Daily Archives: December 22, 2007

Feel safe yet? The latest from Big Brother

It may sound alarmist to some, but there's been some rather chilling developments in the realm of public surveillance lately that you should know about. There's plans from the Department of Homeland Security for a spy satellite program, which they assure us, "won't be used to spy on Americans".

Even more chilling, like something out of the sci-fi flick "Minority Report" is the WaPo story that lets us know about a new program that the FBI is up to:

The FBI is embarking on a $1 billion effort to build the world's largest computer database of peoples' physical characteristics, a project that would give the government unprecedented abilities to identify individuals in the United States and abroad.

More below the jump… 

What this means is a huge database of people's individual characteristics:

Digital images of faces, fingerprints and palm patterns are already flowing into FBI systems in a climate-controlled, secure basement here. Next month, the FBI intends to award a 10-year contract that would significantly expand the amount and kinds of biometric information it receives. And in the coming years, law enforcement authorities around the world will be able to rely on iris patterns, face-shape data, scars and perhaps even the unique ways people walk and talk, to solve crimes and identify criminals and terrorists. The FBI will also retain, upon request by employers, the fingerprints of employees who have undergone criminal background checks so the employers can be notified if employees have brushes with the law.

So between the satellite and the biometrics database, where will one be able to go without risk of being watched? It seems like our options are increasingly limited. And of course, it's all being done in the name of "fighting terrorism". The technology is still somewhat new, and far from accurate, but even if it were 100% accurate, would that make you feel any better?

Another chilling aspect is that usually, when one applies for a sensitive job (such as certain federal positions or jobs that involve children or the elderly), often fingerprints are taken to ensure that the applicant is not a criminal, and then these prints are destroyed or returned. That's apparently changing, as well:

But the FBI is planning a "rap-back" service, under which employers could ask the FBI to keep employees' fingerprints in the database, subject to state privacy laws, so that if that employees are ever arrested or charged with a crime, the employers would be notified.

It really seems that the government is intent on collecting as much information on you as possible.You have nothing to worry about as long as you're not a terrorist, right? 

Locally directed investment …

(This diary seems to have started a good discussion.   – promoted by JulieWaters)

and our Governor.

In light of another now very long thread talking about investment and whether it should/can be directed rather than allowed to flow freely where investment wants to go:

“FairPoint’s financial projections fail to take into account risks that have the potential to lead to a reduction in service quality, to less investment in the Vermont infrastructure, and to slower deployment of broadband services than is acceptable.”

“But for these financial risks, we would approve the merger,” the board members wrote. “Therefore, we will leave this docket open for a period of time to allow FairPoint and Verizon to modify their proposal.”

(Verizon-Fairpoint deal denied, Times Argus, 12/22/07)

Is it okay to insist Fairpoint meet a level of certainty regarding re-investment into Vermont?

If so, then why shouldn’t we expect our state’s various investment funds do the same?