Defense Department 'eDNA' Plan Withdrawn 115
An anonymous reader points out this report on News.com from Declan McCullagh of a far-reaching plan (now withdrawn) to curtail much online privacy through the use of biometric markers, excerpting "The idea involved creating secure areas of the Internet that could be accessed only if a user had such a marker, called eDNA, according to a report in Friday's New York Times." Perhaps they'll withdraw the plan to track everything you buy next. Update: 11/24 17:38 GMT by T : Here is the original New York Times report from John Markoff.
They can still steal your organs in your sleep! (Score:5, Funny)
So be careful about the DoD. Just because they draw one of their insidious plans back into their black helicopter doesn't mean there's one of the fuckers right behind you ready to steal your precious radioactive bodily fluids for further study.
You must remain constantly vigilant. I have not slept in 4 weeks, and neither should you, if you knew what they were up to!
Re:They can still steal your organs in your sleep! (Score:2, Funny)
- A.D. Walter Skinner
Government out of organ legging (Score:3)
The department of energy closed down their online scientific resources to avoid competing with the private sector, so DARPA should follow suit and stop harvesting people for their organs.
It is unfair for entrepeneurs such as myself, who kidnap people and evicerate them to support my drug habit^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfamily, to have to compete with publically funded organ harvesters and traders. These are services that could be more profitably^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hefficiently provided by the private sector. Think of how many of your tax dollars are WASTED stealing organs for local government officials, when those same tax dollars could be apportioned to local government, and then used constructively to buy me a new mercedes.
Remember - when I steal your organs and sell them to the highest bidder, the consumer wins.
DNA protected Web? (Score:2, Interesting)
This would be a new way of selective communication, it could turn out like email with no spam (yet).
privacy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
I also a couple days ago became a card carrying member of EFF [eff.ord] which is probablly more palletable to us technologists. I would encourage everyone to at least look at their website. Too often it is easy for us to click and read, instead of taking action. At 29 I have started writing my first letters to my congressman. He is a republican, who doesn't share my views, but still he needs to know as his constituate, that I don't like his voting style. Sure, it is one small drop in the ocean, but enough drops will create a flood.
Whether all the changes going on upset you, or if you like them all, we should all stand up and let our voice be heard. Too many of us, including myself, sit on the sidelines. I was at a concert for Counting Crows recently and Adam the lead singer said "The reason the country is run by a bunch of old people is because us young people don't stand up for our selves."
Re:privacy (Score:1)
Re:privacy (Score:1)
All you offer is negativism. Where is your contrary solution. If mine is so wrong, what is your?
You call me "bourgeios" in my activism. So? I am a highly paid consultant. Part of the Generation X who worked and did better on his Middle-American upbringing.
You don't know me personally. My donations are just the tip of the ice-burg. I have spent time working with dis-advantage youth, in fact, I have spent time listening to young men ages 12-16 who sell their bodies on the street.
You have made stark generlizations about me, and my life, and offer nothing constructive in return.
Put up or shut up (Score:2, Insightful)
Then offer an alternative. Don't make insulting comments about someone in the guise of an anonymous poster and then offer nothing as a means of an alternate course of action.
Or are you trying to state in a roundabout wait that all is lost and we don't have a prayer of changing things, so why bother?
Please do me a favor: If you're a US citizen, please stay home on the first Tuesday of every November. I can't bear the thought of someone like you helping decide who is in office.
Re:privacy (Score:2)
No, the real reason the country is "run by a bunch of old people" is because that bunch of old people has most of the money. No need to be ageist about it when being classist would be a more accurate response.
Re:privacy (Score:1)
I have been a member for 10 years. I am a flaming leftwing radical. Both we can all united to restore the Constitution and get rid of those treasonous bastards who use the Bill of Rights as toliet paper. Right or left, liberal or conservative, everyone who loves freedom is welcome in the ACLU as long as you love freedom for EVERYONE!
Re:privacy (Score:2)
Re:privacy (Score:1)
Which is why I don't really care that the ACLU ignores (at best, misinterprets it at worst) the second amendment, because Heston's crew has it covered.
Re:privacy (Score:2)
Ask them if they don't have a problem if the state imposed religion is islam, paganism or any other religion that they don't believe in.
What they still have in mind (Score:4, Informative)
Re:What they still have in mind (Score:1)
* shouts *
Heute die Welt, Morgens das Sonnensystem!
Re:What they still have in mind (Score:1)
Spielen sie "Strip Schnipp-Schnapp", Herr Weishaupt?
322
Re:What they still have in mind (Score:2)
Pointdexter may be evil, but stupid he's not, nor are most of the people in the IAO (most likely). I can't help but think that they chose the logo at least in part out of sheer glee at the thought of how it was going to drive a certain portion of the conspiracy-minded public into spasms of paranoia.
Anyway, Heute die welt, morgens das sonnensystem is pretty much the for-real slogan of the Bushites, so we're off the edge of the paranoia event horizon in any case...
History will tell... (Score:5, Interesting)
I truly think we are on a verge of some sort of revelution and one side will win. It is hard to tell which one it is. Either it is freedom of information (which inheritatly includes some anarchy) or a Orwellian controlled society that is something out of a sci-fi book.
What I don't think that we realize right now, is that we are on the threshold of that. Will our grandchildren look back at the DCMA and say "that was the start of it all". Who knows. In my gut, I feel that the DCMA, the dawn of the second millenium after Christ, is a defining moment in who we are as a species.
Fear and paranioia feed one side, and the desire to be free and uncontrolled feed the other. Who will win? Will open journalism keep us free, providing a double check on our governments, or will our freedoms be etched away, until we are left with nothing, comfortable in our little cage, none the wiser. Will information and freedom be nothing more than a commodity sold and developed by Microsoft? What does the future hold?
Opinions and comments welcome...
Re:History will tell... (Score:1)
2+2=5
Re:History will tell... (Score:1)
Re:History will tell... (Score:3, Funny)
We're trained at a young age to worship sports figures as our heroes, and accept our mediocre lives because those guys on tv are too.
Our men are physically becoming more and more impotent, as our per capita sperm count is dropping dramatically. How can we stand up and fight if we can't even 'stand up?'
The Orwellian future is here my friends. Only he couldn't even conceive the degree to which we are sinking.
FUD (f-uh-d) (n) - Fear, uncertainty, and doubt.
PS. *BSD is DYING.
Re:History will tell... (Score:4, Insightful)
They may look back and say that, but only if the freedom of information side wins. If the other side wins who knows if the DMCA will even be remembered - maybe it'll be completely written out of history so that consumers think that the way things are is the way things have always been!
Re:History will tell... (Score:3, Interesting)
The notion of using biometric data to control network access is a direct parallel to the use of passwords, etc.
Re:History will tell... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not about the "wish to copy throw-away commercial entertainment". That's already against the law, and will most likely remain so, DMCA or no DMCA. The issue is whether we have the right to control the operation of our own computers, or whether (government/corporations/etc) may force us to install "restraining bolts" that keep our computers from doing things they consider undesirable. To the extent that one's computer acts as an extension of one's mind, and the Internet as an extension of one's voice, such measures are nothing less than an attempt at thought control. So yes, for a society that increasingly relies on computers and the Internet to conduct its public discourse, it is a human rights issue. Silencing someone with government-mandated software is no different in principle from silencing them any other way.
Re:History will tell... (Score:3, Insightful)
As i'm sure many of you have noticed, there's a whole lot of nutty stuff out there on the intarweb... You want a conspiracy? Someone's already thought it out for you, probably. I'm talking about stuff like The Cutting Edge or other 'new world order' sources, UFOs, bizarre new-age (or ancient) occult plots, along with probably an unhealthy dose of gay martian overlord plots thrown in. I guess the trick is to 1. not go crazy and/or turn into a paranoid psychopath, 2. filter out all the BS 3. not discount an idea just because of the source 4. ??? 5. profit!
Seriously, though. combine the 'barcodes are the mark of the beast' and the possibilities for abuse of implantable electronics, and you have some serious conspiracy-fodder. Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
Dammit, where's my bourbon! No, I mean, tinfoil hat! (ha ha only serious?)
Re:History will tell... (Score:3, Interesting)
Check out this link, Tales from Afternow [ranttv.com]
It's a "Radio play" that may interest you ... it takes the form of a broadcast from a dystopian future where corporations have copywritten everything
Terminology Abuse (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Terminology Abuse (Score:2, Interesting)
Kierthos
Re:Terminology Abuse (Score:1, Interesting)
How do we get the genie back IN to the bottle?! (Score:5, Informative)
Also, apparently there was a huge flame war over how to present the group's findings. The individual initially charged with this ended up being relieved (gratefully, I'm sure) of these duties. Gee, ya think it was because the people gathered together felt *the most* strongly about the total lack of privacy aspect of this? I am inclined to think this was most definitely the case.
Anyway, this all is a problem; so what, it won't be eDNA - but only because they couldn't (at this time) get the job done!
I also find it ironic that the name of this program was pitched as "eDNA" - the reason this made me smile but very wearily is that I keep lobbying against TIA and its assorted ramifications ------ and one of the arguments I use is that as soon as (a) our DNA can be cheaply decoded (it currently can be decoded by Craig Venter) && (b) the information decoded actually means something (i.e. there is still a ton of speculative work into which diseases each of the proteins correlates to and to what degree etc.) you gotta believe that your little double helix's meaning is going to be hard coded along with every snarky e-mail you ever sent, every time you laid yourself out on the line in an e-mail, every purchase you made, when you made it, what it was, what your medical - ENTIRE medical - history is etc. etc. etc.
To a previous poster: don't worry, son; I also am not sleeping. . .
Re:How do we get the genie back IN to the bottle?! (Score:3, Informative)
Also, also, also, in case you are one of the three people left who haven't seen this, here's the TIA systems breakdown [darpa.mil site] [darpa.mil]
Re:How do we get the genie back IN to the bottle?! (Score:3, Interesting)
The DoD has always wanted something like this. Back in 1997 they required all the computers to have PCMCIA slots. The idea was that someone could walk up to a PC whip out their ID disk, which was a PCMCIA card, put in the computer and access, their email, files, etc...
The problem with was that they were a little too forward thinking, you see they knew what they wanted, they just did not have anything to make it work! So they had invested tons of money in researching these sort of projects, and making silly requirements, like requiring all computers get PCMCIA slots in them, but never have anything to show for it. The quickest way for the government to flush money down the toilet, spend on the military.
Now what if... (Score:1)
argh.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:argh.... (Score:1)
I'd also like the home telephone numbers of telemarketers who call me at home. That's also fair.
Actually, the Freedom of Information Act forces the government to reveal any information requested. Particularly sensitive information is exempt, of course. But I'm with you on that whole mutual information thing.
Re:argh.... (Score:1)
Kierthos
Re:argh.... (Score:2)
eDNA.. palladium.. hm (Score:4, Interesting)
And how, exactly, is this *really* much better than creating secure areas of the Internet that can be accessed only if the user has a DRM-safe implementation of Palladium (which will probably only cover the base microsoft implementation)?
Okay, so your copy of Windows Leghorn can't be traced back to you specifically, in that it doesn't go back to your biometrics or whatever. But if you've used at least one e-commerce site with a dodgy privacy policy, it can probably be traced back to your credit card, which means it can be traced back to your mailing address.. which means, well, whatever it means if your mailing address is being sold to random companies along with sites you frequently visit.
Palladium does contain a unique id for each copy of the software implementing it, right? If not, i apologize for my tyrade, but still, am i the only one pissed off by the idea of cordoned-off sections of the internet you can only access if you follow their ultra-specific rules of running specific software, whether that's software that limits how you can reuse bits on your hard drive or software that ensures you're sending out biometric data with your internet connections..
Re:eDNA.. palladium.. hm (Score:3, Funny)
It's a, I say it's a joke son. Don't cha get it? You're built too short, the good ones go over yer head. Ya got a hole in yer glove, boy, I keep pitching them and you keep missing them. Ya gotta keep yer eye on the ball, son. Eye. Ball. Eyeball. I almost had a funny there. Joke, that is.
Gattaca? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Another) American Revolution (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:1)
The world, and this country, are on the brink of something big. Either good or bad, it will be interesting to see what happens, and how we all fit into it. I hope for the best (and even pray for it, even though I'm not religious per se), but deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, I truly fear the worst.
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:1)
Kierthos
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:1)
Wow, I really like that quote! Mind if I take it as a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't think so. We would have been much better off if we could have ended slavery without having its proponents stir up a rebellion. War is not a good thing.
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:2, Informative)
"I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
-Lincoln's Inaugural Address
"I am not now, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social or political equality of the white and black races. I am not now nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor of intermarriages with white people. There is a physical difference between the white and the black races which will forever forbid the two races living together on social or political equality. There must be a position of superior and inferior, and I am in favor of assigning the superior position to the white man."
-Lincoln in his speech to Charleston, Illinois, 1858
He freed the slaves in the south so that when the northern troops got there, the black people there could be freed and enlisted to fight the Confederate states.
So how was this about slavery? It's a myth, that's how.
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember the second amendment! Don't let the government disarm the people.
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:2)
I can't give examples from west europe, not being very interested in the area, but a great example of how the system doesn't work very well is Israel. They have a pure multi-party system, 1000 political parties, and governments that tend not to survive internal problems more often than they do. This has done more damage to the country than I care to list.
As for Green issue - it always amuses me how left-leaning people bitch and moan about their lack of choice etc... Here in NYC, in the last election, we have had 5 or 6 columns for left-wing parties (some of which actually had different candidates),
whereas a right wing nut like me had to choose between the following combinations:
Republican: X Conservaive: same guy
Republican: X Conservaive: empty
Republican: empty Conservaive: empty
Republican: same guy as Democrat.
Given that opyions #3 and 4 were the most common, it was pretty hard to find any election (other than Governor) worth even looking at, as I was basically given a choice "bend over" vs. "bend over more".
-DVK
Re:(Another) American Revolution (Score:2)
Ick. The US system may suck, but I'd much rather have it than the European form of "democracy."
So a third party has more of a chance in Europe. But at what cost? You must have a party affiliation to get elected in Europe! While the independents in Congress are few and far between, there are literally infinitely more politicians independent of party politics in Congress than in any European legislature.
"Not to mention presidents aren't even chosen by popular vote..."
In the parliamentary system used by some other democracies it's the legislature that chooses the head of government (prime minister). Which means the only way the voter gets to choose who gets to be the head of government is to vote along straight party lines. Who are the local candidates? Who cares, as long as they'll vote Bob into office when they get there.
Improving representation in democracy? I'm all for that. But not at the price of sacrificing my voice as an individual. If I have to choose the least evil political party to vote for, no matter how many choices I have, I've already lost.
Why (Score:1)
I don't necessarily think this is a bad idea. Believe it or not, there are quite a few good uses for this. Let me make a comparison to SSL connections. SSL is a technology that allows for data to move across the internet rather securely. Note, not all of the internet requires SSL, just those websites where the website owner and the client both think it would be a good idea. Of course, only your data is secure, not your identity. So lets add another layer with digital signatures. Now you can protect your data and limit those imposters to anyone who has access to your signature keys.
This is merely a technology that would allow the next step. Moving data around the internet with even greater assurance that you sent it.
Think of how this could reduce internet identity crime. Amazon.com gets cracked and your credit card info swiped? Useless without your eDNA.
What about sites like cNet or ZDnet whose review sections have just become a joke since PR firms have been loading up the user reviews with bogus perfect ratings even before the product is available.
Here is a pet peave of mine... [slashdot.org] I have participated in several eBay auctions where it was very apparent that the seller was "shrilling" (using other aliases to fraudulently raise the price). Believe it or not, this is a federal crime. Sites like eBay would be an ideal candidate for this type of technology to prevent this and other types of fraud.
Also this technology doesn't necessarily take away your identity. For instance, lets say you want to use an anonymous sounding handle on eBay and register for an eDNA pass with them. Now lets say you register with your DMV or something with your "real" name and get another. If the registration system is decentralized, then your anonymous eBay identity is more or less secure, provided that the the two different registration sources do not share data. Of course, this opens a whole can of worms with regard to attaining warrants for your eDNA info.
Big picture: This is about developing technology that would allow for (not mandate) areas of the internet to reduce the risks associated with anonymous traffic.
slipping through the cracks... (Score:3, Insightful)
I used to think that the gradual shift to an all-credit society would have its benefits (harder to rob your local convenience store of e-dollars... though, wait, it's coming). As time goes on, however, I'm starting to think that there may be benefit, even salvation, in being able to slip through the cracks. Just because I trust my present elected reps (or think them too stupid to do too much harm) doesn't mean the next set is going to be more brilliant, more misguided, and more dangerous than ever. Policies end up staying in place even though the faces running them change. Let's be damn careful what we set in motion.
So far the court is on our side (Score:4, Insightful)
As long as the supreme court upholds this judgement, we have some small hope.
Re:So far the court is on our side (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but remember it's a double edged sword. Not to sound like some George W Bush speech; anonymity is where the enemies of freedom hide as well.
-- james
Re:So far the court is on our side (Score:3, Insightful)
Goodbye Karma! (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to sound like some Noam Chomsky article... The "enemies of freedom" line is political scape-goatism supported by a massive failure of the 4th Estate. CNN is not doing us any favours by pounding home the message that *we* are the only victims.
The politicians and media have been telling us about our moral superiority for so long that we've effectively lost the ability to see ourselves as the rest of the world sees us. The United States of America and its western allies have propped up as many puppet dictators as they have shut down, and certainly started more wars than they have ended. We look at people like Noriega, Marcos, the Iran-Contra affair, bin Laden, etc. as isolated disasters instead of seeing them as eggs in the same US-made crate.
I'm not suggesting that driving airplanes into buildings is excusable by any stretch of the imagination. What really scares me, though, is not the next terrorist act but the fact that people don't see (or refuse to acknowledge) the cause-effect relationship at play here. As long as the 1st World governments are abusing 3rd World nations there will always be those who have the means and desire to fight back.
The best way to keep the "enemies of freedom" from hiding behind legal or technological walls is to stop manufacturing these enemies of freedom. Perhaps the Canadian diplomat's "moron" comment wasn't so far off base.
ll: bye, Karma. It's been nice knowing you.
They are trying to distract us from fighting TIA (Score:4, Interesting)
This is a classic political tactic: when you find that you've gone too far on something, throw out a strawman that's even more extreme and oppose it, thereby putting yourself in a manufactured moderate position.
Keep your eye on the ball, folks.
Re:They are trying to distract us from fighting TI (Score:1)
Online crime... (Score:2, Interesting)
What's the problem--too many unsolved online crimes? Go look for DB Cooper or the Zodiac killer! Too many unreported crimes? Like they only see that online?!
This, along with the free wiretaps, sounds to me like they want to make their jobs easier. Other than the fact that they're flushing civil rights down the toilet, it sounds great but they'd better be careful what they wish for...when the amount of knowledge required to do your job is minimized to the point where monkeys can do it then you might just find your job being outsourced to the local zoo.
I am used to it... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I am used to it... (Score:1)
internet ID card (Score:5, Interesting)
As much as I am pro freedom and privacy, and hate the power of the state and big corporations like a good leftish boy, there are good reasons to have some kind of identification on the 'net... No CC fraud, less spam (accountability for one's actions), and a definate way to prove who you are.
If it's implemented in a way that I can decide to use this identification, when, where, and how I want, without any possibility of being forced to do so, there is no privacy problem. If you don't want to give the information, you don't. If you need to do it, you can.
The internet could use a way to identify people for who they really are; as long as it's not mandatory or enforcible, it's only a positive thing, in my eyes.
You see, when you buy something with a credit card, or when you just really want to prove to someone who you are, you _want_ to give some information already. There is no privacy issue, since you want the information to be known; you can just back it up with proof.
It could be used as an optional extra check to avoid CC fraud, for instance.
Maybe it's time we blow of the dust of the (e.g.) pgp protocol, and try to find a way to make a official central directory in which we can be sure anybody is who he claims to be. If you don't want to use it and remain anonymous, you don't have to. It's all about choice.
I wonder why PGP isn't more popular.
Re:internet ID card (Score:2, Interesting)
When I signed up for my cable modem for example they insisted that they "needed" my social security number. I told them "no" repeatedly until they said "You either give it to us, or you don't get cable modem access". Since I knew that they had no real need for my SSN I gave them a fake one and got signed up anyway.
Like yourself I believe certain situations call for authentication, but who decides when it is required? And what else are they going to require next?
Fantasy vs Reality (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed -- and if I can win the lottery I will have no financial problems. These are nice things to fantasize about, but they're not wise to plan on when the odds are so fundamentally against them happening.
Remember, the Social Security Number in the US was originally supposed to be only for the purposes of administering Social Security. Now it is "mandatory" for a wide range of things including just having a place to live (e.g., as part of an application for an apartment, a mortgage, etc.). When I was growing up (and I'm only in my 30s so this isn't ancient history!), I didn't need an SSN until I was ready to get a job. We applied for them as part of a 9th grade class; none of my fellow students had one. Scant decades later, my children were required to have an SSN application submitted almost immediately upon birth.
Maybe it's time we blow of the dust of the (e.g.) pgp protocol, and try to find a way to make a official central directory in which we can be sure anybody is who he claims to be.
You mean, like a keyserver [keyserver.net]?
I wonder why PGP isn't more popular.
Probably because "average" people don't understand it and the principles of trust surrounding it. Nor do they want to learn, because, as Thomas Edison put it, "Five percent of the people think; ten percent of the people think they think; and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think."
Re:internet ID card (Score:1)
Yeah, and taking the guns away from all citizen will drop the crime rate, and all that. Did you think the net may be composed of more than US citizens, how do we get around that? Are will there suddenly be "US zoned" web sites and internet traffic. And since no one else outside the US would need the cord, how would it reduce CC fraud, spam, increase accountability, and proving who you are. By the way, if you lose that card, any one can "prove" who they are pretending to be. DON'T INSTITUTE SOLUTIONS THAT WILL BECOME ONLY MUCH BIGGER PROBLEMS THAN THE ORIGINAL.
If it's implemented in a way that I can decide to use this identification, when, where, and how I want, without any possibility of being forced to do so, there is no privacy problem. If you don't want to give the information, you don't. If you need to do it, you can.
The internet could use a way to identify people for who they really are; as long as it's not mandatory or enforcible, it's only a positive thing, in my eyes.
For websites, ever hear of WHOIS?, useful that tool. I don't envision a scenario where, people do that much business or whatever over someone they only met over email (w/o a website) other than something like ebay. Ebays solution, other than CC verification, is the feedback rating. Let people who are bold take the risk, and more cautious types find someone with a good reputation, like in real life. The government shouldn't implement these blanket solutions to problems that people could avoid if the used some brains.
BTW, anything voluntary that gets adopted enmasse soon isn't voluntary any more.
It could be used as an optional extra check to avoid CC fraud, for instance.
No, let the individual use his brain for once, I already know that Amazon.com is safe, so I can use my CC, I don't know if flybynight.com with it's offer of $30 Million of Nigerian Swiss bank account money for $10Gs is safe, so I can do a who is, ask around on reputation, find a comparable or cheaper scam, or use some common sense.
Yes, I got f'ed over on ebay (broken electronics) before for over 50 bucks, but you know what, it was a learning experience, and that blanket solution would not have helped me.
They we probably sued . . . (Score:1)
Cheers
Double-edged sword (Score:3)
Yeah, maybe that sounds paranoid, but this wouldn't be much different from using your SSN to identify yourself to every server you talk to. How long before it's compromised?? Do you trust every server to keep its logs 100% secure from prying eyes? It's 10pm.. do you know where your identity is??
BTW some years ago a similar universal tracking scheme was proposed for (IIRC) private phone calls, and that was shot down by the FBI as being too potentially-hazardous to the lives of field agents.
IRC... (Score:2)
The big picture.. (Score:4, Insightful)
All ranting aside, we need to put a stop to the theory of "Let's see which rights we can take away" and more "Let's see what rights we can protect". In examples such as this don't be satisfied with the fact that they withdrew the plan, let them know how disgusted you are it was ever conceived in the first place.
eDNA may be mismatched name (Score:2, Interesting)
No Biometrics mentioned in article (Score:3, Informative)
Original NYTimes article + link to /. thread (Score:3, Informative)
Links to the original NY Times article and Slashdot thread that discussed another initiative out of this agency. Declan McCullagh's was a follow-up as he mentioned in his piece.
The NY Times [nytimes.com] tells us that DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), the same agency that wants to create a massive cross-domain transaction database [slashdot.org], also proposed what it called eDNA: '...tagging Internet data with unique personal markers to make anonymous use of some parts of the Internet impossible [nytimes.com].' Slashdotter Declan McCullagh [slashdot.org] followed up on the NYT piece with his article [msnbc.com] on MSNBC.
When will people realize? (Score:4, Interesting)
"the same level of accountability"
Makes it all sound perfectly reasonable - doesn't it?
Do they currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to ananalyse? - so is that the same level of accountability?
They wish to tag you like some sex offender - or an animal - would any person of intelligence call that accountability?
When will people realize that the Total Information Awareness plan / USA Patriot act are all bull* propaganda?
Like I stated many times
Ask Security Services in the US, UK or Indonesia (Bali) to deny this:
Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.
Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught
Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).
The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.
The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.
INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA
This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.
Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"
This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.
It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.
They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.
This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from CNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."
"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when they checked individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. The group was lead by badly injured Pam Warren - whom they arrogantly presume would not worry about having her privacy invaded.
All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.
Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.
Sound like cyberpunk? (Score:1)
On that note this is really the dream of the VPN, or am I wrong? Maybe such an eDNA technology could keep those unwanted nasties out of such a VPN.
Even more so than the "desktop" model of GUIs, this seems like a plan where the world of computers models the real world - it's not just passwords and encryption anymore, it's an infringement on what we see as "public space" and our property. Even though we don't really own the infrastructure of cyberspace, any more so than we own the sidewalks and steets we live in, we pay our rates, we pay our access fees.. don't do this!
According To The Paranoid Guy I Met (Score:2)
"And an example of this being that the government is capable of aiming a laser at any random person's head and recording all their thought and memories for later use."
How odd. (Score:1)
Sorry sir, but you sound like a paranoid nutcase. (Score:1)
Re:REJECTED SUBMISSION--PLEASE READ! (Score:3, Informative)
You know there is this great little place on