Report calls data-mining expensive, ineffective "and threaten civil liberties,"

[The Straight Story]

Report calls data-mining expensive, ineffective

From National Journal's Technology Daily
Government-sponsored mining of databases for information is costly, ineffective at catching terrorists and threatens citizens' privacy rights, a new Cato Institute study claims.

The statistical likelihood of false positives is so high that the practice "will inevitably waste resources and threaten civil liberties," according to authors Jim Harper, Cato's information policy studies director, and IBM researcher Jeff Jonas.

Data mining was dubbed a key tool in the war on terror after al Qaeda's attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, with federal agencies arguing that comprehensive monitoring of personal data would assist in tracking terrorists. The method relies on "pattern-based analysis" of private data from large numbers of people, but the technology needed to obtain precise results does not exist, the study found.

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=35689&dcn=todaysnews

[BOSSHOG]

1. "Expensive and Ineffective"

Exactly what republicans produce. Perfect description of the bush administration.

[The Straight Story]

2. Indeed - Excellent observation (nt)

[annabanana]

3. How close to the top of the Dems "to do" list is this?

I sincerely hope the intention is to tackle this monster sooner, rather than later.

[The Straight Story]

5. Their "To Do" list has got to be miles and miles long :)

From environmental to Indian Affairs, immigration, Iraq, Social Security, etc and so on.

I don't envy the amount of work they have ahead of them...

[antigop]

4. Why is an IBM researcher doing studies with the Cato Institute? n/t

[The2ndWheel]

6. If it had something to do with terrorism, that might be right

It's the slow process of knowledge as power. We all enjoy having information. Well, so do governments and corporations. Seeing as they have to deal with large scale issues, the more information the better. They have to keep order, and how else can they do it?

I'm in no way saying these programs are in any way a positive thing. But the good has to come with the bad in this reality. Sorry. We don't get to have the cake, eat it, throw it up, repackage it, and sell it at six times the value.

[The Straight Story]

7. The problem is: They had enough info before and never used it

Then they open the flood gates of money to get new technology to help prevent the mistakes they made before (and using the excuse, well if we had spent more money 9/11 would not have occurred) - so instead of shoring up the errors on how information was used before they deflect the blame to technology and data.

Data mining on some levels is understandable in many ways, but using it as a crutch and tossing a lot of money into before you fix the core issues is a distraction and wasteful - not to mention probably not real helpful in the things they need to be doing.

[The2ndWheel]

8. Enough info to use for what?

I'm not talking about preventing 9/11. I'm talking about gathering and mining information, as much as possible, for its own sake.

Take the UK as an example. They're the most watched society in at least the western world(if not the globe), not because they want to prevent terrorism, but because the further consolidation and centralization of a center of power requires it.

"Then they open the flood gates of money to get new technology to help prevent the mistakes they made before"

The diminishing returns of increased complexity. We do seem to do this with every problem we have, which is why they're never really solved. At best, they're just moved further out of sight, or shaped differently.