Technology. In the 1990s a fierce war was waged between encryption fans on
the internet on the one hand and governments, especially America's, on the
other. The governments argued that they needed access to encryption keys to
be able to enforce the law. They largely lost, mainly because they could
find no guaranteed way to crack sophisticated new codes, though most
governments retain the legal right to demand keys from suspects in criminal
cases. In fact, few people, even terrorists, use encryption regularly.
Fewer still use specialised internet portals that guarantee anonymous
browsing. This could change if concern about web privacy grows. But
technology can only ever be a partial answer. Privacy will be threatened
not only by government or private snooping, but by the constant recording
of all sorts of information that individuals must provide to receive
products or benefits�which is as true off as on the internet.
Ironically, the most effective solution to the privacy problem may be
something that most privacy defenders fiercely resist: a highly secure
identification system, perhaps linked to two or three different biometric
measures. True, this would give a great boost to ubiquitous monitoring, but
it would also make it possible to track precisely who taps into databases.
This seems essential if access to databases is ever going to be properly
controlled.FROM...
http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1534283
When are all you free market fascist 'libertarians' going to wake the fuck
up and smell the coffee? Libertarians are statist filth,it's in your face.
