The same thing goes for Universities too. They used to have to tell you by law, now they can't. They also don't need a subpoena to monitor your computer use any more. I believe a court order will work which is easier to get than a subpoena. So add computer labs and dorms to list.
Fortunatly here in the UK AFAK this doesnt happen (yet) or is very hush hush still.. It strikes me as remarkably ironic that on the one hand there is all this anti-communist/anti-china propoganda and yet we're heading towards an orwellian future more than they are.
If you can't tell (by being big brother) how much money anyone is making, and therefore how much taxes they owe, there's hardly any chance that you'll be able to tell what anyone is thinking and whether or not it conforms to Big Brother's Standards of Conduct. Money is easier to track than brainwaves and purchasing patterns.
Effective taxation requires a lot of infrastructure. Efficient taxation, more so. Getting most people to think like communists, and everybody to act like communists, not so much. Also, keep in mind that if you're going for the communist implementation of totalitarianism, taxes are irrelevant since nobody's making any money anyway.
You seem to forget that the communists are no longer in direct control in Russia. And obviously they were not successful in sustaining big brother in any sense.
I suspect we are a lot more likely to see that approach succeed here. Comparisons to a regime that mostly died 13 years ago are irrelevant.
The CompSci department of my undergraduate degree course actually did a deal with the local bookstore. In return for giving the store exclusive access to the "recommended textbook" lists for each course (ie. buy these books or you don't get to take the course), the store would give the university access to the purchase lists of each book and/or the purchase lists for each student.
Also, staff were also given rights to view the student history lists of each book in the library.
The motivation behind all of this was to protect the university from lawsuits by students who had flunked their courses. If the university could prove that a student had access to all the relevant course materials then the student would have no chance of winning the case.
Opponents of this decision pointed out that if a student was researching material for their own interests, then their research could be disclosed by a member of staff.
After this, the demand for second-hand books paid for in cash sky-rocketed after this was announced. Would the department ban someone from taking the course if they hadn't purchased a single book from the store?
"The C Programming Language -- A language which combines the flexibility of
assembly language with the power of assembly language."
Universities Too (Score:5, Informative)
Thanks Patriot Act.
Re:Universities Too (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Universities Too (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, because they're already there.
Re:Universities Too (Score:2)
Re:Universities Too (Score:2)
It's the control over the ideologies and expectations of the masses that makes it Orwellian, not the efficacy and efficiency of the revenue service.
Re:Universities Too (Score:2)
If you can't tell (by being big brother) how much money anyone is making, and therefore how much taxes they owe, there's hardly any chance that you'll be able to tell what anyone is thinking and whether or not it conforms to Big Brother's Standards of Conduct. Money is easier to track than brainwaves and purchasing patterns.
Re:Universities Too (Score:2)
Re:Universities Too (Score:2)
I suspect we are a lot more likely to see that approach succeed here. Comparisons to a regime that mostly died 13 years ago are irrelevant.
Re:Universities Too (Score:2)
Re:Universities Too (Score:1)
Re:Universities Too (Score:1)
The CompSci department of my undergraduate degree course actually did a deal with the local bookstore. In return for giving the store exclusive access to the "recommended textbook" lists for each course (ie. buy these books or you don't get to take the course), the store would give the university access to the purchase lists of each book and/or the purchase lists for each student.
Also, staff were also given rights to view the student history lists of each book in the library.
The motivation behind all of this was to protect the university from lawsuits by students who had flunked their courses. If the university could prove that a student had access to all the relevant course materials then the student would have no chance of winning the case.
Opponents of this decision pointed out that if a student was researching material for their own interests, then their research could be disclosed by a member of staff.
After this, the demand for second-hand books paid for in cash sky-rocketed after this was announced. Would the department ban someone from taking the course if they hadn't purchased a single book from the store?