the FAA shouldn't be the ones to address this. We also made a point - that I expect many will agree with, that there's really a broader context for privacy - generally - that we as a nation need to address.
Good point that deserves much greater attention, drones as good a starting point as any other evolving surveillance technology. Fragmentation of privacy policy and enforcement among a slew of stakeholders inside and outside government allows, actually encourages, diverse, contradictory, and evasive compliance with all too flatulent aspirations for privacy forever subjected to security. The US has no fully empowered privacy commission, presumably to allow continuous evasion of fulfilling privacy promises deliberately intended to be violated on behalf of evolving, usual secret, national interests of government and commerce. Same old BS of putting government and its contractors before taxpayers. Secrecy, both governmental and non-governmental, remains the biggest threat to privacy and security around the globe. Secrecy policy is a huge mess, bloated and costly, and privacy policy cannot compete so long as the secrecy hegemon prevails. US Patent and Trademark Office today seeks comments on revising policy to issue secrecy orders for "economically significant patents." Economy as vital as WMDs. It is apt to refer to all technologies, Google, MS, Cisco, universities, et al, which perform the dual use of user convenience and spying on users. And arguments for both being necessarily linked are specious apologias which open the door for privacy abuse under guise of security, now economical -- a segue perfect for opposing Occupy Wall Street. An industry has grown to eploit the two sides of privacy and security, using the wedge of secrecy to assure secrecy always wins over privacy in the name of law enforcement and national security. No privacy policy is worth a centavo due to the ever-present flatulence about abiding with lawful requests for data access which in turn is a cover story to hide technological access outside the law. Finally, it has become commonplace for technologists to succumb to legal persuasion to lie about technological capabilities to transgress human rights. Put a lawyer and a technologist together and you have a duality now ruling communications by hook and crook. _______________________________________________ drone-list mailing list drone-list@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/drone-list If you would like to receive a daily digest, click "yes" (once you click above) next to "would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest?" You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE