Comment Re:How about a reverse look-up? (Score 1) 208
Assuming, for openers, that you have your cell phone with you, and that it keeps track of and causes wherever you have been to be stored, somebody besides Al Franken and his liberal colleague should be concerned about the potential for invasions of reasonable and legitimate expectations of privacy 'which 'society' is prepared to recognize," in the troublingly anomalous language of the Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment case law. "Society" does not exist, and certainly has never been nad is not prepared to recognize and protect privacy or other individual rights unless clearly required by the Constitution or other applicable law. The Court, under both "liberal" and "conservative" control, has too often used "useful in fighting [pick one] "the [phony sham and scam that used to be called] the War on Drugs," or "terrorism," etc., ad infinitum, as justifications for invasions of privacy. The same argument could be made for mandatory brain chips or the rack and thumbscrews.
Where you are is rarely a private matter regardless of what you are doing. If you are operating a car on a public street, that is not private and you have no right to expect privacy, or an absence of red light cameras, etc. If you go to a grocery or gun store, Carnegie Hall, or a porno movie house, you have to know there will be Other People and assume that one or more of them will be happy to photograph you with their cell phone and post it, or just tell someone else, including tghe cops, where you were. I'm a retired lawyer and the foolishness of crooks, from the low level idiots to top lawyers and bankers who should know better, never ceased to amaze me. I was robbed in broad daylight in front of several witnesses including a reserve cop and his wife. An experienced lawyer from a big firm drew hundreds of thousands of dollars out of the bank, when he knew or should know that they were required to report that, washed it in a washing machine to remove fingerprints, and gave it to an accomplice who deposited it in his bank, again triggering reporting, and it still took seventeen years before they got caught. One of my genius clients committed a kidnapping with intent to comit rape withn brick-throwingdistance and line of sight from the lighted front door of a police station after having identified himself acrtoss the street. The fun case for me was the client arrested running from the scene of an aggravated robbery and attempted murder because the real criminal threatened and shot at him. Of course the police got the victim to identify my client's picture and coerced him into signing a confession, after the real criminal had confessed, so goess who they prosecuted? We won. I'm fascinated by what this technology would have done to another case where the alleged victim had positively identified the arrested suspect but the jury caught on when he produced his prison record photo showing a tattoo he still had but which the alleged victim had sworn he did not have. I still don't think that robbery ever happened.
After the data has been stored for some time, you might be more likely to find yourself needing an alibi than worried aboiut having to explain why you were at the location of a crime, the police station the address of which the police at the county seat here swore twice was "a high crime area," etc. Of course you might have any number of legitimate reasons for being at a crime scene or other suspicious location.
It probably doesn't cost much to store collected data indefinitely, but it would be my guess that its potential value for any legitimate or illegitimate purpose would diminish rapidly over time.
I'm much more concerned about tracking in cyberspace than the real world. My Web searches and Email are more likely to reveal things that are legally privileged and confidential, or which I am generally more concerned about keeping private.
Normally, nobody cares enough about where you go or what you do to justify the cost of tracking you, but as the cost drops and the process gets easier that primary protection begins to evaporate. My law practice very unexpectedly came to include representing an awful lot of survivors of childhood incest, etc. Do you think either the authorities, or the private crooks, including those who burglarized and burned my law office, do things like that, or seek cell hone data, without already having got the information or some of it clearly illegally?