Many
people have criticized the government's monitoring and analyzing of email
metadata, questioning the authority that the government has to gather the
private information contained in this data. The general idea seems to be
that the government was all wrong in its course of action. Too often
critics only criticize without offering any useful ideas of how things could
have been done more effectively. Cliff Stoll was one of these critics but as he worked closely with individuals from
various government agencies he realized that their motives and desired outcomes
were similar to his. This led him to
abandon many of his criticisms and work towards a common solution. Similarly, I think if those criticizing the
NSA and other government agencies focused more on the common goal of national
safety they could move past useless criticisms and instead contribute to a
greater dialog of reforming current data mining practices. It is more
productive for all people to collaborate and build a better system than to
merely criticize the current system. Recognizing
the similar motives and desired outcomes of those in government agencies is the
critical first step in that collaboration process.
I agree that too often controversial practices of the government such as data mining are frowned upon and criticized without much thought for the purpose and usefulness of such activities. These activities are quick to be condemned because of the secrecy that the participants rely on and the negative lighting which the media often casts on them. I don't pretend to be any more informed than the average person on what the government is actually doing with the data they collect, and I also recognize how many might feel that their rights and privacy are being seriously infringed. But it is the government's responsibility to protect the people: where should the line be drawn to allow them to do that effectively?
ReplyDeleteThe internet provides a place to quickly post your two cents on just about any topic. A lot of those posts aren't even worth that much, though. It's very easy to criticize, but few who do (myself included) know enough to make a fair analysis or suggest a better alternative. I agree that instead of just using technology to vent frustrations, people who demand change have to cultivate a real, useful conversation.
ReplyDelete