Recommended links (in no particular order)
Reason Magazine
Instapundit
Slashdot
Penny Arcade
Chilling Effects
Astronomy pic of the day
Sierra Club
Games * Design * Art * Culture
deviantART

Friends
Adam
Sorknes Art
Single Butterfly
Snowberry Way

Rate Me on BlogHop.com!
  help?

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

First of all, let us look at the word "erosion". This word describes a long, gradual process. In fact, the word, in its most common usage, describes a process that can take millions of years, and which sees very small changes over time. In addition, there is no reversal to erosion: the only thing that can negate erosion is a very sudden, often cataclysmic change. When it comes to civil liberties, I don’t see a total reversal in people’s rights every time a government agency violates them. However, I don’t see such violations as harmless, either. Instead, they are just a small step in a long process towards changing us to obedient drones.

The government, as well as private corporations, knows that most people would get used to anything. After an initial (usually adverse) reaction to a change, people will get accustomed to the new situation. One of the most wondrous things about the human mind is how fast we can forget the past… Thus, in order to abolish civil liberties, one must proceed in small, measured steps. For example, after a sudden crisis, which justifies temporary limits to privacy, one may pass a law, which would expire in a few years. Let’s call this law The Patriot Act. Thanks to human forgetfulness, by the time the law is set to expire, most people won’t remember how life was before the Patriot Act, and the lawmakers won’t have too much trouble extending it.

Then, another attack on privacy takes place. It’s very limited, focusing only on phone calls to and from countries that are known for harboring terrorists. A few people protest, but they are soon silenced by the quiet majority. After that, we can take it a step further, and monitor very limited information on all phone calls. Again, people protest, but soon they won’t care anymore. In fact, the fact that about half of the people already support this kind of monitoring suggests that the government is actually very slow at eroding people’s privacy rights; people can handle faster change.

What will be next? Probably random recording of phone calls. Or outlawing/limiting voice over IP, which so far is not monitored. Not that it matters; there have been direct VOIP solutions for two or more parties for over a decade; people who would like to remain undetected will always be able to do so. In addition, this erosion of privacy will allow private companies to jump on the bandwagon. We can see this already happening with the movie industry monitoring (and presumably opening) packages sent through FedEx. Again, a few people will complain, but soon this will be the standard mode of business.

In addition to the bulk of people, the silent majority, there will be three smaller groups. The first one consists of the supporters of civil liberties erosion. They are usually very loud. They are not inherently evil; they simply suffer from what is called escalation of commitment. They supported some of the early changes, such as the Patriot Act, and now they subconsciously feel they must support the recent changes, as a way to justify their past actions. The second group, as vocal but perceived as having less credibility thanks to being ignored by most media, will protest every change, without any tangible result. Unlike the first two, the third group will be quiet. Large companies will feel pressured by rules and regulations (such as the SEC rules) to keep their inner workings secret, and so they will switch to alternative modes of communication, such as the already mentioned VOIP for phone calls and file transfer instead of FedEx. These companies will always be on the forefront of adoption of technology that would circumvent government and private spying.
May 15, 2006 at 3:00 pm GMT by Jozef