• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Privacy

Reading a book on the destruction of personal privacy in America (I promise, no ranting), and I was wondering what sort of privacy issues are present in the OTU.

As an example, Star Trek TOS just gave us glimpses, but we can see in TNG that the Federation, at least Star Fleet, is a pretty invasive culture. Constant real time computer tracking and recording. Not to mention the Klingon Empire...

Is there constant monitoring or is there so much information out there that authorities can do no more than sample occasionally or look for keywords?
 
One of the things that used to creep me out about ST:TNG was that they had a psionic counselor on board who ensured the mental/emotional health of the crew and obviously didn't mind reading people's emotions without their consent - that's pretty Orwellian.

For the 3I, I think that there is a lot of intrigue/spying involving the nobility but not a great deal of the same involving the worlds and their populations or governments. I think the 3I uses tactics both overt and covert to affect trade between worlds, but once that starport extrality fence is crossed then it takes a very laissez-faire approach and doesn't need to observe the poulace. However, the individual worlds of the Imperium may practice any form of surveillance that their world government deems neccessary as long as it doesn't pass the extrality line into the starport.

Other interstellar nations may practice differently. Case in point, the Zhodani Counselate which IMTU is like the ST:TNG situation described above.
 
Local system Privacy issues are part of the Law Level. The higher the Law Level, the more intrusive and "Big Brother-ish" the government is.
 
Monitoring the crew of a starship is far easier than monitoring the population of a heavily-inhabitated world; its a matter of data overload. Ofcourse, with very high-TL you might have a computer capable of analyzing all of the e-mail and phone traffic of a pop-A world, but that computer would probably have to be sentient - which polities like the Imperium won't like. It does seem like a good scenario for a God-strain Virus in TNE, though...

HumInt (i.e. informers and provocators) does the job of monitoring the population far cheaper and far easier than ElInt (i.e. espionage by electronic matters).

Also, keep in mind that many people have a desire to be watched - just notice the profiliation of webcams transmitting from private residences to public sites.

And "Big Brother" could be masses of "Little Brothers" - especially if you're a celebrity.
 
Establishment of the reasoning behind the surveillance would be a factor, I guess. Monitoring political subversives in great numbers on a high population world could require a good slice of the population working in some capacity to maintain the system, either through direct enforcement, or just hiring people to watch other people. This in the long run has negative social effects as we have seen in a few historical examples. Then the question of who monitors the monitors arises quickly.

What about conditions that might warrant consistant medical monitoring, say in some sort of colony or large space station? This could be a seemingly benign form of it, easily corrupted into an orwellian setup. Another negative example would be the type of world shown in the film "GATTACA". The initial reasoning could be to monitor individuals in a potentially hazardous environment.

This is a very topical topic. I see on TV now they have ads for cell phones that cheerily depict your exact location to all your freinds. I own a cat that has an implanted ID chip in his shoulder. while not exactly obsessive about it, I often wonder what the fruit of all this monitor technology that we have today will be.
 
Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
Monitoring the crew of a starship is far easier than monitoring the population of a heavily-inhabitated world; -clip-
I concur.

Aren't all astronauts / cosmonauts already wired for bio-signs etc and monitored continually?

With the exception of what is demanded by society (Imperial for starships), I'm not sure there would be ANY privacy on a starship. The technology is already in place to monitor all the spaces far too easily.
 
Originally posted by BlackBat242:
Local system Privacy issues are part of the Law Level.
Yeah, maybe the goverment has tons of data about citizens available on a system wide computer system. So their purchases and movements are tracked by the government, maybe the PCs have to enter some codes into a computer system upon landing on the main world.

Another thing that goes along with this is the Freedom of the Press. ie Say your players want some information when they land on a world. The only source is the government controlled press. So the players would have to "hunt" for some truthful non-biased source.

Mike
 
Originally posted by Baron Saarthuran von Gushiddan:
-clip-

This is a very topical topic. I see on TV now they have ads for cell phones that cheerily depict your exact location to all your freinds. I own a cat that has an implanted ID chip in his shoulder. while not exactly obsessive about it, I often wonder what the fruit of all this monitor technology that we have today will be.
Call me paranoid - but I don't want to broadcast my location continually. Even if I'm always exactly where I'm supposed to be, I don't want some bean counting so-and-so to second quess me. My guess is a number of PCs and NPCs would feel the same way - doubly so when they're not always where they're supposed to be!
 
Originally posted by Qstor2:
Another thing that goes along with this is the Freedom of the Press. ie Say your players want some information when they land on a world. The only source is the government controlled press. So the players would have to "hunt" for some truthful non-biased source.
There is actually a flip-side to this - imagine a society where the freedom of press is quite limited because of strict protection of a person's privacy, and writing anything about the personal lives of ceebrities and politicians (among other people) would be disallowed without their direct concent. This would make writing about corruption scandals very difficult...
 
Originally posted by SGB - Steve B:
Call me paranoid - but I don't want to broadcast my location continually. Even if I'm always exactly where I'm supposed to be, I don't want some bean counting so-and-so to second quess me.
Tear up your credit cards and don't buy a new cell phone then ;) Seriously, I heard a few years back that the marketing gurus want access to the tracking chips in the phones, to sync with the shopping database from your credit card, so they can constantly monitor where you are and any time you're within a few meters of a store they show you shop at they'll send an automated call to your phone with an unadvertised special or even just a regular commercial for the store. How's that for intrusion...

...strolling in the mall for exercise out of the weather when <chirp chirp>

"Hello"

<digitized voice> "Hello Mr B did you know The Music Barn has a special on your favorite artist today? Only $12.99 for their latest CD if you act today. If you want express checkout just hit #44 and the store will have it ready to pick up immediately at the checkout and charged to your credit card."

...and there is The Music Barn right in front of you.

Ideally the marketing guru's would want to see everything integrated into one device (phone, gps, credit card, etc. :confused: ). Implanted of course (for you convience, so you don't loose it :rolleyes: ). By law (since that would be the only way to insure consumer safety and security
file_28.gif
). Oh yeah, they've proven that they have our best interests at heart and are paragons of data protection


Paranoid? Not a bit. But that doesn't mean they aren't out to get us
file_22.gif
 
IMTU Only those planets with High law levels (7-A) go through the files it keeps on every citizen regulalry. They have whole departments developed for this purpose.

Other lower law level (0-6) planets have files on everyone but only those in "High Risk" groups (security, military, merchants, ect.) are monitered closely.
 
Originally posted by far-trader:
By law (since that would be the only way to insure consumer safety and security)
There will probably be no need to force this by law - in a sufficiently consumerist society, people will desire to have these devices implanted. They are the consumer's wet dream - an automatic bargain-hunting device that is tailored to their needs, blocks out spam (it only alerts them to purcahases they're likely to make) and serves as a cellphone as well.
 
The very reason that I hate cell phones. The only reason that I got one is that I am job hunting these days. When I new job is landed, I'll "loose" my cell phone and get som eof my life back again.

Spam in the mail is bad enough. I don't want it on my cell phone as well.
 
Originally posted by SGB - Steve B:
With the exception of what is demanded by society (Imperial for starships), I'm not sure there would be ANY privacy on a starship. The technology is already in place to monitor all the spaces far too easily.
I would lilke to pick up on this comment by my colleague, the distinguished gentleman from Mississippi.

I think for modern humans, the obvious need for personal privacy has a direct and causal relationship with one's state of mental health. We all have an interior and an exterior-facing life and it is quite telling that we often define a dystopia as a world without protection of that 'interior life'.

Any group of human beings (from Earth civilizations, anyway) will need some degree of personal privacy in order to function well... for example, 'lying' is often believed to be one of the primary benefits of language, allowing one to maintain a different interior and exterior reality and allowing a social group to function despite stresses.

In the confines of a 'sensor-rich, monitored' environment like a starship I'd argue that while aboard ship the use of (and protection of personal privacy regarding) personal spaces, virtual spaces, holotapes, personal enclosures, etc. will be considered mandatory - and social policies/behaviors will tend to lean on the side of permissiveness towards maintaining privacies and confidences, and the whole culture will in fact require active avoidance of personal information disclosure, lest the crew gently and steadily begin to lose their minds as everyone 'knows their business'. In addition to basic survival needs (air/food/water) one of the big reasons for hypersleep systems will be to avoid fulfilling this need for the entire crew at all times.

Military veterans - what are your views, especially in light of the (greatly?) reduced privacy you may have experienced while in the service?
 
once that starport extrality fence is crossed then it takes a very laissez-faire approach and doesn't need to observe the poulace.
MWM may have taken a page from real history here. Doesn't the effective rule of government start to break down when the borders are 6 or more months distant from the capital?

Call me paranoid - but I don't want to broadcast my location continually.
Enthusiantically agree. However, it might be a good idea for our 'public servants' to get an ankle bracelet as a requirement for serving in office. Give them two weeks off in the summer, and perhaps one week for Christmas...otherwise you are 'on the clock' and we need to know where you are!
file_22.gif


Tear up your credit cards and don't buy a new cell phone then
Actually, if you want to disappear, you have to do several things...

*cancel all credit and debit cards, close bank accounts
*turn off all utilities, live off the grid
*transactions only in cash
*cash checks, if necessary, at payroll check cashing agencies that do transactions on paper only (no computer records)
*sell your car (no registration info in state databases)

How hard would that be where every transaction and movement is monitored? Chilling...

Military veterans - what are your views, especially in light of the (greatly?) reduced privacy you may have experienced while in the service?
In my personal experience, I do not have claustrophobia, so small spaces didn't bother me. It was disconcerting to have to get out of my berthing space to roll over, though... :mad:

I learned to develop a mental separation from others if I had to.

"Hey."
"Hey, you!"
"HEY, ARE YOU DEAF?"
"I'm not deaf. I'm ignoring you."
 
Originally posted by mickazoid:
Military veterans - what are your views, especially in light of the (greatly?) reduced privacy you may have experienced while in the service?
Privacy onboard a Navy ship was often just a thin curtain you could close over your rack. On average, three people were bunked in a space the size of a standard bathroom (10'x6'). Privacy often gave way to the needs of being able to live together. You respect others' privacy when you could, but duties and watchstanding had to come first.

Hygene (sp?) became a big issue with people living that close to one another. The worst name you can be called is a dirtbag. If you didn't change clothes and underclothes on a regular basis and get them washed, you became a pariah quickly. If you didn't shower on a regular basis, you could expect other inhabitants of your berthing compartment to throw you in the shower fully clothed. If the problem became one so great that it went up the chain of command, you could get non-judicial punishment to solve the stink.

The other worst thing you could be called was a thief. With people stacked three high in what are quaintly known as "coffin racks", there isn't enough social space amoungst people to tolerate stealing. If a guy became known as a thief, then it was a race to see if his own bunkmates beat the Hell out of him on their own or he went up on NJP at a Captain's Mast.

On a ship, out to sea, you cannot escape from your own bad habits because the people you offend with them are living right there next to you.

There was a scene from the second or third episode of 'Space: Above and Beyond' where a character (Hawk) plays a CD at maximum volume while the rest of his bunkmates are asleep. In the show, they just yelled at him and shut off his CD player. In real life, the members of the berthing compartment would have beaten Hawk to a bloody pulp and smashed his CD player.

The rule being that if you do not show respect and courtesy for those you live with, they shall not show respect and courtesy to you.

And there are usually a lot more of them than you.
 
For what it may be worth, monitoring is not all bad. We install cameras to monitor parking lots and crime goes down and people 'feel' safer (same for public buildings). There is no great outcry about this invasion of personal privacy, because it is perceived as a good thing.

Every cell phone can be monitored for location to some extent, it is inherent in the tracking technology that allows it to 'roam'. A satellite phone could probably be monitored for location with GPS accuracy (my stupid satellite TV is), but would you consider a phone that is NEVER out of service a good thing or a government plot to play 'big brother'.

In Traveller, if you want the convenience of a hand-held device that does everything, then live on a Pop A, TL 14 world. If you want to avoid all government spying, then live on a Pop 2, TL 4 world.
 
Just a thought on monitoring. If you grow up with constant monitoring and surveilance, you'd get used to it and would probably become uncomfortable if it wasn't there.
 
I suppose what it is used for is the important thing. A lot of people grew up with constant (and very abused) surveillance by the KGB, and they rarely speak of it being either safe or being used to it.

Its one thing to cover a back door to a building or a dark parking lot for security reasons, but I'm not sure how secure a society under a truly eefective means of monitoring would be. I get a feeling that folks would be rather strange and borderline paranoid. Its a short jump from legit security concerns to telescreens and "Inform on your parents day."

On a side note, I have seen my fifth person over the past two weeks that was typing on a Blackberry while driving.
 
I found David Brin's The Transparent Society to be very thought-provoking (non-fiction) discussion of privacy, freedom, and surveillance (among other things). I haven't got time ATM to summarise it, but if there's interest I'll try to do so next week.

John
 
Back
Top