SO101001@BROWNVM.BITNET (Andres Saldana) (03/10/87)
(In response to Bill Daul's previous note on 'sensitive information') This is an incredibly complex issue, so I venture some random reactions: 1. Despite the multiplicity of networks, many machines still can't speak to each other. Compatibility between most systems is certainly in the far-off future, and I believe this, as a technological impediment, has had and will continue to have important effect as a deterrent on governmental surveillance of computer activity and surveillance through computers. 2. The nature of computer technology, on the other hand, lends itself to monitoring in ways that other communication technologies don't. 3. Conspiracy theories will always run up against that most consistent of human traits: fallibility. So what are they going to do with all this surveillance information even if they collect it? 4. In any case, our society is already very extensively surveyed by groups such as the FBI. Computer surveillance will simply be an extension of a policy that is long-established in our social system. 5. The consequences of all this for our personal liberties merits serious consideration of the enforcement and development of constitutional and social barriers to computer surveillance. Perhaps we need a new version of the Bill of Rights. In any case, as in the case of Richard Nixon, I'm sure the founding fathers had no idea...