[ExI] The NSA's new data center

[Eugen Leitl]

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 02:43:49PM -0400, J.R. Jones wrote:

> Oh, I see some extreme difficulties with it myself.  Instead then, how
> about transparency that increases/decreases alongside power/influence?

Absolutely. The more power you have the more scrutiny you deserve.
 
> I think this ties in with my above statement.  Did these events in history
> books happen despite transparency?  My guess is that many

IBMs punched-card data processing was definitely very useful to keep track of these
Jews and Roma and dissidents to be destroyed in Nazi concentration camps.
There are one million people of interest in the US alone. Given a population
of only 0.3 gigapersons, that's an awful lot. And the trend is up, way up.
So, if you want to help transparency, don't start at the bottom.

Start at the top. Why do you think the Pirate Party is trying to be
completely transparent, yet it strongly pro privacy of the individual
citizen? 

> details/actors/variables were kept hidden/non-existent to those outside.

That's just the point, demanding absolutely transparency is bone-headed
simply because you'll voluntarily give whatever little privacy you still
possess, and the powerful people won't. They can make you, but you can't
make them. And since it's apparently no longer obvious for most people
I'm thinking prognosis is poor.
 
> > And that kills it. Only the dumbest livestock picks their own location and
> > method of slaughter.
> >
> >
> Or control freaks?

Don't know, the only way they'll get me to give up my privacy is over
my cold, dead body. And if you're not ready to fight for it, then at
least don't stand in other people's way when they do.