5 ms·

What's concerning to me is that 1) the census is mandatory on the basis that the answers are private but 2) all the information will be made public about 70 yea

by csdvrx 5y ago

What's concerning to me is that 1) the census is mandatory on the basis that the answers are private but 2) all the information will be made public about 70 years later. What if you don't want to volunteer your information?

toomuchtodo 5y ago
There is a balance between privacy and the public interest (historical records). For example, immigration data ("A-files") from USCIS is released after 100 years of an immigrant's birth date to the National Archives [1], under the assumption that everyone is deceased after 100 years and no longer have rights to privacy protections (US-centric law). This is the same reason FamilySearch (the Mormon genealogy application) is very aggressive about ensuring you properly mark subjects as deceased or not. There is a duty of care with regards to a living subject's vital information that does not exist for the deceased (deceased subject vital information is available to all on FamilySearch, living subject vital information is only available to the account that created the record). 70 years seems reasonable considering the lack of sensitivity of census information, and while rental records aren't public, property ownership records are and are frequently used as well for location information (FamilySearch indexes public property record information for ancestor location hints and other vital correlation [2]). [1] https://www.archives.gov/research/immigration/aliens https://www.archives.gov/research/immigration/aliens [2] https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Land_and_Property https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Land_and_...
- csdvrx 5y ago
  That is even more concerning! I believe my right to privacy is more important than any public interest or historical record. > This is the same reason FamilySearch (the Mormon genealogy application) is very aggressive about ensuring you properly mark subjects as deceased or not. What if I want to ensure I will never be posthumously baptized? https://deannaizme.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/mormons-and-posthumous-baptism/ https://deannaizme.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/mormons-and-post... There may be an "opt out" by contacting the LDS, but them not having my information making that possible in the first place would guarantee the end result, far more than trusting them to keep their word! And what about the next religious movement that tries to do the same? I think we need an equivalent of the GPDR right to be forgotten. Some people care about their legacy? I don't! When I'm dead, I want to be scrubbed from all records, census included.
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    Your rights end at death. My condolences.
    - csdvrx 5y ago
      > Your rights end at death. My condolences. Not fully: when you are alive, you can write a contract to dispose of your goods when you die - say to give something to causes, people or even animals you hold dear: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02gift.html https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02gift.html I wish there was such a possibility to ensure your private information is disposed of in the way you want.
  - neallindsay 5y ago
    > …my right to privacy is more important than any public interest… Society in general disagrees with you. Most think that people should have some level of privacy, but I have to think that privileging privacy over all other concerns is a pretty rare viewpoint. The kind of absolute privacy you desire has probably not been possible since the invention of writing. Also, the European right to be forgotten is not a blanket "forget everything about everyone", but merely a way for a person to request that specific, old, embarrassing information about themselves be no longer published.
Asparagirl 5y ago
Nitpick: it’s 72 years. And while you are required to give answers to the census-taker, you are not required to give truthful answers. A significant number of my female relatives seemed to age very slowly or even in reverse through the decades…
neallindsay 5y ago
If you want to prevent people 72 years in the future from finding out about you, you are going to have to do a lot more than dodge the census taker. Maybe you could accomplish this by living in the wilderness with no internet, phone, or postal service, but I wouldn't even count on that.

by csdvrx 5y ago

toomuchtodo 5y ago

There is a balance between privacy and the public interest (historical records). For example, immigration data ("A-files") from USCIS is released after 100 years of an immigrant's birth date to the National Archives [1], under the assumption that everyone is deceased after 100 years and no longer have rights to privacy protections (US-centric law). This is the same reason FamilySearch (the Mormon genealogy application) is very aggressive about ensuring you properly mark subjects as deceased or not. There is a duty of care with regards to a living subject's vital information that does not exist for the deceased (deceased subject vital information is available to all on FamilySearch, living subject vital information is only available to the account that created the record). 70 years seems reasonable considering the lack of sensitivity of census information, and while rental records aren't public, property ownership records are and are frequently used as well for location information (FamilySearch indexes public property record information for ancestor location hints and other vital correlation [2]). [1] https://www.archives.gov/research/immigration/aliens https://www.archives.gov/research/immigration/aliens [2] https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Land_and_Property https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Land_and_...

csdvrx 5y ago
That is even more concerning! I believe my right to privacy is more important than any public interest or historical record. > This is the same reason FamilySearch (the Mormon genealogy application) is very aggressive about ensuring you properly mark subjects as deceased or not. What if I want to ensure I will never be posthumously baptized? https://deannaizme.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/mormons-and-posthumous-baptism/ https://deannaizme.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/mormons-and-post... There may be an "opt out" by contacting the LDS, but them not having my information making that possible in the first place would guarantee the end result, far more than trusting them to keep their word! And what about the next religious movement that tries to do the same? I think we need an equivalent of the GPDR right to be forgotten. Some people care about their legacy? I don't! When I'm dead, I want to be scrubbed from all records, census included.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  Your rights end at death. My condolences.
  - csdvrx 5y ago
    > Your rights end at death. My condolences. Not fully: when you are alive, you can write a contract to dispose of your goods when you die - say to give something to causes, people or even animals you hold dear: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02gift.html https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02gift.html I wish there was such a possibility to ensure your private information is disposed of in the way you want.
- neallindsay 5y ago
  > …my right to privacy is more important than any public interest… Society in general disagrees with you. Most think that people should have some level of privacy, but I have to think that privileging privacy over all other concerns is a pretty rare viewpoint. The kind of absolute privacy you desire has probably not been possible since the invention of writing. Also, the European right to be forgotten is not a blanket "forget everything about everyone", but merely a way for a person to request that specific, old, embarrassing information about themselves be no longer published.

Asparagirl 5y ago

Nitpick: it’s 72 years. And while you are required to give answers to the census-taker, you are not required to give truthful answers. A significant number of my female relatives seemed to age very slowly or even in reverse through the decades…

neallindsay 5y ago

If you want to prevent people 72 years in the future from finding out about you, you are going to have to do a lot more than dodge the census taker. Maybe you could accomplish this by living in the wilderness with no internet, phone, or postal service, but I wouldn't even count on that.