Librarians want to turn us all into privacy fiends

[Dominus Atheos]

I Ars Technica

In my extended family, I have something of a reputation for being a privacy Nazi. This is due to my penchant for not giving out addresses and phone numbers to stores that seem to think my buying something from them is a good enough reason to ask for it, but it turns out I'm only playing in the minor leagues. The American Library Association is raising more than a million dollars to fund a new "Right to Information Privacy Campaign" with a goal of nothing less than getting Americans "to recommit to information privacy."

Librarians might not be the group you'd first imagine out in the streets, manning the barricades, but they can get pretty agitated about both censorship and privacy. (Note: never tell a librarian that you'd like to ban a particular book unless the two of you are separated by an inch of plexiglass.) In this case, the 64,000 librarians of the ALA believe that their work remains vital to a vibrant democracy, since "the right to read and search for information is the foundation of individual liberty."

The ALA's new campaign wants to 1) educate people, and then 2) turn them into activists. The education component of the three-year program will make people aware, for instance, that "checking out a biography of Osama Bin Laden could prompt seizure of their library records" or that "online searches create traceable records that make them vulnerable to questioning by the FBI." The ALA also worries about provisions in the law that "gag" the people who are on the receiving end of government orders to turn over these records.
"Law enforcement agencies at every level are exploiting fears about terrorism and child safety to encourage lawmakers to strip away statutory privacy protections for library records," says the ALA. "This eliminates anonymity in the library, and encourages the mind set that 'good' people should have nothing to hide."

But, as Cory Doctorow wittily points out in a talk he gave to the group last month, people have all sorts of behaviors for which they want "privacy," even if these behaviors aren't "secret." When someone heads off to the bathroom, for instance, and closes the door, their behavior isn't a "secret," but it is "private." And everyone's parents engaged in at least one nonsecret but private activity to produce a child.

The librarians are well suited to mount such a campaign. By nature, they're guardians of anonymity and free access to information, and they also have access to a huge variety of outlets for their message. US public libraries have more locations than McDonalds, and 62 percent of American adults hold library cards. That gives ALA members a natural place to educate the public about these issues and channel that education into public discourse and, hopefully, a new consensus on privacy and its importance.

[Knife]

gag; Americans. You have a SSN that is all over the place, a Drivers Licence all over the fucking place, Credit Card numbers all over the fucking place.

You, if you participate in society at all, are all over the place. Hell, internet user names and passwords are all over the place too. The idea that if the government wants the same level as corporate or civilian America has is some how the second coming the Hitler is absurd.

[Broomstick]

Actually, my SSN is most emphatically NOT all over the place. I also avoid handing out the driver's license number.

SOME people don't give a fuck - until their identity is stolen. Others of us actually do think twice before giving out private information, particularly over the internet.

[Molyneux]

gag; Americans. You have a SSN that is all over the place, a Drivers Licence all over the fucking place, Credit Card numbers all over the fucking place.

You, if you participate in society at all, are all over the place. Hell, internet user names and passwords are all over the place too. The idea that if the government wants the same level as corporate or civilian America has is some how the second coming the Hitler is absurd.

Care to say that last bit again, in English? Same level of WHAT as 'corporate or civilian America'?

Wouldn't the phrase "privacy Nazi" be something of an oxymoron in that context, given the Nazi government's all-encompassing status?

One of my close friends is a (fairly new) librarian, and the topics of censorship and privacy protection are ones on which he and I are in perfect agreement. Nitpick of misuse of the term "Nazi" aside, I wish the ALA the best of luck!

[FSTargetDrone]

Actually, my SSN is most emphatically NOT all over the place. I also avoid handing out the driver's license number.

SOME people don't give a fuck - until their identity is stolen. Others of us actually do think twice before giving out private information, particularly over the internet.

When I was in college, everyone was issued a ID card which featured the individual's social security number as the student ID number, plainly printed on the front of the card. I certainly hope they don't use that system today.

[Darth Wong]

Actually, my SSN is most emphatically NOT all over the place. I also avoid handing out the driver's license number.

SOME people don't give a fuck - until their identity is stolen. Others of us actually do think twice before giving out private information, particularly over the internet.

If we're talking about privacy from the GOVERNMENT, then your SSN is most assuredly "all over the place". The government obviously knows all of that stuff.

[Gaidin]

When I was in college, everyone was issued a ID card which featured the individual's social security number as the student ID number, plainly printed on the front of the card. I certainly hope they don't use that system today.

They do use the SSN as the default student ID number still. However, they give the student the option to have a different id number assigned by the campus as well as no longer displaying student id numbers on the cards anymore. At least at University of Kentucky anyway.

[Broomstick]

Actually, my SSN is most emphatically NOT all over the place. I also avoid handing out the driver's license number.

SOME people don't give a fuck - until their identity is stolen. Others of us actually do think twice before giving out private information, particularly over the internet.

If we're talking about privacy from the GOVERNMENT, then your SSN is most assuredly "all over the place". The government obviously knows all of that stuff.

Well, yes, especially since I applied for a job that requires a security clearance. However, since the SSN is a government issued number I don't have a problem with the issuing party using it. In fact, I've found the Feds to be pretty careful these days with that number. When they do ask for it they almost invariably caution you about keeping that number safe and confidential.

I DO have a problem with it appearing all over the damn place elsewhere for no fucking reason. I resisted having it put on my driver's license, for instance (for awhile Illinois really pushed for that, saying it would be "convenient" - uh, yeah, for identity thieves). Health insurers used to routinely use it as their ID but have now been ordered to stop that. The local stores with their "buying club cards" used to ask for it - WTF? What possible reason could there be for that? And, as mentioned, it used to be common for schools to plaster it onto ID cards.

The only people who should have my SSN are those who have a reason to have it, and they should fucking well keep it private and not hang it out for public display. For that matter, I feel the same way about my home address and telephone number although I'd be inclined to share those a little more freely than the SSN. Even so, I want to know WHY someone needs the info. When a local store started insisting on having me give my phone number to the cashier for every damned transaction (like, buying pens and paperclips) and refused to sell me goods without it I stopped shopping there - and I told them WHY they had lost a customer. They don't need to know that information. I don't give a fuck about their marketing, or their "information about customers" or whatever. They don't need to know that to accept my cash. I might accept the argument that information is required for dangerous substances purchased, but I've yet to run into a gas station that wouldn't take my cash with no questions asked for highly flammable petroleum products. (For some purchases the law does require the seller to positively identify the buyer, usually based on good reason).

I should not have to give my SSN to check out a book from the public library. What possible reason could there be for a library to have that number on file for me?

[MichaelFerrariF1]

At the University of Texas, we have a random number on our student ID. We also have an electronic ID that, after your initials, is made of random numbers. We use that for accessing internet, email, Blackboard, etc. Most actions requiring an ID now ask for the EID, even those involving "hard" medium like scantrons. I don't remember the last time I've used the ID number on my card, if ever.

Fun fact: the back of my student ID has a phone number you can call to report a lost/stolen card. They didn't put a lot of thought into that.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Actually, my SSN is most emphatically NOT all over the place. I also avoid handing out the driver's license number.

SOME people don't give a fuck - until their identity is stolen. Others of us actually do think twice before giving out private information, particularly over the internet.

If we're talking about privacy from the GOVERNMENT, then your SSN is most assuredly "all over the place". The government obviously knows all of that stuff.

The Feds. In Washington State it's illegal for any company or state government agency to demand your SSN (even though many request it anyway) except in the later case the Department of Licensing, and even then your SSN is not printed on your driver's license and you have a separate license number.

[FSTargetDrone]

My SSN doesn't appear on my Pennsylvania Driver's License card, nor does it appear on my library card.

[Alyrium Denryle]

gag; Americans. You have a SSN that is all over the place, a Drivers Licence all over the fucking place, Credit Card numbers all over the fucking place.

You, if you participate in society at all, are all over the place. Hell, internet user names and passwords are all over the place too. The idea that if the government wants the same level as corporate or civilian America has is some how the second coming the Hitler is absurd.

Oh please, corporate or civilian america does not have ready access to my library records, because libraries do not give out the information unless someone decides to hack into a library computer for some reason.

There is no reason why the books I check out should be anyone's business but mine and Sally the librarian. Especially once you factor in the good against the potential risk.

Good: You can collect a database of people who read "suspect" books.

Risk: Who defines suspect? How exhaustive is this list and who is reading it? Sure it might start out as things like the anarchist cookbook, justified by "if you are good you have nothing to hide" but what happens when that list is expanded? Right now it is not as if we have any civilian oversight of the list.

Right now the DOJ for example is packed with graduates of the Liberty University Law School. The law school devoted to churning out lawyers who will cynically use the freedoms spelled out in the bill of rights to subvert them. I dont want anyone of those cretins having any kind of access to my information or setting policy, or investigating me because I checked out Queer Literature, a book on medieval witchcraft, or a copy of The Decent of Man.

[SecondStorm]

Fun fact: the back of my student ID has a phone number you can call to report a lost/stolen card. They didn't put a lot of thought into that.

I guess they assume that people are wise enough to write it down...and people that find a lost card is honest enough to call the number.

[Ender]

Oh please, corporate or civilian america does not have ready access to my library records, because libraries do not give out the information unless someone decides to hack into a library computer for some reason.

There is no reason why the books I check out should be anyone's business but mine and Sally the librarian. Especially once you factor in the good against the potential risk.

Good: You can collect a database of people who read "suspect" books.

Risk: Who defines suspect? How exhaustive is this list and who is reading it? Sure it might start out as things like the anarchist cookbook, justified by "if you are good you have nothing to hide" but what happens when that list is expanded? Right now it is not as if we have any civilian oversight of the list.

Right now the DOJ for example is packed with graduates of the Liberty University Law School. The law school devoted to churning out lawyers who will cynically use the freedoms spelled out in the bill of rights to subvert them. I dont want anyone of those cretins having any kind of access to my information or setting policy, or investigating me because I checked out Queer Literature, a book on medieval witchcraft, or a copy of The Decent of Man.

Corporate America doesn't, but the government does. My library has big signs up at all the search terminals and front desk informing you that per the Patriot act, they can be made to hand over your search and checkout records.

[Col. Crackpot]

Actually, my SSN is most emphatically NOT all over the place. I also avoid handing out the driver's license number.

SOME people don't give a fuck - until their identity is stolen. Others of us actually do think twice before giving out private information, particularly over the internet.

If we're talking about privacy from the GOVERNMENT, then your SSN is most assuredly "all over the place". The government obviously knows all of that stuff.

If you are from Massachusetts, your drivers license number is your SSN. Up until like 3 years ago anyway. Some people still have the old licenses as they are gradually phased out.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Oh please, corporate or civilian america does not have ready access to my library records, because libraries do not give out the information unless someone decides to hack into a library computer for some reason.

There is no reason why the books I check out should be anyone's business but mine and Sally the librarian. Especially once you factor in the good against the potential risk.

Good: You can collect a database of people who read "suspect" books.

Risk: Who defines suspect? How exhaustive is this list and who is reading it? Sure it might start out as things like the anarchist cookbook, justified by "if you are good you have nothing to hide" but what happens when that list is expanded? Right now it is not as if we have any civilian oversight of the list.

Right now the DOJ for example is packed with graduates of the Liberty University Law School. The law school devoted to churning out lawyers who will cynically use the freedoms spelled out in the bill of rights to subvert them. I dont want anyone of those cretins having any kind of access to my information or setting policy, or investigating me because I checked out Queer Literature, a book on medieval witchcraft, or a copy of The Decent of Man.

Corporate America doesn't, but the government does. My library has big signs up at all the search terminals and front desk informing you that per the Patriot act, they can be made to hand over your search and checkout records.

They do that because libraries are categorically opposed to that provision...

[Darth Wong]

Risk: Who defines suspect? How exhaustive is this list and who is reading it? Sure it might start out as things like the anarchist cookbook, justified by "if you are good you have nothing to hide" but what happens when that list is expanded? Right now it is not as if we have any civilian oversight of the list.

Right now the DOJ for example is packed with graduates of the Liberty University Law School. The law school devoted to churning out lawyers who will cynically use the freedoms spelled out in the bill of rights to subvert them. I dont want anyone of those cretins having any kind of access to my information or setting policy, or investigating me because I checked out Queer Literature, a book on medieval witchcraft, or a copy of The Decent of Man.

Suppose they do investigate you; so what? What are they going to find? What people need to stop is the government's ability to "investigate" people by making them disappear rather than doing old-fashioned police work, like digging around to see if they can find anything substantive. THAT is the real problem, not the fact that any arbitrary thing can be used to trigger an investigation.

Consider rural types; if you live in a small town, everyone knows far more about you than they would in a big or even smallish city. The kind of privacy breaches that you consider so terrible would be virtually common knowledge in a small town. But it's not so bad unless people can act on it in a dangerous or destructive way. You are focusing on the wrong problem.