OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/19485/The_Spyware_World_Privacy_in_the_Age_of_Surveillance_Technology Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:52:06 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com Comment by l3v1 http://osnews.com/thread?305675 http://osnews.com/thread?305675
more time a driver spends on the road, the more likelihood of an eventually accident


Which is of course not true. Inexperienced drivers can much easily cause an accident since they run into situations they haven't seen before more easily and they don't have the experience to deal with the situation properly. Spending more time on the road in itself can mean exactly nothing if one wants to get some estimate about the likelihood of an accident. Even having spent a long time on the road without accidents can mean nothing if one doesn't take into consideration what type of car has that person been driving during those years and currently. Also, age in itself can mean nothing either, without complementing with other information about driving experience, fine history, type of car driven, etc.

[edit: added the following]

There would eventually be a presumption that people who didn't want to be monitored were reckless drivers, and the price for privacy would be punitive insurance rates.


This is the same smelly argument that's so fashionable to use in the US if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear. It's not sympathetic, beacuse it's a twisted argument and it can easily make innocent people look like being guilty, forcing them to prove their innocence, which is really not OK, to say the least.

I wouldn't argue against having to pay a somewhat higher price if one wouldn't want to have the tracking device, but going any further than that just calls for trouble.Edited 2008-03-19 14:58 UTC Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (l3v1) Comments RE: Comment by l3v1 http://osnews.com/thread?305683 http://osnews.com/thread?305683 It reminds the story about the fact that most accidents happens near home and some argue that it is because people become careless as they know the area.

The twist is that you spend more time near home, so you will statistically have more accident there.

(Disclaimer: I didn't read the article yet. I know I'm off topic) Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Treza) Comments RE: Comment by l3v1 http://osnews.com/thread?305684 http://osnews.com/thread?305684 Another stuff is that "Law abiding citizens deserve to have the right to wear a gun"

All criminals were law abiding citizens before becoming criminals.
(till a 'crime' DNA sequence is discovered...)

(Disclamer2: Still off-topic, sorry) Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Treza) Comments Privacy is Dead, Get Over It http://osnews.com/thread?305700 http://osnews.com/thread?305700 Steven Rambam gave a two-and-a-half hour lecture on electronic surveillance and privacy at the Hackers On Planet Earth (HOPE) conference in 2006. It is a must-see presentation for anyone with an interest in these topics. You can find it on-line here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-383709537384528624
or http://tinyurl.com/3xjvzn

or order the 3 DVD set via 2600.org at

http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/4384 Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (futurefarmer) Comments RE: Comment by l3v1 http://osnews.com/thread?305709 http://osnews.com/thread?305709
Inexperienced drivers can much easily cause an accident since they run into situations they haven't seen before more easily and they don't have the experience to deal with the situation properly. Spending more time on the road in itself can mean exactly nothing if one wants to get some estimate about the likelihood of an accident.


Perhaps I was unclear in the point I was trying to make. I mean that every mile/hour driven is more opportunity for a driver to be in an accident (be hit by a careless driver, or fall victim to a road hazard, for example). Experienced drivers will of course have less likelihood for an accident, but people who only drive for 30 minutes per week are less likely to be in an accident than people who commute 2 hours per day. Currently, insurance companies must ask prospective clients how much they drive, and have to way to verify. Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (David) Comments RE: Comment by l3v1 http://osnews.com/thread?305713 http://osnews.com/thread?305713 This all, of course, presumes you have a car that contains a tracking device. Another reason for keeping that old car!

If the tracking device is associated with the body, the concept makes more sense. Does this person engage in risky behaviours? Go to dangerous places, travel fast at low altitude regardless of what seat in the car he/she is in, go past dangerous places, or consort with other known felons...oops...gone too far maybe...Edited 2008-03-19 19:14 UTC Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (komrade) Comments consequences on humans http://osnews.com/thread?305720 http://osnews.com/thread?305720 Interesting, but I would like to add another item for consideration: how you feel in such an environment.
this is more important to me, than most of the points you've mentioned. for instance, I once worked at an ISP company, who had surveileance means of monitoring what happens on my computer screen (think vnc-like), and recorded the incoming calls and my responses.
they could have used this data at any time, but to know that you are followed was very discouraging.
you limit yourself, you are acting less freely, and less spontaneously, because it's not a one-on-one talk anymore. others can know a side of you that you don't want them to know. so you limit yourself.
and do we want such a society of people not behaving like themselves? we lose much of the humane characteristics, and fall into a depressing mood environment. The right to privacy is also that you decide to whom you open up to, and without fear that it'll come back to haunt you from unforeseen places. Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (kwakodile) Comments RE: consequences on humans http://osnews.com/thread?305734 http://osnews.com/thread?305734 It's true that being watched tends to make human beings alter their behavior significantly. And it makes most of us uncomfortable unless we are performing some kind of rehearsed action that we expect to be watched. It's like the study that showed that even putting a picture of some eyes on an "honor system" payment jar dramatically increased payment rates. (couldn't find citation) Wed, 19 Mar 2008 22:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (David) Comments RE: Comment by l3v1 http://osnews.com/thread?305768 http://osnews.com/thread?305768
more time a driver spends on the road, the more likelihood of an eventually accident


Which is of course not true. Inexperienced drivers can much easily cause an accident since they run into situations they haven't seen before more easily and they don't have the experience to deal with the situation properly....


Actually, technically, it is true.
The probability of having an accident can be seen as an integration of probability over time. Since the probability of having an accident at any time is always positive, and never zero, the longer you spend driving, the more likely you are to have an accident. Thu, 20 Mar 2008 01:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (stestagg) Comments