An elegy for sweet forgetfulness, soon to be lost forever

In my memory, I'm standing on the Île Saint-Louis, looking at a butcher shop.

But was I ever there? I've provably been in Paris. I've likely been on the Île Saint-Louis. After that I don't know. In my mind's eye I can picture it and picture myself there, but my mind's eye is a notoriously filthy liar. I can remember any number of events that never happened, and I have forgotten many important events that did.

If I was never there, where did this memory come from? It could have been Edmund White, whose evocative novels of his life in Paris have always brought the city to life for me. Reading Declare by Tim Powers brought these memories back, and added wartime paranoia and Nazi intrigue to the mix.

I'll never know for sure whether I've been there before. My previous visits to Paris were before the era of ubiquitous surveillance, GPS cellphone tracking, Google Latitude, Foursquare and ultrazillions of digital photos being taken of absolutely everything at every moment and being pasted online. So even once all of the artificial "privacy" barriers are dropped, once indexing and face recognition systems correlate every sparrow fart since the dawn of the digital age, once every credit-card purchase record is cracked open and something like Vernor Vinge's GreenInc provides a complete personal history of every human, nobody will be able to say with any degree of clarity whether that memory is true or false.

I weep for the children. Their digital trail will never allow them to erase their personal history and start over. No more retrospective virginity restorations. No more he-said, she-said he-did. No more bonfire of the diaries for personal reinvention. Everyone will become a politician denying their words of the day before, followed by an immediate multi-POV video playback with subtitles, location tags, and links to probable original sources shown in the goggles of everyone around them.

On the other hand, I weep with joy for the children. Memory prostheses will make arguments quite different: instead of arguing whose recollection is more accurate, people's agents will automatically debate the relative authoritativeness of the certificate chains and trust authorities of the different sources of evidence. When professionally photoshopped memories, reputation laundering, real-time distributed consensus auctions and whitelisted memory attestation services become common we just won't worry about it anymore. We won't argue about trivia.

Maybe I'll steer clear of the Île Saint-Louis on my next trip and leave the past alone, whether it's mine or borrowed from somebody else. I'll just preserve my own personal mythology a little bit longer.

Thanks to everyone who worked to end DADT

I'd like to thank my friends and family for their efforts in ending the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. It means a lot for me, as I had honestly given up hope of it happening any time soon.

It's too easy to be cynical, but as I watched the past two years go by, and watched the hugest congressional majority in recent memory evaporate, I thought for sure there would be no progress on queer issues. And although I told myself I was content with Obama just naming Supreme Court justices, I was enraged by the contradiction of his "fierce advocate" image shown by his administration's aggressive defense of DOMA, his utter inaction on ENDA and DOMA, and the snail's pace of DADT repeal (coupled with continued vigorous legal defense of the law). I had come to the conclusion that the Democrats had decided that gay votes, gay money, and gay wedge issues were simply too valuable to them to give up, and that they would hold us hostage for another six years or until the courts finally grew a pair. I just couldn't take the disappointment anymore, so I really stopped investing any hope.

Sure, I went through the motions with emails to elected officials (pointless, since I vote in Georgia), but I really couldn't bring myself to care a great deal. I was resigned to it. But this is where my family and friends really stepped in and pushed this through. I'm very thankful and grateful for friends and family who care enough about me to take on issues that affect me - without my having to ask. It really means a lot.

It was a little over two years ago when a former friend's opposition to same-sex marriage made me snap and made me raise my expectations of what friends and family will do to help with the issues of queer people. I'm thrilled to say that not only did they take action, they did it without my asking.

Granted, these issues affect us all — when some of us aren't free, all of us aren't free — but when the folks on the comfortable side of the privilege line do more than I do on issues that affect me, it really is touching. Thank you.

Vancouver's Open Data, Open Standards, Open Source and the Vancouver Public Library

Vancouver has adopted a policy of Open Data, Open Standards, Open Source and I'm really excited about it. David Ascher presented on the topic at Open Web Vancouver 2009 and pointed out that if we don't engage the city and use this data it will go nowhere.

The Vancouver Public Library is one of my favourite places. I love libraries, I love books, but the library here in Vancouver is a really special library for me. So I've been thinking of ways that the library could share data so that I could build applications to make the library more interesting and more valuable to the people of the city.

Here's some data I'd like to have:

• Books on order

  I'd like to know what new books are currently on order, but not available. I want a preview of coming attractions.

• Most unpopular books

  What doesn't get checked out? What's likely to get sold in the next round of disposal, ahem, book sale?

• Most popular books

  What's everybody reading?

• Top 100 sites for library patrons

  What are the most popular sites browsed from the library? I'd like to be able to contrast this with the most popular sites according to Alexa. That should help tell the library what sorts of services patrons need.

These are things that I could mash up into interesting applications, such as presenting a unified view of new popular books on Amazon and which ones are in the library, or popular in the local community.

Obama's election: hope for an exiled gay American

Living in Canada over the past four years it's been hard to admit I'm an American. Before the 2004 election people used to commiserate, saying "what a terrible government you Americans have to deal with." After 2004, the mood got ugly: we really did elect Bush that second time. The negative opinion of the US government was transferred onto its citizens. Since 2004 whenever I have admitted to being American I've watched welcoming smiles melt into frowns, and often had to listen to a tirade about Bush and the US government. I've had to agree with them, too.

After all, I had to leave the US in order to live with my husband, and you'd better believe I've resented it bitterly. With laws that treat me as something between an abomination and a criminal, a Supreme Court prepared to permanently relegate me to second-class citizenship, and a president that seemed intent on breaking every international law, violating every civil liberty and every standard of decent conduct, I could find little to defend about the US, and even less reason to want to.

I certainly hoped Obama would win. I contributed to his campaign, I made phone calls. But I never let myself really believe, because it would just hurt too much if he lost. The Supreme Court holds the key to deciding whether I'll be a second-class citizen in the US until the day I die, and if more Scalitos had been appointed it would have dashed my hopes for two generations. I held my breath.

Today Barack Obama pulled it off, and decisively, breaking the last barrier for African-Americans (which John McCain spoke of so eloquently and movingly in his concession speech). Obama even mentioned gay people as actual Americans in his acceptance speech. Today I have hope, and I can say I'm an American without embarrassment and without (excessive) anger and resentment. I see that the dream is alive in the United States, and I see reason to believe that one day I might be able to live there again, maybe even as an equal.

A lot more has to change for this to happen. Today, people in Arizona, California, and Florida voted to ban same-sex marriage; it passed in Arizona and Florida. The vote is very close in California, but one thing is certain: voters hold farm animals in higher esteem than their fellow citizens. We have a long way to go, but when I look at how far we've come in forty-five years, I have hope.

Congratulations to President-elect Barack Obama and to the people of the United States on turning this historic page. Congratulations to African-Americans who can say that they are now full participants in the society and democracy of the United States. Congratulations and thank you to everyone who worked, donated, and voted to make this happen. Someday it will make a difference for me, too.

Senator Herb Kohl on HR 6304 (The "I Spy" act)

Herb Kohl, Senator from AT&T

Back when the Democrats were preparing to sell our rights, our privacy, and the very rule of law to the telecom lobby while capitulating in the most pathetic way possible to the Bush administration, I wrote a letter to Wisconsin Democratic senator Herb Kohl. I urged him most specifically not to vote for H.R. 6304, a bill that made a mockery of the rule of law by giving felonious telecom companies a free pass for having helped the federal government to spy on US citizens in a way directly prohibited by federal statute.

Of course, he took his marching orders from the Democratic "leadership" (who take their marching orders from AT&T) and voted for the bill. In his letter he never addresses telecom immunity, which was the key issue I wrote to him about. Instead, he lies about the bill and its provisions, parroting the line set down by his masters. And of course, he never mentions that he personally voted to sustain telecom immunity.

Finally, I find it particularly offensive that he says he's taking time to "address my concerns" when he's not addressing them, he's ignoring and dismissing them. No, Senator Kohl, "everyone" doesn't agree.

HERB KOHL		COMMITTEES:
WISCONSIN
		APPROPRIATIONS
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
330 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING		JUDICIARY
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
(202) 224-5653		SPECIAL COMMITTEE
http://kohl.senate.gov	United States Senate	ON AGING
	WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4903
	July 24, 2008

Mr. Chuck Leduc
[address redacted]

Dear Mr. Leduc:

     Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I value the input I get from people back home in Wisconsin, and I would like to take this opportunity to address your concerns.

     In December 2005, the revelation that the President authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to monitor telephone calls and e-mails of United States citizens without obtaining a warrant or court order raises important legal and policy questions. I strongly believe that the President, Congress, and the courts all share a common goal: to protect the American people. If terrorists are operating in this country, or people in this country are communicating with terrorists, everyone can agree that we must give our government the tools it needs to protect the American people, including the power to listen to their phone calls. Security, the Rule of law, and the protection of civil liberties, however, are not mutually exclusive concepts; we can have all three.

     In August 2007, Congress passed, and the President signed, the Protect America Act (PAA). I opposed this bill because it authorized broad electronic surveillance of Americans' communications, and provided for little oversight by Congress and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). The PAA was ultimately enacted as a temporary fix. The ability to conduct surveillance pursuant to the PAA was set to expire in early August.

     It was critically important for Congress to authorize necessary surveillance authorities, this time with appropriate civil liberties protections. To that end, on June 19, 2008, Representative Silvestre Reyes introduced the FISA Amendments Act of2008 (H.R. 6304). This measure authorizes the Intelligence Community to conduct electronic surveillance of individuals located outside of the United States, but also provides Congress and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court greater authorities to conduct oversight of this surveillance and protect the privacy of innocent Americans. In addition, the bill authorizes a thorough investigation of the President's Terrorist Surveillance Program and clarifies that no surveillance can be conducted outside of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I voted for H.R. 6304 because I believe it strikes an appropriate balance between national security and protecting civil liberties. It was signed into law on July 10, 2008.

[page 2]

     Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue.

                         Sincerely,
                         (signed)
                         Herb Kohl
                         United States Senator
HK:mxh

... and finally, my response to his letter:

Dear Senator Kohl,

I am rather disappointed in your response to my letter about telecom immunity and spying. In my letter I specifically urged you to uphold the rule of law by holding telcos accountable for their lawbreaking. I obviously think your vote went contrary to the best interests of the people of the state you represent, but that is not why I am writing back.

The reason I am writing back is because you did not address telecom immunity, my primary concern, in your letter. That is political cowardice: if you are going to put the interests of corporations above those of your constituents, you might as well own up to it. You could even have made up some implausible justification (you seem to be pretty good at that), but to pretend it didn't happen is just plain insulting. Just how stupid do you think we are?

Sincerely,
Charles LeDuc

The ever-growing list

I'm reading Stasiland, a book of stories about the East German intelligence apparatus that engaged 2% of the population to spy on itself. It's sad, engaging, and absurdly funny at turns.

If, by the mere fact of investigating someone you turn them into an Enemy of the State, you could potentially busy yourself with the entire population.

[The definition of "enemy" becomes] "Too wide," he continues, "to be properly carried out. Within available resources I mean."

Stasiland, pp 200

Which makes me think about various terror watchlists compiled in recent years, with no clear criteria for inclusion or exclusion, which grow longer and longer, and thus mean less and less. When you watch everyone, you watch no one: the Stasi compiled the most pervasive surveillance state so far, but even so they failed to predict its own fall.

So one would assume that list keepers have learned this lesson (let's give them the benefit of the doubt on their competence and intellectual capability). So if these lists are ineffective in detecting or preventing terrorism, then what exactly are they for?

---

Of course, one must also never underestimate the power of stupidity: always assume incompetence over conspiracy. It's hard to credit these clowns with carrying out anything successfully.

Security and privacy: bait and switch

Holy cow: Rolling Stone has a relevant article! I always think of Rolling Stone as some sort of tired 70s by-blow of Gloria Steinem and Larry Flynt, the place P.J. O'Rourke writes about vomiting in foreign lands. They get major credit for signing Naomi Klein.

(via BoingBoing (via Schneier))

Here's a story: China reinvents its nation, and in the process uses new technology to build "Totalitarianism 2.0" à la Orwell. Klein sketches a scary picture, draws disturbing parallels and connections with the U.S. government, and points out some nasty trends in our not-so-free society.

Although she doesn't spell it out in the article, I'll take it a step further and give a progression:

1. U.S. citizens were highly resistant to living in a police state.
2. A temporary crisis resulted in permanent security measures which cause widespread delay and irritation, but are ridiculous by any reasonable standard and provide no actual improvement in security.
3. The government provides a new method of sailing through security by handing over biometric information and submitting to electronic tracking.
4. Governments threaten to prohibit travel without biometric identification.

A simplistic view, but when you strip away the fear, propaganda and fancy talk, that's what is left.

I've already fallen for it. The border between the U.S. and Canada used to be a lot easier to cross, but since they tightened it so much in the past decade it is now very slow. As a result, the US and Canadian governments introduced the ominously named NEXUS program to facilitate crossing the border. I'm still regularly stopped and searched at customs and asked the usual questions, but now they have a more easily tracked dossier and my retina prints on file (hello General Poindexter!). This is how our privacy and freedom of movement are chipped away: piece by piece, year by year, and one person at a time.