A few people have recommended these to me and I had chance to catch some on a flight recently and they are quite good... I thought I'd pass the recommendation on.
Too often historical portraits glorify the extremism of the partisans whose goals were ultimately successful in a given conflict. Here a more complicated picture is painted ... the fact of conflict is mourned in victory and in defeat, as a tragedy and a failure, and a course of events which the individual characters don't have the power to turn, but only to manage through.
SSRN-'I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy by Daniel Solove
Topic: Miscellaneous
2:52 pm EDT, Aug 27, 2008
In this short essay, written for a symposium in the San Diego Law Review, Professor Daniel Solove examines the nothing to hide argument. When asked about government surveillance and data mining, many people respond by declaring: "I've got nothing to hide." According to the nothing to hide argument, there is no threat to privacy unless the government uncovers unlawful activity, in which case a person has no legitimate justification to claim that it remain private. The nothing to hide argument and its variants are quite prevalent, and thus are worth addressing. In this essay, Solove critiques the nothing to hide argument and exposes its faulty underpinnings.
Forget 1 hook. Forget 2 hooks. Forget the "hooks in the front" which comes out of left field to make you look silly. Now its all about the Rubik's cube clasp.
The reasonable-suspicion standard should be written into law...
These reasonable compromises should in no way impede the government's ability to search laptops for such things as child pornography or terrorist plans. But they would go a long way toward giving the average, innocent traveler some protection against frivolous or mischievous intrusions.
The Volokh Conspiracy - Temporary Restraining Order Against Crime-Facilitating Speech About Security Vulnerabilities:
Topic: Miscellaneous
7:31 pm EDT, Aug 11, 2008
Unprotected speech generally can only be restricted after a finding on the merits that the speech is indeed unprotected. It generally can't be restricted via a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction that's just based on a preliminary, quick-and-dirty estimate of whether a crime was violated and whether the speech is therefore constitutionally unprotected.
A discussion of the legal issues involved in the MBTA suit, which are familiar.
Chertoff Misleads on Laptop Searches, Feingold Charges | Threat Level from Wired.com
Topic: Miscellaneous
2:37 pm EDT, Aug 10, 2008
On August 1st, I pointed out that Chertoff lied in an editorial published in mid-July in the USA-Today. Apparently he told the same lie to Wired in an interview on the 7th, and on the 8th Sen Russ Feingold echoed my comments exactly:
Secretary Chertoff's description of the newly published DHS policy on laptop searches was not just misleading – it was flat-out wrong. In an interview with Wired.com, the Secretary stated that "[w]e only do [laptop searches] when we put you into secondary [screening] and we only put you into secondary [screening] ... when there is a reason to suspect something."
But the actual policy that DHS published says the exact opposite.
Also note:
DHS spokesman Russ Knocke dismissed Feingold's statement, calling it "sour grapes and paranoia from someone who can't accept that even the 9th Circuit ruled that what we're doing is constitutional."
Hey Russ, have you read that 9th circuit decision? Can you explain what the hell the warrant exception for vehicle searches has to do with the standard of suspicion required to search laptops given that probable cause is required to search a home regardless of whether or not it is "readily mobile."
