Visualisation Problem
From Drcampaign
Media (print, web, tv) loves pictures, and visualisations, and stories, and parables, and metaphors, and so on... But our topics and concerns usually lacks of all these: they are abstract, virtual, pictureless. They are based on subjective feelings of privacy, human rights, free speech, free mind, democracy,... You can't count them or convert them into money.
Thats why I think, we should provide such material, to make it easier for the media to cover our topics, and transport our concerns and ideas.
If we know what we like to transport, we may be able to create/buy/photoshop such things, and use it for media, banners, articles, ect...
--Atrox 18:37, 6 Aug 2005 (CEST)
Some ideas
- Greedy data collection
- reconstruction of private lives, habits, friends, social networks, interrests...
- Criminals that do just fine, Anthony Soprano using a public coin operated payphone comes to mind (does anyone besides me watch the wire? (http://www.hbo.com/thewire/))
I've seen some really good stories concerning this in usenet recently. Here's a short-cut to one of the better ones by Cor: http://afluisterland.nl/cor (unfortunately the thread is in Dutch and might be somewhat technical here or there, but I think it visualizes a lot for those who aren't familiar with the implications of these ridiculous plans) --Julius 14:39, 9 Aug 2005 (CEST)
It is important to raise awareness on how innocent citizens would be affected by data retention. Cases of erroneous police action taken on the basis of traffic data should be described. There have been unjustified searches in Sweden as well as arrests in Austria and the US because of misleading or misinterpreted traffic data. Collecting communications data creates a large number of potential suspects for crimes (e.g. people who happed to be in contact with a suspected criminal, people who happed to be close to the site of a crime). In Germany, hundreds of people who found themselves close to the site of a crime with their mobile phones switched on were questioned by the police later on. There will be no substantial protests against data retention unless people realise how they would personally be affected. --Youthful 08:24, 11 Aug 2005 (CEST)
netkwesties.nl has the story (http://www.netkwesties.nl/editie124/artikel1.html)(in dutch) of a dutch woman who was was arrested un suspicion of threatening someone over the phone. The short story seems to be that the police thought that the number of the threatening caller was from an mobile phone subscription instead of a much closer to anonymous pre-paid mobile phone account. It may be because of this that they didn`t bother to check if the poor woman really owned the phone that was used. They just went ahead and made an arrest, early in the morning, using four cars. In the article the victim speculates that the reason that her name appeared in the registration details of the mobile phone used for the threatening phone call is that her personal details were taken from a stolen wallet. She was let go after questioning becouse if the investigative officers impression of her. Had she failed to keep her cool during the questioning and perhaps had a diffrend background/religion/skin color then the story might have been diffrend.
This is shows one of the huge misconceptions in the debate arount traffic data collection. It isn`t about storing who communicates with who, its about storing what (phone network, computer network) communicates with what.
This should make the point that the billing information of communication providers is intended to be used for billing. If the billing fails because of mistakes or fraud with this billing information then communication providers simply discontinue their service to the associated account. There is no need for communication service providers to ensure that this billing data (if they have it) can be used to find out the people responsible for the use of the communication service. As long as the bills are paid service providers don`t care who or what pays them. Neither do they care if the paying entity has any connection to any of the people who can or do use the communication service. Ofcourse if the cases where the billing data didn`t match with the personal data of the communicating parties were all random flukes there would be no problem. The problems start when there are people who have a motive to avoid having the bills of their communication service send to the address where they sleep, or perhaps having their communication attributed to a specific person...
I recall the story of an American court case where an expert witness or lawyer claimed that an IP address is like a social security number... I can think of no better picture of the identity problem than asking the question: "when you make a phone call, do you dial a social security number, or maybe a number identifying something other than than the person you try to reach?". And what is the first thing you do when answering the phone? Most Europeans state their name, except the British who expect the calling party to ask for a name.
Also a great trick, ask proponents of data retention what person clicked the send button of the spam e-mail they receive. Remember to point out that much of the spam may come from the home pc`s of unsuspecting ordinairy people who unknowingly installed spyware or got infected with a worm. If spammers can send e-mail through your grandmothers home-pc, what is to stop the terrorists/criminals from doing so?--Bsd 00:36, 30 Aug 2005 (CEST)
I think it is good to focus on the specific fears that come with the stored and accessible data, such as lack of privacy:
- A routine police alcohol control, where the officer asks: You are sure you have not been drinking? You withdrew some money this afternoon and afterwards you went to this party, where you stayed 4 hours. And you sounded a bit gigly over your cell phone...
- The tabloids being full of stories about some unknown person: "What was Mr Jones doing at this party?", "Love baby for Mr Jones?". Feel like a movie star. Have your data stored.
Or over-reacting: A nice "picture within picture": A child is playing a first-person shooter and yelling all sorts of mean language to the characters in the video game. Just as he is aiming for a bad guy in the game, his door is kicked in by a squad of digital police calling him a terrorist with the same mean language.
Or unequal treatment:
- Like a trade union leader or a leader of a minority political party who behaves like a movie star, as he knows he is followed everywhere and hopes he can get the digital police voting for him.
- A stalker that has quit stalking. "It's too easy nowadays, you see. I applied for a job as a digital watcher and I can see so much more of her now. And there's no way of escaping me anymore." --DonQuichote 11:17, 5 Sep 2005 (CEST)
Images
- Imitate the Mastercard Campaign (A night in the Pub - A refill in a gas station - An incident on the way - Getting arrested on next day - unpayable)
- A picture of a bad guy using a wireless connection which is not secured
The Advent Of Fascism
In my opinion, this is only the beginning of a new fascistic era. It's coming step by step, very slowly. I mean, the occasional abuse of the data by authorities is not a real threat. It might not happen often enough to be significant.
What I'm afraid is to come, is the use of these techniques for control of all sorts of 'crime'. Then it's only a matter of what is considered criminal. Think of political opposition, subversion, engaging in campaigns like this, using drugs, etc. The bad thing is, that once there is a law it will be hard to stop it.
People have to be taught that soon everyone who acts against the mainstream or takes their own little freedoms, may be considered a terrorist or an organized criminal. Who of you obeys (or even knows!) all the laws? How many of you pedestrians ignore red lights when there is no vehicle on the road? How many of you steal the newspaper on sundays? How many go protesting in the streets? How many have political discussions with their friends while they smoke dope they just ordered the day before at their fellow dealers via cell phone?
I'm afraid that most 'ordinary' people will call such moderately subversive behaviour undesireable and therefore will welcome their new fascistic governments. Do I sound negative?
How can the threat of fascism (even of a subtle type!) be communicated? What can I tell someone why this kind of freedom has to be defended?
