June 21, 2013--Privacy v. Secrecy
Ironically, as Americans feel their constitutional right to privacy increasingly impeached by government surveillance programs, the government is losing its ability to maintain secrecy.
And for the same reasons.
Because of the availability of "big data" and the ability to access it--massive computer networks' ability to sweep in trillions of gigabytes of information; information available from telephone and medical records; Internet searches; on-line purchases; and what individuals in giddy ways reveal about their own interests, "likes,"and networks of friends, with all of this information available, it makes it both relatively easy and irresistible for our government to snoop along the digital trail we are all, knowingly or not, blazing.
With the fear and threat of terrorism as the justification, the federal government, as we now know, using unimaginable computer capacities and the ocean of information surrounding and emanating from virtually all of us, has been using the power Congress granted it to do virtually whatever it deems necessary to keep us safe, very much including, with a secret court's permission, listening in on cell phone calls, reading e- and physical mail, assuming anyone any longer drops important letters in mailboxes.
To do this clandestine work effectively, it needs to be done secretly. But the big data and computer systems the government mines and uses to keep track of potential threats and conspiracies can be turned against that very effort and, as we now also know, is equally as impeachable as the right to privacy.
A relatively inconsequential clerk working for government contractor, Booze Allen, with a few keystrokes on his computer in Hawaii, in seconds downloaded thousands of documents that exposed the range of government surveillance programs and the ways in which they operate.
And then he released much of this classified information to the public, thus ending the secrecy necessary for these anti-terrorist programs to thrive.
So along with our privacy, equally jettisoned is the government's ability to keep things secret.
It doesn't get much more ironic than this. And scary.
And for the same reasons.
Because of the availability of "big data" and the ability to access it--massive computer networks' ability to sweep in trillions of gigabytes of information; information available from telephone and medical records; Internet searches; on-line purchases; and what individuals in giddy ways reveal about their own interests, "likes,"and networks of friends, with all of this information available, it makes it both relatively easy and irresistible for our government to snoop along the digital trail we are all, knowingly or not, blazing.
With the fear and threat of terrorism as the justification, the federal government, as we now know, using unimaginable computer capacities and the ocean of information surrounding and emanating from virtually all of us, has been using the power Congress granted it to do virtually whatever it deems necessary to keep us safe, very much including, with a secret court's permission, listening in on cell phone calls, reading e- and physical mail, assuming anyone any longer drops important letters in mailboxes.
To do this clandestine work effectively, it needs to be done secretly. But the big data and computer systems the government mines and uses to keep track of potential threats and conspiracies can be turned against that very effort and, as we now also know, is equally as impeachable as the right to privacy.
A relatively inconsequential clerk working for government contractor, Booze Allen, with a few keystrokes on his computer in Hawaii, in seconds downloaded thousands of documents that exposed the range of government surveillance programs and the ways in which they operate.
And then he released much of this classified information to the public, thus ending the secrecy necessary for these anti-terrorist programs to thrive.
So along with our privacy, equally jettisoned is the government's ability to keep things secret.
It doesn't get much more ironic than this. And scary.
posted by Steven Zwerling at
5:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home