Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy The Internet Your Rights Online

Endorse EDRI's Statement Against Data Retention 186

Posted by timothy from the but-they're-offering-a-free-backup-service dept.
Ville Oksanen writes "Privacy International (PI) and European Digital Rights (EDRI) have published their joint answer to the consultation on mandatory data retention. The European Commission asked for public comments on a proposed retention regime across Europe between 12 and 36 months for all traffic data generated by using fixed and mobile telephony and Internet. As Statewatch puts it: 'This is a proposal so intrusive that Ashcroft, Ridge and company can only dream about it, exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act.' EDRI and PI are currently collecting endorsements from organizations and companies for their stamement here. This is unfortunately not enough to stop the process - expecially more should be done in the member states, which ultimately decide the fate of the proposal. So contact your local politicians today!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Endorse EDRI's Statement Against Data Retention More

Endorse EDRI's Statement Against Data Retention

Comments Filter:

  • So much for the internet liberating people (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LucidBeast ( 601749 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @03:36AM (#10233425)
    The ability to record our movements, intrests, communications will in the future make it possible to really control the population from itself.

  • "exceeding even the U.S. Patriot Act" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by l3v1 ( 787564 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @03:37AM (#10233429)
    No surprise here. Seeing hoow privacy issues are sought to be handled in the US and how more and more of US (mal)practices come over to us (i.e. Europe) every day, there's nothing to be surprised at.

    What we need to do is hold our ground and not let these things happen. Same holds for software patents and the like.

    Freedom also means you are free to stand up and defend your rights. What we don't defend today may be lost tomorrow. And yes, that's too late. It's always easier [revent than to abolish later.
    • I'm glad you somehow managed to blame the US for this.

      Hell, nazism, fascism, dictatorships--did america cause them too?

      It's just complete nonsense to pretend that Europe (as if there was a European standard) has a perfect and completely enviable record of privacy, rights, etc. Britain for instance has more cameras per capita than any other country i believe? Germany and France both outlaw large degrees of expression, as well as historical collection (one e.g. -- nazi peraphanelia).

      The U.S. is by no mean
      • You may not understand this but we over here are glad that Nazis are proscribed and Nazi paraphenalia is banned. That does NOT limit our freedom of expression anymore than you are not allowed to incite murder. I wish you yanks would understand that.
        • You're right--it is quite hard for us to understand. What is perhaps most difficult for us to understand is how many Europeans on slashdot can insult the US for things like the Patriot act (giving up a little freedom for security? DASTARDLY!) when the exact same thing is happening in Europe.

          And what does your sig mean? "US Freedom of Speech - it's their only freedom and they'll make the goddamm most of it!" For one thing that's simply not true (and I'd love to argue the point with you if you're interested)
          • "Europeans on slashdot can insult the US for things like the Patriot act (giving up a little freedom for security? DASTARDLY!) when the exact same thing is happening in Europe."

            specifics, please -- other than the UK and Netherlands.

            • Sure, I already listed the example of banning of nazi expression and owning of anything that could be considered nazi paraphanelia. Another example would be the laws in France that forbid "inciting religious hatred" and have recently been used to attempt to quash a book critical of Islam. Give up a little freedom for security?

              Mandatory fingerprinting for everyone in the EU and biometric fingerprinting? Looks like it's going to happen, and that's pretty extreme to me.

              Additionally in France, students that

              • "fingerprinting? Looks like it's going to happen"

                maybe. Lots of Brits fight it. Might also happen in the US.
                Regardless, I'm not sure that citing "might" cases is fair in this context.

                I agree with your take on EDRI. But the thing is, it's not important to me whose country it is,
                I hate this shit wherever it happens.
                And I don't pull any punches re my own country, or take it personally when a non-USer voices criticisms that I know are justified;
                I think that "pot calling kettle black" accusations don't cont
        • You're going to have to explain to me how owning a Nazi flag or a German WW2 helmet has anything to do with inciting murder.

          Now, I could understand a law against pro-Nazi demonstrations that specifically encouraged people to kill Jews (which WOULD be inciting murder), but banning the possession or sale of anything related to Nazis goes far beyond that. Hitler isn't going to rise from the dead and turn all your children into Neo-Nazis just because a few people collect war memorabilia.
          • Things got a little pissy in europe in the 1940s. Most reasonable people could care less whether someone is allowed to own a Nazi flag or not... it's that a nation might go too far in banning such things. The Nazis sort of proved they had no right to exist, but if the government doesn't like you, all they have to do is claim you're some covert neonazi group, and pretty soon all the same prohibitions apply to your group.

            Even here in the US, nazis are only protected in principle, not because the fuckhats des
        • You may not understand this but we over here are glad that Nazis are proscribed and Nazi paraphernalia is banned.

          Collecting Nazi paraphernalia is not an overt act. I can think that Joe Dickhead is a jerk and wish he was dead - I can even share my opinion with others, it only becomes illegal if I act on that wish or incite others to act on that wish.

          Prohibiting the collection of Nazi paraphernalia is an ostrich policy, the sentiments and tactics of the Nazi party are alive and well in Europe - avowed r


        • Yes, because we all know [nizkor.org] how [cnn.com] effective [telegraph.co.uk] bans on Nazi paraphenalia have been at getting rid of the ideas.
        • I don't agree that Nazi paraphernalia should banned, only *specifically* violence-inciting expression. (Check google for Nazi + Skokie).
          But I want to apologize for jingoistic ranting posts by some fellow US-ers.
          Please believe me, we're not all like that, and many of us are just as afraid of the US government as Europeans are.

          btw, where are you?
          • Are you calling me jingoistic? :-p

            FWIW, I fear ALL governments. The mistake is made by mayn Europeans (as well as American academe which at its core wants to follow European intellectual trends) that ther only government worth fearing is the US government.
            • actually, i don't remember which post(s) it was,
              but you can always count on them showing up for these topics.

              "The mistake is made by mayn Europeans (as well as American academe which at its core wants to follow European intellectual trends) that ther only government worth fearing is the US government."

              Well, ours ain't the worst. But it used to be the best (now, *that's* jingoistic!).
              Besides, I *live* here -- although I've started looking for alternatives.

              I feel that the USA should be held to a higher st
      • I have similar concerns about the UK.
        Nonetheless, as a US-er, I'm unhappy about the degree to which US economic and military power is used to coerce other nations (and the EU) into propagating *our* excesses (e.g., PNRs).
        And how much longer do you think that Europe will be "allowed" to have more permissive file-sharing laws?

    • Freedom also means you are free to stand up and defend your rights.

      Unfortunately, not doing what the US wants you to do usually ends in a diplomatic riot or trade war. That is, if you're lucky. If you're unlucky the US will draft up some bullshit law ( The "The Hague Invasion Act", anyone? ) and "liberate" you from your vile and evil goverment that opposes your freedom*.

      The US goverment is filled with self-righteous morons who are full of themselves. They WILL try to screw over ANY country by any

      • Unfortunately, not doing what the US wants you to do usually ends in a diplomatic riot or trade war.

        Fortunately, trade war is something the EU is pretty good at. Europe won over steel, but I think the USA won the one about bananas...

    • agreed (from a US-er).
      btw, where are you?

  • Who will store all that data? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dUb ( 21971 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @03:41AM (#10233444) Homepage
    If that will come to happen, I will invest my money to all storage companies. Who can store all records of web, email and instant messenger logs? Is it user who is responsible to store all data (including spam email)? Or is it ISP's and teleoperators?
    That will be huge amount of data!
    • I think it will be the same as phone companies today - "it's your own problem... and if you don't manage to store it all, we'll fine you!"

    • Or on the constructors that are going to build that HUGE building for the thoughtpolice where they analyse it all.

      I think I'll rename myself to Winston Smith, and apply.
    • I'm also surprised. Last time I checked, the discussion went about storage of all connection logs, which would already require a huge storage. But storing all traffic data seems virtually impossible to me.

      Is it user who is responsible to store all data (including spam email)? Or is it ISP's and teleoperators?

      Last time I checked, the ISPs would be responsible. Thats why their organizations (bitkom et al.) protested against the law proposal.

      • The consultation document itself uses the term "traffic data", but nowhere do I see an explicit indication that this refers to the contents of messages. Instead, they seem to be talking about retaining connection logs also after they have been used for billing purposes. As far as I know, operators don't generally retain message contents merely for billing.

        • "The consultation document itself uses the term "traffic data", but nowhere do I see an explicit indication that this refers to the contents of messages."

          Does it matter?

          Consider this: here in California, the local constabulatory spends most of its time driving around on the roads and freeways watching other people driving around (residents here spend most of their time in their cars).

          Enforcement of traffic laws (read "giving out tickets") is what they're ostensibly doing. What typically occurs if/when
        • > The consultation document itself uses the term "traffic data", but nowhere do I see an explicit indication that this refers to the *contents* of messages.

          I couldn't figure out what the difference was, so I did what anyone does. I made the following HTTP request:

          http://www.google.com/search? hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=traffic+data+message+contents+di f ference&btnG=Google+Search

          And then I clicked on a URL, and a Referrer-ID: was generated client-side (because I forgot to block it) as part of

      • Re:Who will store all that data? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        I'm also surprised. Last time I checked, the discussion went about storage of all connection logs, which would already require a huge storage. But storing all traffic data seems virtually impossible to me.

        10 years ago, you could store a megabyte for 1$. Today, you can store a gigabyte for 1$. Storing the connection logs for quite some time is already doable.

        In 10 years, you can store a terrabyte for 1$, and the costs of storing the connection logs will be trivial. Storing all voice traffic will be aff

        • and in ten years (Score:3, Insightful)

          by RMH101 ( 636144 )
          the bandwidth your average guy uses will be 100 times what it is today. you see my point?
        • Let's predict.

          The powers will not store all our conversations because that would be too boring. Computers will attain creativeness. Then storage will be used to store synthesized ideas, which will be far more profound.

          People will become the manipulated. They may or may not believe they have free will any more. Their goals will be preplanned by artificial intelligence. People may have fascinating lifestyles but computers will leap farther and farther ahead.

          Surveillance is used to stop people from doing so

    • Re:Who will store all that data? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      unless the data will be stored to /dev/null.
      upon request, data for analysis can be taken from /dev/random
    • Who can store all records of web, email and instant messenger logs? Is it user who is responsible to store all data (including spam email)?

      In other news, Google officials have asked that ISP's and mobile phone companies not use their Gmail service to store their traffic data.

  • Voters Rights (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Un0r1g1nal ( 711750 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @03:47AM (#10233458)
    Isn't it amazing how all this crap gets put through, even though most of the voters are against the proposal the politicians that are supposed to be our representatives in parliment just don't care and put it through anyway.

    They keep up this illusion that we are a 'free' country, living in a 'democracy' but things like this just show how bad things really are. Used to be they would snoop and we all know they did, but they pretended they didn't for sake of negative publicity. Now they (the government) are showing how little the voters views really count. They don't need to worry about what we want, they just swing the terrorism card and pretend its all for our good, Big brother 'looking after our best intrests.' How nice of them.

    • Re:Voters Rights (Score:3, Insightful)

      by meringuoid ( 568297 )
      The voters, unfortunately, will support absolutely anything that's going to be used against terrorists and/or paedophiles. They are not concerned about the small detail that it'll be used against everyone else too...

      • Re:Voters Rights (Score:5, Interesting)

        by rikkus-x ( 526844 ) <rik@rikkus.info> on Monday September 13, 2004 @04:41AM (#10233578) Homepage
        Just wondering if anyone has useful arguments against monitoring, ID cards, etc. which I can give to people who say to me 'I have nothing to fear, because I haven't done anything wrong'?

        When I tell them that the government makes mistakes, that the government may change to one who they don't like (and now have huge amounts of data on them), that they may be falsely accused of things they haven't done, they just look at me as if I'm a conspiracy theorist.

        Rik
        • Here are a few questions to ask them:

          1. Have you ever gone over the speed limit in a car? Do you want to be monitored 24/7 so if you do, the government can simply issue you a remote fine?

          2. Do you mind having government cameras in your home 24/7? How about in your bedroom, shower or toilet? After all, you have nothing to hide. Right? If you don't want cameras in your home, you must be conspiring against the government. Right?

          3. Why is it that it's ok to have citizens watched 24/7, yet you can't see the f

          • Re:Ask them some questions (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Moridineas ( 213502 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @06:18AM (#10233878) Journal

            1. Have you ever gone over the speed limit in a car? Do you want to be monitored 24/7 so if you do, the government can simply issue you a remote fine?

            No, I don't want to be monitored, but..it WOULD be fair.

            2. Do you mind having government cameras in your home 24/7? How about in your bedroom, shower or toilet? After all, you have nothing to hide. Right? If you don't want cameras in your home, you must be conspiring against the government. Right?

            I don't see the connection between cameras in the house and a national ID card as an example. I guess it's a decent point, but a little alarmist sounding (conspiracy theorist like)

            3. Why is it that it's ok to have citizens watched 24/7, yet you can't see the footage and for some reason, no politicians seem to be surveilled?

            I don't like this argument either. Who would argue that it's not ok for the police to watch criminals? Likewise, if the police was watching you, would you want anyone to be able to download the video off the internet? I don't think so.. Likewise, politicians are probably the most recorded people around.

            4. Why shouldn't the insurance companies know about your entire medical, driving and social records, all the time, so they can dynamically adjust your risk status and increase payments as necessary?

            Would probably be more fair that way...

            5. Why do you need a secret ballot to vote for your politicians?

            That's a decent one.

            6. Shouldn't the politicians be doing your bidding, not ruling you?

            Hmm.. not sure about this one. I elect a politician to lead, not do my bidding. I don't really think that's the point of electing people to office.

            • I elect a politician to lead

              No, you elect a politican to initiate force on your behalf. Anything your "leader" will do and possibly could do will be accomplished through force, not voluntary association.

            • Likewise, politicians are probably the most recorded people around.

              So what was Senator Kennedy doing last night in the privacy of his own home? The problem with your statement is they're recorded when they know they're being recorded. If one of them drives off a bridge leaving a woman stranded in his car to drown, it's an unknown. Or if one of them is having an affair with a well known actress, we're not going to know.

              But if Joe AverageBlueCollarGuy does either while we're all monitored 24/7, not o

        • Re:Voters Rights (Score:2, Insightful)

          by mdwh2 ( 535323 )
          ID cards: Do they want billions of pounds/dollars of taxpayers' money spent on a system (and in the UK, we'll be paying something like 70UKP individually for a card) when there is no clear reason for doing so (first it's terrorists - despite there being no explanation on how it will help - then next minute it's to stop immigrants from getting a job)?

          Do they want to have to carry a card everywhere, and face fines, or possibly being detained until they can prove who they are, if they happen to forget one day

    • Re:Voters Rights (Score:2, Informative)

      by KontinMonet ( 737319 )
      The European Commission is not elected. It is a body of (now since enlargement, I believe) of 25 good and highly trustworthy people (eg: Edith Cresson [bbc.co.uk]) who decide the laws of some 400+ million people. We don't get a say...
      • So then you've all basically given up on the whole "freedom to elect your leaders thing"? No one with any say over there has told them to "piss off?" yet?

        This is an honest question. What little I know about the E.C. is that they are "good, honest, and true allies to the U.S."

        • Re:Voters Rights (Score:3, Insightful)

          by meringuoid ( 568297 )
          The Brussels government is dominated by the Commission, consisting of people appointed by the state governments, and the Parliament, which is directly elected.

          Since the state governments are elected, this isn't quite as undemocratic as it might seem. It's still not great, but nobody in power really wants Brussels to have a real democratic mandate - that would seriously undermine the states' independence, and would also lead to the few votes of places like Ireland or Greece being swamped by the huge popula

    • Re:Voters Rights (Score:2, Interesting)

      by tymbow ( 725036 )
      Politicians don't give two shits anymore. They read very little that it put in front of them and just vote whatever way they are told (if they even bother to vote at all). It is often left to the "left wing loonies" to delve into the murky depths to find the truth and unfortunately the main stream media always paints them as liberal pot smoking hippies so the majority of the public wont listen to their views. They are not always right, but we need a balance of the extreme left and the extreme right to fin
    • I don't know about you, but starting now, everything that's more sensitive than a bug report (and even then, I sometimes wonder), I'm going to encrypt.

      Luckily Enigmail should shorten the time I'll have to spend educating friends and family on the intricacies of GPG...

  • technology (Score:3, Insightful)

    by noelo ( 661375 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @03:49AM (#10233466)
    I can't help wondering how they are going to implement this just from the related information point of view. Sure GSM traffic seems trackable via the standards IMSI/IMSE. But how are they going to relate internet traffic to an individual. The would also need to capture DHCP logs etc, etc. It might be easy to capture and store all the data but without something to pull it all together, its could be just a waste of hard disk space

  • Possible? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 13, 2004 @03:52AM (#10233470)
    Is it even physically possible to store that much data?

    If I stop deleting stuff on my hard drive and archive everything i d/l, it would fill up in a month. Multiply that by 12 or 36 and then, am I supposed to buy a 12-36 harddrives with taxes?

    And that doesnt even begin to include all the voice traffic I'm responsible for and mountains of data I d/l via online gaming.

    I call bullshit, this is just some fascists wet dream.
    • You don't have to read the consultion document: read the summary! It's logging traffic data, not all data. If done sensibly, it doesn't need to take much space.

  • Better start keeping your own records (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Better start to keep your own detailed records of everything.
    Log who visits what websites on your computer, every bank transfer you make keep careful notes, you may be required to prove everything you ever did.

  • Old stuff, unfortunately (Score:5, Interesting)

    by KontinMonet ( 737319 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @03:59AM (#10233487) Homepage Journal
    Several years ago, I was up for an interview with a company in Holland who had already got a government (not EU) grant to start Internet snooping which they were intending to extend to SMS and eventually voice.

    And a lot of snooping already happens in the UK, plus we have more CCTV watching our every move than any other country in the world. This has, of course, dramatically reduced the amount of crime and petty crime we see and we must now be the most pleasant and safest country in the world in which to bring up children. It's getting so good, we will soon be emptying our prisons - which I predict will become quaint tourist destinations at which outsourced Asian tourists can wonder. We live in Arcadia!

    Oh joy, oh joy that we should have more snooping to make our lives so much better! We should do away with envelopes or sealed packages and ban curtains or blinds and have web cams in every room (discreetly pointed away from the toilet perhaps).

    We could, at last, realise the communist utopia of living like a termite colony. And look how efficient they are! The future beckons comrades, embrace, embrace!!

  • Who does something about it? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Kokuyo ( 549451 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @04:04AM (#10233497) Journal
    I'm reading a lot of "We can't let that happen" on message boards when it comes to such things. As a non-American anti-Bush propagandist (yes, I like to be a shitdisturber ;)) I often rant and rage about the current state of the US. But now that the same stupid ideas hit my own continent I'm at a loss what about to do. What CAN we do? I'm really not the pessimistic type most of the time when it comes to personal stuff. But when it involves the gathering of the people I'm pessimistic like hell. Because I know that we almost can't change anything about this stuff. Let's be honest most of us try to survive. Not in the old fashioned "hunt for food" way but in a modern society where it's not only our body that must survive but our mind as well. Most of us try to stay the heck out of things that could get us in trouble (understandably). And most of us try to not concern ourselves with things we deem not so important. And this is "not so important" for a lot of people because "I'm not a criminal so why should this make me nervous". So my question to the /. community, which is a certain elite and not a gathering of your average Joe, what can we from a realistic point of view do? Is there a way to get your average Joe to actually write his political representative?
    • You could try this EuroParl [eu.int] or write to your MEP (if they bother to attend). I've found the Greens are the most responsive by far. But writing to your MEP is moot as the EU Commission is appointed and generally snootily ignores the EU Parliament. Witness the software patent recommendations from the EU Parliament. The Irish (as the rotating presidency at the time) just threw it all away! The Commission utterly ignored any representation with which they (or at least the biggest spending lobbyists) did no
    • IMO, this law proposal will fail for simple economic reasons. If they really want it mandatory to store ALL traffic data, that would make internet infrastructure more expensive by several orders of magnitude. If business depends heavily on internet infrastructure, and it's several orders of magnitude cheaper elsewhere, business might go there instead.

      People will not be upset for being snooped on, but for having to pay too much.
    • Ask me to invite you to metanet, and when you get there, start inviting people yourself.

      Or you can fight the good political fight, and they'll even toss you a token victory once or twice a decade, while passing more extreme versions of the law after you let down your guard. Up to you.

  • Concentrate on the next election... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by thrill12 ( 711899 ) * on Monday September 13, 2004 @04:21AM (#10233530) Journal
    ...in the European country of your choice, too.
    The main driving force behind these kind of proposals are mainly the center and right of the political spectrum. Just as Bolkenstein (former comissioner and right wing liberal(dutch 'VVD')) introduced the dreaded software patents, so will other right winged.

    The amount of energy put into the actions to counteract the european legislators (just like the action against software patents [ffii.org]) is huge, but in the end things usually pay off only half, or not at all.
    By using your right to choose and elect, and choosing based upon the decisions made by those politicians (pro- or con- the issues you are for/against) you can deal with this thing preemptively.
    In the meantime, try to live with the harsh reality but never forget who put this in your lap.
    • It's generally the right that is more sold out to corporate interests. But in the UK, the only parties that voted against software patents were the smaller ones: the Greens (left) and the UK Independence Party (right).

      Labour, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats all support software patents. (By European standards, I suppose all three are fairly right-wing.) Fortunately, elections to the European Parliament are fought under a proportional system, so votes for Green or UKIP aren't wasted.

  • Woo hoo! (Score:4, Funny)

    by weave ( 48069 ) * on Monday September 13, 2004 @04:51AM (#10233619) Journal
    Up to a 3 year retention on alt.binaries.* groups? Dudes, I am so moving to EU. Incompletes can bite my pale white ass.
  • Oh, Slashdot, and slashdotters... never read what is in the linked documents and you're just fine here :-)

    Now seriously, look what is in the proposal:

    Because of changes in technologies, business models and service offerings ... law enforcement authorities are concerned that some data may not always be stored by all electronic communications operators to the same extent as they were in
    recent years. These traffic data would hence not be available for these public authorities
    when needed.

    As a professional
  • But given that David Blunkett is the Home Secretary at the moment, I doubt that the opposing reports, comments and complaints will even be read...

  • Hmz lets do the math (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Bluelive ( 608914 )
    Gigabit university connection. 1Gbit/sec is 3 Petabytes per year of storage or about 20000 large harddrives. Right, yup, impossible.

  • It's nothing new, just Right Wing pressure (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Maljin Jolt ( 746064 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @05:06AM (#10233661) Journal
    It may be cheaper for some bussinesses to build their own private networks instead of using public internet for traffic. The regulators can do nothing with private networks.

    Here in Europe, underground people are already building their own high speed comm links out of reach of government, at least in big cities. I suggest you should do the same in U.S.A.

  • Some home truths.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GuyFawkes ( 729054 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @05:35AM (#10233756) Homepage Journal

    Facts are these...

    The UK government is not alone Europe in being really keen on such ideas for some years now.

    Not a few weeks, not six months, several years, long before world trade centre stuff, well before osama was front page news.

    Note well, anyone who thinks "government" = bush or blair or labour or democrat of whatever is doomed before they start, government in the UK is the many tens of thousands of unelected civil servants who remain in office year after year after year.

    These are the corporate pen-pushers trying to carve out a piece of personal power and influence that are really behind all these schemes, and the ballot box will NEVER touch these people.

    Not that the citizenry as a whole will ever unite on anything like this, forget it, it won't ever happen.

    It is also a straw man argument to claim that such aims are impossible as there just ain't enough disk space on the planet, bullshit, it can be done pretty easy.

    Spool all smtp and pop traffic, being text based it will compress real well anyway.

    Spool all nntp traffic, when data gets to 80 days out strip out everything except the headers.

    Spool all http traffic, you only need to keep the apache server logs on a per individual basis anyway, except where keyword matches allow you to elect to store the entire page.

    Doesn't matter if this adds 50% to the costs for an ISP, because it will be added to ALL providers it will be in effect a tax where the cost is passed down to the consumer.
    Google and others offering FREE gigabytes of storage will also make a very strong weapon in the armoury for these people claiming that it is quite possible and economical to do.

    Scott Nealy said many years ago that the idea of anonymity on the internet was no more than a fiction anyway, so get used to it, little has changed.

    OK, so back in the real world, and speaking as someone who was once described on the front pages of the business section of the (London) Times newpaper as an "Electronic Guerilla" and as a self proclaimed anarchist and libertarian, it is cloud cuckoo land to thing that some popular peoples movement is going to stop this happening.

    I will offer you a simple proof of why this is so.

    Take slashdot itself for an example, a techies website if ever there was one, all the slashdot owners have to do is move from http://www.slashdot.org/ to https://www.slashdot.org/ and lo and behold all those records on government computers for that bit of the internet now hold encrypted data.

    Chances of this ever happening?
    Zero.

    Ok, so it is futile to talk about motivating the masses to move to pgp / blowfish / whatever encrypted communications... it will never happen, 95% of users can't even decide whether running bonzi-buddy is a good idea or not, and just click yes anyway.

    No, if you really want to break a system you must push WITH the flow instead of against it, you efforts will then be far more effective if you try to steer it towards self destruction, than if you just stand in it's path and try to stop it, whete it will simply crush you.

    No, EVERYONE should come out and start harping on about moores law and data storage densities and pence per terabyte etc etc, and push for ALL data, and I mean ALL data, not just TCP/IP of today, but emerging data such as TCP/IP telephony when BT and ma bell switch from switched networks, I mean ALL television programming, and of course I mean ALL CCTV or indeed any other form of surveilance "footage", yes ALL data, should be stored, IN PERPETUITY, and IN COMPLETE STREAMS, not every tenth frame, and not just headers.

    I also want ALL vehicles to be tracked 24/7 via, GPS / GPRS, and ALL CITIZENS TOO.

    We need to push for EVERY LAST BYTE to be stored in perpetuity, and we need to push for this by stating (correctly) that ONLY a full data stream tells the whole story.

    Once people start to get behind this idea as a meme and take it on board we then need to push the photos
    • You're crazy. Are you telling me the rich and powerfull won't get a free card out? You seem to forget that it happens in 1984, noone controls the elite.
      The thing is, the powerfull can pretty much disregard the law and it's consequences as is, they could pretty much buy out censorship of their crimes for matters of national security or some bullshit.
      And how would you feel if every desire you have is analised for its conformance with society, feeling that anyone could pick on you for every fault, knowing that
  • Case in point, Robin Good writes "A yet to approved Senate bill would provide the ability to the US Government to basically put off limits all of the images coming off from research and monitoring satellites." http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2004/09/11/blin ded_skies_government_to_close.htm/ [masternewmedia.org]

    "Nondisclosure of Certain Products of Commercial Satellite Operations," would exempt from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), unclassified, commercial satellite pictures bought up by the government, as well as
    • I've got a BUD (Big Ugly Dish - 9ft diameter) in my yard. Not currently hooked up, but it just needs a decent pole. It has C-band and Ku-band heads and receivers to match. There are literally thousands of these things all over the country. There's no way that someone isn't going to pick up any signal coming down out of the sky...

      OK, so it can be encrypted - but do the current crop of satellites have that capability onboard?? Can they be reprogrammed to support encryption?? How much of a hit can they a

  • Information overload (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Trurl's Machine ( 651488 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @05:40AM (#10233775) Journal
    Actually, one could expect better from the old continent. We have the perfect example of Stasi [sovietski.com], East Germany political police that was so effective in gathering information... that it has rendered itself totally ineffective. Stasi maintained an extensive network of informants and in 1980's simply everyone in the DDR was under some sort of surveillance (either himself or at least his neighbor or someone in the family already was a paid Stasi informer). In 1980's Stasi knew everything about everyone exept just one thing - they didn't know what they know. When the Berlin wall fell down, many Stasi secret files were opened - to much suprise, many of them were opened for the first time. The network was just too huge to control itself anymore. The information flow jammed all the available channels. Since everyone was under surveillance, it was almost as if there was no surveillance at all. I thought this will be a meaningful lessons for all the powers that be... but it took roughtly 15 years for European politicians to repeat the same mistake. Oh well.
    • Since everyone was under surveillance, it was almost as if there was no surveillance at all.

      Oh, come on. Now we have SQL. :-)
    • The information flow jammed all the available channels. Since everyone was under surveillance, it was almost as if there was no surveillance at all. I thought this will be a meaningful lessons for all the powers that be... but it took roughtly 15 years for European politicians to repeat the same mistake.

      Of course they learned their lesson. Store it digitally, have a bunch of computers connect the dots. That way, you can run a huge surveilance operation with relatively few people on the job. The problem of

  • Contacting Politicians (Score:4, Interesting)

    by timmyf2371 ( 586051 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @05:56AM (#10233821)
    So contact your local politicians today!

    I wrote a polite, finely worded letter to my local MP (Jim Murphy) in regards to the RIP bill a number of years ago before it was introduced within the UK - and I wasn't even given a response either explaining why the UK should go ahead with the RIP bill or discussing the points I made in further details.

    I do intend to write to him again regarding this, however I do not expect to receive a reply or any notification my letter has even been read.

    • I have a dead horse you may want to beat.
    • Hor do they react to recorded delivery??
      • Can't say I've ever used recorded delivery to contact a politician. I've only had to contact my local MP on two occasions - once about the RIP issue in my original post, and secondly an issue about Family Tax Credit (that one was sent via e-mail). Both unfortunately received no response - automated nor "real".

        The only response I've received from a politician was in response to a letter sent to John Major (then Prime Minister) regarding the Dunblane incident in the mid-90s.

        This in mind, it may be worth sendi

        • It was just a thought. It's been said here and elsewhere that US politicians generally respond better to written letters than to email, though that is beginning to change. The theory is that anyone can bang out email on the spur of the moment, but actually putting pen to paper supposedly means you've thought about the issue and care enough to waste a stamp on it. Registered post or recorded delivery ought to send the same message.

          Any issue I cared about, I'd just talk to my father. He was a County Counc

  • Well well, just in case you didn't get it, some nutjob who calls himself John Titor claims to be a time traveller from 2038 claims that there will be a civil war brewing in the US of A in the 2004/2005.

    Also "predicted" (well, not really so since it is all history for him) the war on iraq.

    And a whole lot of other things.

    http://www.johntitor.com/ [johntitor.com]
    http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/ [strategicbrains.com]

    Better educate yourself, it is just another "the end is nigh" message, but in the recent days I find myself more and more

  • copyrighteousness (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @10:11AM (#10235813) Homepage Journal
    Personal info is implicitly copyrighted. It is published or transferred solely to a single counterparty, for a transaction of a single purpose, unless expressly specified otherwise. Copyrighted info cannot be distributed or retained beyond the completion of that transaction, whether successful or unsuccessful. Write your lawyers and political representatives. It's time individuals claimed our copyrights to protect our liberty with the force corporations have siezed theirs.

  • ..emanating from his hiding place...

    Get real-- hat about all the useless random connections that will be generated by legions of morons while their computers are idle (or while YOUR computers are idle, via trojans, virii, worms, etc.), simply to fill the logs with useless gibberish? And all the connection "anonymizers" that will spring up? How much useless use of bandwidth is going to be encouraged with such a logging scheme?

    The REAL question seems to be, when are we going to get some COMPETENT peo

Slashdot Top Deals

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Close