More on privacy, transparency, accountability, & the 21st century decimating antiquated systems (& insane info about 4th Amendment)

TL;DR - The 4th Amendment doesn’t extend to 3rd party agreements. Privacy is a trick and diversion. Let’s talk about civil liberties before they’re gone, as well.

—————————–

 I don’t even know if I think privacy is an inalienable right. Liberties- yes. But what have we done for this country that we deserve to stand in the way of protecting ourselves? This is a developing conversation I am having with myself… I don’t know where I stand, to be sure.  But privacy is a fairly modern notion. We had the town square, and we had people gossiping while doing laundry by the river…. privacy never really existed until the 20th century, anyway.  It was a moment in time, and I just am not sure people are ready to get over the quaint notion of “privacy”.

However, the inefficiency and corruption and systematic bureaucracy heavily dents my idealism. That’s the sober monkey on my back telling me to calm down, and realize the nature of what reality should be like, versus how it is.

Still….. This NSA Prism data is encrypted and can’t be used without a court order. Anyone using it would be a criminal.

But yes… two issues.

a) Who decides what is “important” or “criminal behaviour” (although new tech based accountability and transparency may hold gov, courts, corp, & the people that make that up, to new standards)

b) That the government is never criminal. Lol

I would be more worried of criminal hackers accessing the data and releasing it.  My google searches could get me arrested or maybe just laughed at, but NOBODY CARES anyway. My friend said he worries, and acts a bit chicken little-y…. and I think chicken little was prepared for the worst at least.

Speaking to the IRS, for a brief second- as if Acorn or Tea Party should be tax exempt. What social good are any of those groups doing to deserve charity status while remaining dark and nebulous?  The whole scandal thing recently pisses me off, b/c the larger point is that none of these groups should be tax exempted.  But IRS is a good example of where privacy might matter. Also pre existing medical conditions for hiring or health care. If I googled a potential employee who was complaining about severe back problems online, what does that mean, legally?? It would be unwise of someone to publicly disclose that stuff, right?  But a business doesn’t want a worker’s comp or liability issue. I assume that search could get someone sued by worker rights people? Right? This is crazy times.

I say transparency for all, and privacy is mutually exclusive of that. Guarantee liberties…. and privacy is only for criminals. Then the sober monkey reminds me that I don’t get to define criminality.  Not that I would want to, but the courts are hardly refined objectivism.

I think privacy is the wrong conversation, and completely misplaced definition of our current civil liberties. Meaning – I think the privacy conversation is a diversion, and waste of time, while our civil liberties become were threatened.

I think talking about privacy at this point is a lot like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, with the band playing, 40 years *after* it sank.

Something important to all the naive privacy advocates (I am *NOT* anti-privacy, but I am a pro-transparency advocate, all the way)

The 4th Amendment does *not* extend to

3rd party agreements.

Every app you OK, every cell contract you sign, every social site you post on…. and still you complain about privacy.

You haven’t needed a warrant to sit on an encrypted data dump since 1979. You haven’t had privacy since McCarthy.

I think Scott McNealy from Sun Microsystems said it best, in *1999*-

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1999/01/17538

“The chief executive officer of Sun Microsystems said Monday that consumer privacy issues are a “red herring.”

“You have zero privacy anyway,” Scott McNealy told a group of reporters and analysts Monday night at an event to launch his company’s new Jini technology…. Get over it.”

If you think you have any privacy, or you are possibly self-important enough to think you need it, read David Brin’s “The Transparent Society”, from 1998. It is good to get up to speed on the war you are fighting that ended decades ago.

Privacy is a trick and diversion. Let’s talk about civil liberties before they’re gone, as well.

For example, “online privacy settings” are a complete diversion, and sort of a joke.

If you want privacy, send a letter. No, really… I have submitted that to the Post Office as a new ad campaign. 

In the coming era of transparency, we are already seeing the government have to be accountable, and transparent. They’re forced to release really crazy details they wish they wouldn’t have to release – but it’s the era of transparency. Now, even the FOIA stuff is behind in exposing / revelations.

To me, it’s just disappointing all these fringe liberals and conservatives are wailing that the government or corporations need transparency, and accountability, while they still whine about needing privacy for themselves. Privacy doesn’t work in a self-involved society, anyway. Everyone wants privacy until it serves your own needs….. “Cities or gov shouldn’t be allowed to have cameras on us!!! But I will use one on my porch to see if someone is stealing boxes, or on my dash to lower insurance premiums”, etc.

You can’t have it both ways, you know? People make up those corporations and governments, so transparency will trickle down, and expose *everything*. You can’t just pick and choose… privacy is mutually exclusive from transparency – they’re polar opposites. 

It’s curious times. I think it’s fascinating to watch people, governments, corporations, and mainly, archaic systems, still anchored in the 20th century, being ripped from their moorings by the 21st century. It’s unbelievable to watch, and I feel very honored to be witnessing all of this.