Silicon Valley vs. Your Privacy 182
TreeRat submits word of an article in the New York Times' magazine section, including mention of the proposed national database which has been talked about on Slashdot before. "The story goes into great detail with Larry Ellison, who is still pushing hard to bring 'Big Brother' to life. When asked if this database will be created, and run on Oracle, Larry's response was 'I do think it will exist, and I think it is going to be an Oracle database. ...And we're going to track everything.' There's a lot more than Ellison in this piece, though, and much of it is scary.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I Feel Bad for Oracle (Score:5, Funny)
You know what bugs me about Oracle though... nothing philosophical... its all the little SQL "enhancements" they provide that I find when looking at someone else's SQL query. I thought languages were supposed to be standardized. There are a few other DB's that do it too... Nothing big but it bugs me when I run into it.
Re:I Feel Bad for Oracle (Score:1)
Re:I Feel Bad for Oracle (Score:1)
SQL89: SELECT
SQL92: SELECT
Oracle 9 supports both syntaxes now.
Re:I Feel Bad for Oracle (Score:1)
SQL92: SELECT
----------------
I'm curious about something, then. The only SQL DBs that I have a lot of experience with are MySQL and MS Access. Both of them support a syntax like this:
SELECT
What standard is that?
--Brad
Re:I Feel Bad for Oracle (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Larry Ellison vs. Privacy (Score:1)
Scientologists simply rely on the SQL server Hubbard built into all of their heads at one of their OT levels... lol... and hey... if that's what works for ya more power to you... but any philosophy that condones the mistreatment or suppression of humans is wrong... Which is the most valid argument against their organization.
Mormon family records (Score:3, Informative)
We already have enough databases (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually (Score:1)
> simple "SELECT * FROM WHERE Citizen=foo" would be,
> in my mind, a violation of the 4th amendment.
In my mind, it would be nothing more than a violation of SQL syntax.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Actually (Score:2)
Re:Actually (Score:1)
Re:We already have enough databases (Score:2, Insightful)
Then why is most of the US Department of the Interior disconnected from the internet by court order? (Hint: It wasn't as secure as they thought it was.)
The fourth amendment was to protect a persons privacy, and most of this information is not private. That which is, is already protected by law such as medical records.
Actually, the Fourth is clear and privacy isn't named in it. A person's records are what the word "papers" mean. And it takes more than just a whim to legally set up a pen register or get unlisted phone information from the phone company.
Our government does more for you in you a day than you will probably do for it and the rest of your country in a lifetime, they have a greater responsibility that you can possibly fathom and all of you need to grow up and try to contribute to our nations security instead of crying about it like spoiled children.
What have you done for our nation's security? How many of the major threats have you personally dealt with? How many drunk drivers have you taken off of the roads? How many child abusers and wife beaters have you locked up? How many weapons have you taken away from high school students?
And how many times have you been shot on behalf of our society? I'm willing to bet that I'm ahead of you on all of these. And Ellison's wet dream scares the hell out of me.
Re:We already have enough databases (Score:1)
Completely and totally irrelavent. I have made no claims to have done such things, as such what you have done compared to what I have done means nothing at all. And since that reply wasn't directed at you,
Re: (Score:2)
Re:We already have enough databases (Score:1)
Point 2: Perhaps, perhaps not. Where you go is your choice, if you chose to go to someplace by public means then that fact is public knowledge. You are not hiding your face under a mask or driving in a car with blackened windows, you have no "expectation" of privacy, which is key with the law. What you buy, you buy from a company, that information is their property and unless they signed something saying they would not do XXX with it, or they violate some arcane government privacy law, that is also theirs to do with as they wish. Your social security information are papers, but they most certainly are not yours therefor your claim to privacy is limited. (Read: Confidential) There is no violation here, people just assume too many things about their life to be private by divine right, and it's simply not so.
Point 3: The applications for abuse of a database like this do not even BEGAIN to compare to the ability for the government to violate your rights with the new anti-terrorist laws passed recently. Which would you rather care about, some guy selling your address or criminal record to a company that wants information on you, or the FBI wire-tapping you without a warrant? How about the ability to hold you without a charge on suspiscions of terrorism? I hope you are never arrested since it's perfectly legal for them to listen to your conversations with your lawyer now.
Point 4: I'm not proposing better solutions because I'm not attacking ones brought to light by others. My point is what you take as a right to personal privacy is just not private. Your person, your place and your things are private, information, especially that which you do not OWN is not.
There are much more important things for you to worry about and yet here you are attacking something that 1. May help better secure our country 2. help you in the future by making POSSIBLY important information available to any agency that may need it in due course.
Not every person that disagrees with privacy nuts is instantly the enemy, a die-hard government supporter that would sell their mother for a dime. Most people who agree that things like this are needed are much more in tune with the reality of privacy and how our government functions as well as the bigger picture of just how much our lives have changed.
We are not giving up more freedom for security here, we are coming to the realization that certain freedoms never existed in the first place. We are finally coming down to earth and saying "This will make things better and safer for us all, some things are just worth putting up with."
And for reference, I did not call you a name, I described yours (and everyone elses) actions.
Re: (Score:2)
KW (Score:5, Funny)
ORACLE = One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison
Re:KW (Score:2)
This post sponsered by Oracle.
Re:KW (Score:1)
What to do, what to do...
big brother, eh? (Score:4, Interesting)
Reading said article requires me telling the New York Times Magazine about my 'interests' and other personal data (including household income?!?!).. Considering the relationship of this post to the Big Brother(esque) mentality, the irony becomes to thick for me to handle--thus reducing me to a pile of incoherent literary rubble on the floor.
-twitch twitch-
Re:big brother, eh? (Score:1, Insightful)
Voluntarily providing information, VS having one entitity share information about you with another.
Basically, give fake/false information, and maybe they wont bother asking anymore (and they wont have anything to share)..
Re:big brother, eh? (Score:2)
damn thats vague!
you know, i think i'm going to call afghanistan sometime, just to say howdy, and see what trouble it gets me. fFlying lessons arent cheap, but i want to get some anyway. now if i could just fFind a ton of fFertilizer!!! (as if fFertilizer is the only thing you can build bombs out of... how daft!)
now this part of the article is truly profound. someone gets it! Accenture's profiling scheme is open to question not only because it would almost certainly violate the privacy rights of airline passengers, but also because it seems unlikely to work. Investigators will tell you that people who commit credit-card fraud often fit a consistent profile -- using the stolen card to buy gas at self-service stations, for example, and then using it to buy clothes. By contrast, terrorists don't fit a consistent profile: you're looking for a needle in a haystack, but the color and the shape of the needle keep changing.
bloody brilliant! he gets it
Re:big brother, eh? (Score:1)
So, I agree that NYTimes is not "the" big brother (how dare you apply a definite article to Big Brother!!! The Ministry of Love is going to kill you), but the fact that a free service here requires some information collection seems to follow a Big Brother mentality, doesn't it?
Christ, I keep telling myself that I'll only post to /. from work.....it's saturday for goodness sake!
Re:big brother, eh? (Score:2)
There are those of us who value our privacy though. But all we have to do is supply fake information.
Learning to love the Surveillance State (Score:2)
Are we learning to stop worrying and love the Surveillance State? [spectacle.org]
Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org) [sethf.com]
on npr (Score:2, Insightful)
The longer this idea takes to get into the mainstream though, the better. For once maybe our tendency to forget something (Sept. 11) when CNN stops covering it will play to our collective advantage.
Re:on npr (Score:2, Interesting)
"Dubya" has already come out against this national id/database idea.
If you knew your facts, you would know that leftist democrats favor this idea much more than republican/libertarians. Leftists tend to trust the government much more than republicans/libertarians.
Maybe you need to do a little political philosophy research before you spout such nonsense.
But then again, this is slashdot where anything anti-republican is modded up.
Re:on npr (Score:2)
Tell that to Ralph Nader.
And really, I think confusing Republicans with Libertarians is about as sensible as confusing Leftists and Democrats. Demopublicans are all in one big boat with a couple fringy issues to pretend they're different.
Re:on npr (Score:2)
I don't know too many persons on the Left who like this idea, either: not the environmentalists, not the socialists, and definitely not the gay rights or abortion rights crowds. And I doubt you'll find more than a handful of persons, out of the hundreds of thousands who voted Green, who support a national database. In fact, most of the Left is very suspicious of government survailance, because they remember what happened during the 1950s and 1960s with the FBI and various anti-activist Red Squads.
Despite what Rush Limbaugh might be telling people, freedom from survailance is not a simple Left-Right issue. This is more of an issue of both sides (the Left and the Right) against a frightened, probably gullible, and not terribly thoughtful Middle. Unfortunately, that Middle constitutes the bulk of the American electorate.
As for who trusts government more in general: there are people on the Left who want to outlaw guns and SUVs; there are people on the Right who want to outlaw homosexuality and abortion. In my mind, each side is as bad as the other with respect to government control.
The fFirst one is fFree (or, software as a drug) (Score:2)
in answer to your observation, no, i dont think there would be too much trouble in getting public admittance. afterall, it's fFree right? and that's always good . .
fFrom the article:
o/t: amateur fighter pilot?? (Score:4, Funny)
Like... what? Does this mean he and a few pals like to take their F16s for a spin at the weekend, mebbe practice some bomb runs, perhaps take out the odd MiG when they feel like it - just for kicks?
Toc, toc, toc...
Re:o/t: amateur fighter pilot?? (Score:1)
Re:o/t: amateur fighter pilot?? (Score:2)
When all you have is a database... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:When all you have is a database... (Score:1, Interesting)
What Big Brother Ellison doesn't seem to "get" is that people want their privacy respected...
If he wants to build his database, let him. BUT, it should be left as an exercise for the student (in this case, the incredibly naive Ellison) to determine which of the data in the database is *real*, and what isn't. AOL claims to have so many "members", as does Yahoo, Netscape Mail, etc., etc. But how _unique_ individuals are there behind all those accounts? I get phone calls nearly daily on my modem line for the individual who had the number before I got it - in December, 1999. I don't know what his new number is or if he's even alive. I submit that Ellison's database could be stuffed full of dead or erroneous information - and should be.
Re:When all you have is a database... (Score:1)
...everyone begins to look like data.
Fresh Air interview with the author (Score:3, Informative)
who's with me? (Score:1)
seriously, this guys out of control.
database containing everbit of info about you !=good.
the day they implement it, I'm moving to canada or New Zealand.
and I'm bringing all my toys as well.
if it were in my power, I'd never buy any oracle products- however, I'm realistic in the fact that I'll never be able to AFFORD them, so I'm gonna waste my time and energy on GeekPAC. [slashdot.org]
Stay far away (Score:2, Offtopic)
I have had bad run-in's with Oracle before. I once was upgrading the db and the java-based installer wouldn't work. It was the most stupid thing. We are using the UNIX version, and they do not even offer a text based installer! After being up for almost 24 hrs with our website down the whole time, we gave up, and restored the old database. Before we upgraded and had problems thier tech support would say "we can't help because you need to upgrade" so we try to upgrade, and their response was "well it's a new product, so we can't help you becuase you are pioneering new ground". WTF! A few months later we found the answer in thier online help file. It was the NUM LOCK key. If the num lock key is on, it would not install. NO WHERE was this mentioned in the documentation, on the screen or by the tech monkey we called. I don't even know how to check for the numlock key in Java! I would think that they would have go out of thier way to make a product this bad.
My point is, why bother if there is an open souce alternative? MySQL is good enugh for NASA, it's good enugh for me! Let Oracle be the big brother, and I'll just be the Red-Headed stepchild.
Re:Stay far away (Score:1)
Re:Stay far away (Score:1)
Re:Stay far away (Score:1)
oh well. look on the positive side. If they end up commissioning this database, they'll probably ending up losing all the info anyway
-- james
Safety and Security come first (Score:1)
But this database will provide neither (Score:1)
Evidently with you bin Laden already won (Score:4, Interesting)
It means that some undereducated fool at a security check point will tell you "its for your own safety," when anyone that can think KNOWS that no US flight, and probably none anywhere will ever again be taken over by terrorists in the foreseeable futre because the 9-11 terrorists proved themselves liars. No passenger can ever again accept the risk of believing a terrorist's assertion that they won't be hurt. This "security" is not for your own good; it was not for your own good; it will never be for your own good. Building a reliable mass transit would be for your own good.
While you are thinking about this try running a simultaneous search on google for "Bush" and "bin Laden." After you read a few of THOSE hits, the fact that an ORACLE data base could monitor every emergency room bed in New York state "on the eve of " 9-11 might really get your paranoia going. Look into the stock transactions for American and United in the month immediately before 9-11 and try to correlate those moves with any news about the companies. Someone made several fortunes shorting them, but not all of the profits have been collected yet.
Re:Safety and Security come first (Score:1)
Alister
Re:And Franklin is always right? (Score:1)
we still have slaves today.
our capitalist society just isn't condutive to the flavor of slavery that existed at his time.
but i can get mexicans to mow my lawn and pick up the dog droppings for 3 bucks an hour.
Re:Safety and Security come first (Score:1)
Re:Safety and Security come first (Score:2)
but i'll talk now on what i really want to comment on: you say if the CIA had proper fFunding, sep 11 wouldnt have happened. on the contrary, there is a lot of evidence which says they DID know a great deal about it, as well as numerous other criminal activities. http://www.fromthewilderness.com/ [fromthewilderness.com] reports regularly on the shifty goings on of the central intelligence agency. (it's very leftist, but a good read)
the point is, the CIA is not automaticaly your fFriend, and it's abjectly daft to think otherwise.
What sort of brother? (Score:1)
Dont define the solution before defining t project (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Dont define the solution before defining t proj (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Dont define the solution before defining t proj (Score:1)
Boring (Score:2, Funny)
Big Business model for Big Brother (Score:3, Insightful)
I asked if there would be any controls on access to the database. For example, would Ellison want people to be kept off a plane because they were late on their alimony payments?
''Oh, no, I don't think we would keep anyone off on alimony payments,'' Ellison said. ''But if the system designed to catch terrorists also catches mere bank robbers and deadbeat dads, that's O.K. I think that's a good thing. I don't think it's a bad thing.''
never mind anyone else who is politically incorrect.
Talk about trust worthy computing.
Who do you trust?
Is it just me.... (Score:1)
I could be wrong, though, and Ellison could be incredibly considerate of our right to privacy and he could be NOT elevating himself to the level of Big Brother. As soon as I can pick myself up off the floor from laughing at the thought of Ellison lowering himself to the status of a mere citizen, I'll have to give it some more consideration.
HOWTO fight terrorist the right way, using the net (Score:3, Interesting)
Imagine you enter an airport, now a computer has tagged an id to your creditcard, cellphone a.s. and tracks this id. This id would not be stored in a database but simply in an in memory map linking your id to what you've done. Then should it match a terrorist profile the computer would then try to identify you after having been cleared by a security officer reviewing the data collected. Your data would otherwise expire and be deleted after you'd left the airport. The law could require that such systems don't have hard-drives, but boots the OS from a ROM, and that there doesn't excist any method for retrieving data that isn't associated with potential threats.
This is compromise.
Re:HOWTO fight terrorist the right way, using the (Score:5, Interesting)
Social Security numbers were NEVER supposed to be used for anything but retirement accounts - and people who claimed they would someday be used as identification were called paranoid.
You say: This is compromise. I have an idea. I want you to send me $100, you don't want to send me anything, so why not just send me $50? This is compromise, too.
Giving people the power to take away your rights is not "compromise", it is capitulation
Re:HOWTO fight terrorist the right way, using the (Score:1)
I'm not sure how many more people have to die because of some perceived danger in catching evil people. You realise that there were US agencies with warrants out on the guys that crashed those planes into the WTC? They'd have been picked up at the airport!
It's time to take a responsible stance. Denying the technology to save lives because it might be dangerous is akin to saying ban cars because people die in them. Like everything, it can be used for the purpose that was intended.
BTW (fair question) what harm has come from the US having social security numbers?
-- james
Re:HOWTO fight terrorist the right way, using the (Score:2)
I am a 38 year old professor of mathematics who has read much, from many areas of the political spectrum. I would love to be a k1ddi3 again, but those days are long gone, and I am proud if I write a script to set freecell goals. (which I have. [dougshaw.com]) It does not speak well of your own maturity or intelligence when you assume that people who disagree with you must not have put a lot of thought into a given issue.
BTW (fair question) what harm has come from the US having social security numbers?
That is a very fair question. Notice that I do not assume you are a "script kiddie" because you don't know a lot about a given issue. I don't claim to be an expert, but here is some from the top of my head. (If this thread were still live, I'm sure other people, more up on this than I am, would be able to add to my list)
1) Identity Theft. By expanding the Social Security number to an "ID" card, we are in a situation where, in order to transact business, most Americans wind up giving this number out. (Try getting electric service without it in some states) Then, if the number is taken, the thief can get a copy of your birth certificate, and start opening bank accounts and credit cards. This happens often, and is happening more and more frequently.
2) Government Harassment. (Our government has a history of using the FBI and the IRS to harass people who believe differently than they do. Read a book about the latter part of Martin Luther King's life for one example, and there are many others.) If the social security number was used as promised, then all the government could do with it would be to deny you your legitimate retirement benefits. Now, with it being used as an ID number, it can be used to track you. What's the harm? What if you are not a criminal, but a person using his/her constitutional rights to attend meetings that the government doesn't like, or to attend protests. You don't think the government would abuse this power? There was a protest in Minneapolis when George W. came to town. It was a peaceful protest. But when the News Cameras were setting up, your government decided they didn't want the protestors around... so they were all taken away and arrested for brandishing weapons. The "weapons" were pretzel sticks, and the police apologized as they were taking the protestors away.
3) Principle. I know that this probably doesn't carry a lot of weight with you, because you would prefer the illusion of safety over anything else. But when the social security cards were issued, the people, the people whom congress is supposed to represent, said, "No. We don't want this system, because we don't want national ID cards." The government doesn't get to say, "We will do what we want and then ask you 'what's the harm?' " That is not how it works. So a compromise was reached. The social security cards were issued ON THE CONDITION that they would NEVER be used as ID cards. That was the agreement. And the government broke it.
4) High Stakes Errors. A lot of information about me is now stored under my social security number. If there is a mistake at this point, the consequences could be very bad for me. If you have a number close to mine, and you default on a loan, that blemish could be entered under my number, and I wouldn't know about it until years later when I was trying to buy a house.
But social security numbers wasn't the point of my posting.
The point of my posting was that if the government says, "We will take away the following bit of your privacy but ONLY IN THIS ONE case, for ONLY THIS ONE PURPOSE and we will DELETE THE DATA" and you allow the structure to be set up; it is foolish and naive to believe that the government will keep its word. And I used the social security card as an example.
Re:HOWTO fight terrorist the right way, using the (Score:1, Flamebait)
No. We don't. Sorry to expose myself to US mindsets here, but (Terrorist == Soldier) and the only difference is whether the reporting media are on the same side as the combattant, or on the opposing side.
So please, before you condemn the people you consider to be terrorists, bear in mind that most of the world considers Bush/Blair/Sharon to be murderers and terrorists, and that your needling of Israel to kill yet more civillians sickens us.
I was going to say... (Score:1, Flamebait)
...well, I can't think of any just now, I'll let you know when I do.
Re:I was going to say... (Score:1)
O.R.A.C.L.E. (Score:5, Funny)
Hitler Comparrisons (Score:1)
Re:Hitler Comparrisons (Score:2)
Re:Hitler Comparrisons (Score:1)
Re:Hitler Comparrisons (Score:2)
IBM had all sorts of machines for selecting, sorting cards by fields. It made for "efficent" handling of personal data. Primative by todays standards, it was wizzbang stuff back then. (And IBM did a shell game to allow IBM Germany to keep operating during the war.)
Be Well, Citizens! (Score:1)
I hope that when the time comes They show us how to use the three seashells.
[Note - much funnier if you've seen Demolition Man [imdb.com]]
Two unrelated things: (Score:3, Interesting)
Fantastic. I think discrimination should be easier and more accessible, on a nation-wide government level. Is that even possible?
2) It's this fear of an all-too-powerful government rising up and snatching away our liberties.'' Since Sept. 11, Ellison argued, those qualms no longer make any sense: ''It's our lives that are at risk, not our liberties,'' he said.
Both are at risk, jackass, they aren't mutually exclusive. But, if saving lives and fighting terrorism is the goal, here's an easy way to do it. Listen up, get ready to write this down if you're a member of the government: If we want to put an end to terrorism, all we have to do is......(ready?)..stop funding terrorists. Don't give the Taliban $43mil, don't give both Israel and Palestine money and act surprised when bombs go off, don't create Contra's or an Osama Bin Laden knowing full well what they're capable of. If our governments and large corporations stop going in for funding them, it clips their wings. It won't end terrorism, but it'll make it a hell of a lot smaller. I think with $43mil and however-much-more we don't know about, a terrorist could fund their way around an Oracle DB.
Besides, what's more efficient than a database is just putting a soldier with an M-16 in every home to watch over us. Or to have a marine follow every citizen around...start a draft to even up the odds. Maybe when he said our liberties aren't at risk, "our" referred to him and his buddies? Who even knows anymore.
The best solution (Score:2, Funny)
I propose that we go ahead with a national database, make it open to the public, and have it all administered by Oracle. Only I don't mean Larry Ellison's Oracle.
That's right, all queries will have to be answered by the Usenet Oracle [google.com]. We can't ensure that the information in this "database" will all be accurate, but at least we'll be able to share a hearty laugh as we vote any congressmen who try to implement this idea out of office...
Why not put Ellison... (Score:1)
Larry (Score:3, Funny)
But...
I have to repeat this (unable to give proper credit though...)
What is the difference between Larry Ellison and God?
God dosen't think that he is Larry Ellison.
Re:Larry (Score:1)
What is the difference between Larry Ellison and God?
God dosen't think that he is Larry Ellison.
That's from Larry's biography: The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison [amazon.com] by Mike Wilson. The sub-title is God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison.
Re:Larry (Score:1)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/cm/br
Exporting costs (Score:2, Insightful)
Exporting costs to goverment were the copyright holder or marketer can do what he does best and the goverment can do what they do best. Why recreate a police force, census, or intelligence agency when the goverment already has them. Isn't that what globalization about, doing what you do best and buying services of what you are not as good at.
It is a new mellennium.
Re:Exporting costs (Score:1)
random login generator (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:random login generator (Score:3, Interesting)
I book marked it for future use. Thanks.
btw, does your script handle passing the ny times link to it? It would be great to reference nytimes stuff directly through your script when making postings here on
Re:random login generator (Score:1)
Now, really cool thing would be if all of /. crowd logs in making sure that all 4 boxes are checked in a popup window before clicking 'submit'
1960's fear's 1970's awareness meets 1990's bugs (Score:2)
1970's Home computers like the Apple
Soon we'll be able to hack into those larg databases and change them... The ground work for the revolution...
1990's Windows defects tolerated by government and business agentcys make hacking databases even easier...
While end users fuss and more knowladgeable use Mac, Linux, BSD and in the enterprise Solarus..
2000's The database comes into existence..
Orical.. on Windows XP.
Soon after Freshmeat apps show up to erase your criminal record and give yourself dimplomatic status..
The revolution is won..
Just think of the spammers! (Score:1)
This is not spam, by existing you agreed to receive this email...
Ellison's nemesis; thankfully, the Constitution. (Score:4, Insightful)
Mr. Ellison is listened to because he as a lot of money, mainly. IMHO, however, the man wears blinders, isn't concerned about minor things like the Constitution, and doesn't seem to bother to take into consideration existing problems with that's out there when wanting to roll over everything. I have no opinion as to whether it's his nature or his money that gives him this nature, or if he's spent too much time in his oriental surroundings, I'll leave that for others to decide.
But some things are troubling. He points out the huge databases that already exist. What he fails to also acknowledge are the problems. Forget about the 'mall experience'; but when, for example, credit data is incorrect in a database, it can take years to straighten out. It took Congress to act to even get the companies maintaining them to act even in a less than timely manner. Identity theft is greatly on the rise; again becuase of the existing databases and through theft of information, people can 'take over' another person's identity. It takes, IIRC, years for people to get that straightened out. That generally doesn't, though it can and HAS, get people tossed in jail. Mr. Ellison wants a single federal database of everyone with it's likely error rate to equal or exceed the individual databases that already exist? Now instead of a credit problem, people could be subject to being tossed in jail as suspected terrorists.
Actually, as far as protection of data or at least access, I'd give the FBI higher marks historically than the private sector. My only experience dates back many years at the advent of the NCIC, but the FBI had some very strict (and followed up on) procedures on connecting to it, who had access, logging data, etc). At that point, it was mainly a repository for things like stolen boats, airplanes, etc. Criminal history databases didn't exists, and I don't think warrants and other data was kept on there, certainly not centrally from states. But they had good controls becuase it WAS limited in who accessed it and what went on it. Even then, there were errors and problems with some who'd access the data. Mr. Ellison's gandiose plans would obviously make control of both access, updating information, and accuracy a nightmare. Identify theft wouldn't necessarily be any harder, as there'd still be corrupt people to sell false ID's just like the terrorists who purchased false drivers licenese data; it might only cost them more. Had it existed prior to 9/11, it wouldn't have prevented anything; since most were here legally, it seems. Would they have been prevented to board a flight becuase they had a speeding ticket in some other state? Probably not. Though if so, then a LOT of people are going to be missing flights.
Also, as one amasses huge amounts of data, the accuracy goes down and there's nobody to really analyze it. It all becomes automated. If that leads to profiling the entire country, it becomes another nightmare. And based on what? and by whom? The courts have shot down some profiling methodolgy, and undoubtedly would others. Even with existing data we had, the INS seems a mess, unable to control data and process what it already has. So adding millions and millions more pieces of data is going to improve that?
I think the BIG downfall and the area that needs to be upgraded are the areas that the gov't thought they were going to do with techonology or were afraid to do for public opinion. AS others thought the USA still had 'war fright' and wouldn't potentially react as it did to 9/11 or for that matter the Gulf War, they found out wrong. But the other area that was shackled upwards of 30+? years ago was the intelligence community, CIA for example. They got bad press, people compained we actually had 'spies', technology was improving, and even gov't types revolted aginst them. Were there problems? Sure. Mr. Hoover destroyed the perceived integrity of the FBI for years. But the gov't also pretty much wiped out foreign intelligence too. We ended up with satellites and pictures of everyplace on earth, probably damn good pics, but we didn't have agents to hear what those were saying or plotting that we had pictures of from miles up in space. If we dont' go back to the practice of infiltrating foreign groups that are a threat to us, we'll probably only learn of acts after they occur instead of preventing some of them. I think we're probably doing a lot more than previously, but maybe that's where we should be putting our resources and support. I don't blame the CIA for 9/11, but I have a hunch, strictly an opinion, some of those in gov't who highly criticized those agencies for 9/11 are the same ones who voted to tightly restrict them many years ago.
Before we listen to someone like Mr. Ellison and destroy much of what the founding father's wrote, let's take the things that we already have and 'fix' the problems that exist, and go back to obtining accurate intelligence, having the right people to analyze it, and keeping those that are going to be the terrorists and keep them out before they even have a chance to end up in any 'national database' that Mr. Ellison so highly values. (along with the revenue. The article did mention he'd give the gov't the software. It also said they'd pay for upgrades and maintenance in the future. I guess that'd give Mr. Ellison even more money and connections in case any data was ever wrong in HIS profile. Though that doesn't solve the years other people would have fixing problems with errors on them in his database as they couldn't call their lawyers at 3am or their local congreeman or senator or president to get an appointment 10 minutes later.)
Re: (Score:1)
Hitler was first (Score:1, Interesting)
If not everyone one of us actively speaks out and acts NOW against the abuse of social security numbers and further centralization it will be too late very soon.
The first step is a simple rule that you want to follow for security reasons as well: Do never give your social security number to any landlord, utility company, administrators, organizations, schools, potential criminals, etc.
Let's be Realistic (Score:2, Flamebait)
All an ID card will do is make it slightly easier for them to do it, and much harder for terrorists to use forged documentation to travel, make it easier to prove you are who you say you are.
Many European countries have national ID cards, but The Man isn't keeping them down. UK has cameras all over the place, but they're still not being taught Newspeak. The problem is not in the cards, it's in how they're used. If you don't trust your government, elect a new one. If that's not feasible, move to another country. Yeah Ellison's a nutjob, but so what? Leave the country and don't go back.
--Dan
I used to respect this man... (Score:3, Insightful)
I pity the company he controls, for being under the thumb of someone like him. I can only hope they find a way to boot him out before he drags them down (or worse, succeeds in his mad scheme). If I have anything to say about it, he'll never see a dollar of mine; I'd sooner give it to Microsoft now.
wondering about Ellison (Score:1)
''Like, that's really disturbing. Like, don't mess with my mall experience. O.K., so people have to die over here without this, but that's not going to affect my experience going to the mall.'' He exhaled, and in his regular billionaire voice asked, ''I mean, what the hell is going on?''
It's funny to me that the second richest man in the world, who has everything, seems so sincerely scared of being killed. I mean, do you think he's saying these things as part of his salesmen's pitch (which is entirely possible...he could be a closet privacy activist but such a good salesman that we would never know) or is the fear of being killed randomly part of his psyche?
I suspect he is also really obsessive about the food he eats, exercising, doing yoga, et cetera. All the money in the world can't buy him another body, or a better body, and he probably knows that in the back of his mind. Hence we have a person who is likely very afraid of dying.
Not to mention the ego trip of being omniscient. Because if Oracle databases know everything, then at some level, he knows everything.
''I really don't understand. Central databases already exist. Privacy is already gone.''
For him. There's no doubt it's gone for him...it would be hard living his life and maintaining any sense of privacy. The rich and famous are the least sensitive to data privacy issues, because frankly, they don't understand them. How can they have a good grasp of what privacy is, when they don't live private lives. Actors should though--they aren't getting paid all that moolah because they are working really hard--they are getting paid all that moolah because they are selling the rights of their "image." That brings along a certain amount of disadvantages, like no privacy, but you are getting paid for it. Ellison likely never got paid for it.
Well, you've got to hand it to him... (Score:2)
Personally I think that is a good sign.
Worse than you think (Score:1)
It would be very easy to build a system required in order to buy or sell, as profesied.
'We're going to build a bioterrorism shield, so eventually everyone is going to have to participate '
Steve Cooperman, Oracle's new director of homeland security
Ellison does not seem to even understand the objections against the system.
'There are, at the moment, legal restrictions prohibiting the sharing of data by government agencies. The most important restriction was passed in 1974, to prevent President Nixon from ordering dragnet surveillance of Vietnam protesters and searching for their youthful marijuana arrests. I asked Ellison whether these legal restrictions should be relaxed. "Oh, absolutely," he said. "I mean absolutely. The prohibitions are absurd. It's this fear of an all-too-powerful government rising up and snatching away our liberties."'
'"Well, my God, there are hundreds of places we have to look to see if you're a security risk." He [Ellison] dismissed the risks of privacy violations: "I really don't understand. Central databases already exist. Privacy is already gone."'
Ellison wants this to be mandatory for aliens, but optional for citizens. However, this will most likely last until one minute after a US citizen commits an act of terrorism.
Also of interest is the 'thumbprint or iris scan' that could be interpreted as the mark on the right hand or forehead.
'Ellison proposes to link the central government database to a system of digital identification cards that would be optional for citizens but mandatory for aliens. He wants each card holder to provide a thumbprint or iris scan that would be stored in the central database.'
(I am rather sleepy right now, so this may not be quite coherent.)
I really hope I am wrong about this.
Creating a single point of failure like this ... (Score:1)
It's seems so incredible to me that this idea should even be be suggested.
I can't help but wonder why the TLA outfits are not making descreet enquiries as to the position of the author's loyalties.
God bless America, because you will need every blessing you can grab now for use later when you are living under the upcoming Pax Americana, which will, I fear, re-define the meaning of the words "Police State".
Got LDAP? (Score:1)
Congresswoman: Bush knew in advance of 9/11 (Score:2, Interesting)
In a recent interview with a Berkeley, Calif., radio station, McKinney said: "We know there were numerous warnings of the events to come on September 11th. . . . What did this administration know and when did it know it, about the events of September 11th? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York who were needlessly murdered? . . . What do they have to hide?"
Scary (Score:1, Informative)
Remember, your government, if you live in a democratic nation, is there to serve you. If this requires detailed, complete tracking of the population, then so be it. But keep asking the question "is this necessary?", and not "isn't it already happening?"
Re:Databases? (Score:1)
Re:Databases? (Score:1)