×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NSA Revelation Leads FTC To Propose "Reclaim Your Name" Initiative

timothy posted about 10 months ago | from the agency-vs.-agency-vs.-reality dept.

Government 82

First time accepted submitter clegrand writes "Julie Brill, a member of the Federal trade Commission, has proposed a voluntary big data industry initiative to allow consumers access to their personal records and the ability to correct them. She has coined it 'Reclaim Your Name.' While some big data companies such as Acxiom already allow such access, it is not an industry-wide practice. She sees this campaign as a natural extension of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and a logical partner for the ongoing effort of the Do Not Track mechanism currently under standardization review with the W3C."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

82 comments

Data Verification (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142001)

Yes, they wouldn't want to be keeping inaccurate dossiers on you. Why with your cooperation there is no limit to what they can know about you. Terrorism will be a thing of the past. So of course that means that we can repeal the various Patriot type acts that the western world has been going gonzo over for the past decade.

Re:Data Verification (4, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 10 months ago | (#44145489)

Exactly.

If Ms. FTC wants to impress me, she can propose that we have access to that material and the ability to remove it, not to change it.

I wouldn't want to change it. If some asshole screws me over because they were using faulty data, I might have a chance to sue. If I did their work for them and corrected their information, I'd pretty much be waiving any right I might have if they then used it against me somehow.

Re:Data Verification (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44145635)

Actually they want you to "feel good" and not change or fix a damn thing. The original databases are going to still exist, but would then include comments like "this dumbass said we were wrong. ticket him as often as possible" and "IRS needs to audit this guy for correcting us".

People _are_ catching on slowly, lets see how many fall for this laughable "fix".

Re:Data Verification (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44148101)

Seriously, you don't see the value in this? I bet when a security question asks for your mother's maiden name, you write in her real name, too, don't you? Well, with this initiative, you can go back and fix that mistake, and who's to say your mother's maiden name isn't actually Hillary Obama The Robots Are Coming 11001010, anyway? After all, you're the one fixing the info.

data preening (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142045)

voluntary eh? because biog data companies have such a great desire to be good?

so they want us to consolidate, clean, and correct the data that they have on us... for free?

great idea... for the big corporations.

Re:data preening (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142173)

Considering the NSA etc gets a look then be careful with any corrections as the least little mistake, even if it wasn't your mistake, might fall under the lying to the government laws if they so choose. Shame that don't mean that every credit bureau asshole isn't going to be in prison where they belong.

Re:data preening (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44143609)

JUlie Brill is a whore who advances her pimps agenda.

Why is federal agency proposing private PR stunt?

What are the legal obligations of voluntary private code? None.
Philip Morris was using the very same voluntary code for a few decades for sole
purpose of deceiving the public.

Re: data preening (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44158249)

Sure why wouldn't a company want to crowd source... err correct their info (data) for free. Sounds like ðY'© to me.

Good luck with that (4, Interesting)

markdavis (642305) | about 10 months ago | (#44142055)

Good luck with that. There was an expose' a year or two ago on TV that I watched showing just how futile it is to try and correct ANY wrong negative info in your credit reports with any of the agencies. To the point that many agencies simply didn't do anything at all when you contact them, except send you around in circles (if you are even that lucky).

So you can make all the laws you want, probably won't make a damn bit of difference. Plus, consumers have NO IDEA how many records are being kept about them and shared and aggregated and combined and by whom.

Re:Good luck with that (3, Insightful)

Trepidity (597) | about 10 months ago | (#44142085)

Yeah, from their perspective individual inaccuracies aren't a huge deal. The only kind of inaccuracies that particularly matter to them are systemic ones that their actual customers, banks and lenders, care about. So e.g. if they were flagging large groups of would've-been-profitable folks or not flagging large groups of deadbeats, they might try to tweak their data-collection or score formula to reduce the rate of those false-positives or false-negatives. But that's all at a macro-level: much like Google, they don't care to resolve individual mistakes in a case-by-case manner.

Re:Good luck with that (3, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | about 10 months ago | (#44142275)

I purposefully introduce inaccuracies into corporate data sets.
Slightly misspelled names, incorrect birth day/month/year, variable spellings of my street address.

note: the post office has always gotten my mail to me, misspellings and everything,
but it's enough to prevent lazy companies from matching that information to an existing profile.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | about 10 months ago | (#44142423)

I have the opposite problem with my post office. The address can be spelled perfectly but it might end up at my neighbor's house. I know this because it happens so frequently we all have to play nice or we'd all be missing bills, letters from friends, etc. When it gets really bad one or more of us will jump through the hoops to complain to the post office and it will get better for a while, and then slide right back to where it is now.

Re:Good luck with that (1)

Anachragnome (1008495) | about 10 months ago | (#44143723)

"... they don't care to resolve individual mistakes in a case-by-case manner."

Hogwash.

These guys want accurate information, as finely grained as they can get. If they are looking at networks of people, then a single incorrect connection can lead to much barking up the wrong tree. My guess is that there has been a huge uptick in garbage data being sent in response to the NSA being exposed, and now they need to start sorting through all of that garbage.

This is a ploy to correct what they know is incorrect data. Who better then US to ask for corrections?

This is like them asking you and I to help sort that garbage. No thanks.

Re:Good luck with that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44145671)

If you really believe that these people will believe corrections, you really need to understand the minds of these people better. They are delusional, narcissistic, and arrogant. To them, they did nothing wrong in collecting the data so it should be obvious that that to them their data can not be wrong.

Talk to someone trained in psychology about these types of people and be amazed. And yes, the people in power have profiles in place to ensure that people getting these jobs fit the fore mentioned psychological disorders.

Re:Good luck with that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142219)

Exactly, we've had that law in our country since the 90s, and it's like it's not even there. You hand out your details to probably 20 or so companies a month. Can you pin point exactly which one to go to to amend the details you want amended?

You can already correct your details with Google and Facebook and that's because they care about their user database and they do want to keep it up to date. The rest of the companies that may or may not be keeping your data, like Akamai or whatever, usually fly below the regular consumer's radar. I didn't know for example, that by opening an account in my bank, I agreed to have my data shared with almost a hundred third-party companies. I knew this was happening, I just didn't know the scale of this thing.

So such a law fixes nothing. The only way is to be in control of your own data, and provide access to it on an as-needed basis. Have a central, government run (or maybe not...) database with everyone's details stored there, and each time you sign something you give permission to access this database in some respect, which is clearly outlined in the documents you sign. Once you no longer wish to share your data, you revoke the access and it's done - a company cannot lawfully retain any data about you in any capacity, but can still ask for billing information if you owe them anything. Of course you have the right to see who has access to your data and to what capacity. You could even order a monthly report on to whom you gave the permission and why. There - I fixed the world for you :)

Re:Good luck with that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142817)

Fucking cunt. How about being able to substantially harm any data collector who gets it wrong with a simple small claims action if they fail to remove the data in 10 days? I'm talking 1 million per refusal to remove. They can add it back if they substantiate it to the satisfaction of a state court judge.

Re:Good luck with that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44143535)

Good luck with that. There was an expose' a year or two ago on TV that I watched showing just how futile it is to try and correct ANY wrong negative info in your credit reports with any of the agencies. To the point that many agencies simply didn't do anything at all when you contact them, except send you around in circles (if you are even that lucky).

I am foreigner and just curious. Why one cannot call it "incorrect written defamatory statement ..." and sue for libel?

Re:Good luck with that (1)

chriscappuccio (80696) | about 10 months ago | (#44144011)

that seems plausible, the only defense they might have is that a credit report isn't "public" information, so it isn't libel

but if anyone can buy a report, i think it is public. this is intriguing and i wonder if anyone has already tried it.

Re:Good luck with that (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 10 months ago | (#44144699)

There was an expose' a year or two ago on TV that I watched showing just how futile it is to try and correct ANY wrong negative info in your credit reports with any of the agencies.

It can make Kafka look like a realist. About a year ago I did a refi w/ the bank that held my mortgage (Wells Fargo) to lower the interest rate. No problem. I figured while I was at it I'd get a small HELOC to put a new roof and siding on (you actually can't get a HELOC as small as I wanted, but you don't have to use all the money either). I was turned down because one of the ratings agencies gave me a poor credit score, which surprised me because I'd always had a pretty good one. I asked what the big black marks were. I was told that I'd made three late mortgage payments. I know for a fact that I've never had a late mortgage payment, and it's not something you can miss as they give you notice and charge a late payment fee (I doubt they would have overlooked it if I hadn't paid the late fee). I pointed out that Wells Fargo, the bank I was trying to get a HELOC from, should be able to confirm that I'd never had a late mortgage payment because they'd held my mortgage for 13 years! No effect. Unbelievable. I got so sick of dealing with the system that I'm just saving up a bit and will pay cash.

Isn't this what the free market advocates claim? (1)

Artifakt (700173) | about 10 months ago | (#44142057)

If a lot of libertarians are right, this initiative will rapidly be adopted. After all, it's in many businesses interests to have accurate information, and in individual consumer's interests to correct their own info. Libertarian theory says that the free market should have a lot of incentive to correct for bad info.
          My own bet is that this will not happen. Fifty years from now, most of the organizations that 'should' voluntarily embrace this initiative, will still be ignoring it, and the invisible hand crew will be saying that the market will correct eventually, and stop trying to hurry it along.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

sjames (1099) | about 10 months ago | (#44142101)

Perhaps the pumpkin patch isn't sincere enough?

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (2, Informative)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 10 months ago | (#44142223)

. After all, it's in many businesses interests to have accurate information

agreed.

and in individual consumer's interests to correct their own info.

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on their goals. Being obscured would suit some (many?) people just fine. It depends what value people assign to different things.

Libertarian theory says that the free market should have a lot of incentive to correct for bad info.

In a free market environment without corporations (government-granted exemptions from liability) and courts that respected property rights this might very well be true. Are you willing to allow that theory to be tested?

and the invisible hand crew will be saying that the market will correct eventually, and stop trying to hurry it along

I can't name a single libertarian who thinks that the government-corporate collusion that's going on to invade the privacy of US residents (and others) is likely to subside voluntarily. Ask Joseph Nacchio how well it works out if you put the interests of your customers over those of the State. And before you say, "but he did something wrong," realize that the entire purpose of PRISM and its ilk is to make a retrospectable list of crimes and prohibition violations that every American commits [amazon.com]. You too.

"The invisible hand" is Smith's market-god but Austrian price-information theory and its compliment, game theory, do provide a testable framework for information dispersal in free markets. That requires investigation of mid-to-late 20th century scholarship, though, not ideas that came two centuries before. And also markets that aren't artificially manipulated, for best effect, though the theory does work when such intrusions are counted as costs and losses.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 10 months ago | (#44144651)

. After all, it's in many businesses interests to have accurate information

agreed.

I used to agree, but I'm not sure anymore that that's true of credit ratings. The correlation between credit rating and the probability of you paying back a loan is very poor. Furthermore what it takes to go from a very good credit rating to a poor one is surprisingly small, like a few late payments, and serious credit issues like having a house foreclosed on or not paying back a car loan don't seem to have a proportionately large effect. I strongly suspect that banks largely used credit ratings as an excuse to not give people the "loss leader" rates that they advertise.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | about 10 months ago | (#44145643)

And also markets that aren't artificially manipulated

And there's your fundamental flaw: since property is itself an artificial creation, there can be not exchange of it, no market, that does not involve artifice.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 10 months ago | (#44153729)

since property is itself an artificial creation

A given implementation of property rights has some artificial trappings, but even insects implement property rights by defending marked territories. Every animal has this idea hard-wired in. Heck, one could stretch the argument to walnut trees.

Georgists tend to ignore Nature in their search for an abstract ideal.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (3, Informative)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 10 months ago | (#44142225)

What the hell are you talking about?

Libertarianism is a set of related political philosophies that uphold liberty as the highest political end. This includes emphasis on the primacy of individual liberty, political freedom, and voluntary association. It is the antonym to authoritarianism. Libertarians advocate a society with a greatly reduced state or no state at all

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism [wikipedia.org]

Libertarianism is about individual liberty, period. They believe that liberty is a human right, and no public need is great enough to give cause to remove it from the individual. It has absolutely nothing to do with this story. From the Libertarians point of view the FTC and even the credit burrows wouldn't exist, as both limit the liberty of the individual through regulation. Libertarians believe the only laws and regulations that should be created are ones that increase Liberty and prevent authoritarian control of the populace by Government or other citizens. i.e. Murder would be illegal because it obviously takes liberty away from the victim.

Please don't talk shit about political philosophies you clearly know absolutely nothing about.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142501)

Otherwise known as the "Fuck you, got mine" philosophy of political thought.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (0, Troll)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 10 months ago | (#44142645)

Otherwise known as the "Fuck you, got mine" philosophy of political thought.

No, you're thinking of welfare-state progressivism, which guarantees basic living expenses, health care and control of property for certain groups regardless of their contribution, and fuck you if you want any freedom or opportunity to work your way to a better class.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142767)

Otherwise known as the fallacious bootstraps argument. Hard work =/= getting ahead.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (0)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 10 months ago | (#44142815)

Otherwise known as the fallacious bootstraps argument. Hard work =/= getting ahead.

Whoosh! In fact it can, unless the government takes every little thing they deem "too much", and it becomes not even possible. Incestuous relations between big government and big business have virtually destroyed social mobility over the last 40 years, and Obama is even now stating explicitly that he wants "the middle class" to "stay there."

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 10 months ago | (#44143323)

...Obama is even now stating explicitly that he wants "the middle class" to "stay there."

As opposed to letting them continue to slide as a class into poverty, yep.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 10 months ago | (#44147151)

...Obama is even now stating explicitly that he wants "the middle class" to "stay there."

As opposed to letting them continue to slide as a class into poverty, yep.

Oh, yes, can't "let" them move, can't "let" them get ahead, can't "let" them struggle, can't "let" anyone do anything to unbalance the status-quo, or challenge the elites that run everything. Already we have re-defined the "American Dream" - it now means "just getting by". Bread to eat, circuses to watch, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

sasquatch989 (2663479) | about 10 months ago | (#44148147)

Otherwise known as the fallacious bootstraps argument. Hard work =/= getting ahead.

It'd be fallacious only if it weren't true. Sadly, in spite of your narrow and ill-informed view, hard work does indeed == getting ahead for many people every day all over the world.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (1)

chihowa (366380) | about 10 months ago | (#44143193)

Abusive monopolies and massive quasi-governmental corporations practically fall into the same category as the state, so (little "L") libertarians would be opposed to them as well. Libertarianism doesn't exclude the use of regulation for the preservation of liberty. As the GP stated, there would still be laws concerning murder, etc.

Robber barons and feudal lords may be the poster child of (capital "L") Libertarianism, but not (lowercase "L") libertarianism.

What about the nonobvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142563)

Murder would be illegal because it obviously takes liberty away from the victim.

What about things that don't obviously take liberty away from the victim? With free association, I can chose to not do business with companies that sell my private information. The problem is, when every business does it, I no longer have the liberty to chose.

Re:What about the nonobvious (0)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 10 months ago | (#44142681)

Murder would be illegal because it obviously takes liberty away from the victim.

What about things that don't obviously take liberty away from the victim? With free association, I can chose to not do business with companies that sell my private information. The problem is, when every business does it, I no longer have the liberty to chose.

Not true - your relationship with any other private entity or business is always voluntary. But you can't get a bank account without handing over your social security number because the government requires the banks to do that. There are very few businesses that won't take your money without having your personal information, unless it's because government regulations say they have to collect it.

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44160967)

New T-Shirt Idea (Thanks!):

"The Credit - It Burrows!!!" :-)

Re:Isn't this what the free market advocates claim (3, Insightful)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 10 months ago | (#44143697)

The most commonly ignored factor in most theories is human nature.

Has been the law in France since 1978 (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142067)

http://www.ambafrance-uk.org/Protection-of-freedoms-in-France

Re:Has been the law in France since 1978 (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 10 months ago | (#44146601)

Reading /. I've come to appreciate the way personal privacy is treated in the EU.

State Laws Related to Internet Privacy (United States)
http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/telecom/state-laws-related-to-internet-privacy.aspx [ncsl.org]

Not really any rights at all, well Nebraska you can nail a flamer :)
Only 17 states require their Government Web Sites to tell the truth in a ToS or privacy Policy.

US is in a sorry state where Internet Privacy is concerned and I didn't know how bad till this article and post.

Hell I read where Australia was sending personal information to be processed in the U.S because our (U.S.'s)
Internet Privacy laws or lack of.

I don't see how. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142079)

While some big data companies such as Acxiom already allow such access, ...

Really? How? None of the articles say so..

All that's mentioned is this:

Acxiom, announced that it plans to open its dossiers so that consumers can see the information the company holds about them.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I have plans to call you in the morning and I have plans to put the check in the mail.

Data curation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142103)

All this does is get's the public to curate their own data that is being mined. Instead, the FTC should allow you to intentionally corrupt the data. If the NSA wants to know who I am, I want them to have to decide if my Google profile which says that I'm a destitute quadriplegic Quaker from Kansas City or my Facebook profile that says that I'm a Swiss-born acupuncturist/stand-up comic in Fresno.

Re:Data curation? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142187)

I find it amusing when I get mail addressed to Return to Sender and Destroy Junk Mail because I used that as a real name on some website 2 years ago. If they require a phone number I usually give them their own number.

Re:Data curation? (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 10 months ago | (#44143407)

I sometimes wonder how much junk mail bearing my name has been delivered to 1060 West Addison Street,
Chicago, Illinois 60613
. :)

Re:Data curation? (2)

AJWM (19027) | about 10 months ago | (#44142925)

All this does is get the public to curate their own data that is being mined. Instead, the FTC should allow you to intentionally corrupt the data.

This.

In fact, it's perfectly legal (or at least, it used to be; who knows these days) to give false information or a false name as long as you're not trying to commit fraud. (Or impede justice; don't lie to the cops, just remain silent.)

Re:Data curation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44145693)

Actually you can be prosecuted for wire fraud if you provide false information on a web site. See 5 felonies a day, they explain it better than I.

Modding, so posting AC - spetry

FTC vs NSA, FCC vs NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142105)

In related news, the FCC reminds carriers there are laws in the land and we're not a military dictator ship just yet:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/28/fcc-declaratory-ruling-customer-privacy/

"Privacy has been a hot-button topic of late, no more so than in the area of telecommunications. Perhaps as a response to these concerns, the FCC voted today for a Declaratory Ruling that all carriers must safeguard the private data in their customers' mobile devices. This data is known as customer proprietary network information (CPNI) and consists of metadata like phone numbers, call duration, call locations and call logs. "

Two problems (3, Funny)

Rougement (975188) | about 10 months ago | (#44142135)

"Voluntary" and "ability to correct them" How about "compulsory" "removal" of my data if I should choose?

Re:Two problems (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142165)

You can just edit the data to be completely ridiculous therefore rendering it's value to zero.

Re:Two problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142263)

You can just edit the data to be completely ridiculous therefore rendering it's value to zero.

Family animals (the four-legged kind, not your mother-in-law) have received credit card offers before, as have deceased relatives.

You were saying about ridiculous?

The only thing that is ridiculous here is the fact that you MUST eradicate the data completely for it to be not (ab)used in some way.

No you can't (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142365)

You can just edit the data to be completely ridiculous therefore rendering it's value to zero.

Most likely it'll work like the credit bureaus - you send in proof of your identity (copies of: driver license, birthcert. SS #) with a description of what data is wrong. They then "investigate" and change it if they agree; at the very least, they keep the letter on file.

So in effect, to correct data, you have to supply them with correct data - all for free.

No you cannot get it removed because they own the data collected on you.

Re:Two problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142183)

stop pissing in the coolaid. drink it instead. problem solved.

Dont use free services (1)

future assassin (639396) | about 10 months ago | (#44142535)

then you don't have to give up your info in exchange for the shiny. I no longer use any "free" services for me or my business and use a email with a domain the I registered just for that.

Back up a bit. (1)

Shoten (260439) | about 10 months ago | (#44142177)

Everyone should go back and read about what the NSA program has been collecting. There are no dossiers in the programs that have recently come to light; it's metadata, and in some cases raw data. The phone information, for example, is which numbers called which other numbers and for how long. It's not like a credit report where there is derivative information; they go to the database when they want to look up associations between entities. Creating dossiers on hundreds of millions of people at random is hugely wasteful, since (conservatively) 99.9999% of the time it'd be a total waste of time and the person would never be of interest. The NSA isn't dumb when it comes to this stuff, ethical concerns about whether they should be doing it aside.

Re:Back up a bit. (3, Interesting)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about 10 months ago | (#44142231)

Everyone should go back and read about what the NSA program has been collecting. There are no dossiers in the programs that have recently come to light; it's metadata, and in some cases raw data. The phone information, for example, is which numbers called which other numbers and for how long. It's not like a credit report where there is derivative information; they go to the database when they want to look up associations between entities. Creating dossiers on hundreds of millions of people at random is hugely wasteful, since (conservatively) 99.9999% of the time it'd be a total waste of time and the person would never be of interest. The NSA isn't dumb when it comes to this stuff, ethical concerns about whether they should be doing it aside.

Your whole premise is based on what has recently come to light. What has most people concerned is what hasn't come to light. I would suppose that the FBI isn't dumb either and yet they kept files on millions of people without strong reason to during Hoover's reign.

You say that creating dossiers on hundreds of millions of peole is hugely wasteful. I would agree, but then again, DASD is cheap and when has the government been known to be frugal in its endeavors, especially when it involves secret operations?

Re:Back up a bit. (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about 10 months ago | (#44142253)

you forget that the justification for collecting the metadata is for filtering for activity which is a cause for collecting more data.
it's for so that they know which data they need to go after if they want person XYZ's data.

but this is more about the problem that corporations in america can do anything with your data, even if inaccurate. you lack the data protection directive which is pretty much what caught many companies including facebook with their pants down in eu.

Read it an weep (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142341)

It's everything unencrypted across the internet. Your searches, your email content if not encrypted, your URLs, your passwords to anything unencrypted. All is filed away. 100% of it. Your phone metadata, including location data (yes Clapper is lying to Congress again, we know already location data is collected by the NSA). Who you donate to, what you read, all the comments you made, your anon slashdot posts, everything. An additional feed comes in from the UK taps. That's even bigger.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining

From 'Boundless Informant' leak we learned that 90 billion pieces of intelligence are collected a month, this number does not include the stuff obtained via a FISA warrant, it does not include the count of phone metadata for example, or the internet taps or Google taps, or Hotmail taps, obtained via FISA or through PRISM. Boundless Informant FAQ explains it doesn't cover these programs. These include 3 billion additional records the NSA obtained on Americans, and as yet unexplained. These are neither phone meta data nor internet because those would be FISA items, we know this from the leaked memo.

"The Boundless Informant documents show the agency collecting almost 3 billion pieces of intelligence from US computer networks over a 30-day period ending in March 2013."

You said this: "Creating dossiers on hundreds of millions of people at random is hugely wasteful, since (conservatively) 99.9999% of the time it'd be a total waste of time and the person would never be of interest."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/27/nsa-data-mining-authorised-obama

"The Obama administration for more than two years permitted the National Security Agency to continue collecting vast amounts of records detailing the email and internet usage of Americans, according to secret documents obtained by the Guardian."

And they do mine it too, even Americans:
"Eventually, the NSA gained authority to "analyze communications metadata associated with United States persons and persons believed to be in the United States", according to a 2007 Justice Department memo, which is marked secret."

And they have a $24 BILLION cyber budget to do it, and Internet Archive tech works out they could store phone calls for $20 million a year. So yes they store everything,

Not anonymous meta-data (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142427)

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/depth-review-new-nsa-documents-expose-how-americans-can-be-spied-without-warrant

"The targeting document also exposes the government’s deceptive strategy to down-play their gigantic database of all the phone call records of Americans, obtained by misusing Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. They collect all information on who you call and how long the call lasts, but as President Obama emphatically stated "There are no names." Maybe not in that database, but the documents here shows that NSA also maintains a separate database of names, telephone numbers and other identifiers."

So be clear this is not anonymous meta data.

You could sue, but the NSA ignores client-lawyer privilege and collects that too.
You could run for President and sack the NSA chief, but he has your supporters list, your campaign strategy, a list of your backers, every mistake you've made, all the research you did, and probably the text of your speech before you say a word. Good luck with that democracy thing. BTW.

Re:Back up a bit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44143907)

What has come to light is just what they were comfortable showing to Snowden. He likely has a very limited view of the full extent of the operation.

How much will we be compensated? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142297)

I'm not going to correct my info for free, you know.

This Is Bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142301)

Every one of these "correct your data" things is always too difficult to actually use. As long as there is a for-profit incentive for corporations and governments to collect and abuse information, it will be collected and abused.

Unequal is Illegal (2)

b4upoo (166390) | about 10 months ago | (#44142327)

Suppose that I as a private person collected data about people, did not correct errors, and passed it around to the world as I see fit. If a credit agency can do that and be immune from suits or criminal charges what concept in American law permits a credit bureau to do it? Seems like equal before the law resides in the toilet.

Re:Unequal is Illegal (1)

LVSlushdat (854194) | about 10 months ago | (#44142375)

Seems like equal before the law resides in the toilet.

Heh.. you're just *now* figuring *that* out???? Some of us have known *that* fact for a LONG time....

Re:Unequal is Illegal (1)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | about 10 months ago | (#44142381)

Suppose that I as a private person collected data about people, did not correct errors, and passed it around to the world as I see fit. If a credit agency can do that and be immune from suits or criminal charges what concept in American law permits a credit bureau to do it? Seems like equal before the law resides in the toilet.

You can take them to court, represent yourself, and beat them. Maybe the answer is for everyone with credit history errors to sue.

Data value increase work done for free (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142391)

Funny how the bill does not apparently allow suing any data collector for inaccuracies, which might have already impacted somebody's life.

Instead, you are being magnanimously allowed to increase the value of the data by correcting the mistakes.

For free.

If details of my life are a product, why am I not allowed to trademark it?

Re:Data value increase work done for free (2)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 10 months ago | (#44142729)

Funny how the bill does not apparently allow suing any data collector for inaccuracies, which might have already impacted somebody's life.

This. The whole idea is to sell it to the public as a "consumer protection" measure, but when the final passes it will actually do more to protect the credit bureaus and other corporations that collect data. Right now you have some ability to sue for damages from a company spreading inaccurate information - do doubt this bill will end up eliminating that with a liability waiver clause.

These guys have balls... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142455)

Not only do they want you accept state surveillance, but they want you to keep the data clean for them.

Welcome to the land of the WTF???

Identity confusion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142521)

I'm sick of being confused with this other guy who happens to have the same name with me. I'll be getting tons of email and web site postings that have nothing to do with me, and many of them contain rants with obscenities and, on the other extreme, photos from little girls hitting me up for 'dates'.

I'm a 62-year old COBOL programmer, and pretty good at what I do!

- Justin Prescott Bieber

And in Sweden (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44142545)

this is a right established in the data law of 1973. Not only should a hastily correction be made, but all parties the information had been shared with should be informed of the correction.

Correct Data? (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about 10 months ago | (#44142781)

Why would I want the Panopticon to have correct data? Improving the accuracy of the data would only make it more economically attractive to collect even more data.

No, I want the data to be as inaccurate as possible. If they give access to data it seems best to change any correct facts to inaccurate non-facts.

Correct them? (1)

AJWM (19027) | about 10 months ago | (#44142893)

Why the hell would I want to do that?

I say lets inject even more noise into them. That won't matter if you're using the data for statistical purposes, and it gives some (alas, not much) plausible deniability for everything else.

Recruit people for free (1)

forrie (695122) | about 10 months ago | (#44142969)

I agree with the other posts, Good Luck With That.

But a couple other thoughts come to mind -- as we know, credit reports are sometimes (notoriously) inaccurate. What a great way for the gov't and industry to get more accurate information about you, for their various reports and metrics, by recruiting YOU to correct it for them, free of charge?

I agree with the aforementioned broadcast in that ultimately, the credit report industry is a huge scam of sorts, benefiting only one side of the market. One day, I hope someone cracks that industry right open. Until then...

Stop the slavery in the U.S. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44143343)

It seems large chunk of population 90% don't own anything and statistically will never break out of the poverty. Yes poverty. Wage slavery, mortgage, recurring payments do not make you a Big Shot, in contrast what media want you to believe.
Credit companies, data mining corporations are free to create complex profiles of you, human. And you don't have any recourse. Your life is sold on the slave market because no one gives a shit or can do, if faced with big companies' lawyers.

Good luck with "your" life.

W R O N G (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44147869)

The solution isn't correcting data you don't own at the whims of a company or government.

The solution is owning they data about you. So the government and companies must protect your property or face penalties if they use, steal, borrow or change your property without you giving them permission.

Personal Information as Property

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...