... there is zero chance that the president will be able to censor the private sector.
If you mean the U.S. private sector, you're right. But otherwise, the U.S. President is allowed to take a whole lot of actions which can effectively censor non-citizens, and I've got some bad news pertaining to one in particular involving compliance with European privacy regulations which could potentially result in the deletion of records including accounts of European citizens from hosting providers such as Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Please see:
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/26/trump-signs-executive-order-stripping-no...
"Enforcing privacy policies that specifically 'exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents,' while aimed at enhancing domestic immigration laws, effectively invalidates America's part of the Privacy Shield agreement, opens the current administration up to sanctions by the EU and could lead our allies across the Atlantic to suspend the agreement outright."
If Google is forced to delete all the personally identifying information of European citizens because the President ordered U.S. federal agencies to stop enforcing privacy policies, that would effectively be an act of censorship on a scale without historical precedent, would it not?
Im not sure you are reading section 14 correctly. It makes reference to Privacy Act (Privacy Act of 1974) and the privacy policy of the federal agencies involved in immigration enforcement and law enforcement agencies. IE the government can freely share information between agencies with regards to non-citizens. If you look at the Privacy Act, it lists twelve cases where data is permitted to be disclosed by federal agencies, with the new order it allows all governmental data to be shared between governmental agencies. Again none of this pertains to the Civilian sector. The Privacy Shield really has nothing to do with the root issue. United States governmental agencies sharing information about non-citizens with each other. In the context of the actual document it is referencing sharing data about non-citizens who are not legal residents of the United States, who are illegally in the country.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:13 PM, James Salsman jsalsman@gmail.com wrote:
... there is zero chance that the president will be able to censor the private sector.
If you mean the U.S. private sector, you're right. But otherwise, the U.S. President is allowed to take a whole lot of actions which can effectively censor non-citizens, and I've got some bad news pertaining to one in particular involving compliance with European privacy regulations which could potentially result in the deletion of records including accounts of European citizens from hosting providers such as Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Please see:
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/26/trump-signs-executive- order-stripping-non-citizens-of-privacy-ri/
"Enforcing privacy policies that specifically 'exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents,' while aimed at enhancing domestic immigration laws, effectively invalidates America's part of the Privacy Shield agreement, opens the current administration up to sanctions by the EU and could lead our allies across the Atlantic to suspend the agreement outright."
If Google is forced to delete all the personally identifying information of European citizens because the President ordered U.S. federal agencies to stop enforcing privacy policies, that would effectively be an act of censorship on a scale without historical precedent, would it not?
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:39 PM, John phoenixoverride@gmail.com wrote:
Im not sure you are reading section 14 correctly. It makes reference to Privacy Act (Privacy Act of 1974) and the privacy policy of the federal agencies involved in immigration enforcement and law enforcement agencies. IE the government can freely share information between agencies with regards to non-citizens. If you look at the Privacy Act, it lists twelve cases where data is permitted to be disclosed by federal agencies, with the new order it allows all governmental data to be shared between governmental agencies. Again none of this pertains to the Civilian sector. The Privacy Shield really has nothing to do with the root issue. United States governmental agencies sharing information about non-citizens with each other. In the context of the actual document it is referencing sharing data about non-citizens who are not legal residents of the United States, who are illegally in the country.
There are plenty of news reports, available with a moment on Google, that discuss the possibility that this executive order prevents the Commerce department from fulfilling its enforcement role in the law that replaced the Safe Harbor data protection agreement between the EU and the U.S. This would invalidate the new agreement, jeopardizing the authorization of US companies to handle data on European residents.
The question is: Is it a legitimate issue or a sensationalized mole hill? Given what I researched I am seeing more of a mole hill. Give it a few days, odds are there will be clarification and this issue will blow over.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:39 PM, John phoenixoverride@gmail.com wrote:
Im not sure you are reading section 14 correctly. It makes reference to Privacy Act (Privacy Act of 1974) and the privacy policy of the federal agencies involved in immigration enforcement and law enforcement
agencies.
IE the government can freely share information between agencies with regards to non-citizens. If you look at the Privacy Act, it lists twelve cases where data is permitted to be disclosed by federal agencies, with
the
new order it allows all governmental data to be shared between
governmental
agencies. Again none of this pertains to the Civilian sector. The Privacy Shield really has nothing to do with the root issue. United States governmental agencies sharing information about non-citizens with each other. In the context of the actual document it is referencing sharing
data
about non-citizens who are not legal residents of the United States, who are illegally in the country.
There are plenty of news reports, available with a moment on Google, that discuss the possibility that this executive order prevents the Commerce department from fulfilling its enforcement role in the law that replaced the Safe Harbor data protection agreement between the EU and the U.S. This would invalidate the new agreement, jeopardizing the authorization of US companies to handle data on European residents. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I for one would really, really, really like to see full backup of all data to servers outside USA, if necessary with anonymized contributors. A first step would be to store digests for the revisions on alternate servers, and make it possible to double check the validity of the content. That is, a canary for the content.
No I don't think WMF would tamper with the content, but it might not be up to them to stop it from happening.
As long as humanity maintains the concept of non-citizen, global suffering will prevail.
I believe the only way to address backup and privacy concerns is to permanently dissolve all current systems relying on the infrastructure that corporations and governments can touch or see and move to something where absolutely no single entity would be able to control any other entity in any way whatsoever.
However, this goes against some of our fundamental principles and values of Wikipedia because our communities embrace authoritarian and autocratic processes which enable censorship and persecution. We control what people say every time we edit the corpus. Another way to convey my point: Eliminating being a corpus eliminates censorship.
Also, as WMF has experienced, there is no way you can talk people out of powerful positions. Asking people to stop their behavior, which is enabled by a power we give them, will not produce the desired result.
Damon
https://damon.sicore.com Flicked by head hugging plastic rectangular zero and one signal emitter.
On Jan 27, 2017, at 4:39 PM, John phoenixoverride@gmail.com wrote:
United States governmental agencies sharing information about non-citizens with each other. In the context of the actual document it is referencing sharing data about non-citizens who are not legal residents of the United States, who are illegally in the country.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org