you're in a free country.

    You have a phone? You're cross-linked with the people you call, and the above information is crunched for your 'circle of friends'. Ever call overseas? Which country?

    Computers were invented to do math, but showed tremedous utility in data processing. It is naive to think that this sort of profiling does not go on in the most money-oriented, statisticaly driven, heavily computerized country in the world. People may not be organized enough to plan something like this, but corporations are, after all, there is huge money at stake.

    Reality check for the future... You give blood? Which database will those genetic tests end up in? You have a LoJack? A cell-phone? No need to tell anyone where you're going, they already know. Wouldn't you like to protect your new born son against abduction through a genetic sample taken at birth? Just wait until his girlfriend's father checks that information in 16 years, for a nominal fee of course...

    Paranoid? Probably. Wrong? Probably not.
  • "Note, 'tho, that the NSA's charter is pretty darn specific. In most circumstances, they are NOT allowed to deliberately eavesdrop on an American citizen, or to arrange for any other nation to do so -- and their own FAQ reiterates this. Exceptions, if memory serves, include conversations with foreign nationals.

    In theory, of course. But, in practice, all any intelligence agency needs to do to perform domestic surveillance, is apply to the special FISA court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Title 50, Chapter 36 US Code [cornell.edu], which, last I heard, had refused exactly one request (out of tens of thousands) since 1978. FISA warrants (which, unlike regular warrants are not published or released) have skyrocketed in the past few years -- averaging ca 250/yr in the first 15 years of FISA, and over 1000/yr by the latest Congressional figures I've seen (which may not be a complete count of recent warrrants for obvious reasons).

    I discussed FISA in another story recently, and I don't like to think about it too much in one day (it's too depressing, for personal reasons) so please see my earlier post on wiretaps [slashdot.org] [there's a bug in slashcode, so you may have to click the post # to see the whole thing) or do a Google search for "FISA wiretap" (no quotes).

    I like the NSA (also for personal reasons), but my personal fondness for the organizations doesn't blind me to the dangers intrisic in irresponsible policy.

    One of the trends that brought down the USSR was the way technology disproportionately empowered the individual in a restrictive society. In the 70's, mimeographs and xeroxes were tightly regulated as potential printing presses. Even a senior scientist seeking a reprint usually had to get it copied by a designated library officer, who kept logs. One key to the maintaining power was maintaining a disparity in capability between the KGb (e.g.) and the indivisual. But the Soviet economy would not long stand unless they freely used computers, networks, fax, xerox, and other technologies that were growing common in the West, and these tools could be (and were) used for dissent as well

    In a society where technology and openness traditionally favor the individual, the balance can easily swing the other way -- it really has nowhere else to go. Overly broad powers, in actual experience yield little, and even in theory should yield very little, given practical realities.

    Powers tend to be used, regardless of the target. US vs THEM is very deep in the human tribal nature, and is a common attitude in any gov't agency or business. The Geeks (individuals) led technology, but now the technology is so powerful that for many individual applications it doesn't matter if you have a P-100 or a Beowulf cluster... large organizations, however, can harness the full power of the new technology...

    We need to use our Mark I jello-ware neural-nets before it's too late!
  • This new "threat" on civil rights and personal privacy looks just lika a publicity stunt to me because you can never compare the extreme survelance the KGB had before the fall of communism.

    The KGB had a really great survelance system because most of their information came from the civilian population itself, from citizens who where looking for a little extra money or simply a better life, and this was a difficult task in a communist country. Now that Russia and the other ex-USSR countries have a free market economy, people have a lot more options to improve their quality of life. In short, to achieve the level the KGB had as a spying state-driven organization this new agency has to hire thousands, if not millions, of russian citizens to watch one another. Even so, the quantity of the information would be so much that most of it would be unreachable or not usable, and that's without checking the quality of it.

    I dont recall exacly but I think the german secret police, the Stasi, had this problem, they where overwelmed with information and most of it was useless.

    What the Russian goverment should do is protect civil rights and enforce them like western countries do. This is part of a transition, and Russian citizens are more or less used to this kind of espionage and invasion or personal privacy.

  • Hay I mean it couldn't happen in the United States Land of the free, CIA and FBI.

    Hold on a moment...
    *Silently*Hay someone get the brainwashing machine working.... we got one... yeah.. he's on to us BIG TIME...
  • There was no such silly thing. There was a kind of "radio-thru-cable" system, but it was up to people to buy the actual box. And these boxes were extremely low-tech and easy to disassemble.
  • That still doesn't invalidate the comment. Some people are so offended that they would rather have a government, which can and does use that information to kill people to a bunch of companies using the information for reasons unknown. It is sort of the "devil you know" syndrome. Do I understand it? Nope. But if the government never killed anyone you know, it's pretty easy to dismiss their actions.
  • I can picture the next headline in The Moscow Times: "Russian Internet Shut Down by Slashdotters".

    I don't know what kind of internet connectivity they have there but I'm sure this is not going to help the situation :)

    ------
    IanO
  • ...they would be hauled off for contempt of congress, but the NSA managed to get away with it.

    Your answer: the NSA could blackmail any (not every) politician in Congress out of office in a microsecond. Every politician has large skeletons in the closet, and NSA knows everything. Do you need a more plausible reason why Congress didn't press the point?
  • The grocery cards are a bad example in that they are voluntary. You don't have to have them/use them, or you can use them intermittnetly (only when you buy on sale). Yes, it's more expensive not to use them. Think of the savings as the grocery store paying you for the use of your personal data.

    Pharmacies are a better example, where the data collected are not voluntary -- you want meds, you have to give them a minimum of info. They've tried (and changed their minds when it hit the evening news) to sell the data. That's scary!
  • Fortunately, this could never happen here

    I think he was being sarcastic.
  • Nitpick: Congress doesn't approve funding for Echelon (directly anyway). Recently, Congress requested information from the NSA to prove that American's privacy weren't being violated. The NSA refused, claiming Attorney-Client privledge or some other lameass excuse. If an individual tried that, they would be hauled off for contempt of congress, but the NSA managed to get away with it.

    -B

  • Re:Optimism at work (Score:3)

    by Ralph Wiggam ( 22354 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @10:05AM (#950916) Homepage
    The police are in the executive branch of the government (enforcing the laws), while judges are in the judicial branch (interpretting the laws). The judiciary is supposed to check the power of the executive branch, there is nothing "redundant" about that.
    One of the reasons that those requests are rarely denied is because the police know what is required to get permission and don't want to waste their own, or the judges, time making a request without reasonable suspicion. Also, just because a judge gives permission for a wiretap doesn't mean that a good defense lawyer won't get it thrown out in court.

    -B

    PS- I'm not saying the system works perfectly, but it is designed well.

  • Re:Optimism at work (Score:4)

    by Ralph Wiggam ( 22354 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @09:55AM (#950917) Homepage
    According to my logs from today, you spent 3 hours surfing the web (an hour of that on Slashdot), an hour and a half playing Minesweeper, clipped your fingernails for 15 minutes, and wrote one email to your girlfriend. BTW, if you're going to do that thing with the baby oil, you should put a shower curtain down on the floor first.

    -Agent B
  • Prosecutor General's Office spokeswoman Natalya Veshnyakova said Thursday that federal prosecutors were not ready to comment because "we have no Internet access and have not seen the database."
    Wow.
  • The simple fact is that there are so many people and only a few of them can be dedicated to playing back every phone call (even at high speed) or tailing a person in hopes of finding something useful. Targets have to be picked based on high profile or probable cause and I don't qualify. Neither, likely, do you.

    To a certain extent, I agree with this now, but there are a few important issues I have with that:
    • I may not be important enough now, but what about the future? I may have had lots of fun renting goat porn in college, but what if I want to run for Congress when I'm 35? You try explaining that to a bunch of "60 Minutes" reporters!
    • Right now there's a tremendously prohibitive amount of work required to wiretap the phone of everyone in the United States. But imagine X number of years down the road, if speech and context recognition become advanced enough - it wouldn't be too tough at all.
    • It doesn't neccesarily have to be a sophisticated government agency spying on a high-profile politician. With the advent of search engines and the Internet, it's possible to find somewhat incriminating information without even trying. If my mother ever visited Slashdot, she could find my "goat porn" quote with relative ease. Try punching someone's name into Google or DejaNews and see what happens.

    I'm not saying this is anything that will affect your or me significantly in our lifetimes, but they are issues that need to be dealt with as soon as possible. Besides, just because it doesn't affect us doesn't mean it's not important. Senators are people too! :)
  • I seem to remember that Russian homes were required to have hard-wired "radios" for some time. This was probably mostly done to minimize the use of real radio receivers and the possibility of receiving anything that conflicted the official pravda.

    However, I've always wondered how many of these things were simply 1-way speakers, and how many were 2-way speaker/microphones, like George Orwell's 2-way TVs.

  • Sarcasm at work (Score:3)

    by TheDullBlade ( 28998 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @09:47AM (#950921)
    Maybe jamie should have wrote it as:

    <sarcasm>Fortunately, this could never happen here</sarcasm>

    so we wouldn't have to deal with people who can't recognize sarcasm pointing out how naive he (she?) is.
  • This should be a wakeup call for people who don't take their own privacy seriously. This should also be a wakeup call for congress when they approve funding every year for eschelon related activities. This should be a wakeup call for anybody who belives that nobody cares what they do with their private life.
  • What?! You mean Scott Mc Nealy was right and we have no privacy anyway? I guess we'll just have to "get over it"... ;-)
  • Well, given that "The Moscow Times" is an English language newspaper, I don't see what is disturbing about it...

  • Re:Too late (Score:3)

    by hey! ( 33014 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @10:44AM (#950925) Homepage Journal
    Well, look at it this way.

    The law enforcement types say they need to curtail civil liberties to be effective.

    Ok, they got it.

    Step back from an occaisional drug bust and look at the situation as a whole. Are they demonstratively more effective than before?

    If not,then we've just traded our liberties for nothing.

  • Not true! Babelfish [altavista.com] now does Russian to English!

  • We have ways and means to prevent this (to an extent. gpg/pgp, ssh, ssl for web. This covers most things that people do on the net. These aren't perfect and are still prone to human error but using these simple things can lessen the effects of this.

  • You know, for someone who posts so much you sure don't get moderated up very often.

    ^^--- This ad hominem attack was brought to you by the letter "M" and the number "23" -- ^^

    - Rev.

  • Every day, it seems, we see more and more stories about how group X is violating privacy. From Echelon to RealNetworks, privacy abuse is very, very obviously pervasive and almost totally unchecked.

    And what does the /. crowd do? They bitch. Bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch. Katz spews out another horror piece. User comments that amount to little more than "that sucks!" are moderated up to 5. Endless debate occurs over the rights of states & corporations vs. the rights of the individuals. On and on and on...

    In the meantime, little harm occurs to those who violate these rights. Have you written or called your Congresscritter to bitch about this? Yes, money rules politics. But so does the ballot box. If they think that there are concerned citizens out there it will at least give them pause before voting for the "Feinstein-Helms Let's Give the Corporations More Power to Eavesdrop Bill of 2000". PLEASE spend less time posting comments here and more time calling up Congressmembers. Bitch to THEM. Get active! As cool as /. is, it affects policy only marginally. "They've got the guns but we've got the numbers" as Jim Morrison famously said. Bitch, moan, complain and do so loudly and consistently.

    [Note: This message applies worldwide: just replace "Congress" with "Parliament" or "Duma" or whatever happens to apply to your particular locale. But fucking DO it. Nothing positive will happen in the "real world", no matter how high your karma is here.]

    This should probably be modded as flamebait, because I am trying to be inflammatory. I *want* people to get pissed.

    And while we're at it, can someone email me & tell me why IPv6/IPsec hasn't been widely implemented yet? Packet level encryption would help in situations like this.

    - Rev.

  • Re:Even better - lie on the application (Score:3)

    by coyote-san ( 38515 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @01:26PM (#950930)
    It's hard to take a moral stand when your snout is deep in the slop.

    I told *two* grocery stores that I would change my shopping habits and never darken their door again rather than provide personally identifiable marketing information. Fortunately the third chain (Albertsons) has repeatedly stated that they will not introduce them. When I really wanted something that only a carded store carried, I shopped at the local grocery store and paid full price. (It subsequently went bankrupt and was purchased by Albertsons.)

    This was a pain, but nobody can accuse me of sitting on the fence. I was also always very clear that I would accept their cards if they were truly anonymous - put a bowl of them out on the customer service desk and donate any bonus points to charity. I'll grab a new card every few months - long enough for you to collect real marketing information, but not long enough that I would worry about my privacy. I have been told by all stores that that is "impossible."

    In contrast, you're already in bed with the marketers. You lie, other people swap cards at parties, but you all buy into the Big Lie that it's legitimate for a grocery store to demand personal information in exchange for token discounts on merchandise they artificially marked up in the first place. (E.g., I noticed that 2-liter bottles of soda shot up from $0.99/2L to $3.99/2L, with a "sale" price of $1.99/2L, after the introduction of these cards.) When they decide to crack down on identity fraud and demand that you provide real information to get your discounts you're not in a strong moral position to protest.

    This seems like a minor point, but if you look at the civil disobediences that worked (including the experiences of POW camp survivors) you'll see that one of the common threads is that the leaders and members always made an explicit effort to avoid any benefits which weren't available to all. I'll take advantange of a sales price which is available to everyone, card or not, but I won't accept a sales price that in any way - no matter how small - reflects special treatment in return for cooperation.
  • We're so close to this line already. Just think of all the information that your employer keeps track of, and legally so. All web site addresses, emails, and even phone conversations (since so many companies are already big enough to have a room where their own PBX is stationed).

    Man, I just joined this place, and NO ONE knows anything about the PBX, which is just in an unlocked 'closet' that I can go into anytime. Why do telcos and employers think that "all those wires" make no sense to anyone? It's actually a piece of cake. Security through obscurity at it's worse!

    Anyway, what would keep your employer from coughing up any of the information they already have on you? We've already had court cases where the Company's backup tapes are open for viewing! Add this to that Quova company that is port scanning everyone on the internet, and the information your employer has is their's to peruse. Some people asked how in the heck could Quova get your buying habits and interests from this... Maybe text parsign through all your emails. Or simply finding the Net-Nanny-Watch type software that already has all of your web site visits handy... and coded to your name.

    Rader

  • Then obviously the law is no longer working in the public's favor and a better system should replace it.

    It's unfortunate that most people are too scared to even think about going against Big Brother.
  • Heroin _IS_ legal. It's a VERY powerful pain killer and is generally used in terminal patients with very painful diseases (I've not heard of it being used in nonterminal cases). The thing is, there's no good reason to use heroin other than to get high. The only other reason generally puts in you a hospital anyway. Your doctor could concievably write you a perscription for heroin, same as (s)he could for morphine. Just wanted to clear that up. There are a lot of other drugs that are the same way (most "hard" drugs).
  • not to nitpick, but the current federal govt(you know, that one established with this constitutions, in 1789), was put in place as a response to the prevous federal government, the Articles of Confederation, which was really weak. It gave the federal government no power, and if we had kept it, I'm sure we wouldn't be as well off today.

    But more on the subject, I don't understand why you state-righters think that giving the states more power will somehow lead to better protection of civil liberties. There isn't a tie between the two. In fact, as the federal government has gained power(thanks to FDR and LBJ, JFK), people have gained even more rights and protections....thanks to the federal government's ability to coerce the states(like Mississippi, Alabama, etc)

    to sum it up, Federalism(the balance of power between the states and the federal government) isn't tied to civil liberties...and if it is, federal power is good for increasing civil liberties.

    your friendly poly sci major
    quatto
  • Wake up call to Congress? Do you honestly think congress is watching out for your privacy? The same group that supports Echelon? The same one that makes it easier to tap phone lines w/o much red tape?

    I seriously doubt this is any sort of wake-up call to a politician.
  • so it's probably easy enough for the government to monitor all communications and hone in on key words that are spoken!

    It's called Echelon, and it is very real.

    Echelon is "sigint." Or signal intelligence. I remember reading an article in Time Magazine [time.com] shortly after Australia first announced that it was taking part in the project to monitor the worlds private and public communications. Time reported that all email, land-line phone, cell phone, newsgroup, message board, pager, etc was open to interception by this singal monitoring project.

    They originally reported that it looks for key words (ie presidential threats). The monitoring has been done by computer which flags suspected transmissions and sends them off for further investigation.

    Conclusion: It has long sinc been possible to monitor you phone calls. Big Brother is watching.
  • Part of the worry though, might be the possibility of some day qualifying as a "target." Follow me as I go a little over-board, but bare with me.

    Suppose we allow this to happen, with a little resistance, but in the end the government encroaches upon our privacy more and more. We give up a little privacy here, and a little more there. All in the name of national security, drug wars, what have you.

    This is when things go wrong. What happens if people begin to fight against injustice, speak out against toxic dumping, or disagree with the political actions of the government. With all the resitricted privacy, the voice of the people is truly drowned out. Anyone who doesn't agree with the president and might not vote for him could be "quieted." It's not about your slashdot karma now, or your criminal record, it's about preserving what we have for the moments in history when they are needed.

    I'm not saying either that right now our government is evil, but I'm saying that the potential for abuse is great. That is why we were given these rights in the first place. The American people are the ultimate form of checks and balances.
  • Soo...

    Fess up! what did they have on you. I'm not expecting you to give details, but was it accurate, scarily precise, or just vague and uninformative.

    Me, I'm proud of the fact that the credit agencies do a knock-kncok routine ("Johan who?") when they hear my name. Tho it does make getting appartments a hassle.
  • it's in English. themoscowtimes.com and themoscwtimes.ru are both in English. Kind of worrysome if you ask me.

  • Re:Too late (Score:3)

    by barleyguy ( 64202 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @10:02AM (#950940)
    Of course, you won't realize it until one day your health insurance agent says they are downgrading you to a 'At Risk' group, doomed to pay more, simply because they noticed that you haven't been buying the 5% fat beef instead of the 20% fat beef.

    More likely, it will be because of cigarettes or alcohol. Cigarettes are almost ALWAYS cheaper with a card.

    There was one particular lawsuit where someone sued a grocery store, and they brought up alcohol purchases on his club card in their legal defense.

    I generally avoid these type of cards for that reason. Of course, if you have use a credit card, all of that information is logged anyway. For maximum privacy the only option is cash.
  • I've heard tales of Echelon, and others coming out of the US, but here in Canada we've had the government admit to storing a large database of information on large number of citizens, not just a select few who are into politics, rebellion, etc. Though we do have CSIS (Canadian Security and Intelligence Service) who tends to keep some pretty large files on those who might be termed 'dissidents'.

    To quote [canoe.ca]: "The "extraordinarily detailed database" holds a dossier on almost every person in Canada with as many as 2,000 pieces of information about each person's education, marital status, ethnic origin, mobility, disabilities, income tax, employment and social assistance history.".

    It's scary stuff to say the least. Ostensibly, this information has been collected "to plan schools, hospitals, utilities", but it's only one step from being a huge money-maker when sold to advertisers. How would you like to receive targeted marketing from medical companies when they learn from your medical records that you have such-and-such a disease/condition?

    Apparently (though I can't find the news article relating to it), there is going to be a dismantling of this database, but do you trust that the information will be destroyed? Or will it be broken down into smaller chunks and disseminated among government agencies responsible for particulars? When you decide to run for prime minister at age 50, will the two months that you were on welfare in your 20's be delivered to the media by some source?


    TheGeek

  • If you really want to be private then you need to follow these simple steps:

    1. Don't communicate. No phone, no internet, no speaking, hell, don't even blink your eyes.

    2. Don't go anywhere. People can see where you're at.

    3. Don't shed any skin/hair/bodily fluid. People can look at your genetic code and engineer a biotoxin that can only make YOU sterile. (Which shouldn't matter if you follow this rule anyway, as you can't spill bodily fluid.)

    4. Don't touch ANYTHING, as then they can get your fingerprint.

    5. Stop living. This is the only surefire way to rid mortals of keeping tabs on you. (Except for the U.S. Census, which has a tendancy to count graveyards in their polls, but no on listens to them anyway.)

    The point is, you are safe nowhere as long as you exist. Why anyone would be SURPRISED that we are all being spied on all of the time is beyond me. I mean what the hell do you think all of those satillites are for? Weather Forecasting?! PSHAW!

    Vulgrin the MAD

  • Ok, well said.

    But what do you do about this? Take away all of the DEA's powers? Make everything go in front of a judge? Think of what that will do for red-tape.

    I'm not defending them at all, but you have to think of alternatives to give them the tools they need to solve their task. Either that or legalize all drugs and have the country turn into a cesspool.

    My 2 cents. Any unused currency can be returned for a full refund within 30 days.

    Vulgrin the MAD
  • Again, I don't agree with the DEA or anything but:

    Imagine if they HADN'T been doing what they have been doing for so long. Would it be better or worse?

    Its a completely pointless question, that I don't personally agree with, but I'm trying to look at both sides.

    Vulgrin the MAD
  • Who says that can't happen here in America. Bill Clinton does it. Remember that little thing about hiring a detective? Who knows what black box projects are going on and what they are doing. Hell, the US & Russian governments don't need to use electronics. They have other means. In the US, one such project was "StarGate"-- I am not sure if I have the name correct. The US government you trained military to remotely view places in the world from well within the US borders.

    For all we know, Bill Clinton has a mega database with all our names in it, or was that Bill Gates. ;)
  • >> Who knows what black box projects are going on and what they are doing.

    > Uh, don't you mean "black ops"?

    No not really, but I should probably explain it for the intellectually challenged. "[B]lack ops" would refer to an operation. A Black box project refers to a project that may or may not contain operations. The project I am refering to contained both. Research and people actually using it.
  • Yes, they're executive branch. There've been hearings before on matters potentially embarrassing to the NSA, although IIRC their budget is still pretty much hidden from most of Congress (excepting, perhaps, intelligence committee members).

    Note, 'tho, that the NSA's charter is pretty darn specific. In most circumstances, they are NOT allowed to deliberately eavesdrop on an American citizen, or to arrange for any other nation to do so -- and their own FAQ reiterates this. Exceptions, if memory serves, include conversations with foreign nationals.

    Consequently, they stand to get nailed if anybody proves that they directly or indirectly (via UKUSA) arrange for blanket SIGINT collection on domestic conversations...

  • Not too many Congressmen want to go home to their districts labelled as "against national security"...

    Asking them to prove that they did NOT violate privacy of Americans in contravention of their Charter is also obviously impossible, since they would have to "prove" that they did not dispose of evidence, and so forth. So it's an utterly bogus request.

    Soliciting whistleblowing employees past and present is more logical if one believes that the Agency violates its charter.
  • It couldn't translate what I've typed in in KOI8-R, so I guess it only understands Windows-1251 (which I can't type). Sigh.
    --
  • one commentator during Hitler's reign said basically that he did't protest when the troops came for the disabled, or the elderly or the Jews and when they came for him there was nobody left to speak up for him.
    The Rev. Martin Neimoller (or maybe Niemoller, I can't spell German worth a darn).
    --
    Ancient Goth: Someone who overthrew the Roman Empire.
  • Slashdot does not HAVE a consistent political opinion. It never will because people the world over post their varied opinions here. Is this news to you?
    --
  • Namesys is based in Russia, is it not? I wonder if he made it on the list.
  • Uh no: Judge - judicial decision maker. Police - executive enforcement.

    There's a reason for that. Figure it out.
  • Judge - likes to put people in prison
    Police - likes to put people in prison

    You are a moron.
  • I, personally, take my privacy very seriously. However, I also simultaneously realize that, if the government (or any agency, for that matter, be it private investigators or my neighbors) wants to get information on me, they will get it one way or another. It's similar to protecting your house. I lock my doors, lock my windows, and have timers on my lights. However, as good as these precautions are, if somebody wants to get inside my house, they're going to get inside my house. They'll break down the door, smash a window, etc. If they want in, they'll get in. If somebody wants my information, they're going to get it, whether I like it or not (and I do NOT).
    ------

  • Optimism at work (Score:4)

    by Wind_Walker ( 83965 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @09:34AM (#950956) Homepage Journal
    Fortunately, this could never happen here

    I hate to be the pessimist/conspiratory theorist here, but truthfully, for all that I know my phones are tapped by uncounted numbers of people/organizations. I would never know about it, from the "end user" point of view, but somebody could easily be eavesdropping on all my conversations, e-mail (can anybody say Echelon?), and God knows what else. Just because the U.S. government says they are upholding the law and not bending it does not make it true. I recall a bit of text placed on the music video for Van Halen's "Right Now" song... "Right Now, our government is doing things you think only other governments do" It's not far from the truth, folks.
    ------

  • Not that the DEA are by any means the only abusers of the fourth ammendment. Any police organization that can get a warrant for information can sieze a company's (or a citizen's) computers for an indefinite amount of time. Steve Jackson games is perhaps the most fameous example of this.

    I've got an easy solution for those cards. Lie. There's nothing on the form you fill out that says you can't. Lie, and then trade the cards with your friends on a regular basis. There's nothing on the form you fill out about that either.

  • Maybe it is me, but Russia is starting to sound more and more like a perfect liberterian society: a tiny government that has pulled back significantly, leaving the free market to govern itself.

    And market it did, everything it could, at maximum profit and perfect prices. Suddenly a database of private lives is only worth 50k, and no pesky law telling you what you can sell or not.

    Funny enough, it just doesn't sound like a place to raise children or grow old in.

  • Too late (Score:5)

    by Chairboy ( 88841 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @09:51AM (#950959) Homepage
    It's too late to hope it never happens here, it already happens every day.

    The Drug Enforcement Agency has lobbied for and received an amazing suite of powers, ostensibly for use in fighting the 'War on Drugs'. Not only can the DEA seize cash and assets without proof of wrongdoing, mere suspicion, they can also get wiretaps on suspected criminals with minimal evidence. In fact, DEA and other law enforcement can now get wiretaps without the inconvenience of justifying it to a judge by merely waving the flag of 'Drug War'. After that, it's basically a blank wiretapping check that's written in their name.

    For a more pervasive example of observastion, take a look at the grocery 'Club Cards' that are becoming popular. These cards allow the stores to attach names to the lists of purchases made. There is nothing to prevent them from selling this information to insurance companies and marketing companies in the years to come. Of course, you won't realize it until one day your health insurance agent says they are downgrading you to a 'At Risk' group, doomed to pay more, simply because they noticed that you haven't been buying the 5% fat beef instead of the 20% fat beef. A marketer might call you up one day and ask you to try Pepsi instead of Coke, or browbeat you on your choice of laundry detergents.

    Phone tapping isn't the biggest problem anymore, it's all the OTHER data that's sorted, collated, and filed under you social security number.
  • At least in America, they could have their conversations monitored and lives dissected in front of a national audience, and have a chance at a HUGE CASH PRIZE!!! The only downside is you have to live in a house or on an island full of strangers...
  • The major networks already use an army of hidden cameras and microphones to broadcast conversations that participants are led to believe are private.
  • True, I was talking about the U.S. I'm curious whether or not the sort of "hidden camera" techniques used by American journalists would be legal in Europe with its privacy laws (for example if I were a European journalist, could I apply for a job at a supermarket and then surreptitiously videotape my fellow employees going about their business?)

  • do you read the stories? (Score:3)

    by briancarnell ( 94247 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @09:40AM (#950963) Homepage
    As the story indicates, the leading suspect here for gathering this information is the independent news television station. You might have noticed that journalists and network news shows also believe thy are allowed to committ fraud to secretly tape private conversations.

    This is news?
  • Err, guys, why did you think the British sold that tower? Because we don't spy on our citizens anymore? No, offcourse not, the hardware was appearantly obsolete and replaced by better.. (As every ./ knows what happends to obsolete hw..) Privacy? It ended the day you hooked up your first inet (AOL) account (to figure out it sucked indeed..).. Want to know for sure? Try typing your name in let's say Altavista and be amazed..
  • This is a good point. Its as I have heard many times "Security is about managing risk".

    I met a person at Usenix last month who keeps his pgp key on a disk, in an undisclosed physically secure location (probably in a safe). When he signs someones key, he boots his laptop (cold boot) off a CDROM, containing ONLY software that he personally audited, with a copy of gpg or pgp (I forget) on the CDROM.

    He then uses that to sign the keys.

    Now this is all well and good but...very secure. However is it needed? I don't know about others but I figure that if someone is willing to expend the effort to A) Break into my masquerading host, B) break into my workstation host, and then C) invest the energy (CPU time etc) to try and crack the encryption on _MY_ gpg key (given that MY key has a strong passphrase)...

    Well if someone had motive to expend THAT MUCH effort to get MY key...then I have larger problems than key protection is going to solve.

    All we can really do is protect ourselves with deterrent systems, like the car locks and doors on houses, to make the barrier to entry high enough that its not worth it for most people to attack....then hope its enough.

    I think the real problem with the net is the volume. If you want to listen to voice conversations in bedrooms...you need to have listening devices pointed at every bedroom. If you want to listen to email....all you need is a tap at a high volume net juncture...and you can get thousands upon thousands of messages.
    (our mail exchangers alone do about 100k messages/day..upstream 1 or 2 hops from us..its probably more like 1 million or more)
  • I have a personal copy of PGP Desktop Security 6.5.3 on Windows 98, a corporate PGP Security Suite (or whatever, the version with the ADKs and custom installer-builder). I have been able to get both to send and receive information with GnuPG. Version 6+ of PGP defaults to DH/DSS keys similar enough to what GPG uses. You are kind of constrained to what block cipher you use, but that's about it.
  • Is it just me, or does anybody else find it somewhat disturbing that 'The Moscow Times' website, including both themoscowtimes.com and themoscwtimes.ru, is entirely in English?

  • Actually, a bit of further research reveals the the Moscow Times is owned by something called Independent Media. From their site [moscowtimes.ru]:

    Independent Media, a privately owned limited liability Dutch company, is one of the strongest publishing houses on the Russian mass media scene today.
    ... and is the leader in the English-language newspaper market with its flagship, The Moscow Times.

    Guess that explains it.

  • DEA shmEA! at least they have to do it actively. the NSA knows all...big brother is watching you :) No Such Agency is the largest, best funded, and most secretive intelligence agency in the world. it's been like that since 1952, when Harry Truman signed a document that brought it into existence. they monitor essentially all communications, in the USA as well as in the rest of the world. Echelon does it, 24/7, and automatically. All that, and you get a free mixer too! I know this sounds paranoid, but it's true. So buy a bingo-machine and start making those one-time pads...

  • Is DEA not an excuse? (Score:4)

    by Poingggg ( 103097 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @10:30AM (#950970)
    First, let me state that I don't like drugdealers and their like at all. Softdrugs (cannabis) is merely OK with me, harddrugs are just bad. But that's off-topic. But the Mafia was born in the time that alcohol was illegal in the USA, and gangs started making big money with it. It turned out that prohibiting alcohol gave more trouble than allowing and controlling it. The same goes, for a great part, for drugs. One can easily become 100 years using heroine of a good, pure quality, and noone has to bother about people using this. Now, it's big money and it's mixed with all kinds of shit that causes users to become sick etc, and it's expensive, so people have to steal to use it. IMHO it'd be better to legalize it and control it.
    BUT America wants to have an excuse (yes, I'm finally coming to my point here :-) ) to have a finger into everything, everywhere. So what works better than to create a devil (drugs) and have a force with almost unlimited power to 'fight' it?
    The DEA is such a force, it's everywhere and when America thinks it's needed to do something about a thing they don't like, they use it. And. of course, everything and everyone has to be monitored everywhere. I think the DEA is just an excuse to get influence.
    Am I lucky I live in the Netherlands! (Yes, I have used cannabis for years, absolutely problemless, I stopped, without any problem, and I'm not using any other drugs (apart from caffeine), never have used other drugs, and never wanted to. But that's off-topic again :-) )

  • Why could it never happen here? Yes, it is illeagal, but the article states that is was a blackmarket datableas, hence, illeagal. You can buy wiretap kits from any number of catolog companies, and/or a library card and a couple of bucks.
  • right, so it won't be admissible as evidence, but can still be part of the public record? no thanks, my exploits with baby oil should remain between me and whoever i convince to join me.
  • "Soon, we will look back with nostalgia at the times when we were only listened to by the KGB and not by God-knows-whom, by anybody."

    Bullshit. The KGB murdered people for political beliefs. This happens when law breaks down to the point that the government itself is simply a system of force. The US is a long way from there, despite incidents like Ruby Ridge, Waco, and Miami.

    Don't try to compare M$ or DoubleClick using your email to sell shit, to the KGB. It's an insult to all the people that they killed.

  • What restraint?

    Ruby Ridge: Government could have waited. Instead they used sniper to kill.

    Waco: Government could have arrested leader in town. Instead they decided to go in with guns blazing, and failed. They then could have waited. Instead they decided to snipe and storm.

    Elian: They could have waited for the court decision. Once again, they stormed a private house.

    Now what laws? All of the above cases have the stench of abitrary and exmplerary enforcement. The last case was the shakiest legaly as A. Child Custody is a State matter. B. Federal law grants immunity rights to ANY Cuban that reaches US soil. C. No flight hazard was ever demonstrated.

    The framers of the constitution put thought billiting of troops in private houses was evil enough to be mentioned in the Bill of Rights. I wonder what they might think of the above.

  • "Soon, we will look back with nostalgia at the times when we were only listened to by the KGB and not by God-knows-whom, by anybody."

    Psst - Don't trust those bastards to snoop on you! Only the real KGB knows how to do it right. Just let us take charge again and never have to think for yourself again. We'll round up all of those pesky computers, copy machines, and other printing presses for you. Happy days will come again.

    From what I've read, this is not winning anyone over but retirees and, suprise, party members who have taken some big hits. What can be worse than being killed for thinking? People want to be free.

    The KGB is still watching you too!

  • "KGB/FSB"

    He's mixed up with the KGB!? I always knew he was a communist!

    ----------------
    Programming, is like sex.

  • There was one particular lawsuit where someone sued a grocery store, and they brought up alcohol purchases on his club card in their legal defense.

    That happened to Robert Riveria, in a supermarket named Vons, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Safeway.

    Briefly, what happened is that Mr. Riveria sued because he slipped in a yogurt spill that hadn't been cleaned up yet. (Seems a bit frivolous to me - but that's just my opinion.) According to Mr.Riveria's attorney, the mediator assigned to the case said Vons' lawyers informed them that theys had used his purchasing information to determine that he regularly purchased alchololic information, and they might imply in court that that was the reason why Mr. Riveria was unable to successfully negotiate his way around the wet cleanup.

    Vons asserts their lawyers asked them for the information from the card record department, but it was never granted. (Interestingly, they didn't actually deny that their attorneys made the threat, only that it was baseless.) Note that the information was never used in court, and in fact it was the plantiff who held the press conference reporting it.

    I'm note sure this is a case of black and white. Make the judgement yourself. You can find some info about it here [azstarnet.com]

  • Re:Too late (Score:4)

    by rgmoore ( 133276 ) <glandauer@charter.net> on Friday July 07, 2000 @05:27PM (#950999) Homepage
    But what do you do about this? Take away all of the DEA's powers? Make everything go in front of a judge? Think of what that will do for red-tape.

    I'm not defending them at all, but you have to think of alternatives to give them the tools they need to solve their task. Either that or legalize all drugs and have the country turn into a cesspool.

    I certainly do think that the DEA should have to go in front of a judge to get a warrant for a wiretap, search, etc. The purpose of that "Red Tape" is to protect your rights. Going through the trouble to justify a warrant isn't some stupid formality that's there to get in the way. It's a vitally important step in preventing abuse of police powers. If there's actually a problem processing these things promptly that means you need more judges to deal with the workload, not that you should start ripping up the Bill of Rights to save time.

    The key is that allowing a minor loophole in an important protection is like being a little bit pregnant. Once there's a single agency that can violate your rights, all of the other groups that want to can just call them up, trump up some bogus grounds for a search, and "happen" to find whatever else they were looking for.

    The big thing to remember is that someone involved in a big, organized activity like large scale drug traffic will inherently produce a trail of physical and documentary evidence. Sooner or later some of that is going to show up in a way that will convince a judge that it's worth while letting the police have their warrant. It's people who haven't done anything wrong but just happen to look suspicious (or have pissed off a member of the police) who are the real potential victims here. When you let the police barge in wherever and whenever they want, you'll increase the number of innocent people harmed much more than the number of guilty people caught.

  • I really wasn't posting with regard to the legality or morality of what was being done. I agree that we should fight against this even when it doesn't affect us. I don't recall the full statement or who said it, but one commentator during Hitler's reign said basically that he did't protest when the troops came for the disabled, or the elderly or the Jews and when they came for him there was nobody left to speak up for him.

    I was dealing directly with the idea that we all are being spied on. When the resources simply aren't there to do the job, such statements should be pointed out as paranoid.

  • it is your right to smoke, the gov't shouldn't be able to say anything about it as long as it's not hurting anybody else.

    I'm not aware of any legislation to prohibit smoking except in public areas where it can indeed hurt others. I am extremely sensitive to smoke, usually getting a headache before I can even smell it.

    What happens when Billy boy thinks that high-cholesterol meats are bad for you, imagine that congress bill.

    You talkin' about Double Cheeseburger Bill? The resident of the USofA? Not likely.

  • ...there are quite a number who would brutally murder you for being gay.

    I think there are actually very few who would do so. The media tend to play up the connection in a case like Matt Sheppard's (sp?) murder.

    Similarly, people who support abortion are also often the victims of zealous murderous fundamentalists.

    While abortion providers have been targeted, I don't believe the numbers justify the use of the term 'often'. Also, zeal and belief in the fundamentals of an individual's religion are superfluous and inflammatory with respect to this argument. There are just as many people who are zealous in their beliefs and twisted enough in their thinking to kill people simply because they are christians (or muslims, or bahai, etc.) as in school shootings in Kentucky, Littleton and the Baptist church in Texas. You could probably take the numbers of churchgoers killed in these three attacks and come up with a significantly larger number of deaths than those of abortion providers.

    I recently read about a prominent atheist who was kidnapped and then was never seen again.

    If you're referring to Madelyn O'Hare, she and two of her children are presumed murdered by an associate for $500,000.00 in gold (I think that's the right amount) and not because of her beliefs or activism.

    These examples are similar to the idea that we are all being spied on in that they are exaggerated in and even sensationalistic. Does that mean that there aren't people who would just as soon kill homosexuals as look at them? No, I'm certain that there are, just as I'm certain that there are a few people who would target someone because of their religious beliefs or the color of their skin, or any number of other differences. They don't all belong to a single demographic, but a single mindset that says it's OK to use violence to achieve your ends. There are a few who would carry that as far as murder, far more who would beat the living daylights out of you, and still more who would scheme against you or rail against you publicly. I don't believe the increases from group to group to be incremental but exponential. This is not based on profiling, but simple observation.

    carlos

  • ....over-provocative (although true in general)

    That's funny. Almost governmental, giving with one hand what you take away with the other.

    If you check out my previous posts you'll see that I don't have a problem with a need to preserve privacy. I think all of us have things in our lives, past or present, that we'd just as soon weren't made public (except the sociopaths).

  • Re:Wakeup Call for the US! (Score:4)

    by carlos_benj ( 140796 ) on Friday July 07, 2000 @10:10AM (#951007) Journal
    This should be a wakeup call for anybody who belives that nobody cares what they do with their private life.

    That still probably holds true for most of us. The only names on the database are high-profile: 140 politicians, journalists, businessmen and criminals.

    I doubt anyone's Slashdot Karma level is sufficient to bring about such scrutiny.

    Let's say someone did tap my phone. What will they use the information for? Will they attempt to blackmail me with information regarding cheating on my diet? What would they expect to gain? My assets are few. I try to live my life peaceably with others and within the limitations of the law.

    The simple fact is that there are so many people and only a few of them can be dedicated to playing back every phone call (even at high speed) or tailing a person in hopes of finding something useful. Targets have to be picked based on high profile or probable cause and I don't qualify. Neither, likely, do you.

    carlos

  • It could happen here.

    One of the the things I have noticed about watching Russia that last several years is there is tendency to take their new found freedoms to extremes. Kind of like a teenager driving.

    The company suspected of doing the spying is a private broadcast company which produces "news" shows similiar to Hard Copy.

    Their Mafia is more violent, there politicians more corrupt in general, their journalists more invasive, or are they.

    I did notice that the commentary tends to indicate that the calls they cite as being tapped are long distance calls. My understanding of Russia's infrastructure is that a lot of their long distance calls still go out over microwave transmission. Microwave transmissions are notoriously easy to snoop. It has long been rumored that the NSA satellites regular snooped on microwave transmissions. Curious enough, is they used to "calibrate" their equipment over friendly countries.

    Mind if I calibrate this bug in your office?

  • Hey everybody, it is certainly time to wake up. After years of reading alarmists and other paranoids talk about how "they" are watching, it seems that there is some much harder evidence. We have known all along that there was potential for privacy infringement, but now we see it for real in Russia. The worst thing is we can't count on legislation. The government (national) is frequently the culprit. This should be a call for states to stand up and reassert their powers in the government, in the United States any way. The constitution provides for limited government at the national level. It is time that this was enforced. No matter what you philosophy of government now, you cannot deny that this was the intent of the founders. Here's hoping it isn't too late yet...

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close