From: Camden Hutchison <crh2014@columbia.edu>
  To  : <cpc@emoglen.law.columbia.edu>
  Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:57:56 -0500

Re: private versus government data collection

My point wasn't that US governmental machinery functions poorly.  My
point was that Americans might be more likely to employ that
machinery to combat identity theft or spam than to restrict
government surveillance.

-Camden

>
> Camden,
>
> >From your point of view, the problems associated with private
> data
> collection are more "tractable" because the voting public, via
> governmental
> machinery, can vote to snuff out abuses. There is a slight
> contradiction in
> your perspective, however, as it presupposes the inherent
> reliability of the
> government - something which you go on to doubt, at least in the
> context of
> public collection of data.
>
> I do appreciate your point about the over-extension of the
> legitimacy in
> public data mining, however. Fortunately, this is the United
> States, and not
> some paternalistic country like Singapore, where people simply
> believe (and
> obey) what their government tells them hook, line and sinker.
> There's a long
> way to go yet before the US turns into a nanny state - but that
> means the
> earlier we start taking precautions, the better.
>
> Sze
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Camden Hutchison" <crh2014@columbia.edu>
> To: <cpc@emoglen.law.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 4:56 PM
> Subject: Re: private versus government data collection
>
>
> >
> > Points taken, but the problems with private data collection
> still
> > seem a little more... I don't know... tractable, maybe, than
> the
> > issue of increasing government surveillance of society.  For
> > instance, I have a feeling that the worst abuses in private
> data
> > collection (like sloppy control of data) can actually be solved
> > legally once the voting public becomes upset enough about them.
> >
> > Data mining by the government is more worrisome to me because I
> fear
> > that it is less likely to raise the public ire.  I am worried
> that
> > September 11 may have really caused the sort of cultural shift
> > whereby ordinary people are willing to accept government
> monitoring
> > because they are afraid.  By the time that the threat of
> terrorism
> > fades from salience, the security apparatus will still be there
> and
> > Americans will have become accustomed to it.  The potential for
> this
> > type of change -- a paradigm shift in the conception and
> reality of
> > civil liberties -- is what concerns me most.
> >
> > -Camden
> >
> >> I would say this an oversimplification of things, and more
> >> importantly the
> >> issue is not only the use that the government can make of the
> all
> >> of this
> >> information but also the misuse and defective protection of
> the
> >> private
> >> data by private individuals. added to that is the use that
> others
> >> can make
> >> of the data that readily available for stealing and for which
> >> there is not
> >> penalty under American privacy laws, which only bind the
> >> government
> >> -excerpt maybe for the fair credit reporting act.
> >>
> >> So its not really either or, and its not what is worse, its
> the
> >> combined
> >> effect of it all.
> >>
> >> Alex
> >>
> >> --On Sunday, February 20, 2005 9:15 AM -0500 Camden Hutchison
> >> <crh2014@columbia.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > The impression I am getting from reading Robert O'Harrow,
> Jr.'s
> >> book
> >> > is that new data collection technologies raise two distinct
> >> social
> >> > issues.  One is that private businesses now have easy access
> to
> >> > detailed personal information about us.  The other is that
> the
> >> > federal government increasingly also has access to detailed
> >> > personal information about us.
> >> >
> >> > I am curious as to which of these two issues other students
> >> feel is
> >> > the core problem we should be addressing in the class.  My
> own
> >> > feeling is that government use of our personal information
> (at
> >> > least when it is being used for national security purposes)
> is
> >> far
> >> > more worrisome than private use of that information.  Like
> Eben
> >> > said in class, the worst that marketers can do is try to
> >> convince
> >> > us to go to Disneyworld.  The government can send men with
> guns
> >> to
> >> > our homes.
> >> >
> >> > -Camden
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > Computers, Privacy, and the Constitution mailing list
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Computers, Privacy, and the Constitution mailing list
> >
> >
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Computers, Privacy, and the Constitution mailing list
>



-----------------------------------------------------------------
Computers, Privacy, and the Constitution mailing list