Nofsck Ingcloo writes: CNet has published a guest column by Eric Wheeler warning the world of the evil consequences of Do Not Track. In it he makes strong (I would claim exaggerated) arguments in favor of targeted advertising. He claims the threat of political action on Do Not Track should, "strike fear into the hearts of every company that does business online...." He speaks of compromising a $300 billion industry, which I read as being the industry composed of online advertisers and all their clients. He clearly thinks the tradeoff between freedom from snooping and free access to web content always favors free acccess. He concludes his arguments by saying, "Taken as a whole, the potentially dire impact of Do Not Track is clear: the end of the free internet and a crippling blow to the technology industry." He then goes on to advocate contacting legislators and the FTC in opposition to Do Not Track.
Nofsck Ingcloo writes: "Secrecy News" is reporting that yet another case about the balance between the Fourth Amendment and the "State Secrets Priviledge" has been dismissed.
The case claimed that the FBI had “conducted an indiscriminate ‘dragnet’ investigation and gathered personal information about [the plaintiffs] and other innocent Muslim Americans in Southern California based on their religion.” The article reports that, "The court granted the Obama Administration’s claim that the state secrets privilege precluded litigation of the case."
The judge wrote [PDF], "...when properly invoked, [the state secret priviledge] is absolute — the interest of protecting state secrets cannot give way to any other need or interest.”
IMHO this pretty well defines a very serious problem, and it has to change.