Colleges protest upgrade of Internet scrutiny — More government intrusion into our lives.
The federal government, vastly extending the reach of an 11-year-old law, is requiring hundreds of universities, online communications companies and cities to overhaul their Internet computer networks to make it easier for law enforcement authorities to monitor e-mail and other online communications.
The action, which the government says is intended to help catch terrorists and other criminals, has unleashed protests and the threat of lawsuits from universities, which argue that it will cost them at least $7 billion while doing little to apprehend lawbreakers.
via R20 who adds:
So how long before someone develops a rogue Internet that everyone will secretly log into for free speech matters a’la Snow Crash and the Matrix? It’s like we’re adopting China’s Internet policy!
Why don’t they just use eWatch? — Here’s a service that will make your skin crawl.
eWatch says it monitors “thousands of editorial-based sites on the Web,” as well as “more than 63,000 Usenet groups and Electronic Mailing Lists.” Furthermore it “monitors hundreds of public discussion areas on AOL and CompuServe” and the finance/investor bulletin boards on Yahoo!, Motley Fool and Silicon Investor.
So if you”re ticked off about that refrigerator you bought at an e-commerce site from a giant manufacturer, or the brokerage-recommended stock you bought that tanked three days later, and you go online to complain about it, watch out. You are now an “anti-corporate activist,” as it has come to be known in the PR trade.
At eWatch, client companies submit keywords (which are then monitored) and eWatch forwards the results to clients. “Every report lists activity for each day, including a brief analysis, an executive summary and the full text of all of the clips we gathered,” the company says.
Tracking so-called “perpetrators” is also part of the service…
Computers are unreliable. If I was planning something illegal, which I’m not, I wouldn’t use a computer. I blame this nonsense on the government IT vendors. They make all these claims to sell stuff and some agency gets a new system and all of a sudden people start getting ideas. A classic example is the FBI virtual case file system. The government spent $150 million or something and all they got was a worthless pile of crap. There must of been a hell of a sales push. It’s like they want a system that let’s them know about the crime before it happens and somebody is selling that. Just buy more laptops and servers and crime will drop. Did you see the nuts fighting over cheap laptops at Walmart yesterday? It’s like that, except you have huge IT budgets and a million and one people pretending that they can help you control the world with a keyboard and LCD display. There were computers put into local police cars a couple of years back and nothing ever worked right. I can just imagine what was spent on that.
It was ironic that the police cars were falling apart and being run with bald tires. All you need to do to get ahold of law enforcement is pick up a phone and call 911. It’s not like you need to have millions of police online or maybe you do. Child predators are a problem, because people buy their little idiot rugrats PC’s and put them online.
That’s a social problem and police aren’t real good at solving social problems. Being an idiot with children isn’t a crime.
Jim,
I agree with your first paragraph but not the second. Computers in Police Cars have helped a lot. When the police stop a car, the officer enters the car plate number for a check on the registration The driver’s license may also be entered the same way. In a very short time answers come back about if the car is stolen or the driver is wanted. Before, the officer would have to find a hole in the radio communication, call the station, get the radio operator’s attention, verbally give the plate number and the driver’s license number, wait while someone looked up the information manually and got back to the officer. Much faster and more exact. When an officer is dispatched to an address, the process is again much faster and more exact. A side benefit is the police cars and officers may be tracked at all times so supervisors know where they are.
My six yr old has had her own computer since she was two. She now goes on line to play computer games at Nick Jr., and Disney. My wife has even hooked her up with her NeoPet. I will be vigilant about teaching her what to stay away from as she searches the Internet. Our computers are all in the same room with the monitors against the walls facing into the room. It is the deviants out there that are the problem though, not my daughter being on line.
I also think that the police are poor at solving crimes extending outside their jurisdiction or even district. We need the a Federal Police to handle national crimes from the Internet and identity theft.
As for ewatch.
I don’t use my name when I am online. Here is a good reason why. Damn, that is a scary thought that someone is cataloging discussions across the web to identify certain people. And its not run by the government which means it must be working.
Just to add to Pat’s note: If it’s in the budget, most jurisdictions have their networks [especially including patrol car laptops] set for quick access to the NCIC, National Crime Information Center.
That’s why you often read of some thug stopped for a routine traffic check being arrested for 17 axe murders 3 states away.
Yes, there also is a “political” component to the those records.
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/ncic.htm and read on down to the bottom of the page and notice ” On-line Ad-hoc Inquiry”.
I find it facinating that librarians might be the ones who finally draw the line in the sand against government intrusion in our lives.
For a while I thought it would be rural gun owning conservatives but, for some reason, they totally gave up that issue when Bush got elected.
Maybe it will be librarians who declare “enough is enough.”
Add your name to the list here.
Well I think is time I invent a new language to talk to my friends with, so that the government can’t eavesdrop my conversations of my private life.
“Yes, there also is a “political” component to the those records.”
Please expand on this.
>>Well I think is time I invent a new language to talk to my friends with, so that the government can’t eavesdrop my conversations of my private life.
Do you need a _new_ language? I wonder how well any of these systems work on foreign languages.
How about esperanto? It’s super easy to learn. I’m guessing that not that many of these programs know Esperanto.