topgold writes "During an initial public meeting yesterday, the Irish Justice Ministry revealed that for nearly a year, the Irish government has mandated all telecommunications operators store traffic information from every landline, fax and mobile phone call for at least three years. Irish Times journalist Karlin Lillington offers insights regarding this secret data retention regime in several national newspaper columns. A considerable citizen reaction is at the boiling point, stoked by a civil liberties discussion board and the rejuvenation of the Electronic Freedom Ireland citizen group. By law, the Irish government can deep-six any Cabinet discussions related to the 'deliberative process' and since this decision to retain phone records happened at Cabinet level, it could have remained hidden for more than five years."

11:35:11 PM    

Instead of one mark of the beast embedded under your skin, your entire household could be profiled by hundreds or thousands of items. My god, it is a marketing and demographic person's wet dream, to drive down a street and run a RFID scan on a house and know exactly how to target market a sales pitch. And worse, for that same sales person to know virtually everything about you.

I mean, if it is true that we are what we eat, erm, I mean we are what we buy?

Miasma

New York Times - free registration required A Radio Chip in Every Consumer Product.

And, yes, Procter & Gamble will notice if a case of Pantene shampoo does not make it to the Wal-mart Supercenter in Broken Arrow, Okla. Its truck is equipped to monitor signals continuously from chips hidden in each case. If any case stops sending its "Hi, I'm still here" signal, a monitor in the "smart truck" will record exactly when and where.

Such technology, known as radio-frequency identification -- the same techniques that enable an electronic sensor to record data from an E-ZPass tag or an office door to open for people with chip-equipped cards in their pockets -- could one day stymie pilferers. But it is also capable of doing much more for commerce. Beyond Gillette and Procter & Gamble, companies as diverse as International Paper and Canon USA are teaming up with retailers and customers to apply R.F.I.D., as it is known, to tracking products from the time they leave an assembly line to the time they leave the store.

The companies are tagging clothes, drugs, auto parts, copy machines and even mail with chips laden with information about content, origin and destination. They are also equipping shelves, doors and walls with sensors that can record that data when the products are near. "We want to track all of our merchandise, and that includes items that people are unlikely to steal," William C. Wertz, a spokesman for Wal-Mart Stores, said.

[ ... ]

Consumer privacy is also an issue. It would be easy to combine credit card data with information from the retail chips to know who bought what, and when -- and, conceivably, track the product even after it left the store.

"I don't think the average consumer understands the threat to personal privacy that these kinds of technologies can present," said Alan N. Sutin, a partner specializing in information technology at the law firm of Greenberg Traurig.

William H. Steele, a consumer products analyst with Bank of America, doubts companies will "succumb to the temptation to keep tracking products in the consumers' hands," but he, too, stops short of calling the issue specious. "There should be a certain level of skepticism on the part of the U.S. consumer," he said.

[Privacy Digest]

11:31:55 PM    

The American Civil Liberties Union today targeted Attorney General John Ashcroft's continuing push for expanded surveillance and intelligence gathering powers with a new full-page newspaper advertisement in this morning's Washington Times and New York Times.

"Americans of all ideological stripes - right, center and left - are up in arms about the unnecessary and intrusive powers being pushed for by John Ashcroft's Justice Department," said Anthony Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. "This new advertisement highlights the serious concerns shared by an unlikely alliance that includes groups and individuals as ideologically disparate as the ACLU and well-known conservative Bob Barr."

The ad describes examples of the slew of new intelligence gathering and law enforcement powers either asserted unilaterally by the Administration or granted to the President by Congress since September 11, 2001.  It also warns against the proposed Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, the Department of Justice's follow-up wish list of expanded powers not granted in the original USA PATRIOT Act. 

11:24:02 PM    

[chest tumping alert!]

Yup, I am a Salon subscriber, premium service. I resisted for a long time, but eventually admitted that I was powerless over my addiction, and I had to turn it over to a higher power along with doing a searching and fearless moral inventory...

Wait, wrong meeting. Sorry.

What I mean is that I sucked it up and bit the bullet after long resisting, because I don't believe in the subscription model on the web, and figuring I'd resent it even as I resent having registered for the NYTimes site and having been a long time hater of the Time Warner Pathfinder site in the mid-90s asking me to sign over rights to my first born child before I could even log on...

As in, this STUNK of OLD MEDIA.

But then I did it. I wanted an article dammit! And since I know how to get around the NYTimes archive fee charge (not gonna tell how...), this is the ONLY one I did cough up for.

Funny thing happened on the way to being co-opted. I started really using the premium service and liking it. Liked the little music compilation thingie too. Not to mention the Mother Jones and Utne Reader subscriptions. Good will. Then they added blogs, and I'm still happy even tho my blog isn't in that club.

Worse, I would be sad if Salon went away in a way that I would not be sad if Slate went away (has it gone away?). Obviously I subscribe to it in my news feed reader and Radio aggregator.

I like its righteous ballsy streak. I miss Suck.com, and that sucks. There are a lot of things we could and do miss because VC interpreted the dot.com bomb as an excuse to take leave of what little imagination and vision the pathetic souls had in the first place.

So they say Salon spends too much money and lives too high in its offices. That these periodic death throes are con jobs to get more money and get propped up a bit longer.

To that, I say, "What the fuck? It is a hell of a lot better than those far more periodic beg-fests on public radio and television, and I cough up for those every 5 years or so when I am flush and when the guilt hits me."

Salon is like a less serious and more mouthy version of NPR, and for that I love it. And if you need more reasons, here's their version of a beg-fest. Come on, y'all. Cough it up. It isn't as bad as you might think.

Miasma

Did you ever get the feeling that some people want you dead? Last week's flurry of news stories about Salon's imminent demise produced another wave of hate mail from those eager to dance on our grave. (The fact that Salon never seems to actually die -- despite the tone of absolute certainty in these perennial press obits that this time, yes, it MUST be going under! -- never diminishes these letter writers' bloodlust.)

[...]

Stan Willock offers these words of consolation to Salon readers: "[They] will still have PBS, where hundreds are misinformed and entertained at taxpayer expense, as well as CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC. All are losing viewers to the fair and balanced Fox News Channel and to conservative talk radio. Best of luck looking for a new job. Hopefully you qualify as a member of a preferred group (person of color, female, gay, lesbian, etc)."

[...]

Salon -- and I -- take all these attacks in stride. As Ishmael Reed observed, "writin' is fightin'." When you publish a rambunctiously independent daily in a time marked by conservative backlash and martial fever, you're bound to make some enemies. And we're proud of those we've made over the years, from Ken Starr to John Ashcroft and, of course, the right-wing guidance counselors at the Wall Street Journal's editorial pages.

[...]

Chris Broderick wrote, "As a subscriber, I don't really know what I can do, but damn, there's got to be a way. With the way things are now in the world, I really rely on you people to give the news that I perceive to be the truth. I am so goddam frustrated with the mainstream media and their neglect of truthful reporting. It's going to be like a death in the family if you guys go down."

Mark E. Michael e-mailed: "I stumbled on you a few years back and then told my wife and her sister about this great e-zine (as it was once called). You have given us some wonderful memories, but we don't want them to end. And we cannot let right-wing voices be the only ones heard. There are elements in the government that wish to silence dissent and do it permanently. There will be no marketplace of ideas, only the authorized, approved one ... How can Salon be saved?"

[...]

If every one of our 53,000 subscribers brings in just ONE additional subscription, Salon will finally break even this year. In the current economic climate, advertising cannot be counted on to secure Salon's future. But YOU can help do that by buying at least one gift subscription.

The enemies of a free and critical press -- like the ministers of information at the Wall Street Journal -- want to write off Salon as dead. With our voice silent, there will be one less bullhorn to question the wisdom of our country's current direction. The world is becoming increasingly dangerous. As reader Mark E. Michael warned, don't let the "authorized" version become the only one you read. Help us fight the good fight. Thank you.

-- David Talbot Editor, salon.com

12:47:09 AM