ifling

Associated Press reports today (July 10th, 2008) President Bush signed a new law giving immunity from prosecution to telecommunication companies for their part in warrant less wire tapping. According to Democrats.Com 73% of Americans object to this as a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which reads:

http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/114

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Fourth Amendment only applies to governmental actors. It does not guarantee a right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures conducted by private citizens or organizations. And this current bill applies freedom from prosecution to corporations that under American law exist as individuals, so the current bill does not violate the Fourth amendment as it would seem to be interpreted.

But as I perceive the objections to this bill it is that people feel their privacy is being violated. Well, first, the Constitution grants no right to privacy. But what if it did? According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project 75% of Americans say they own cell phones. Cell phones which work on radio waves that can be intercepted with pretty basic equipment. Shortwave radios have been known to pick up cell phone transmissions, so what privacy can you truly expect when you are talking on one? I don’t even need to go that far to break down your so called right to privacy. How many times have you sat and listened to someone else’s life unfolding in a restaurant, while shopping, or on a public sidewalk. And have you always scrupulously removed yourself from a public place to use your phone, or do you wait until you are in your car?

http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/300/press_release.asp

Would that be your GPS equipped car? Or your GPS equipped phone? From either of which you can be easily located almost anywhere on Earth unless you intend to live in a cave and do nothing but watch cable TV. Of course there is a phenomenon of living in constant darkness where time seems to stretch out, or compress and you lose touch with the actual time of day as determined by the position of the sun in the sky, so you may have to TIVO some of your favorite shows to make sure you get to see them. Oh, you didn’t know that TIVO is sending information back to your cable provider about what shows you watch, what commercials you watch, what commercials you skip? Well, it is.

I have sat in a public place with my Bluetooth equipped cell phone, or PDA and just for having nothing better to do, scanned for other bluetooth devices that were within range, and turned on. Want to know what I found? Can you even buy a laptop computer that is not equipped with wireless transmission anymore? Can you go into a library or a coffee shop that does not offer you a wireless hook up? I see there are entire cities attempting to, or offering wireless service city wide. All these transmissions are interceptible.

When was the last time you shopped on Amazon, or ordered a movie from Netflix? Have you ever noticed in the recommendations based on what choices you make often contain movies you have already seen or books you have already read? That same software evaluates every advertisement you look at on the internet, everything you click on, and targets you with the advertisements you are most likely to respond to. But that is just a convenience so you don’t have to go looking for the things you want, they will come to you.

In the county I live in , I can get online and tell anyone else in the county how much they paid for their property, what the taxes are, who is named on the mortgage. I bet I can do it where you live. Your credit card company watches everything you buy, and every place you buy it. They do this so when something anomalous happens, like your card being used in New York City a few hours after you used it in Seattle, they can alert you that you have been a victim of identity theft. (This happened to me.) Yes it is a protection, but is it a violation of privacy?

Walk through a grocery store, or get online to any blog site and see how many newspapers, magazines, and blog articles are based on what the celebrity of the hour is having at Starbucks, and who they are having it with. Paparazzi make thousands of dollars for just the right picture that will show up on the cover of one tabloid or another, or any of a score of TV shows dedicated to, and reaping huge profits from the invasion of privacy of celebrities. Some people call it investigative journalism. If I were among the celebrity crowd I would be laughing on the floor at the average American whining about invasions of privacy.

In the end, I expect when the government receives all these recordings what they will mostly get is thousands of hours of people asking “Can you hear me now?” So they better regulate the coverage that cell providers offer, and the quality of service if they want to get anything out of this bill.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS