From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 03:49:36 +0800
To: Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com>
Subject: Re: William Just doesn't get it.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970624113126.8208A-100000@beast.brainlink.com>
Message-ID: <199706241938.OAA11409@mailhub.amaranth.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <Pine.SUN.3.96.970624113126.8208A-100000@beast.brainlink.com>, on
06/24/97 
   at 12:00 PM, Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com> said:

>On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:

>> Only one here being clueless is you Ray.

>Thanks for the compliment.  I burp in your general direction.
> 
>> The state is not allowed to engage in secret activities with select
>> members of society. Whenever it issues a permit or a license to someone it
>> is public knowledge. Whenever someone is arrested, whenever there is a
>> trial both great and small the full details are public information.

>Asking the state to protect my privacy by not disclosing the information
>I disclose to it is not asking the state to engage in secret activities
>with select members of society.  It is asking it not to release
>information that I am forced to give them in return for certain goods,
>services, or privilidges - driving for example.  Having a driver's
>license doesn't mean I wish to share the information that the DMV
>requires to provide such a license to the world.

>Paying taxes doesn't mean I wish to disclose my 1040 form to the world.
> 
>> All actions of the state *must* be reviewable by the citizens. You can not
>> have a free and open society without the people being able to check on
>> what it's government is doing.

>And tell me dear William, in what way will you prevent the government
>from taking capricious actions against a free and open society by
>allowing anyone to find out a phone number that is unlisted by simply
>calling up DMV records?

>This isn't keeping tabs on the government, this is keeping tabs on the
>people which the government choses to infringe on.

>If the DMV wasn't giving licenses to certain types of people and one
>believed that this was the case, one should ask those people who felt
>that they were discriminated against.  One should not have the ability to
>look at EVERY record in the DMV databases - no matter how noble the
>thought.

>This is not to protect the DMV, this is to protect those listed within
>its databases.

>> This means that all of the following *must* be open to the public:

>Again, by your oppinion, not mine.  And no, I don't believe in a "free
>and open" society.  I believe in a "free and private" society.
> 
>> Criminal Records

>As for these, IMHO, once a criminal has completed their sentence they
>should be allowed to have a life.  Having these records available to all
>is a means of discriminating against them for having commited a crime as
>judged by a jury.  Not necessarily having commited the crime, but being
>convicted of doing so - as is well known mistakes have been made and
>lives have been destroyed by such mistakes.

>IMHO, repeat offenders will wind up in jail again, and will be punished
>again.  This should not infringe on their right to secure jobs or the
>right to rent, or buy homes.

>The idea of the justice system is to correct these wrongs, not to punish
>for life.  Once the debt is paid, it is paid.  There are some who believe
>that offenders should not be re-released into society because they will
>commit more crimes, and/or that the communities should be notified when
>they are allowed to move there.  If it is the case that person X is
>likely to commit more crime, then that fact should play a factor in
>person X's parole hearing.  IMHO, if the danger is there, don't let the
>bastard out. If it isn't, then let them go and let them live in peace and
>privacy.

>> Voter Registrations

>These too can be both a benefit and an infringement on privacy.  Whatever
>information these records hold might be used for other purposes.

Obviously you have never seen Chicago Politics at work. Chicago the most
democratic country in the world, even the dead get to vote ... TWICE!!! :)

>> Census Records

>Why?  What is the purpose of having these records available in forms
>other than a number?

>> Building Permits

>I agree here.

>> Profesional Licenses

>Sure, but only so far as to say "Yep, person X has this license" not "and
>they live on xyz street, have three kids, and a poodle."

>> Court Transcripts

>Granted.

>> Federal Records
>> State Records
>> County Records
>> City Records

>Granted, but which specific records?

>> ect, ect, ect.

>clue: You mean etc as in "Et Cetera."

>> The problem here is *NOT* that this information is public. The problem is
>> that the goverment has got it's fat little fingers into everything. The
>> solution is *NOT* letting the state hide what it is doing with these so
>> called privacy laws but to get the state out of where it has no business
>> being in the first place!!!

>I agree that there is ALSO a problem that the government has its fat
>fingers in everything and is allowed to do things that others aren't
>allowed to do.  For instance many places where gambling is illegal
>provide lotteries with astronomical odds against the player.  Were the
>things done by casinos, nobody would play.

>I agree that what the state does and whom they interact with should be
>public knowledge.  I do not agree that by virtue of interacting with the
>state that I should be force to give up my privacy.  I do not have the
>choice of not interacting with the state due to lovelies such as income
>taxes and drivers licenses - I should not be forced to give up privacy as
> well because of this.

>Based on what you say everything the state does should be public.  Fine,
>but if anyone were able to see anyone else's 1040 forms, you'd have a lot
>of invasion of privacy.  This is what you fail to see or understand. 
>This isn't a strawman, it's plain fact.  If I can see your return, I can
>see how much you make, whatever deductions or exemptions you claim can
>give me a slew of information as to what you have purchased and your
>general life style.  The address info and SSN will give me even more keys
>into your info.  Birth and Marriage records will tell me who your mother
>is, then I can look up her records, and find her maiden name, then I can
>take your SSN, your mother's maiden name, your date of birth and hand
>them over to TRW and see your credit card purchases, etc.  This is the
>thing that should not be that you are advocating, the thing I and
>fighting you on.  I think that it is indeed the case that you require a
>few clues.

>> And this has nothing to do with GAK or any other 1984ish monitoring of
>> citizens. The issue here is bringing the activities of the state into the
>> light of day. The activities of the citizens that do not directly involve
>> the state are not at issue here.

>Then DMV records should not be fully visible, neither should 1040 forms,
>for example.  But the key is "that do not directly involve the state" 
>The problem is that the state directly involves us into their activities
>and we directly involve them through our votes.  That is the key that
>will unlock the records into the activities of the citizens, and unlock
>their privacy when they should not.

>For the most part we agree - the government's activities should be public
>knowledge and should be watched and reviewed carefully.  However in your
>eagerness to make this happen you would also strip away the privacy of
>the citizens only because the government interacts and forces itself on
>interacting with them.

>And that is the clue you fail to get.

How are you going to verify what the government *says* it is doing without
a mechinism of authenticating of who they are doing it with?

How can you verify that the census reports are vailid if you don't know
who is in the census?

How can you check and see if the party in power is stuffing the balot
boxes if you can't confirm who is on the voting rolls??

How will you know which John Doe is issued a Medical License without
additional information being available?

How can you prevent criminal records from being known when all police
arrests & court procedings are public knowledge?

In your zeal to make public information "private" you are giving the
government the perfect mechanism to hide all its activities from its
citizens.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM7AjHY9Co1n+aLhhAQFGXQP+MeTQt7vohgI7QBSa1rgAzaXXX4woRcLv
5Rbfx/r0XCSoyjDIREPcrnpwX0RQRHs07+NpXKCrygqeU7ruD6zw5xmZaP9obyw3
iGqoqcemt+x/S+UZGh2w4mXMN7GKLzyihoxTg/wYIbW964qr20ujig0jJ7pyDrpL
DtyNs8NB4ZQ=
=Me1A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----