More on privacy, via schneier:

[unixronin]

Almost every piece of personal information that Americans try to keep secret -- including bank account statements, e-mail messages and telephone records -- is semi-public and available for sale.

That was the lesson Congress learned over the last week during a series of hearings aimed at exposing peddlers of personal data, from whom banks, car dealers, jealous lovers and even some law enforcement officers have covertly purchased information to use as they wish.

[....]

The committee subpoenaed representatives from 11 companies that use the Internet and phone calls to obtain, market, and sell personal data, but they refused to talk.

All invoked their constitutional right to not incriminate themselves when asked whether they sold "personal, non-public information" that had been obtained by lying or impersonating someone.

In other words, out of 11 companies that sell personal data, 11 companies - gee, that's all of the sample, isn't it? -- had illegally obtained some of that data by various forms of fraud, all 11 knew it was illegal, and all 11, oddly enough, chose to continue to be lying ratfinks about it instead of coming clean.

And we allow these people to stay in business why, exactly?

Comments

[yndy.livejournal.com]

because our congress just can't fathom "they know it's wrong and they do it anyways because no one prosecutes them" mentalities.

If one is pro-privacy in today's fear-based-society, then one clearly has "something to hide" -- it never occurs to those who espouse that line that maybe, just maybe, there are those of us paranoid because there are those who ARE out to get us.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

because our congress just can't fathom "they know it's wrong and they do it anyways because no one prosecutes them" mentalities.

Or perhaps because doing so would set a precedent that they might be prosecuted under in turn? The crookedness of Congress compared to the general population is quite breathtaking.

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

And we allow these people to stay in business why, exactly?

Because we are not customers of these companies, so we have no pull. Our politicians do not have the balls to stand up to the customers of these companies, because that is where their money, and reelection, comes from.

And the idiots want me to get all lathered up about the government knowing who I call, and who I gave money to in my last international funds transfer? Please!

[ehintz.livejournal.com]

Why? Because we can't be bothered with such trival things when the finals of American Idol are on. Besides, we got NFL on satellite. What more could a guy want?

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

The bread-and-circuses factor, indeed .....

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

I read a suggestion that I actually liked, on each access of our personal data, we (the person) gets a cash royalty. Since we can't really stop it, we might as well benefit.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

I'd sooner stop it. But I suppose getting paid would be a tolerable substitute. The trick would be to find the optimum value of the micropayment to maximize the income to the owner of the data sold.

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

I pictured modeling it on the ASCAP payment system for musicians.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Isn't the first rule of the ASCAP system "The musician bends over, here it comes again"?