5 ms·

I have to agree. The issue is isn't about the USPS having access to the information on the outside of mail, but that they are cataloging it. When I send a lette

I have to agree. The issue is isn't about the USPS having access to the information on the outside of mail, but that they are cataloging it. When I send a letter, I am providing my information for a service to be fulfilled and not for it to be put in long-term storage. In some sense, I think this is comparable to email. If Google was giving out a record of the addresses I've sent email to and received email from, I would consider it an invasion of my privacy. Services need to be upfront about what is being done with our data--anything else is dishonest. When I know what is being done with my information, I can make an informed decision on what services to use.

nfoz 12y ago
> If Google was giving out a record of the addresses I've sent email to and received email from, I would consider it an invasion of my privacy. Yet you're sending this in cleartext over the internet...
- wavefunction 12y ago
  And yet they are doing that in full knowledge of what they are doing, which is not what is happening either with the post office or the expectation one has with Google. Different situations have different expectations and outcomes.
XorNot 12y ago
We have had actual cases where someone mailed a bunch of anthrax through the US post. Given that the post can be used to send dangerous physical objects, it seems prudent to maintain medium-term records of what was sent and where to assist in the prevention of this type of terrorism. Because the alternative, is we wait till it happens, we have no record of where anything came from, and then we get to engage in a multi-month campaign of opening and inspecting mail arbitrarily considered "suspect" to try and prevent the next round.
- wooter 12y ago
  "type of terrorism" what makes your example "terrorism" and not "crime"?
  - XorNot 12y ago
    Why is any terrorism not just "crime"? Call it what you want: if we have no records of where mail was sent from and where it got delivered too over a medium-scale timeframe, we are seriously limiting any ability to deal wit this type of activity effectively. The term "letter bomb" is a real thing that was and still is really done.
    - DanBC 12y ago
      Do terrorists put a correct return address on the mail and use a local mailbox? Or do they forge a return address and use a distant mailbox? Mail data didn't catch the unabomber - has it caught anyone?
      - XorNot 12y ago
        You have to travel to the mailbox to send something from it. That mailbox is generally surrounded by other people who might notice it's comings and goings, or unfamiliar characters posting large packages. Frankly, the idea that metadata can't help us solve crimes but it can obviously be used to nebulously control a population is an oxymoron. Either metadata is useful, or it isn't. If it's useful, then why isn't it useful or potentially useful for dealing with crime? You can't have it both ways.
- pstuart 12y ago
  So if somebody wanted to mail anthrax to, say, a government office, how would this stop that? Dropping off a stamped envelope in a mailbox in a different neighborhood with no witnesses is not likely to get intercepted. And of course government efforts in "The War on Terror" would never be abused, right?
hueving 12y ago
But Google does keep precisely the information you described and will quickly give it to federal law enforcement as required by law without informing anyone (also required by law).
- Agnogenic 12y ago
  Agreed. But, the issue is transparency. Now that I know what is happening with my Google data, I can at least make a decision to not use that service. Both the data collection and the act of keeping that data collection a secret are issues.

nfoz 12y ago

> If Google was giving out a record of the addresses I've sent email to and received email from, I would consider it an invasion of my privacy. Yet you're sending this in cleartext over the internet...

wavefunction 12y ago
And yet they are doing that in full knowledge of what they are doing, which is not what is happening either with the post office or the expectation one has with Google. Different situations have different expectations and outcomes.

XorNot 12y ago

We have had actual cases where someone mailed a bunch of anthrax through the US post. Given that the post can be used to send dangerous physical objects, it seems prudent to maintain medium-term records of what was sent and where to assist in the prevention of this type of terrorism. Because the alternative, is we wait till it happens, we have no record of where anything came from, and then we get to engage in a multi-month campaign of opening and inspecting mail arbitrarily considered "suspect" to try and prevent the next round.

wooter 12y ago
"type of terrorism" what makes your example "terrorism" and not "crime"?
- XorNot 12y ago
  Why is any terrorism not just "crime"? Call it what you want: if we have no records of where mail was sent from and where it got delivered too over a medium-scale timeframe, we are seriously limiting any ability to deal wit this type of activity effectively. The term "letter bomb" is a real thing that was and still is really done.
  - DanBC 12y ago
    Do terrorists put a correct return address on the mail and use a local mailbox? Or do they forge a return address and use a distant mailbox? Mail data didn't catch the unabomber - has it caught anyone?
    - XorNot 12y ago
      You have to travel to the mailbox to send something from it. That mailbox is generally surrounded by other people who might notice it's comings and goings, or unfamiliar characters posting large packages. Frankly, the idea that metadata can't help us solve crimes but it can obviously be used to nebulously control a population is an oxymoron. Either metadata is useful, or it isn't. If it's useful, then why isn't it useful or potentially useful for dealing with crime? You can't have it both ways.
pstuart 12y ago
So if somebody wanted to mail anthrax to, say, a government office, how would this stop that? Dropping off a stamped envelope in a mailbox in a different neighborhood with no witnesses is not likely to get intercepted. And of course government efforts in "The War on Terror" would never be abused, right?

hueving 12y ago

But Google does keep precisely the information you described and will quickly give it to federal law enforcement as required by law without informing anyone (also required by law).

Agnogenic 12y ago
Agreed. But, the issue is transparency. Now that I know what is happening with my Google data, I can at least make a decision to not use that service. Both the data collection and the act of keeping that data collection a secret are issues.