Another Obama Database

[albrecht]

1.Not sure the need for paper backups, although I'm sure medical doctors will write out their prescriptions illegibly using pen and paper for a long time to come.

2.I believe it is possible that this database, since it would be strictly one way, could be put on a server walled off from the internet.  Wasn't Freenet something like that?  All updates on drug interactions would have to be entered separately into this database.

3.I agree that no civil servant should have access to medical records, but I don't know that they do right now. I like you albrecht, but I think even you'd admit that you're far too willing to believe in conspiracy theories and anything that supports them.  So, I'm going to take your claim that civil servants have access to these databases with a grain of salt.

Already hackers have gained access to various insurance companies and OPM databases. And apparently some military ones also. The IRS databases has been used to political targeting of "opposition" people and groups (and not just Obama partisans but others in the past.) The State Dept databases also (recall people "checking" on Obama's, and McCain's, passport data prior to the first election?) The consolidation of databases and "information sharing" between government departments has resulted in people like Snowden, Manning, etc being able to leak/steal (depending on one's view) far more material than in times past with more firewalls and less access by people, civilian contractors or actual government/military employees. (I think the jump to "connect" departments, databases, etc after 911 was a mistake personally. And I mentioned back then, we shouldn't switch our whole MO based on Muslim throwbacks. The real, at least potential, enemies- State actors, Russia, China, etc or organized criminal groups are far more sophisticated and the more "sharing" and less compartmentalization opens us up for more leaks or theft.)

Like the "Yes, Minister" "Big Brother" aspect simply having the capability, or the database, eventually it will be used (maybe for good, but also for bad.) Sure the government likes to spend, and that can be a priority in of itself, but logic would have it that there is some other motives besides "make work" jobs for bureaucrats or sweet-heart contracts for private contractors for making these databases about ALL our personal information (health, financial, racial, internet browsing, phone conversations and texts, etc.) You don't "build it" without some intention of using it. Even IF someone like Obama has good, or at least benign, purposes or agenda (which I doubt) there is nothing to say that the "next guy" will also. Or that a minion or civil service employee won't abuse it for their own purposes. (People, even at state and local levels, have already been caught using these databases to stalk girls, find ex-wives, make a buck by looking up information for organized crime, etc.)

ps: thanks. Like you too, especially for the links to some good CBC shows. Regarding conspiracy, I will always tend to look at the worst possibilities and, at least at first take, "if it aint broke, don't fix it." Call it the "err on the side of caution" but especially in large systems or if personal liberties are at sake before one jumps into "change" make sure what you are getting into. Simply because it is "new" doesn't mean it is good. "Change" for "change's sake" is likely not worth it.  And quick, system-changing response to some stimuli is not, usually, the best response.

[Jackstar]

I wouldn't necessarily mind there being a monstrous collection of information on me and my life, if they weren't fucking lying to me about it.

[NowhereInTime]

I wouldn't necessarily mind there being a monstrous collection of information on me and my life, if they weren't fucking lying to me about it.

Your damn right about that.  (It really would be helpful is the NSA would help us reboot our drives when they crashed...)

[albrecht]

Your damn right about that.  (It really would be helpful is the NSA would help us reboot our drives when they crashed...)

And if accused of a crime, or even some nefarious activity, in a civil proceeding. When will a clever lawyer demand the NSA to turn over the movements, communications, internet posts, emails, and telephone conversations of a client to prove his innocence and refute the claims of the prosecutor's offic? Or a lawyer those records try to get those records for divorce proceedings, etc?
Scenario:
"Your honor we can prove via government databases that my client's wife was treated by her doctor for syphilis but as you can also see from the Obamacare database my client has never had such condition. The NSA database further, your honor, shows a Skype call and frequent texts call to Mr.Johnson during those dates from my client's wife, as shown in the TSA database, that my client was away on business. Furthermore the financial records of my client's wife, obtained by FACTA and "know your customer" provisos show a transaction for a suite at the Hilton and use of the mini-bar. The surveillance cameras at the hotel accessed via the DIA unit clearly shows my client's wife and Mr.Johnson entering the suite on Feb.15, 2014 and remaining in their to Feb.16. And the license plate scanner data, accessed via the FBI, shows Mr.Johnson dropping my client's wife off at my client's shared residence at 11:30am on the 16th of Feb."

If they really are monitoring all our communications, and/or movements, then there could be exculpatory evidence there is some cases. Or important details for leverage/evidence in civil cases.