Is privacy an obsolete concept?

[ndebord]

If intelligence officers ruled the day.


http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/an-intelligence-officials-privacy-proposal/?hp

"Privacy, I would offer, is a system of laws, rules, and customs with an infrastructure of Inspectors General, oversight committees, and privacy boards on which our intelligence community commitment is based and measured."

[Lindsey]

"Privacy, I would offer, is a system of laws, rules, and customs with an infrastructure of Inspectors General, oversight committees, and privacy boards on which our intelligence community commitment is based and measured."
If that's not a bureaucrat's answer, I don't know what is.

I would not call privacy an obsolete concept, but it is getting harder and harder to protect, in no small part because people will happily give it up without really thinking about what they are doing in order to save 50 cents on a gallon of laundry detergent. It's routine now for stores to ask you for a telephone number when you buy something, even if you pay cash (and they have no reason to ask for a telephone number even if you pay with a credit card), and for web sites (especially newspaper sites) to ask for an e-mail address before they will allow you to read the articles. Privacy is no longer the default condition; you have to work very hard to try to maintain some semblance of it.

Jeffrey Rosen says that we need to change our legal practice to give privacy rights the same status as property rights. I think he may have something there.

--Lindsey

[Jeff]

If that's not a bureaucrat's answer, I don't know what is.

Jeffrey Rosen says that we need to change our legal practice to give privacy rights the same status as property rights. I think he may have something there.

--Lindsey

A recent exchange with Comcast "customer service". I call, they ask for my phone number to pull up my account. Ok Then, "to verify who I am", they ask for the last four digits of my SS number. I say I'm not giving you or anyone else any part of my SS number, but I am paying Comcast $125 a month. Would you like that to stop? At that point things abruptly changed and a "supervisor" came on the line and there was no more fishing for my SS number.

Just say NO

- Jeff

- Jeff

[Lindsey]

I say I'm not giving you or anyone else any part of my SS number, but I am paying Comcast $125 a month. Would you like that to stop?
LOL! I love it!

Yeah, you're right, you do have to "just say no," and be prepared to endure incredulous looks from store clerks who can't believe you won't give them your home telephone number so that you can be mailed all these incredible coupons for stuff you don't want...

But, you know, our schooling has taught us to be good little worker drones, and when someone asks a question, we are programmed from a young age to pipe up with an answer. :(

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

Jeffrey Rosen says that we need to change our legal practice to give privacy rights the same status as property rights. I think he may have something there.Specific types of property rights, of course... still thinking about the "we can take your land if we think another private owner will use it better than you will" case...

[Lindsey]

Specific types of property rights, of course... still thinking about the "we can take your land if we think another private owner will use it better than you will" case...
That's not exactly what that ruling said, but at least the government still has to jump through legal hoops to claim eminent domain! Their current stand on privacy seems to be that individuals have no right to claim any, and that the government should be free to poke its nose anywhere it pleases. It is currently the law, remember, that the FBI can do "sneak searches" of your house -- they can enter and look around while you are not there and never really have to notify you. So much for the Fourth Amendment.

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

It is currently the law, remember, that the FBI can do "sneak searches" of your house -- they can enter and look around while you are not there and never really have to notify you. So much for the Fourth Amendment.The so-called "sneak and peek" situations do require a warrant and the warrant must provide for notice at some point. The standards for delaying notice aren't the best (there's one catch-all category that is all too easily abused) but this isn't devoid of judicial oversight.

[Lindsey]

The so-called "sneak and peek" situations do require a warrant and the warrant must provide for notice at some point.
I had forgotten that. But notice of the search can be delayed for months, and then not until an arrest is made. And according to this site (http://www.law.uga.edu/academics/profiles/dwilkes_more/36sneak.html)

If a sneak and peek warrant targets a person who, as it turns out, is in fact innocent and the search uncovers nothing criminal, it is unlikely that the victim of the search will ever find out about it.

Exactly who, after all, is going to make sure that police notify such a person of the search?

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

Exactly who, after all, is going to make sure that police notify such a person of the search?It should be the Court, which should have a record of the decision on the request for permission to delay notification and should require a report.

[Lindsey]

It should be the Court, which should have a record of the decision on the request for permission to delay notification and should require a report.
Well, we can hope that they would, and that someone would follow up if they didn't get one.

But there is also the other thing: since the property owner is not present at a "sneak and peek" search, there is no one to observe whether or not the law enforcement officials follow the rules in the course of the search. And so even if the owner is later notified, he has almost no way to challenge it after the fact.

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

there is also the other thing: since the property owner is not present at a "sneak and peek" search, there is no one to observe whether or not the law enforcement officials follow the rules in the course of the search. And so even if the owner is later notified, he has almost no way to challenge it after the fact.I hear you, but I have to tell you that this doesn't bother me nearly as much as it might someone who didn't have prosecutorial experience. Since there are reports written by everybody, and copies of the photos are kept with the reports, and the judge can be asked to review the reports and the photos, there is a chance for judicial review.

[Lindsey]

...there is a chance for judicial review.
Is that before or after they send you off to Guantanamo Bay?

--Lindsey

[Judy G. Russell]

Is that before or after they send you off to Guantanamo Bay?They don't send Americans off to Guantanamo Bay, silly rabbit. They send Americans to the Navy brig somewhere buried in the Carolinas.

[ndebord]

They don't send Americans off to Guantanamo Bay, silly rabbit. They send Americans to the Navy brig somewhere buried in the Carolinas.

Judy,

Or, if you are already in the military, Levenworth is built on top of an old Civil War prison. They have nice dark, dank dungeons on the bottom layer they don't talk much about.

[Judy G. Russell]

Or, if you are already in the military, Levenworth is built on top of an old Civil War prison. They have nice dark, dank dungeons on the bottom layer they don't talk much about.Yeah, Leavenworth wouldn't be a place I'd like to spend any time. Nor would (in the general federal system) Atlanta or Marion, IL (where part of the prison is underground for security reasons) or Supermax...

[Lindsey]

They don't send Americans off to Guantanamo Bay, silly rabbit.
Give 'em time. There is no depth to which this crowd will not sink.

--Lindsey

[ndebord]

Yeah, Leavenworth wouldn't be a place I'd like to spend any time. Nor would (in the general federal system) Atlanta or Marion, IL (where part of the prison is underground for security reasons) or Supermax...


Judy,

Not the same. The new prisons have an antiseptic feel to them. I know a guy who did time in Leavenworth for the Ft. Dix stockade riots and I shudder when I hear what he said. Reminds me of the time I spent in Sing Sing helping Vets down on their luck. That place gave me the creeps. I don't even want to know how much a Leavenworth dungeon would creep me out.

[Judy G. Russell]

Not the same. The new prisons have an antiseptic feel to them.Atlanta isn't new (that's where they held the Mariel boat folks) and Marion is just plain awful. There are prisoners there who never, ever, see daylight. Literally.

[ndebord]

Atlanta isn't new (that's where they held the Mariel boat folks) and Marion is just plain awful. There are prisoners there who never, ever, see daylight. Literally.

Judy,


Have not had the pleasure of being in either. Will gladly pass on all of them, but particularly Leavenworth.