U.S. at the Bottom of Global Privacy Rankings
Big Brother lives. And he may live a lot closer to home than you might think or want.
Human rights organization Privacy International compiled list of the best and worst countries in 2007 for citizen privacy versus government surveillance. The United States sits squarely at the bottom of that list with Privacy International classifying the country as one of the world's most "endemic surveillance societies."
Other low ranking countries include: China, Russia, Thailand, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, and England. Greece was the highest ranking country when it came to citizen privacy protection. Privacy International said that Greece had "adequate safeguards against abuse." No country reached the highest ranking of "significant protections and safeguards" or "consistently upholds human rights safeguards."
The US has dropped in status since last year, when it was given the marginally better label of an "extensive surveillance society."
To some the ranking of high surveillance may sound like a good thing, after all more surveillance means more security, right? However it is important to note that the US ranking is below the ranking of "systemic failure to uphold safeguards" when regarding citizen privacy. There is a trade-off at work where more security means less privacy.
As for me, I'd like to have a bit more privacy. Hopefully in 2008 the U.S. can raise its privacy standards to something above an utter failure.
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
Never going to happen. The privacy issue is only going one way and that is squarely in the direction of LESS privacy.
Frankly this would have been true even without 911 but since then pretty much any erosion of privacy/civil liberties is 'Justifiable' according to our overlords.
Get used to it!
Now... Strap in and get ready for the rants and screams from those who will be shouting that in order to protect our 'freedom'. we have to give up our 'FREEDOM!'.
Good Luck...
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
Are you a U.S. citizen? If so, you should be scared of the society you have crafted for yourself. You should be scared for yourself and for your family. With only 5% of the world's population, the U.S. holds the world record for prisoners, having 25% of the world's incarceratedpopulation. The incarceration rate is going up-up-up, and by 2058, it is estimated that over half the population of the U.S. will be incarcerated. Why are people in prison? Mostly for drug related offenses. A less draconian drug policy would see your tax dollars being far better spent. Besides, the 'War On Drugs' is a primary excuse the government uses to peer into your private matters. Bah, go ahead, call me a pot-smoking-hippy-freak for wanting to change this mess. I don't mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisons_in_the_United_States?section=12#_ref-5
The Government wants you! Like petengina said. There will be less and less privacy. Have you seen the cameras above the traffic signals? Have you seen Google Earth? The Government will say "Give up your freedom for more security" Do not believe it. I have seen tapes. The Government knew about the 911 attack. They new about the Oklahoma city bombing. I have seen tapes. They are creating concentration camps for people who do not go along with their "NEW WORLD ORDER" BAD MEN WILL PREVAIL IF GOOD MEN DO NOTHING.
JUSTICE
"ALL IT TAKES FOR EVIL TO SUCCEED IS FOR GOOD PEOPLE TO DO NOTHING."
GENERAL WILLIAM T SHERMAN, COMMANDING
We have strong power to the people due to Bill of Rights_1st 10 Amendments to US Constitution_#2 Guards # 1_Free Press & the REST!
It's a sad thing when the citizens of a country end up having to watch their own backs and safeguard themselves against their own government. Not so long ago, the citizens of the U.S.S.R. allowed their freedom and privacy to slip away in the name of security. As did the people of Germany. Their will always be tyrants, usually with a small group backing him, that want to dominate and control the people of a country. They come and they go, and they usually weaken the fabric of a free people enough to eventually cause the downfall of that particular government. To be living in a time when our once great and proud nation decides to spy on it's own people en mass, condone torture and in-human treatment of others, start wars and worry later about explaining why we are killing other people abroad, and suspects it's own people of being the enemy, is a sad thing for me to watch.
It's a sad thing when the citizens of a country end up having to watch their own backs and safeguard themselves against their own government. Not so long ago, the citizens of the U.S.S.R. allowed their freedom and privacy to slip away in the name of security. As did the people of Germany. Their will always be tyrants, usually with a small group backing him, that want to dominate and control the people of a country. They come and they go, and they usually weaken the fabric of a free people enough to eventually cause the downfall of that particular government. To be living in a time when our once great and proud nation decides to spy on it's own people en mass, condone torture and in-human treatment of others, start wars and worry later about explaining why we are killing other people abroad, and suspects it's own people of being the enemy, is a sad thing for me to watch.
Grrrr. Hate when that happens.
Sorry for the double post. Had a hickup in my internet service.
Or else the NSA is watching me and intercepting my posts and they double posted ! :)
Reminds me of a few years ago, with my SBC DSL service. My pings and traceroutes always lead through the SBC switches in Chicago. Till I started posting things online about stuff that Mr Bush was doing that I disagreed with. Suddenly I noticed that my ISP was routing me through Washington DC instead of Chicago. That went on for many months.
No kidding.
If you think thats something read this
US unveils new driver's license rules
By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer
10 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Homeland Security Department has spent years crafting the final regulations for the REAL ID Act, a law designed to make it harder for terrorists, illegal immigrants and con artists to get government-issued identification. The effort once envisioned to take effect in 2008 has been pushed back in the hopes of winning over skeptical state officials.
Even with more time, more federal help and technical advances, REAL ID still faces stiff opposition from civil liberties groups.
To address some of those concerns, the government now plans to phase in a secure ID initiative that Congress passed into law in 2005. Now, DHS plans a key deadline in 2011 — when federal authorities hope all states will be in compliance — and then further measures to be enacted three years later, according to congressional staffers who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because an announcement had not yet been made. DHS officials briefed legislative aides on the details late Thursday.
Without discussing details, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff promoted the final rules for REAL ID during a meeting Thursday with an advisory council.
"We worked very closely with the states in terms of developing a plan that I think will be inexpensive, reasonable to implement and produce the results," he said. "This is a win-win. As long as people use driver's licenses to identify themselves for whatever reason there's no reason for those licenses to be easily counterfeited or tampered with."
In order to make the plan more appealing to cost-conscious states, federal authorities drastically reduced the expected cost from $14.6 billion to $3.9 billion, a 73 percent decline, according to Homeland Security officials familiar with the plan.
The American Civil Liberties Union has fiercely objected to the effort, particularly the sharing of personal data among government agencies. The DHS and other officials say the only way to make sure an ID is safe is to check it against secure government data; critics like the ACLU say that creates a system that is more likely to be infiltrated and have its personal data pilfered.
In its written objection to the law, the ACLU claims REAL ID amounts to the "first-ever national identity card system," which "would irreparably damage the fabric of American life."
The Sept. 11 attacks were the main motivation for the changes.
The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had a total of four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states. The DHS, which was created in response to the attacks, has created a slogan for REAL ID: "One driver, one license."
By 2014, anyone seeking to board an airplane or enter a federal building would have to present a REAL ID-compliant driver's license, with the notable exception of those more than 50 years old, Homeland Security officials said.
The over-50 exemption was created to give states more time to get everyone new licenses, and officials say the risk of someone in that age group being a terrorist, illegal immigrant or con artist is much less. By 2017, even those over 50 must have a REAL ID-compliant card to board a plane.
Among other details of the REAL ID plan:
_The traditional driver's license photograph would be taken at the beginning of the application instead of the end so that should someone be rejected for failure to prove identity and citizenship, the applicant's photo would be kept on file and checked in the future if that person attempted to con the system again.
_The cards will have three layers of security measures but will not contain microchips as some had expected. States will be able to choose from a menu which security measures they will put in their cards.
Over the next year, the government expects all states to begin checking both the Social Security numbers and immigration status of license applicants.
Most states currently check Social Security numbers and about half check immigration status. Some, like New York, Virginia, North Carolina and California, already have implemented many of the security measures envisioned in REAL ID. In California, for example, officials expect the only major change to adopt the first phase would be to take the photograph at the beginning of the application process instead of the end.
After the Social Security and immigration status checks become nationwide practice, officials plan to move on to more expansive security checks, including state DMV offices checking with the State Department to verify those applicants who use passports to get a driver's license, verifying birth certificates and checking with other states to ensure an applicant doesn't have more than one license.
A handful of states have already signed written agreements indicating plans to comply with REAL ID. Seventeen others, though, have passed legislation or resolutions objecting to it, often based on concerns about the billions of dollars such extra security is expected to cost.