This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/15/digital-revoltution-gift-power-state

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The digital revolution? It's all a gift to the power of the state The digital revolution? It's all a gift to the power of the state
(4 months later)
On Monday the US justice department admitted it knew of every phone call made by 100 Associated Press reporters in April and May last year. It had seized the details, undisclosed, from the relevant phone companies. No reason was given. The department said it "valued the freedom of the press", but – that phrase is always followed by but – it had to balance this against the public interest in security.On Monday the US justice department admitted it knew of every phone call made by 100 Associated Press reporters in April and May last year. It had seized the details, undisclosed, from the relevant phone companies. No reason was given. The department said it "valued the freedom of the press", but – that phrase is always followed by but – it had to balance this against the public interest in security.
This week also saw the boot on the other foot. Reporters at Bloomberg had access to restricted data via market tracking terminals that the firm had sold to Wall Street banks. The banks realised that reporters could follow "searches and keystrokes in their mergers and acquisitions departments" as a result of Bloomberg's "spy in the office". The company hurriedly apologised.This week also saw the boot on the other foot. Reporters at Bloomberg had access to restricted data via market tracking terminals that the firm had sold to Wall Street banks. The banks realised that reporters could follow "searches and keystrokes in their mergers and acquisitions departments" as a result of Bloomberg's "spy in the office". The company hurriedly apologised.
Meanwhile, in Britain it was revealed that Jack Straw's notorious 2000 Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa) is about as secure as a telephone book. The biggest mobile company, EE (for Orange and T-Mobile) has been selling on its 27m mobile subscribers, including calls made, location of use, downloads and sites visited. Quick off the mark, Ipsos Mori offered to sell on the acquired material to the Metropolitan Police. EE protested that its data was "aggregated and anonymised to protect its customers". Why then did the Met want to buy it? Everyone apologised.Meanwhile, in Britain it was revealed that Jack Straw's notorious 2000 Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa) is about as secure as a telephone book. The biggest mobile company, EE (for Orange and T-Mobile) has been selling on its 27m mobile subscribers, including calls made, location of use, downloads and sites visited. Quick off the mark, Ipsos Mori offered to sell on the acquired material to the Metropolitan Police. EE protested that its data was "aggregated and anonymised to protect its customers". Why then did the Met want to buy it? Everyone apologised.
You can scream that nothing online is secure until you are blue in the face. No one seems to believe it. Governments and corporations claim to respect data privacy, but they are babes in arms against nerds in attics, including those they employ. I am sure 2 million American officials thought their missives were safe from WikiLeaks. I am sure Whitehall ministers and officials who claimed ID-card records and NHS computers were "double-locked" may have thought so. They also thought the kit they bought from computer snake-oil sales staff would work."You can scream that nothing online is secure until you are blue in the face. No one seems to believe it. Governments and corporations claim to respect data privacy, but they are babes in arms against nerds in attics, including those they employ. I am sure 2 million American officials thought their missives were safe from WikiLeaks. I am sure Whitehall ministers and officials who claimed ID-card records and NHS computers were "double-locked" may have thought so. They also thought the kit they bought from computer snake-oil sales staff would work."
Data protection is a blazing contradiction in terms. True, the sheer quantity of the stuff can defy retrieval. As the American statistician Nate Silver says, the problem today is not information or transparency but "finding patterns in random noise". Doubtless a killer algorithm will do it one day. But for all the boasts of computer geeks, the internet still cannot stop crime, cure cancer, predict earthquakes or resolve the greatest recession of modern times, which it in part caused.Data protection is a blazing contradiction in terms. True, the sheer quantity of the stuff can defy retrieval. As the American statistician Nate Silver says, the problem today is not information or transparency but "finding patterns in random noise". Doubtless a killer algorithm will do it one day. But for all the boasts of computer geeks, the internet still cannot stop crime, cure cancer, predict earthquakes or resolve the greatest recession of modern times, which it in part caused.
This is all mildly reminiscent of the early days of atomic power. That too was the wild-eyed futuristic dream, of a world powered by nuclear fission, made secure by it and liberated by it. The atomic revolution now seems so much neophiliac dross, with built-in nightmares.This is all mildly reminiscent of the early days of atomic power. That too was the wild-eyed futuristic dream, of a world powered by nuclear fission, made secure by it and liberated by it. The atomic revolution now seems so much neophiliac dross, with built-in nightmares.
There is now a deluge of futurology about the data surge. The latest, and best, is from Google's Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen. In The New Digital Age they map the emerging dualism between real and virtual worlds. There is no dodging it. Those who try to avoid the virtual one will become, in the state's eyes, "hidden people", and will be digitised as such.There is now a deluge of futurology about the data surge. The latest, and best, is from Google's Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen. In The New Digital Age they map the emerging dualism between real and virtual worlds. There is no dodging it. Those who try to avoid the virtual one will become, in the state's eyes, "hidden people", and will be digitised as such.
Without a digital personality and a "verifiable" past, we will not be trusted by bank managers, employers, border guards, even spouses. Our teenage years will haunt us, perhaps rendering millions unemployable. Such people are Orwell's unpersons. When the internet, a sensational tool for living, crosses the frontier and becomes a life in itself, it risks destroying life.Without a digital personality and a "verifiable" past, we will not be trusted by bank managers, employers, border guards, even spouses. Our teenage years will haunt us, perhaps rendering millions unemployable. Such people are Orwell's unpersons. When the internet, a sensational tool for living, crosses the frontier and becomes a life in itself, it risks destroying life.
Already the implied omniscience of the digital revolution is a gift to power. The American justice department was apparently angry with AP because it revealed details of a CIA operation in Yemen without Washington's permission. In days of print – of Watergate and Spycatcher – power had to bow the knee to the media and the law. There is no such bowing now. The American government is about to open in Utah the greatest surveillance centre and storehouse on Earth, hoovering data from satellites and cables everywhere.Already the implied omniscience of the digital revolution is a gift to power. The American justice department was apparently angry with AP because it revealed details of a CIA operation in Yemen without Washington's permission. In days of print – of Watergate and Spycatcher – power had to bow the knee to the media and the law. There is no such bowing now. The American government is about to open in Utah the greatest surveillance centre and storehouse on Earth, hoovering data from satellites and cables everywhere.
Government efforts to stamp on free information and opinion are usually a cloak to conceal executive embarrassment in "national security". It dusts secrecy with good intent: say a word and the dreaded al-Qaida will get to hear. Britain's Ripa dragnet, which the present home secretary still wants to extend, subjects the entire electronic realm to secretive state surveillance.Government efforts to stamp on free information and opinion are usually a cloak to conceal executive embarrassment in "national security". It dusts secrecy with good intent: say a word and the dreaded al-Qaida will get to hear. Britain's Ripa dragnet, which the present home secretary still wants to extend, subjects the entire electronic realm to secretive state surveillance.
Some of this intrusion may be useful – for example, in exposing tax evasion or paedophile websites. Every cloud can be found a silver lining. But two things are frightening in the Schmidt-Cohen futurology. One is the near total absence of accountability or redress – little beyond pleas for voluntary protocols and codes of corporate behaviour. Relying for personal privacy and security on corporate virtue – remember, the virtual world is entirely corporate – is like relying on Google to pay taxes.Some of this intrusion may be useful – for example, in exposing tax evasion or paedophile websites. Every cloud can be found a silver lining. But two things are frightening in the Schmidt-Cohen futurology. One is the near total absence of accountability or redress – little beyond pleas for voluntary protocols and codes of corporate behaviour. Relying for personal privacy and security on corporate virtue – remember, the virtual world is entirely corporate – is like relying on Google to pay taxes.
Far worse is the boost the internet offers to state paranoia. The US justice department professes to decide for itself how to balance press freedom against national security. How does it come by this licence? As the security industry goads ministers to ever more purchases, the ratchet is always towards control and against freedom.Far worse is the boost the internet offers to state paranoia. The US justice department professes to decide for itself how to balance press freedom against national security. How does it come by this licence? As the security industry goads ministers to ever more purchases, the ratchet is always towards control and against freedom.
Schmidt and Cohen's book is obsessed with the ruling fixation of American government, with 9/11 and terrorism. What must be the most secure society on Earth seems petrified by a threat it puts on a par with the cold war. The terrorist is today where the communist was yesterday, under every bed, lurking in every website. As a result there is no balance between freedom and control, only ever more fiendish means of control.Schmidt and Cohen's book is obsessed with the ruling fixation of American government, with 9/11 and terrorism. What must be the most secure society on Earth seems petrified by a threat it puts on a par with the cold war. The terrorist is today where the communist was yesterday, under every bed, lurking in every website. As a result there is no balance between freedom and control, only ever more fiendish means of control.
In Britain likewise, each home secretary in turn capitulates to the defence lobby. Jack Straw, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke, Jacqui Smith, Ken Clarke, all indulged the lobby's latest whim or computer gizmo. The last to stand his ground was Willie Whitelaw in the 1980s. He bellowed, "Nice try, lads, drinks all round," when asked by the security services for some new snoopers' charter.In Britain likewise, each home secretary in turn capitulates to the defence lobby. Jack Straw, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke, Jacqui Smith, Ken Clarke, all indulged the lobby's latest whim or computer gizmo. The last to stand his ground was Willie Whitelaw in the 1980s. He bellowed, "Nice try, lads, drinks all round," when asked by the security services for some new snoopers' charter.
Giving in to terrorism has given data intrusion, "back door" surveillance and press restriction all the best tunes. The Pentagon pleads 9/11 and Whitehall pleads 7/7. Lord Justice Leveson can only plead Hugh Grant, but he is enough. They all say they want a "responsible press". But the direction of travel is the same, towards the pollution of freedom. Acts of government that would once have caused outrage are now met with a shrug. The internet is free. The internet is good. The internet can do no wrong. Who cares?Giving in to terrorism has given data intrusion, "back door" surveillance and press restriction all the best tunes. The Pentagon pleads 9/11 and Whitehall pleads 7/7. Lord Justice Leveson can only plead Hugh Grant, but he is enough. They all say they want a "responsible press". But the direction of travel is the same, towards the pollution of freedom. Acts of government that would once have caused outrage are now met with a shrug. The internet is free. The internet is good. The internet can do no wrong. Who cares?
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.