] Powell said the Iraqi authorities had conducted
] experiments on people, with one source reporting that
] 1,600 convicted prisoners had been transferred to special
] units where such experiments were carried out. Autopsies
] were later conducted to check the results, he said.

BBC | Powell UN briefing: Key points

If you agree with Thompson's perspective on America, and you're looking for a worst case scenario, you could do worse then to read this book. Its a psycho analysis of the reasons that people establish totalitarian states. This is what fear does to societies.

Amazon.com: Books: Escape from Freedom

] Perhaps Thompson's most disturbing charge is aimed at the
] American people -- only half of whom exercise their right
] to vote. "The oligarchy doesn't need an educated public.
] And maybe the nation does prefer tyranny," he says. "I
] think that's what worries me."

Actually, the "oligarchy" does, in fact, need an educated public. However, I'd agree that the nation prefers tyranny. They seem to externalize it. Like Tyranny is great because its not going to effect me. And I'd offer that the people prefer to be uneducated. Thinking is hard. Its easy just to do what you're told.

Salon.com News | Hunter S. Thompson

] The combination of increasing public debate on the
] Internet and a global dialog will help the Japanese
] people become aware of the domestic problems as well as
] the context and responsibility of Japan globally. A new
] sense of global responsibility to achieve a higher
] ethical standard will help the Japanese people create a
] modern democracy capable of solving the domestic problems
] and allowing Japan to participate in the global
] geo-political arena as a true global entity. The
] revolution in Japan will be a ethical revolution about
] the people become aware that they are actually in charge.

How much of this essay seems to ring true in the US?

Joi Ito's Web: My draft essay about the revolution in Japan

] The Supreme Court has always held that what is reasonable
] depends on context. If you're in a situation where people
] are being killed and you're trying to save lives, you can
] be more intrusive...Protecting the state is a higher
] duty. To say otherwise is to sacrifice the ends to the
] means. If you're unwilling in times of crisis to depart
] from the law, and you lose your freedom, you've done no
] service to anyone.

Perspective: The first 'e-war'

] Like most information technologies, Mobile and Ubiquitous
] Computing carries a number of security and privacy
] implications. We feel that care should be taken to
] consider these issues when designing Ubicomp systems. In
] this report we will enumerate a number of the privacy
] concerns in Ubicomp and provide a philisophical
] discussion of the importance of addressing these
] problems. In considering these problems we have found
] that a number of Ubicomp techniques are in fact well
] suited to solving security and privacy problems that
] arise in Ubicomp. We will discuss some of these
] techniques in the hope of inspiring further
] consideration. Systems described include a secure RF-ID
] system, an architecture for setting privacy levels based
] on context, and a wearable cryptographic authenticator.

This is probably the coolest paper I've ever written, and for one of the coolest classes I ever took. I'm linking this here because I've had to dig it out of Georgia Tech's site twice now and I figure it ought to be easy to find...

Security and Privacy in Ubiquitous Computing

This is funny as hell. I love the closeup of the VCR in the third frame. If Disney did redo the Pirates of the Caribbean ride to have animatronic portrayals of P2P users and overseas DVD duplication labs, I would make the trip to see it. Thats my idea of entertainment.

Link from boingboing.net.

Fox Trot and the War on Technology

] All of those guys were talking about the present, that's
] what science fiction writers really do. I've been struck
] lately rereading Brave New World and 1984 at the extent
] to which both of these visions, which would seem to be
] completely contradictory, have turned out to be true and
] in fact complementary. You have the totalitarian thought
] control and language modification of 1984 going on: I
] mean, consider the phrase "weapons of mass destruction"
] -- completely Orwellian in use. And at the same time you
] have something like the feelies from Brave New World
] which are the soporific media message that puts everyone
] to sleep. Both of those things are happening
] simultaneously. The totalitarian message is being
] transmitted while you're zoned out in front of the
] television watching the feelies, high on soma -- which is
] some combination of Prozac and Budweiser.

JPB in Mother Jones. Lots of stuff covered before here, but a few choice metaphores.

MotherJones.com | John Perry Barlow Interview

] Each of the animals has a word from a poem written on
] their backs and as they wander about the words take a new
] poetic form each time they come to rest.
]
] But the exercise is not just an attempt to create living poems,
] it is also, according to the poet, an exercise in quantum
] mechanics.

This is just weird enough to warrent mentioning. People are STRANGE.

Woolly writing creates new poetry

Elonka wrote:
] But in terms of security at airports? I agree with the sign
] that is posted at St. Louis Lambert International Airport,
] which, to the best of my recollection, says: "Passengers
] wishing to fly are not required to submit to search of their
] persons or belongings. Such search may be refused, in which
] case the airlines have the right to refuse to allow the
] individual to board the aircraft."

You might be interested in this, its a lawsuit covering this issue which is currently in the courts:

http://cryptome.org/freetotravel.htm

The lawsuit brings the following issues to bare on the comments you made:

1. You state that an ID requirement to fly is ok if it isn't also coupled with ID requirement as bus terminals, hotels, train stations, and other travel related businesses. The case argues that it is.

2. A search at an airport isn't legal just because you can avoid it by not flying. This kind of excuse could be used in any context. (You can avoid the search by opting not to, say, buy groceries, go to church, visit a doctor, or vote...) The searches are legal only because they are specifically intended to find weapons and explosives and are directly related to airline security. This doesn't mean that they can't bust you if they find evidence of a crime, but it does mean they can't LOOK for it. For instance, they can't pass out a picture of a stolen artifact and ask airport security to keep an eye out for it. This would constitute a warrentless search that has nothing to do with airline security.

Consider how this fact relates to the no fly list. If they can't look for evidence of crimes, then can they look for people who may be wanted for crimes? There seems to be a very fine line here.

An ID check is only useful to the extent that the IDs are cross referenced with a database. Prior to 911 the *ONLY* reason that ID checks were performed was to prevent people from reselling tickets. (Consumers bought into this because they beleived it was security related, but in practice ANY form of ID was acceptable and they were not cross referenced with anything other then your ticket.)

What database should these IDs be cross referenced with? It would clearly be illegal to cross reference the IDs with traffic ticket information. Again, this is a search with no cause. Its a dragnet.

Where do you draw a line between this and the no fly list?

Frustraing matters, of course, is the fact that the government security regulations are "secret" as is the no fly list. This might explain why the experience is inconsistent. The airlines probably don't really know what the actual rules are.

This also creates an incredible opportunity for abuse. What do we know about who is on this list? Do we even know if its well maintained?

RE: How to fly without ID!