I wonder if private carriers, e.g. FedEx, are also under surveillance.
U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
121–130 of 242 posts
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it isn't, that was going on all through the Cold War. It's just more efficient now. This isn't just a government problem either; people in europe are at least as unhappy about firms like Google and Facebook warehousing their data, but at least over in Europe they have robust privacy laws that service providers have to comply with. See for example these stories, in which (some) American users express puzzlement ove…
Interesting points. One thing all of this brings to mind is that we appear to be nearing a crossroads (perhaps we've already passed it). That is, we'll have to very soon decide en masse whether we are OK with the demise of privacy or not. This is irrespective of whether our privacy is lost to companies, government, or both. Because it seems that by default, people are simply becoming accustomed to a world without per…
I don't think we're seeing the demise of personal privacy. For most of American history, "privacy" meant that what happened in the walls of your home or in the confines of some other private place remained private. You could expect privacy in your house and your coat pocket and in conversations you had with people in a private setting. And by and large, that's still the case. If you live on a farm like most people did in 1789 and go into town once a week to get supplies you pay for with cash, the government doesn't really have any data on you today that it didn't have back then.
Rather, what we're seeing is these conceptions of "private spaces" not being abstracted and extended to the new media people use to communicate (cell phones, e-mail, Facebook, etc). You might analogize between your GDrive account and the contents of your desk drawer, but that doesn't seem to be the model we're heading towards.
And I think the fundamental reason for that is the nature of the technology, not the law. A teenager might post a snarky comment on Facebook which back in the day he would have said out loud in the locker room, but that analogy doesn't change the fact that back then, the only people who heard that kid were other kids in the locker room, while today there are thousands of people with access to that data as it travels over some cell phone network to Facebook's data center to be permanently recorded forever. The internet is really not designed to keep communications over it secret or private in any way, and platforms like Google and Facebook are built on exposing as much private information about users as possible.
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe you view the scanning of the outside of people's letters differently now... but it's not a new story and the article says as much. I guess it's the context of an all-pervasive spying culture that lends it a new relevance. And who cares if it's "new". We might only realise the relevance of an old story years later. We might only realise a whistleblower was telling the truth after years of dismissing their tall…
No need to attack my character. I deleted the comment immediately after writing it because I decided it contributes to the thing I'm complaining about, which is many front page stories full of repetitive comment threads that are only tangentially related to the linked story and contain little new information or insight.
Fair enough. Usually I would probably agree with you. But in this case, I feel the "reaction comments" are important. The reaction is going to be the main story, after all.
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at it from a purely numerical standpoint. How much is lost when a teenager buys a $100 pair of Ralph Lauren jeans when a pair that is identical in all but brand-name could be produced for $20 or so? That is the opportunity cost of that money to that kid? Military technology kills a few people (large harms to a few people), but advertising diverts vast amounts of money towards industries where it is easy to take…
Using war or the threat of war to apprehend peace is antithetical to pacifism. I'm not sure what the American populace's purported will has to do with my view that war and its antecedents are revolting. Certainly you aren't suggesting that building these things is patriotic duty for a US citizen?
I think Rayiner is a consequentialist (as I am) - judging by quality of outcomes. This doesn't work for everything (since we lack foresight), so I'm a reluctant deontologist, in general; but lacking an obvious or enforceable ontology, consequentialism all the way, baby.
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#125About seven years ago, I was at a sushi bar and struck up a conversation with an older gentleman sitting next to me. He told me he was a developer and created systems for USPS. I am always fascinated by the technology used in large scale systems so I picked his brain for a good hour. From what I recall, he said at the key distribution centers, USPS scans every single mail (in standard envelop sizes) and in under a se…
this was a Linux system, I remember reading the articles taking about it (but it's been a while)...
That one was for machine-printed addresses. I had the luck to hire the lead on that project in 1997 or 1998. The interview consisted of "teach me how that works."
Edit: Ah, after we worked together it looks as if he went back to pick up the hand-written addresses as well: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2985
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it isn't, that was going on all through the Cold War. It's just more efficient now. This isn't just a government problem either; people in europe are at least as unhappy about firms like Google and Facebook warehousing their data, but at least over in Europe they have robust privacy laws that service providers have to comply with. See for example these stories, in which (some) American users express puzzlement ove…
Interesting points. One thing all of this brings to mind is that we appear to be nearing a crossroads (perhaps we've already passed it). That is, we'll have to very soon decide en masse whether we are OK with the demise of privacy or not. This is irrespective of whether our privacy is lost to companies, government, or both. Because it seems that by default, people are simply becoming accustomed to a world without per…
I fully agree. In the short term, I'd urge particular attention to the US-EU Free Trade Agreement talks that are underway at present. I'm strongly in favor of an FTA, but I think there's a lot to be learned from how the disparity between the US and EU laws on privacy are handled therein.
Over the long term, I really do think a constitutional amendment is necessary, which is a 10-year project at minimum.
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#127If you need to send an anonymous letter - hopefully for good (say, whistle blowing) and not evil - you can still do so. Use a fake return address (duh). Drive to a mailbox far away from your work or home. Pick a mailbox that has no security cameras. Don't go into a Post Office, where there will be security cameras. Turn off your phone before going anywhere near the drop location. (This is all coming from a PBS docume…
MI5 had a nickname of "Box" or "Box500" because postal mail was sent to "PO Box 500".
The letter would be put in an envelope. That envelope would be addressed with a department (but not a name). That envelope would then be put in another envelope. The outside envelope would be sent to Box 500.
It is kind of weird that in the 21st century we're re-learning ancient tradecraft from retired spies.
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#128Maybe I'm alone here, but I never had an expectation of privacy in regards to what I write on the outside of a envelope and drop into a public receptacle (mailbox). I expect the contents to be considered highly private, but not the outside. There's also this issue of willing disclosure of information to an entity. When I put a stamp on something and drop it in the mailbox, I know I'm handing that information over to…
Scope matters.
It’s quite different to assume that people can look at the outside of any particular letter, than it is to assume that people are building a database of all your mail, and doing social network analysis on it.
The results of the 2 actions are radically different, with radically different amounts of information gleaned.
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#129Everytime I read things like this, I'm wondering why the US still has no strong Pirate Party.
(Yes, I know, Winner-takes-it-all-2-party-system..)
Are you guys not getting fed up at some point? Land of the free, please be it again.
Re: U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement
#130Could you not just refrain from writing a return address on your mail? Or instead, put down a false return address? In that case there'd be no tracking of who is mailing whom, but instead just how many letters someone is receiving.
Yes, and for most private mail that's perfectly fine as long as there is adequate postage. People who are required to furnish an accurate return address include senders of prepaid mail (you know, where it's printed on the envelope with a number), distributers of periodicals, senders of priority and registered mail, and a few other similar examples.