Why The Experts Are Probably Wrong About The Healthcare.gov Crack-Up

“Many technology experts are blaming the software behind Healthcare.gov for all the problems Americans have encountered while trying to sign up for health insurance in accordance with the Affordable Care Act.”

This interesting article explores what is wrong and what is right about healthcare.gov. To view the full article, please visit Why The Experts Are Probably Wrong About The Healthcare.gov Crack-Up.

Five More Organizations Join Lawsuit Against NSA Surveillance

National Lawyers Guild, Patient Privacy Rights and The Shalom Center Among 22 Groups Asserting Right to Free Association

 

San Francisco, Ca – infoZine – Five new groups—including civil-rights lawyers, medical-privacy advocates and Jewish social-justice activists—have joined a lawsuit filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) against the National Security Agency (NSA) over the unconstitutional collection of bulk telephone call records. With today’s amended complaint, EFF now represents 22 entities in alleging that government surveillance under Section 215 of the Patriot Act violates Americans’ First Amendment right to freedom of association.

 

The five entities joining the First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. NSA lawsuit before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California are: Acorn Active Media, the Charity and Security Network, the National Lawyers Guild, Patient Privacy Rights and The Shalom Center. They join an already diverse coalition of groups representing interests including gun rights, environmentalism, drug-policy reform, human rights, open-source technology, media reform and religious freedom.

 

Five More Organizations Join Lawsuit Against NSA Surveillance

To view the full article, please visit: Five More Organizations Join Lawsuit Against NSA Surveillance

“The five entities joining the First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. NSA lawsuit before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California are: Acorn Active Media, the Charity and Security Network, the National Lawyers Guild, Patient Privacy Rights and The Shalom Center. They join an already diverse coalition of groups representing interests including gun rights, environmentalism, drug-policy reform, human rights, open-source technology, media reform and religious freedom.”

The FBI’s New Wiretapping Plan Is Great News for Criminals

To view the full article, please visit: The FBI’s New Wiretapping Plan Is Great News for Criminals

US technology is designed for ‘exceptions’ and ‘outliers’, i.e., ‘worst-case’ scenarios like terrorists and unconscious patients.

Bruce Schneier concludes  his May 29th  essay:

“Finally there’s a general principle at work that’s worth explicitly stating. All tools can be used by the good guys and the bad guys. Cars have enormous societal value, even though bank robbers can use them as getaway cars. Cash is no different. Both good guys and bad guys send e-mails, use Skype, and eat at all-night restaurants. But because society consists overwhelmingly of good guys, the good uses of these dual-use technologies greatly outweigh the bad uses. Strong Internet security makes us all safer, even though it helps the bad guys as well. And it makes no sense to harm all of us in an attempt to harm a small subset of us.”

Fear-driven technology harms Democracy and health:

  • Example #1: FBI

Bruce Schneier’s essay (below) tells how US-created security flaws help the wrong people (criminals and terrorists) and harm the rest of us (law-abiding citizens).

  • Giving the government access (via back doors, brute force decryption, etc) to everyone’s data to find terrorists is the ‘worst-case’ scenario used to justify destroying strong data security protections.
  • But law-abiding people, businesses, and government really NEED strong data security protections to function everyday online.
  • Criminals and terrorists can exploit the security flaws created to catch them to steal information and harm governments, individuals, and corporations; but ordinary citizens and businesses can’t build or afford security technology to protect their own data.
  • WORST CONSEQUENCES: people will not trust technology and governments, and cyber-wars can destroy people, governments, and corporations.

 

  • Example #2: US health technology systems

The US eliminated data privacy in health technology systems, helping the wrong people (government and corporations) and harming patients.

  • Government and corporations control the use of the nation’s health data. Medical emergencies are the ‘worst-case’ scenario used to justify this technology: if you are unconscious in an emergency room (a one-in-a-million), you can’t give consent to share your data.
  • But the 299,999, 700 million US patients who are awake expect to control use of personal health data in order to trust doctors and technology.
  • Government and industry control use of the nation’s data for various purposes without the knowledge of the public, there is no ‘chain of custody’ for health data and no data map to track uses. Some hidden uses may be beneficial and some may harm patients.  Patients can’t buy or use privacy technology to protect health data.
  • WORST CONSEQUENCES: 40-50 million people/year avoid or delay treatment, or hide information to protect the privacy of health information, risking their lives and health.  Technology causes tens of millions of people who need treatment to suffer bad health outcomes.

 

In a Democracy, judges should approve spying on suspected criminals or terrorists. In a Democracy patients should be asked for consent to use personal health data. Advance directives or break-the-glass technology can permit access to health data when patients are unconscious.

 

In a Democracy, shouldn’t technology support ‘best-case’ scenarios , i.e., citizens’ freedoms and human and civil rights to privacy and health?

Consumer Watchdog and Other Privacy Groups Urge FTC to Block Pending Facebook Privacy Changes

“A coalition of six consumer privacy groups is calling on the Federal Trade Commission to enforce an earlier consent order with Facebook and block proposed changes in the social network’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and its Data Use Policy because the proposed changes violate the 2011 settlement with the Commission.”

“The changes will allow Facebook to routinely use the images and names of Facebook users for commercial advertising without consent,” the groups said. “The changes violate Facebook’s current policies and the 2011 Facebook settlement with the FTC. The Commission must act to enforce its order.”

Signing the letter were Consumer Watchdog, the Electronic Privacy Information (EPIC), the Center for Digital Democracy, Patient Privacy Rights, U.S. PIRG, and Privacy Rights Clearing House. Read a copy of the letter here: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/ltrfacebookftc090413.pdf

“Facebook has long played fast and loose with users’ data and relied on complex privacy settings to confuse its users, but these proposed changes go well beyond that,” said John M. Simpson, Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy director. “Facebook’s overreach violates the FTC Consent Order that was put in place after the last major privacy violation; if the Commission is to retain any of its credibility, it must act immediately to enforce that order.”

To view the full article, please visit: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/consumer-watchdog-and-other-privacy-groups-urge-ftc-to-block-pending-facebook-privacy-changes-2013-09-05

Privacy Advocates Set Their Sights on the Wrong G-Men

In the wake of NSA revelations, key privacy advocates make the point that private corporations and the government are working to ensure total surveillance of all digital information about all 300 million Americans and lock in billions in corporate revenue from the sale of personal data and detailed digital profiles of everyone in the US.

Corporate and government collection, use, and sale of the nation’s personal data is opaque.  The author of the story below trashes several  privacy advocates and misrepresents their key points about the hidden ‘government-industrial complex’.  And he claims that “Individuals can choose not to use a particular social network, search engine or website.”  But individuals have no meaningful choices online. See the documentary: “Terms and Conditions May Apply”.

The lack of trust online and in all holders of personal data is why President Obama proposed the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights (CPBOR). Unfortunately the proposed data privacy protections in the CPBOR do not apply to the most sensitive data of all, health data.

Meanwhile,  the ‘government-industrial complex’ is destroying Americans’ most fundamental rights to privacy. The highest right of civilized man is the right to be ‘let alone’—which happens to be the foundation of Democracy.  Yet all we read about are the wonders of ‘big data’ and the need to collect and use personal data without meaningful informed consent. We can certainly use big data for innovation and benefits—but the public wants to be asked permission for all uses of data, especially for ‘research’ uses. Big data analytics is research.

  • See Westin’s research that shows only 1% of the public approves use of health data for research without consent. See more of his findings here.

Today US citizens have no control over their most sensitive personal information: health data from DNA to prescriptions records to diagnoses—-because privacy-destructive technologies and system architectures prevent us from exercising our rights to give meaningful informed consent before health data is collected, used, disclosed, or sold.

To view the full article, please visit: Privacy Advocates Set Their Sights on the Wrong G-Men

Enabling the Health Care Locavore

Here’s a great article written by PPR’s Chief Technical Officer, Dr. Adrian Gropper about “why hip replacement surgery costs 5-10 times as much in the US as in Belgium even though it’s the same implant… JAMA publish[ing] research and a superb editorial on the Views of US Physicians About Controlling Health Care Costs and CMS put[ting] out a request for public comment on whether physicians’ Medicare pay should be made public.”

To view the full article, please visit Enabling the Health Care Locavore on The Health Care Blog.

Jonah Goldberg: Civil Libertarians’ Hypocrisy

This insightful piece highlights the drastic violations of our current healthcare system in relation to the recent NSA breach.

Key quote from the article:

“What I have a hard time understanding, however, is how one can get worked up into a near panic about an overreaching national security apparatus while also celebrating other government expansions into our lives, chief among them the hydrahead leviathan of the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare). The 2009 stimulus created a health database that will store all your health records. The Federal Data Services Hub will record everything bureaucrats deem useful, from your incarceration record and immigration status to whether or not you had an abortion or were treated for depression or erectile dysfunction.”

Snowden Took a Job To Leak NSA Secrets? Cool. Let’s Have More Like Him at the DOJ, IRS …

Jul. 2, 2013  Reason.com

Much has been made of Edward Snowden telling the South China Morning Post that he deliberately took a job with Booz Allen to gather up evidence of National Security Agency spying so he could leak it to the world. This makes the international man of government officials’ mysteries even more traitorish to the authority-worshippers who already didn’t like his revealing widespread surveillance by the U.S. For the rest of us, it means he set out to do a thorough job before giving the state a well-deserved kick in the ‘nads. This is a guy who apparently deliberately infiltrated the security apparatus, got hold of its dark secrets, and imposed a little of that “transparency” we’d been promised. We could use a few thousand more like him at the IRS, the Justice Department, the DEA, in the Obamacare bureaucracy, local police forces …

To view the full article please visit Snowden Took a Job To Leak NSA Secrets? Cool.

My Routine – Mark Rothstein, Law Professor

To view the full article, please visit My Routine – Mark Rothstein, Law Professor.

This is a very interesting article about Mark Rothstein’s opinion of current governmental actions involving privacy law. Rothstein asserts, “We live in an age in which consent should not be mistaken for choice. We click through consent on software without even reading it. Even if we technically consented, I doubt very much whether the average person would say, ‘Oh sure, it’s OK for my phone company to accumulate all this data about me.’”

In the interview, Rothstein also comments on the views of Louis D. Brandeis, saying “He felt that the government set the tone for society. If the government doesn’t value privacy and invades people’s privacy, then everybody will do that. He also thought it was very important that government activities be subject to review by the political process and the people.”