At 08:48 AM 8/9/96 -0700, John F. Fricker wrote:

I am not a great fan of social engineering and regulations. Yet the legisture in Oregon may get called for a special session to address this issue and I see this an opportunity for a grander arguement than merely acccess to the DMV data. And as much as we dislike the presence of the governments they do indeed exist. Living within their domain limits our choices to either: complacency through inaction (cynicism et al), attempts at isolation (back to the land), or taking an active role through voting, education, civil disobedience or participation in the process (a pox on party politics! the latter choice is easily the least enticing while civil disobedience can be truly fun! >g<). Ok so call me a statist and shove me out the door, but I am not argueing for the existance of a state. It does currently exist and I am not self-sufficient. But I digress.

Of course, in my opinion the "The State currently exists" observation is a problem, but I believe it's a solvable one!

#2) The records industry (for lack of a better term to encompass all companies that accumulate data on individuals) needs some standards and guidelines. Or walls and fences. Maybe even bars and a moat! And the sooner the better. Federally imposed software requirements are not uncommon in certain industries. It is time for standards for the personal data maintained by co-operating entities (ie agencies the public co-operates with such as doctors, the DMV, and so on).

Even better would be to simply stop the state from collecting the records in the first place, right?

#3) The goal is the anonymous citizen. The first step it to secure the data currently exposed. Can this be done _without_ legislation?

Perhaps the better question is, "Can this be done _WITH_ legislation?!?" Legislation, by its very nature, tends to serve the interests of the government first, and possibly some of the citizenry trailing a bit behind. Remember the saying, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, you treat every problem as if it were a nail." "Solving" the problem by legislation inherently tries to convert actions into crimes, or at least punishable activities. Needless to say, it won't be GOVERNMENT people who get jailed or dissuaded. A market and technology-based solution to the problem inherently involves cooperation, rather than confrontation, because the market has no inherent way to coerce people into acting