[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CPT letters to NYT



> Railing against computers is barking up the wrong tree.  

So's arguing against a misinterpretation.  As far as I can recall, 
Jamie's never said that computers are bad or that records should not 
be computerized, but stated the clear fact that computerization of 
records is generally hazardous to privacy, and that the current proposal 
treats offline and online records as if they are the same.  

I read Jamie's position as asking for increased controls on computerized 
medical records, because their potential for abuse is far greater than 
that of paper records.  That's certainly my position (though that does 
not imply that this is an official EFF position at present).

Barring legislation preventing it, at some point almost all of your 
personal information that has any value to businesses and police forces 
is going to be in a database somewhere, and sooner or later those 
databases are going to all be connected.  The big-brother potential of a 
system like that is absolutely staggering, and it's already well on the way.
The bill at hand can either contribute to the problem (and in its current 
form I believe it will do so), or it can be a piece of legislation helping
prevent it.  I for one would rather see the latter.

On a side note, I've seen a lot of "smoking gun" stuff pointing to links 
between CDT, IBM, insurance companies, favorable press coverage for the 
bill, and legislators.  What I've not seen yet is CDT's side of this 
story, and I'd like to.  I am always highly skeptical of conspiracy theories.
However it's no surprise to me that the AMA and various trade 
associations whose members depend heavily on reaping citizen medical 
information consider this bill to be a "green light" fulfill their 
fondest desires, whether or not IBM had anything to do with it, whether 
or not CDT had anything to do with it, whether or not the AMA is lining 
the pockets of Congressfolks: the bill has problems from a privacy 
standpoint, and those problems almost by definition are pluses for the 
personal info marketeers.  Even CDT is not 100% pleased with this bill, 
so I don't think the conspiracy theory is going to hold any water. 
Clearly something is amok and awry here. As I've said before, we really 
need to put our organizational heads together and either fix the bill or 
kill it.



--
<HTML><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/~mech/">    Stanton McCandlish
</A><HR><A HREF="mailto:mech@eff.org">        mech@eff.org
</A><P><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/">         Electronic Frontier Foundation
</A><P><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/A/">       Online Activist    </A></HTML>