Hi Michael,
I have no problem moving some aspects of the discussion about the
implications of an architecture on currently funded efforts. But
clearly I am proposing an architecture that supports real-time
requirements legitimized by any/FISA court orders so we appear to be
vigorously agreeing that the (what is it, 5 years?) retention regime
currently authorized is absurd and poses much opportunity for evil
and criminal activity. You're appearing to hand-wave though, saying
let the ISP do it -- okay, how? The 4th Amendment requires personal
specificity, not IP specificity, which is all one can get with
current Internet architecture (and hence the need to track all
activity of all IPs and hence the need for Utah). Privacy as I
mentioned fundamentally requires personally identifying one's
privacy expectations, just what the 4th is all about, though IANAL
but just a lowly architect.
But let's note that privacy
expectations must definitely INCLUDE whether I wish to allow
Google or anyone else to search my content for keywords. In other
words, it would be a crime for Google to index content that I deem
private. A punishable crime, as it should be, in my opinion.
Frankly this is why I started the thread Is Big Data an invasion
of privacy? because actually delivering privacy has profound
implications for the private sector as well. The current
mechanism, robot.txt, is a complete joke in the context of privacy
protections enforced by the rule of law.
/jmc
On 1/18/2014 9:43 AM, Michael Brunnbauer wrote:
Hello John,
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 09:23:45AM -0800, John McClure wrote:
What does the data center being built in Utah portend to you? Are not
its disk drives *yet another nuclear arsenal*, a physical infrastructure
*forever* a source of illegitimate power?
Yes they are.
So please if you
have an idea for a better architecture that eliminates the need for that
data center, please suggest.
There is no need for that data center. It should be dismantled right now.
If the state want's to snoop on anyone, they should do it in real time -
without long term data retention. And they should have to go through the ISP,
telephone company, cloud provider, whatever.
Do you think they would stop searching the traffic for keywords or other
general patterns if anonymous communication is made impossible ? Very probably
not.
This part of the thread is quite off topic. Maybe we should move off-list if
you want to argue some more :-)
Regards,
Michael Brunnbauer
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
|
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01)
|