Privacy

[Havoc]

Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security. - Benjamin Franklin

Shit has once again hit the fan over here because of our idiotic government parties. As of next month, whenever applying for a new identification document, you are forced to supply two of your fingerprints which are stored on a chip inside the ID and in a national database. Yes that's right. The entire country is forced to give up their fingerprints.

If I didn't have my entire life in this country I would move out of this place in a heartbeat. In a few years we'll have no privacy left.

Your opinions? How much do you value your privacy and how much of it would you give up for extra security?

[Wil]

I still don’t know how to think about invasion of privacy. Obviously I’m leaning heavily towards the proponents of liberty, but I can’t get riled about government workers eavesdropping my phone calls until I consider how much of a waste of resources it must be. If some stranger wants to listen to my stilted chats about nothing interesting, they can go for it. Likewise, if they really want a database of fingerprints that’s going to be useful, I couldn’t care less. They’re products of genes and stochasticity, and I can’t say I’m attached to them in any way but literally, so phrasing it in such a way as to conjure up imagery of a squad of bureaucrats lasering all patterns off my skin only weakens your stance, I feel.

Because as much as it might come across poignant to suggest the government is stealing our identity and individuality, the key issue as far as I can tell is that the governments just don’t trust their own citizens, and rather imply that we shouldn’t trust each other either. Not to come across as naïve as to assume that there aren’t dangerous people, but the answer to this is growing to be a case of treating everyone like a potential culprit of some dreadful but undisclosed act. I want an authority that’s going to watch my back, and I hope they’ll keep abreast of technology to do so, but I don’t want constant surveillance or permanent records of it, because that’s going to leave me and everyone else open to retrospective criminalization. Especially if some arse racist/homophobic creeps like the BNP seize power.

There was actually a series of adverts recently giving people a number to call if they discovered a suspicious combination of discarded chemical bottles on one their nightly rummages through the neighbours’ bins. It’s nice that such a number exists, just in case, but prominent displays that implore us to be suspicious of everyone around us will fuel existing prejudices and scare people into thinking threats are so much greater and more impending than we might casually assume that, it turns out, we really do need the government establishing biometric databases of everything ever, damn the expense to education, health and benefits.

To summarize, I’ve an ‘I’ve got nothing to hide’ argument that doesn’t come with a ‘so I’ve got nothing to worry about’ conclusion, but I’ve also a distaste for phrases like ‘we’ll have no privacy left’ that sound like Helen Lovejoy screeching something about children, or maybe the tagline of a very bad movie that’s jumping aboard the TOTALITARIAN BAD bandwagon for no reason but to head towards the goldmines. Benjamin Franklin’s quote also makes him sound like a cock. Who, specifically, is he proposing we strip of liberty and security? Because I’m sure I wouldn’t agree.

[Bullet Magnet]

Fingerprints seem to be the more innocuous of security measurements they could have chosen.

We've got to remember that no government or government agency has anything like the resources we like to imagine they do, which is why we see advertising tactics designed to persuade people to do their jobs for them. That's the real problem, if it paints a picture where everyone around you is hiding something that could kill you.

Truly the terrorists are winning. They don't have to do anything more at this point, we'll self destruct without any more of their input.

[Havoc]

Well it's a combination of things, don't forget that. Just because you have nothing to hide doesn't mean it's a good idea to give everyone complete insight in your life. We've begun to get very digital with personal info lately. Somewhere next year we'll have a personalized card for public transport, which could mean that any law enforcing agency could check where you've been traveling and when.
Internet histories are being kept by providers so agencies can check what you've been doing online.
On a daily basis I probably show up on at least two dozen security cameras in stores and on the street. Combined with my financial records an agency has the ability (if they wanted to use it) to trace my life to the tiniest detail. Down to the flavour of ice cream I bought five days ago at the train station in Amsterdam while wearing my brown leather jacket.

My concern is not about there being a record of all these things but the large abuse potential it has. For now it's about security and catching bad guys. In 10 years shit could hit the fan and those systems that were once meant to protect us now function as a digital prison.

China for example. Speak bad about the government on the internet and they will track you down and lock you up. And that's just the internet.

World War II is another nice example. How do you think the Nazi's managed to pin down every jew in the country? Because all they had to do was open a book and find every single registered jew in the country complete with phone number and adres.

[Bullet Magnet]

It's a bit rich to complain about that in a world of Facebook, MySpace and Twitter.

[used:)]

I can't believe you're comparing Holland to China and Nazi Germany.

This doesn't sound that bad. It sounds good to me, actually. If everyone's fingerprints are on a database, that seems like it should make criminal investigation a lot easier, or at least scare criminals out of the country before they have to give up their fingerprints.

This comes from someone who lives in a country whose government invaded its people's privacy by wire-tapping and checking their emails. I don't doubt there's a collective decline of civilization, but it isn't because of an invisibile governmental dystopia, it's like what BM said, the public is growing more infantilized and paranoid due to overprotection and the nonexistant shitstorm the media makes the world out to be on a daily basis. It's a combination of people being people and the profit-motivated higher-ups that are willing to do anything in the public's favor if it makes them money. It's a problem that exacerbates itself.

[Daxter King]

As Used said, it really doesn't sound that bad. I know atleast in Texas when you get your drivers license they have to get your thumbprints.

[ArtemisPanthar]

I don't see a problem with fingerprinting - in fact, it seems quite beneficial. I can't really conceive of a way it can be used as a detriment that can't already happen. If someone (especially a government official or a cop) wants to frame you for a crime, they have the resources to get your fingerprints "legitimately".
The thing is, fingerprinting is used to find criminals but it does fuckall in finding criminals who have never been arrested (like most serial killers).

And at least you know about it. If someone really wants your fingerprints, its not that hard to obtain - you leave it everywhere.

That said, I agree with Bullet Magnet. The most dangerous thing a government can do is foster an atmosphere of paranoia. Society can do much more damage itself than any one organization - Nazi Germany wouldn't have been nearly as successful in their butchery and hate-mongering if the Germans at the time weren't convinced of how evil the Jews were and that the only way to protect themselves was to turn in any Jew they found. But it was OK, because they were evil and trying to hurt everyone else.

[Havoc]

I can't believe you're comparing Holland to China and Nazi Germany.

I'm not. I was naming examples of places where private information is used for much more then just keeping the peace.

As far as the fingerprinting goes, this means that if I'm out having a drink at a bar and go home, and some douchebag shoots someone in that same bar, police will be at MY door (even though I wasn't even there at the time of the shooting) because they found my fingerprint in the bar amongst all the debris.

And you might say 'well but that's only for a more efficient manhunt'. Yes that may be, but you also have to consider that unless you've been ruled out you're a potential murder suspect, just for having a drink in a bar.

I'm all for more efficient crime control but not if it means having the police on my doorstep everytime a crime goes on somewhere I happened to be less then 24 hours ago. Automatically being a suspect because of my fingerprint being there is not something I'm very comfortable with. Because you just know that's going to go wrong with someone eventually.

[Wil]

That’s a daft example. The police would want to know all the information they can from anyone present around the time of the incident. The police would look to you as a potential witness, not a potential murderer. Unless there comes to be an actual increase in false accusations and arrests I don’t think police coming to your door is something you should worry about. You should take the opportunity to help them with their investigation.

[AlexFili]

While I do like there to be CCTV cameras in every public place, I couldn't cope with a CCTV camera in every single room of my house. I need some... 'privacy time'.

[Wil]

I feel this is appropriate:

http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../05/22/1714245

Or perhaps inappropriate.