Unbelievable!!!

[socalgal]

I read this tonight 11.07.99 in the Business section of the Sunday Los Angeles Times. Here is the online article from that paper.

I think you will be as concerned as I was when I read it, things are really going too far here!!...

http://www.latimes.com/business/19991107/t000101214.html

[This message has been edited by socalgal (edited 11-07-1999).]

[welsh wizard]

That sucks for you guys Stateside, I think the UK already has in place a form of Data protection that was introduced back in 86 or 87 thats over 12 years ago, not sure of this lot down under but I'll have to check it out.
If they are the same as the US I'll have to get a bigger matress for the bed.
WW

[Zotzmein]

Americans are so use to leveraging themselves to the hilt and beyond it’s made them venerable to such invasions. I personally prefer a cash and barter system.

Admitted I don’t live much beyond what I earn but I have very little debt besides the monthly bills and thusly have very minimal exposure. I do maintain a checking account and a credit card account, both used sparingly.

I doubt the federal government is going to come quickly to the aid of it’s citizenship, given the need for enormous amounts of funds to facilitate the election of it's officials to the highest levels of government. It would be a clear case of biting the hand that feeds them.

America, land of the free and home of the brave, where everyone and everything has its price: what’s yours?

Regards to All,

Zotz Mein

You may ask what of my future? I hoard hard assets, things that have inherent value that can be easily turned into cash or traded for other things of value.

[This message has been edited by Zotzmein (edited 11-08-1999).]

[Chainsaw]

"more choice"
"lose the business"
I for one, have already made the 'choice'
NOT to use this bank.
It's on a long list of banks that have 'lost my business'.
Buyer beware, for sure, but it 'is' "Unbelievable"
that they have absolutely no ethical conscience, whatsoever
and will continue to unscrupulously spill our guts,
selling our confidential financial records unless leashed in by
stricter privacy laws.
This is very disturbing!!!,
but the real clincher is that they can actually sell 'account numbers'
and 'Social Security numbers' to anyone willing to fork out a few bucks.
Until this practice actually affects and starts donning on a few of those
living within the beltway, it's definitely time to use existing laws
as "creatively" as possible to hit 'em right where it hurts,
right in the moneybag!

Granted, I probably won't fill my mattress up for a while at the my current rate, but I sure might sleep better on it.

I too am all for the barter system, as long as no one tries to offer me shares of Wells Fargo or M$ for my work.

[This message has been edited by Chainsaw (edited 11-08-1999).]

[pickel]

Socalgal: I was kinda hip to this years ago.
I donot have a personal checking account just
business. And traded in my credit cards about three years ago. Sometimes it may be a bit inconvient, however once you get used to
dealing with this method and plan ahead, it's not so bad! I have saved I don't know how much in interest( probably enough to buy this computer I'm typing on) and feel immune to the just what was discused(?) in that newspaper article. There is NOTHING you have to have RIGHT NOW. Alot of times you wish you hadn't spent that money and can't return it. But when you see that GREEN coming out of your hand, it's a whole different story. Sorta want to hold on to it a little more. This isn't for everybody but works for me and mine. /forum/smile.gif the pickel

P.S. hope your computer's working OK /forum/biggrin.gif

[U-96]

I'm not sure why people are so surprised. Banks are in business from you being in debt. They hate people in credit. That's why they send you credit and loan applications when you go overdrawn.

In such an amoral climate, is it any surprise that your financial details go to other parties?

Oh btw WW, the UK data protection DOESN'T extend to financial, medical or educational records. All these have loopholes (doctor's privilege, confidentiality etc). Just about everything you would want to keep private.
However the new European (from 1998) legislation is phasing in better controls, including access to information and the right to change/delete incorrect information held. Also, people must "opt-in" to having data stored on them, as opposed to the previous "if we don't hear from you then we'll do it anyway" method.
Believe me, this is a complete headache if you work in fundraising and are trying to unobtrusivley research people's wealth and giving potential. However, we wouldn't stoop as low as to ask a bank for your account details. We ask your friends instead. /forum/smile.gif

U-96

[welsh wizard]

Hi U-96
I was back in U.K. when the intro of that Data protection came in, it made running a business on the computer frustrating as we were inform by the authorities that we had to not only info anyone who was on computer based records that they were on file but also get their permission, what happened did they change the original Act. or were the authorities abusing power again, ( That act was one of the main reason I sead stuffit to Briton and got out, I thought that it was getting to much like a Police State.)
WW

[U-96]

WW, I'm glad someone else has come up against this stuff. It seems that while this government has increased the rights of people to commercial data held on them (e.g. for targetted mailshots, etc), they have tightened up access to police, medical, education and financial records, yet still get away with saying that it protects the consumer.
The argument being used by many libertarians here, is that if I am considered to be a suicide/credit/whatever risk, then I **** well have a right to know that decisions about me are being made based on that information, however true it may be.

The original incentive to improve the DPA came from Europe, in response to the massive increase in electronic data and it's use in automated decision-making. The new law also extends to paper records (e.g. a card catalogue), and specifies "sensitive" areas of information that cannot be held. Again, there are exclusions for national security, police, finance, etc, but at the moment not for charities and non-profits.
We used to hold data on religion, marital status, and sexual preference (among other things) where this information was volunteered or in the public domain. This was very important for us when arranging alumni events, for catering (e.g. kosher), seating plans (x divored y and left for z - you don't want all three sat together!), or to avoid asking an "out" gay person "how the wife/husband and kids are" or "are you getting married" etc. We rely on looking professional when we solicit donations, and all this information helped, being very much a face-to-face line of work, based on relationships.

For the full propsals of the act, go here:

http://www.dataprotection.gov.uk/eurotalk.htm

Oh and we can only trade info with countries with reciprocal data protection law. I think that's just New Zealand and Singapore outside the EU /forum/smile.gif. The US freedom of information thing really messes things up, as we have a US office in NY and we have to be REAL careful what information we send them. Just names and addresses until we get our lawyers to look into it. The problem, as with any new act, is that we don't want to become part of a legal precendent.

U-96

[Ygor]

Telemarketers have had this sort of access for a long time.
What's more, a non-pub number is no help either. City directories may be used to cross link a number with an address, an address with a name.
Police have access to this info for "emergency" purposes too. The problem there is when someone in dispatch or elsewhere is an "ex" or knows someone you want to avoid. You get the picture.

[lance201]

so only do your banking with swiss-Banks!

[Apostle 83]

Welsh, I think that most of the 'free' countries in the world are getting to be police states. I am worried about the U.S. when I hear things like echelon being used on internal e-mails and there is no public outcry or mention on the news that I have seen or heard of. I worry about the U.S. when the government can use fear tactics to manipulate its people into supporting 'gun control' legislation... You people in the U.K. know what that leads to (sorry you can't have guns anymore), and that it doesn't work. And I worry about the U.S., when for over 80 years, an unconstitutional entity has been invading the lives of Americans- the IRS. And now even the post office is gonna get intrusive and charge a 5 cent tax on every e-mail...
Ha, if we had the technology to colonize space, I would be the first guy in line to leave and go where we had freedom!!!!!!!!!!!!
Man, I want to paint my face blue and white, grow my hair long and pop in a turkey feather and some disco!

[U-96]

Sorry guys, way off topic, but I had to respond to Apostle 83, without prejudice, and I just like to give the view from this side of the pond /forum/smile.gif /forum/smile.gif /forum/smile.gif

"Fear tactics" to drum up support for gun control?
Roughly as many Americans are killed by gunshot wounds (criminal, self-inflicted or accidental) every year as were killed in the ENTIRE Vietnam War.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/firearms.htm

In my opinion that is a horrible waste of life. I think the figures speak for themselves.
When there is an armed robbery or shooting in the UK, it's headline news, and people are still freely allowed licensed guns for hunting, sport, etc. It's the home defence and stockpiling for Armageddon element that doesn't (generally) occur here.
That's all gun control means - that you own a gun for a purpose, not a possibility.
Our police are still not routinely armed, although they can be very quickly if required. There are many countries who look to Britain with envy for our approach to law enforcement.

But like anywhere, we still get the odd psycho, and you are right to say that gun control would have little effect of this type of premeditated shooting.

Just my 0.02p

U-96

[Zotzmein]

The want and desire to keep and bear arms in this nation is intrinsic bound in both our history and the fundamental tenets of what it is to be American.

I reject the argument that guns kill people. I’ve yet to read of a single case of a gun developing cognitive thought, in such self-awareness forming the intent to kill and correspondingly act to that end.

Human beings have been killing each other since before the written word. If not guns, then knives, arrows, swords, axes, clubs or even rocks.

Removing guns will not stem the tide of violence in the United States only change the methodology by which our nations growing homicidal appetite is satiated.

Guns are not a contributing factor to our nations growing amoral and violent attitude, they are nothing more than a symptomatology of deeper and more complex sets of issues.

Failure to address the underlying causes to this epidemic would only remove my ability to defend myself from it’s effects.

Regards to All,

Zotz Mein

[welsh wizard]

well I am not sure why we are on guns and not personal data rights,
But I have to agree on some points,
A gun needs an operatator to become a killer, problem is even sane minded people can in the right moment in time be prepared to kill, and thats what a gun was dezigned for.
As for the UK the fact that the Fuzz don't carry guns is a myth, there are many full time armed officers out there, it's just you normal Bobby that doesn't, and even if they don't carry guns UK police still have been known to abuse power, I seem to recal some teenage smuck in a mini being stopped by the North Wales police some years ago ( speeding I think) unknown to the Fuzz someone was video tapeing them and they were caught on camera pulling this kid from his car and beating and kicking ten ton of S**t out of him, this just show how police states start, and once you got them they want every thing that allows control over Joe public.
It's time Joe public started kicking up about there right's, back in the sixty's we dreamed of a perfect world, GSM what the hell happened to my generation that instead of improveing things they contrabuted to the monsters we now live under.
WW

[Zotzmein]

Sorry for the digression WW.

I believe that the two subject are intertwined because they both are credible examples of the erosion of individual rights.

Regards to All,

Zotz Mein

-------------------------------

The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter—the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter!—all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!

William Pitt the Elder (1708–1778), British statesman.

[U-96]

Admirable retorts. Let's see if I can bring this back to the topic. /forum/smile.gif

So far we have:

1) banks sell your details
2) data protection sucks
3) freedom of information sucks
4) the government is bad
5) gun control is bad
6) too many people die
7) UK police are generally unarmed
8) gun control is good
9) UK police are generally armed
10)police are brutal and stupid everywhere

After the various statements have cancelled out, we are left with:

1) banks sell your details
2) governments and police are bad
3) too many people die

Why did I cancel out data protection and freedom of information?
Freedom of Information, like the right to bear arms, is as Zotzmein says, is historically an intrinsic part of what it is to be American. It allows lawful access to pretty much everything that doesn't concern national security. Unfortunately, in this instance that freedom also extends to your financial records, and pretty much anything else about you. It is the same principle that allows exposure of corruption in public office, corporate negligence, etc. Very much a double-edged sword.
In the UK and Europe we appear to have chosen to attack the issue from the other angle, in that the vast majority of information is protected from intrusion. While this generally increases the privacy of the individual (at least protecting them from other individuals - the govt and police can still get what they want), it also makes it harder to expose institutional corruption and negligence.
The majority of EU countries have had scandals in finance, social care, policing, etc, where charges could not be brought because the information was "privileged".

So the question is, can you have freedom of information and data protection? I'm sure the required legislation would keep lawyers busy for decades.

The strange irony is that, at least in Britain, we also have no privacy law, and thus see regular intrusion by trashy tabloid newspapers in the private lives of celebrities and normal citizens on the shaky ground of "public interest". Are the public really interested? Nope, and they mostly don't vote in elections either. Apathy will kill democracy. Bread and circuses. McDonalds and Fox Network.

U-96

Rant over /forum/smile.gif

[welsh wizard]

U-96 The main thing now is what are we going to do about our rights, the more the net grows the more we find out about these abuses of power. ( I noticed that someone started an internet protest over mobo's for AMD support just recently) should we not at least lodge a protest in some way, or are all those flower power children now running the State in way 30 years ago they would been protesting against.
WW

[Zotzmein]

The freedom of an individual or organization to barter, sale, trade, traffic or otherwise distribute the personal information of a individual for profit or gain is a precept of capitalism not democracy.

Individual rights are internal not external. I have the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense but not the right offensively use those arms to kill another. I have the right to privacy but not the right to invade your privacy.

The rights of the individual is philosophically a political consideration not economic. If a government has any job, it’s that of protecting it’s citizenry from individuals, associations or organizations who would subordinate individual rights in the name of commerce or profit.

Regards to All,

Zotz Mein

[pickel]

The name of the game is : Protect yourself
cause no one is going to do it for you.
Example: I called the newspaper today to list
one of my bikes( motorcycles) for sale. The first question the girl asked was " What is your phone number?" I replied and she said
"Well, that's a business phone, I need a home phone." I said this is a home based business. By listing my phone this way (even though we have a intermittent word processing
side line) she had no idea of who I was or
the basis by which any other personal info could be retrieved, until I gave her my name.
My name isn't in the phone book, directory assistance, but I still have a phone ,internet connection and all the other benefits without the hassles. Even residential unlisted numbers aren't really safe. This is just a buffer to those who try toinvade my privacy. Nothing is 100% but this definitely helps.Now about the guns.I don't leave the house without at least one, sometimes two. After my neighbor's nephew was killed by a gang for the purpose of an initiation, I spent my $150and got my carry permit. It has saved one very appeciative lady from being robbed if not worse. If you take the guns from the citizens , that leaves the cops and the robbers. A very dim senerio by any strech of the imagination. At first my wife was quite nervous with me carrying a weapon. But as stories of her friends and co-workers aboutthe reality of life on streets and the resulting episodes of life threathening situations became evident to her she now feels alot safer and at ease since this has become a daily way of life.You don't go to Kroger or K Mart or the Mall around here without being on your toes and eyes wide open.But no one is going to do it for you, as I have said,just like fixing your computer, you have to do by yourself.

[Zotzmein]

Pickel,

Amen!

Regards to All,

Zotz Mein

PS. Ed, I'm a full fledge member!

[This message has been edited by Zotzmein (edited 11-13-1999).]

[U-96]

It had to happen sooner or later. Hacking is now a terrorist act and you will be compelled to give your passwords over to the police. Like they know what to do with them /forum/smile.gif
http://www.newsunlimited.co.uk/politics/story/0,3604,103641,00.html

WW, in response to your question, "what is to be done", I don't have an answer.
Rights are something we all take for granted. The right to pray and vote how you want is something that is alien to a large proportion of the world's population, let alone the right to privacy or the right to own a gun.

What concerns me most about the development of IT and its intrusion into our lives is that the programmers that produce such applications have no morality.

Doctors, surgeons, even the police and politicians ostensibly have some kind of institutional and even personal moral code. To protect life, to uphold the law, whatever.

The governmental and commercial instigators in this insidious data-collection are not programmers, they hire them. If more programmers had it within them (and there are many that do) to say "no way, that is against my principles" then maybe someone would get the message. Unfortunately there will always be those who will take the money.

U-96

"Harmony through ethical computing"

[Ygor]

Even Barney Fife has a computer nowadays. Most police would have a good idea of what to do with a password, or have access to those who would.
I really have no problem with guns myself. It's the bullets...

[Chainsaw]

I was recently also made aware that the information that you have to give the state to get your drivers license is currently being sold to the highest bidder in some states. Thus further blurring the boundaries of what may have once been considered an area of trust.

[This message has been edited by Chainsaw (edited 11-15-1999).]