Not so much. It prevents the surreptitious recording, but anything in public is still fair game.

The US Supreme Court ruled just last June that a warrant is necessary to search a cell phone or other personal data storage device.

We put cameras in places where risk is high -- banks, retail stores, convenience stores, ATMs, etc., etc., are all being recorded and we don't complain about them, because the risk of corruption and crime is very high.

Police officers are at high risk for corruption, and they always have been. Their personal opinion of someone can be used to punish that person physically, emotionally, and financially. It's not too much to ask that their actions as employees be more closely monitored.

Not only business: Political campaigns use the same marketing tactics and sociological research business does.

Yesterday, I watched an old episode of "The Rockford Files" from 1977 -- a serious two-parter about a private consortium committing various crimes while setting up a secret computer system to track consumers. The episode ended with a black screen and a chilling message from NBC:

"Secret information centers, building dossiers on individuals, exist today. You have no legal right to know abut them, prevent them, or sue for damages. Our liberty may well be the price we pay for permitting this to continue unchecked -- Member, U.S. Privacy Protection Commission."

The competition angle has been pretty successful for DARPA, too....

...would just use this as a wedge issue, further "proof" of Obama's "socialism," and Obama has been going out of his way to avoid wedge issues. I think he knows that he can rule, but can't be effective, with a 51% majority.
As much as I love the entire open source movement, I don't think it would ever fly, politically, in our current culture.

3 outta 4 ain't bad....

The only time I've been subjected to a personality test at the office, it was Myers-Briggs as a "Team-Building" effort. All results would be confidential, they assured us when we questioned the ability of oil industry managers to gauge us with psychological exams... and these results would *not* be used to prejudice.

Out of the hundred or so participants, I was the only person with my personality type. The event coordinator -- an HR manager who had never before met me -- made me stand below a sign bearing my 4-letter code, and explained to everyone there what I was capable and incapable of doing, both in the industry and in my personal life.

It's pop psychology at its worst.

It used to be that these things called "Resumes" and "Interviews" would give you an idea of the applicants' specific abilities....