NationStates Jolt Archive

Category: Human rights
Inportance: Medium
Proposed by: Radlett

Description: If imposed, this resolution will grant citizens of affected countries full privacy over their action.

To name a few:
1) Poliece cameras may be set up in public places, but not in private accomodation or buisinesses.
2) Spyware is made illegal. Any company found using spyware be fined heavily.
3) Random stop-and-search checks in the street be banned.
4) Government cencus not be available to large buisnesses.

Accepts that countries with high crime levels need added surveilance in the country. However, these states should persue a way to reduce crime without causing distress to innocents and infringe human rights.

Accepts that this will require an added amount of poliecemen to tackle problems. These will be funded by the new fines imposed on law breakers.

Cameras in public areas? You want them in businesses, too, to discourage theft, and in case that dosen't work, catch the crook.

Also: Run a spell/grammar check.

Sorry if I didn't mention it, but I intended supermarkets and banks to be watched for crime. After all, they are open to the public.

Category: Human rights
Inportance: Medium
Proposed by: Radlett

Description: If imposed, this resolution will grant citizens of affected countries full privacy over their action.

To name a few:
1) Poliece cameras may be set up in public places, but not in private accomodation or buisinesses.
2) Spyware is made illegal. Any company found using spyware be fined heavily.
3) Random stop-and-search checks in the street be banned.
4) Government cencus not be available to large buisnesses.

Accepts that countries with high crime levels need added surveilance in the country. However, these states should persue a way to reduce crime without causing distress to innocents and infringe human rights.

Accepts that this will require an added amount of poliecemen to tackle problems. These will be funded by the new fines imposed on law breakers.

I can only think of one or two problems, but they are kind of serious problems.

Firstly - what do you class as police cameras? Cause a lot of hotels, hostels, schools and so forth have security cameras around because (quite honestly) it is getting to the point where it is not safe not to have them. And all of these are not public places (except maybe schools I guess!)

How do you define spyware? Is it pop-up adds? Or (for example) a mail system that examines the text of e-mails to provide a better service?

How random does a random stop and search have to be? If there is a crime in TilEnca we tend to stop anyone who looks suspicious or was in the area at the time, and if they continue to act suspicious we search them. But it isn't random - we do it to everyone :} (Actually we don't do any of this, but I am just testing the limits of the proposal)

Will the government census be available to small businesses?

Category: Human rights
Inportance: Medium
Proposed by: Radlett

Description: If imposed, this resolution will grant citizens of affected countries full privacy over their action.

Hmm. I support the idea of citizens having privacy and for police to do their jobs. We shall see.

To name a few:
1) Poliece cameras may be set up in public places, but not in private accomodation or buisinesses.

Do private security cameras count? If not, I agree.

2) Spyware is made illegal. Any company found using spyware be fined heavily.

Agree. It gets annoying.

3) Random stop-and-search checks in the street be banned.

Agree.

4) Government cencus not be available to large buisnesses.

Will it be available publically? In DLE, an editted form is available publically at first and the full form after about a century.

Accepts that countries with high crime levels need added surveilance in the country. However, these states should persue a way to reduce crime without causing distress to innocents and infringe human rights.

Damn. It seems you hit the jackpot on this one.

Accepts that this will require an added amount of poliecemen to tackle problems. These will be funded by the new fines imposed on law breakers.

Congrats. Your first proposal with no DLE complaints. I'll support.

Wow, good.

Firstly, private cameras don't count. They are not monitored by the police, and therefore no buisiness of the state. Howver, they may be used as evidence in court.

It is within every human right to read the cencus uneditied. However, large buisnesses exploit this to find out consumer needs. I propose that the government does not pass on these cencuses. The cencus should be kept in a locked room in a libraray and electronicly tagged, and displayed on paper as opposed to on a computer (all records of the cencus wil be removed from the internet). If anybody wishes to view the document, they must ask the librarian who will supervise them as they read. This will mean havoc trying to record multiple cencus, and stop buisinesses infringing on personal privacy.

Spyware is a kind of computer program that secretly downloads onto your computer, and gathers personal information for compaines. I propose a total ban on this.

Spyware is a kind of computer program that secretly downloads onto your computer, and gathers personal information for compaines. I propose a total ban on this.
I thought spyware is the anti-spaying program, but I guess I wrong.
if I could, I will endorese that proposal.

If you guys want to endorse this proposal, the final revised edition has been sent to the UN.

What about the stop-and-search thing?

What about it? It means that the police have no right to search any member of the public randomly on the streets to look for illigal objects. This causes distress, is a wate of police time and often discriminates different races.

What about it? It means that the police have no right to search any member of the public randomly on the streets to look for illigal objects. This causes distress, is a wate of police time and often discriminates different races.

My original question was



How random does a random stop and search have to be? If there is a crime in TilEnca we tend to stop anyone who looks suspicious or was in the area at the time, and if they continue to act suspicious we search them. But it isn't random - we do it to everyone :} (Actually we don't do any of this, but I am just testing the limits of the proposal)


What do you define (or what do you think the proposal defines) as a random stop and search? What criteria is it based on?

At airports we stop and search everyone, same for when they enter "high priority" buildings (such as courts or the Council Chambers).

Would we have to curtail all these searches?

Those aren't random. I mean stop and searches on the street, usually to counter terrorism. The police have no grounds to search these people.

Those aren't random. I mean stop and searches on the street, usually to counter terrorism. The police have no grounds to search these people.

What if they think the person is acting in a suspicious manner? Like standing outside a building looking around in a shifty way? I would want to find out what that person is doing.

And - if a fire has just been started in a warehouse, it would seem sensible to stop anyone in the area to see what they know and if they are involved.

That was what I meant by stop and search. I don't think that it is invading people's privacy too much to be honest, and I don't think it needs to be made the subject of international law.


And on a similar topic, we have no crime, so we don't need more police and we don't think that the UN should be telling us how to punish our non-existant criminals.

Also we have a thing called probable cause - the police tend to stop and search people if they think they are acting suspiciously. Does that class as random?

(The more I think about this, the more I am beginning to dislike the whole proposal. Sorry)

Further - a copy of the census on paper, but not computer? Do you have any idea how complicated that will be to search? Not to mention how much paper will be required?

And if members of the public can view it, then surely someone who works for a big business could sneak in, read it, copy some stuff down and then leave.

The rules about SpyWare are unworkable - it just means that non-UN nations can swamp our computers with stuff and we can not do anything to them in return because they would not be covered about this. Plus we have software for dealing with that.

So I think I am going to have to refuse to support this on the grounds that it is (potentially) going to stop the police doing their job, costs thousands and thousands of gold pieces to implement and restrict the freedom of information to an alarming degree.

Let me give you an example. Following capitalist rebellions in Radlett, the police have been given permission to randomly search suspicious looking individuals for weapons. Of course, the cops naturally look for snobby looking people, or men wearing suits. This is discriminatory and upsetting, as a criminal could be anybody. The chances of finding a true rebel with evidence in his pockets is miniscule. Police raids agains known houses of capitalists is more efective.
Say your warehouse has just been torched. Chances are the arsonist has escaped, but the police can randomly search people in the area as they have grounds to, a crime has just been commited.
This resolution doesn't tackle crime. In fact, in most of the UN countries spyware and looking at the cencus is legal. The purpouse of the resolution is simply to simply to protect personal matters that aren't already covered by law.

Further - a copy of the census on paper, but not computer? Do you have any idea how complicated that will be to search? Not to mention how much paper will be required?

And if members of the public can view it, then surely someone who works for a big business could sneak in, read it, copy some stuff down and then leave.

The rules about SpyWare are unworkable - it just means that non-UN nations can swamp our computers with stuff and we can not do anything to them in return because they would not be covered about this. Plus we have software for dealing with that.

So I think I am going to have to refuse to support this on the grounds that it is (potentially) going to stop the police doing their job, costs thousands and thousands of gold pieces to implement and restrict the freedom of information to an alarming degree.

1) Only the public may view the paper. The government will have it on PC. The cencus will be filed by year and region in a specially allocated room containing restricted documents.

2) A buisinessman could not sneak in, unless he breaks down a locked door without causing alarm. The entire point of the paper is that it is hard to copy down large amounts of data. Even if this man did have a camera up his sleeve, 32 pictures is useless to his company.

3) Sorry if I got the wrong thing, but I meant spyware as in the thing that looks at our information on the computer. I know that there are means of controlling this, but this resolution plans to ban it as an infringement on human privacy. Besides, the fines will finance policemen. You can still keep your computer defece software to protect against the non-UN.

4) This is not ristricting the freedom of information. This is to stop personal information from being gained unfairly. The good public will still have the full oppertunity to read the cencus.

1) Only the public may view the paper. The government will have it on PC. The cencus will be filed by year and region in a specially allocated room containing restricted documents.


But we still have to produce it on paper, in every city in our nation. That is a hell of a lot of paper. And what if more than one person wants to view it at once? There would have to be hundreds of different copies, instead of one central copy on a computer.

Far too expensive for something that is not really that much of an issue.

Also what about all the people who can't make it to a census office but want to read it anyway? Will we have to mail them a copy? (And how to we differentiate between them and people who are just pretending to be disabled to get a copy?)

And quite honestly the biggest problem with privacy is with the government and security agencies. But since they are the ones taking the census there is no way to stop them getting the information!


2) A buisinessman could not sneak in, unless he breaks down a locked door without causing alarm. The entire point of the paper is that it is hard to copy down large amounts of data. Even if this man did have a camera up his sleeve, 32 pictures is useless to his company.


That much I will accept, but I still have issues with the whole paper thing.


3) Sorry if I got the wrong thing, but I meant spyware as in the thing that looks at our information on the computer. I know that there are means of controlling this, but this resolution plans to ban it as an infringement on human privacy. Besides, the fines will finance policemen. You can still keep your computer defece software to protect against the non-UN.


This is what I mean. You can stop it in UN nations, but you have no power over the other two thirds of the world who will still be able to flood our computers with spyware galore.
And is it only spyware that people object to? There are some programs that people want on their computers, or agree to have to get something else for free. Would these be covered? And what if some people agree and other people don't agree - would the software be classed as spyware then?


4) This is not ristricting the freedom of information. This is to stop personal information from being gained unfairly. The good public will still have the full oppertunity to read the cencus.

Unless they are unable to get to a census office. Or blind. (Unless you are going to require it to be written in every language that the country speaks, including braile and so forth). And is the information only restricted to the people of one nation? Or should everyone in the UN have the right to read the census from my nation? In which case I would have to publish it in every known language ever.

Can you see why I want to put it on computer? And on the internet so everyone can get at it? (Even those who might use it for ill-gotten purposes).

I would accept that it can be put on computer in an edited form - taking out names, addresses and phone numbers (but not postcodes) and any other personal specific information - and I am not suggesting publishing the forms people filled in. But everyone should have the right to it, even if they are going to use it for marketing purposes.

I don't think this is going to work as it is written. Sorry.

But we still have to produce it on paper, in every city in our nation. That is a hell of a lot of paper. And what if more than one person wants to view it at once? There would have to be hundreds of different copies, instead of one central copy on a computer.

1) Every city? The cencus is usually only kept in selected libraries.

Far too expensive for something that is not really that much of an issue.

2) It would only be the cost of paper and ink. Almost nothing for even a low-budget government.

Also what about all the people who can't make it to a census office but want to read it anyway? Will we have to mail them a copy? (And how to we differentiate between them and people who are just pretending to be disabled to get a copy?)

3) The cencus doesn't make light reading. It's a serious document that is only read very rarely by the piblic. If the person is that disabled, then they wouldn't be reading the document.

And quite honestly the biggest problem with privacy is with the government and security agencies. But since they are the ones taking the census there is no way to stop them getting the information!

4) This proposal deals with the consumer side of information leaking. What the government does with the cencus is none of the UN's buisness.

This is what I mean. You can stop it in UN nations, but you have no power over the other two thirds of the world who will still be able to flood our computers with spyware galore.
And is it only spyware that people object to? There are some programs that people want on their computers, or agree to have to get something else for free. Would these be covered? And what if some people agree and other people don't agree - would the software be classed as spyware then?

5)I don't quite get you, but that's the problem with politics. You don't always agree with laws.

Unless they are unable to get to a census office. Or blind. (Unless you are going to require it to be written in every language that the country speaks, including braile and so forth). And is the information only restricted to the people of one nation? Or should everyone in the UN have the right to read the census from my nation? In which case I would have to publish it in every known language ever.

6)Your nit picking now. The cencus is written by the public in a single lanuage and is recorded in one, even if the country has multiple lanuages. There could be a single braile edition as a standard donated by the UN.

Can you see why I want to put it on computer? And on the internet so everyone can get at it? (Even those who might use it for ill-gotten purposes).

I would accept that it can be put on computer in an edited form - taking out names, addresses and phone numbers (but not postcodes) and any other personal specific information - and I am not suggesting publishing the forms people filled in. But everyone should have the right to it, even if they are going to use it for marketing purposes.

7) Put it on the internet in that form and it's useless to all who read it. These companies simply exploit the freeedom of information laws, and I feel that it should be put to an end.

But we still have to produce it on paper, in every city in our nation. That is a hell of a lot of paper. And what if more than one person wants to view it at once? There would have to be hundreds of different copies, instead of one central copy on a computer.

1) Every city? The cencus is usually only kept in selected libraries.

Far too expensive for something that is not really that much of an issue.

2) It would only be the cost of paper and ink. Almost nothing for even a low-budget government.

Also what about all the people who can't make it to a census office but want to read it anyway? Will we have to mail them a copy? (And how to we differentiate between them and people who are just pretending to be disabled to get a copy?)

3) The cencus doesn't make light reading. It's a serious document that is only read very rarely by the piblic. If the person is that disabled, then they wouldn't be reading the document.


So now you are discriminating against disabled people with your proposal. I think there are laws about that in the UN. And you are making sweeping generalisations about disabled people. Some of our best and brighest minds can't walk and mostly work out of their houses. Should they be prevented from reading the census just because of that?



And quite honestly the biggest problem with privacy is with the government and security agencies. But since they are the ones taking the census there is no way to stop them getting the information!

4) This proposal deals with the consumer side of information leaking. What the government does with the cencus is none of the UN's buisness.


Except you are forbidding the government from selling it. So you are making part of what the government does the UN's business, aren't you?


This is what I mean. You can stop it in UN nations, but you have no power over the other two thirds of the world who will still be able to flood our computers with spyware galore.
And is it only spyware that people object to? There are some programs that people want on their computers, or agree to have to get something else for free. Would these be covered? And what if some people agree and other people don't agree - would the software be classed as spyware then?

5)I don't quite get you, but that's the problem with politics. You don't always agree with laws.



Say I produce some software called "Monitor System 1021" that is sent out with my operating system. It gathers information about the computer and monitors it, so that if people are having problems with their software I can read the monitor logs to find out what the problem is and help them.

3/4 my nation like this, cause it stops their computers breaking. The rest hate it because they feel it is an intrusion in to their privacy. But it comes as part of the OS and they accept it as part of that when they accept the licence agreement (assuming they read it before they accept it).

Is this spyware? Would I have to stop using this, despite it's popularity?


Unless they are unable to get to a census office. Or blind. (Unless you are going to require it to be written in every language that the country speaks, including braile and so forth). And is the information only restricted to the people of one nation? Or should everyone in the UN have the right to read the census from my nation? In which case I would have to publish it in every known language ever.

6)Your nit picking now. The cencus is written by the public in a single lanuage and is recorded in one, even if the country has multiple lanuages. There could be a single braile edition as a standard donated by the UN.


Well duh! (sorry). You are writing INTERNATIONAL LAW - this is not something you just write then forget about - it has consequences, and you have to accept that if the three main languages in my nation are human, elf and dwarf then by not writing it in elf and dwarf I am discriminating against two thirds of my people, which I think the UN has laws about.


Can you see why I want to put it on computer? And on the internet so everyone can get at it? (Even those who might use it for ill-gotten purposes).

I would accept that it can be put on computer in an edited form - taking out names, addresses and phone numbers (but not postcodes) and any other personal specific information - and I am not suggesting publishing the forms people filled in. But everyone should have the right to it, even if they are going to use it for marketing purposes.


7) Put it on the internet in that form and it's useless to all who read it. These companies simply exploit the freeedom of information laws, and I feel that it should be put to an end.[/QUOTE]

Why? And why should it be in full form all the time? Do my people really need to know where I live? Is that not a gross invasion of my privacy?
And basically you are a fan of freedom of information, except when you don't think people should have it.

Companies can sell you stuff, and tailor markets to your needs. In comparrison to knowing every single thing about you, and using that to justify locking you up without trial for the rest of eternity it is really not a scary thing that companies get it.

I like the fact companies can get hold of this information - because it means that people who really need it (rather than people whom the government decide are suitable) can get access to it as well.


So basically I disagree with the part about the census, the part about spyware, and the part about the stop and search. I kind of agree about the cameras, except if you have a jail run by a private company. The police should be allowed to monitor that since it does kind of concern their area of business :}

I have no problem with companies conduucting market research. However, by reading the cencus they get it wrong. They often send junk snail mail to dead people, sometimes even babies get spam.
The cencus has always been a part of libraries, and so there is no change for disabled people. You would never send the document in the post anyway.
You don't understand that I mean CORPORATE spyware. Use your whatever to help people, but buisiness and virus spyware can even cather credit-card information. Do 3/4 of your population want that?
Again, I do not want to meddle with governments, but seeing how handing over the cencus mixes with buisinesses, some interventions must be made.
Your edited mode didn't even reveal your name. If someone was conducting a search for a family member, that would be useful.
Police cameras would be set up in jails as those inmates hardly have priavcy laws and after all, they are police establishments.

I think we ought to extract #2 and make it its own separate case for a resolution. :D

I have no problem with companies conduucting market research. However, by reading the cencus they get it wrong. They often send junk snail mail to dead people, sometimes even babies get spam.
The cencus has always been a part of libraries, and so there is no change for disabled people. You would never send the document in the post anyway.
You don't understand that I mean CORPORATE spyware. Use your whatever to help people, but buisiness and virus spyware can even cather credit-card information. Do 3/4 of your population want that?
Again, I do not want to meddle with governments, but seeing how handing over the cencus mixes with buisinesses, some interventions must be made.
Your edited mode didn't even reveal your name. If someone was conducting a search for a family member, that would be useful.
Police cameras would be set up in jails as those inmates hardly have priavcy laws and after all, they are police establishments.

My main problem is your whole proposal appears to be covering a lot of areas. You say you are trying to curtail the commercial side, but you want to stop the police doing stop and search, and limit where their cameras are.

And if you want to stop the commerical side, then you would have to ban security cameras in private shops, since they could be used to track who came in to a shop when, what they bought and so forth. Your proposal does nothing to stop that.

Private jails are not under the jurisdiction of the police - they are run by a private company. Which by your proposal means the police would have no right to monitor what goes on in there. Which is a good way to let people abuse prisoners and so forth.

If your proposal deals with human rights, you can't argue that it is someone's right to stop their government acting however they chose with the census information. If it is to do with business it should be in the free trade section, which would mean that the parts about the police would have to be removed.

I realise you have put some thought in to this, and I don't usually like totally stomping over people's proposals but this is confused, doesn't appear to be in the right category, doesn't appear to know what it is trying to achieve and altogether would probably have severely bad effects on my nation.

And yeah - I have no idea what you mean by corporate spyware. And since you did not limit it to that in the proposal (you just said spyware will be illegal) it doesn't matter what you mean because you are banning ALL spyware, regardless of what it actually does.

I have no doubt that you use spyware well, but others can just as easily use it for bad, wether it be commercial or for private use.
I'm not confused. It's just that you were finding difficulty accepting the cencus and spyware section, so I went into the commercial side. Police surveilance and stop-and-searches are both nothing to do with consumerism.
Cameras in supermarkets should not be removed as the shop is technicly open to the public, and do not help the supermarket as they already know how much of each item sells by checking stock.
This proposal is not intended to change any nation severely, just increase human rights a notch.

I have no doubt that you use spyware well, but others can just as easily use it for bad, wether it be commercial or for private use.


So you are going to ban it for everyone, and take out the good as well as the bad?

[QUOPTE]
I'm not confused. It's just that you were finding difficulty accepting the cencus and spyware section, so I went into the commercial side. Police surveilance and stop-and-searches are both nothing to do with consumerism.
[/QUOTE]

And I would say that spy ware has NOTHING to do with human rights. It is not a default human right to have a computer with no spyware on. It's a default human right not to have the crap kicked out of you for being black. How you can put those two on the same level is beyond me.


Cameras in supermarkets should not be removed as the shop is technicly open to the public, and do not help the supermarket as they already know how much of each item sells by checking stock.


But they can extend the cameras to keeping track of which people come in. And you can cross-reference that with your credit card number and find out what each person bought. Which can then be used to do targeted advertising.


This proposal is not intended to change any nation severely, just increase human rights a notch.

It will cause a huge rise in crime, discriminate against the disabled, possibly wreck various economies by outlawing various types of legitimate software and stopping companies from using publicly available material for advertising research.

(I am going to stop arguing my case now, because I can't make it any more clear that I oppose it on various grounds)

So you are going to ban it for everyone, and take out the good as well as the bad?

So just for the sake of a few people getting free computer help thousands of others are going to have personal details stolen?

And I would say that spy ware has NOTHING to do with human rights. It is not a default human right to have a computer with no spyware on. It's a default human right not to have the crap kicked out of you for being black. How you can put those two on the same level is beyond me.

Do you not agree that it is a right to have your privacy protected? Do you not agree that it is a right to be different? There are no levels of human rights. I'm not proposing this is a human right to do with computers, it just helps the privacy issue.

But they can extend the cameras to keeping track of which people come in. And you can cross-reference that with your credit card number and find out what each person bought. Which can then be used to do targeted advertising.

But do they? The cost of having trained guards watching the camera's 24/7 and machines to time credit-card scans would far exceed the profit made from advertising.

It will cause a huge rise in crime, discriminate against the disabled, possibly wreck various economies by outlawing various types of legitimate software and stopping companies from using publicly available material for advertising research.

READ THE RESOLUTION.
1) Your overreacting. More policemen will be trained with fine money, and cameras will remain in place.
2) Is your country anticipating huge riots because disabled people can't go to the library to read the cencus?
3) Spyware is not usually legal, and it doesn't have a tremendous affect on the economy, just innocent civilians
4) But the cencus is not there to speed up globalisation. It's there because the people have a right to find out about famous people and to conduct private research. I've said it before, once your name goes on the cencus, you get floods of junk mail. It happens in our countries, now. I propose to stop that.

(I am going to stop arguing my case now, because I can't make it any more clear that I oppose it on various grounds)

But I've argued against your points well, I don't see why you still oppose my proposition.

Honsetly? Because it is dangerous, ill-thought-out and generally will cause mayhem, chaos and be used to set the idea of human rights back around three hundred years or so.

By the way - the phrase "to name a few" implies that I can enact almost any other law under the provision of this proposal. So if someone thinks their privacy is being invaded because the police are questioning them about a crime, they have the right not to answer. If their privacy is being invaded when the police search their house because they believe stolen property is there, they can refuse to let the police in, and the police have no grounds to go there.
No one can be asked to testify in court, because surely their thoughts are the most private things, and being asked to talk about them on the record is a CLEAR invasion of their privacy. Being asked to show a passport when leaving the country is an invasion of their privacy - why do we need to know where they are going and what they are doing?

I will enact all of these laws and many more that will make it impossible for anyone of my people to be arrested or tried for any crime in any country, and then we will swarm over the border and pillage every country we can find, and you can't do anything about it because we have the right to privacy, including our names and addresses if we are stopped by the police.

As I said - it is ill-thought-out and dangerous.

So just for the sake of a few people getting free computer help thousands of others are going to have personal details stolen?


The software helped around 200 million people last year. And five people reported having their personal details stolen.

Beat that with a stick.


Do you not agree that it is a right to have your privacy protected? Do you not agree that it is a right to be different? There are no levels of human rights. I'm not proposing this is a human right to do with computers, it just helps the privacy issue.


Having a law to ban junk mail is not a human right. And of course there are levels of human rights. Some people think everyone has the basic right to free internet access. But compare that to the right of not having your brains beaten in because you are gay and I think you will agree that one is a tad more important than the others.

This overlaps in to affecting businesses, and so comes under more than one category.



But do they? The cost of having trained guards watching the camera's 24/7 and machines to time credit-card scans would far exceed the profit made from advertising.


Facial recognition systems work wonders these days. And why do we need to time the credit card scans? All the receipts have the time and date on them already.


READ THE RESOLUTION.


I did. Did you?


1) Your overreacting. More policemen will be trained with fine money, and cameras will remain in place.


But the police will not be able to stop people so what good will training them do?


2) Is your country anticipating huge riots because disabled people can't go to the library to read the cencus?


Seriously - it's census. But aside from that that is not the point. You are asking me to enact a law that discriminates against the disabled. I am pretty sure that is not a good thing.


3) Spyware is not usually legal, and it doesn't have a tremendous affect on the economy, just innocent civilians


In your nation maybe. Plus you did not define what type of spyware, and there is some good stuff out there that does good for people. I will have to stop selling that, and some of my companies will go belly up because of it.


4) But the cencus is not there to speed up globalisation. It's there because the people have a right to find out about famous people and to conduct private research. I've said it before, once your name goes on the cencus, you get floods of junk mail. It happens in our countries, now. I propose to stop that.


Why? And why should I be forced to stop it just because you disaprove of it? Why should my businesses be penalised because you find junk mail a bad thing?

Also - and this is where you totally lose me - if everyone has a right to privacy, why should people be allowed to find out about famous people? Don't they have a right to privacy too?

And - btw - you only said big businesses. So I intend to instruct all my "big businesses" to set up small dummy companies ("small businesses") that will have access to the census. What they do with it is up to them :}


But I've argued against your points well, I don't see why you still oppose my proposition.

Well - you haven't, so I do.

4) But the cencus is not there to speed up globalisation. It's there because the people have a right to find out about famous people and to conduct private research. I've said it before, once your name goes on the cencus, you get floods of junk mail. It happens in our countries, now. I propose to stop that.
You seem to have absolutely no understanding of what a census is.

A census is a poll of every citizen and permanent resident in a nation.

It is not a way of 'finding out about famous people', nor is it a way of 'conducting private research'.

A census is intended to find out about national trends, such as the shape of the age pyramid, the language/s spoken, the ethnicities of the nation, the main religion/s, the population, the mean income, the location of the most affluent, the changing populations in different levels and other things of national importance.

At least as far as Australia is concerned, the complete census details of any person cannot be released until at least 100 years have passed, with the consent of the person involved. General information is released as soon as it is to hand, but specifics on any person must wait for a century. This is the way we work in regards to the protection of privacy, and anything less should be seen as an appalling breach of privacy.

We don't get 'flooded' with junk mail for filling in a census form, instead, we gain a chance to tell the future how we live today.

Is that clear?

You seem to have absolutely no understanding of what a census is.

A census is a poll of every citizen and permanent resident in a nation.

It is not a way of 'finding out about famous people', nor is it a way of 'conducting private research'.

A census is intended to find out about national trends, such as the shape of the age pyramid, the language/s spoken, the ethnicities of the nation, the main religion/s, the population, the mean income, the location of the most affluent, the changing populations in different levels and other things of national importance.

At least as far as Australia is concerned, the complete census details of any person cannot be released until at least 100 years have passed, with the consent of the person involved. General information is released as soon as it is to hand, but specifics on any person must wait for a century. This is the way we work in regards to the protection of privacy, and anything less should be seen as an appalling breach of privacy.

We don't get 'flooded' with junk mail for filling in a census form, instead, we gain a chance to tell the future how we live today.

Is that clear?

I know what a cencus is. Once it's released, it's a means of conducting research. Your country seems to have tackled the privacy issue, but the UN resolution will not change that if passed. Many countries do get junk mail. In fact, it's the prime reason telephone marketing is in place. The cencus is only a minor part of the proposition.

But junk mail has pretty much nothing to do with censuses (Censi? Censipodes? Anyone know the correct plural?). Addresses can be discovered through any number of institutions, both public and private. Besides, most junk mail is just delivered to everyone, regardless of address.

In any case, your definition of spyware could be taken to include cookies. While they can be annoying, they are pretty much required for many sites, including this one. Are they to be deleted as well?

I think the plural of census is actually census (like sheep and moose)

plural of census on bbc (http://www.bbc.co.uk/skillswise/glossary/index.shtml?00704)

And on Encarta (http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861595801)

Sorry, just thought I'd clarify :)

I stand corrected :}

I stand corrected :}

Sorry didn't mean to be pedantic :)

But junk mail has pretty much nothing to do with censuses (Censi? Censipodes? Anyone know the correct plural?). Addresses can be discovered through any number of institutions, both public and private. Besides, most junk mail is just delivered to everyone, regardless of address.

In any case, your definition of spyware could be taken to include cookies. While they can be annoying, they are pretty much required for many sites, including this one. Are they to be deleted as well?

Junk mail is to do with the cencus. The government hands out the cencus, companies get adresses of citizens and flood their mailboxes. How else do they find out adresses? The same with tele-marketing. They don't just dial random numbers and hope for the best.
By spyware my defenition meant corporate buisinesses hacking into computers.
Quote:
Spyware be banned. Any company found usining it be fined.'
End Quote

Uh,

Has anyone stopped to think this is not a global issue?

I could see some provisions that deal with the use of satellites and the internet, but let the nations themselves decide where they put cameras.

:rolleyes:

Junk mail is to do with the cencus. The government hands out the cencus, companies get adresses of citizens and flood their mailboxes. How else do they find out adresses? The same with tele-marketing. They don't just dial random numbers and hope for the best.
By spyware my defenition meant corporate buisinesses hacking into computers.
Quote:
Spyware be banned. Any company found usining it be fined.'
End Quote

When I last worked in Telemarketing we used the phone book. Not the census. And junk mail is mostly based on people who register for products, or shop at shops that they have loyalty cards with, or things like that. I really can not imagine a company going through it just to do advertising when there are much better ways.


And again - you did not define it like that. You just said spyware. And I know I am being pedantic, but as I said this is INTERNATIONAL LAW you are creating, so you have to be specific if you mean a specific type.

There are cases of dead people and babies getting junk mail. You don't find their adresses in the phone book. All these companies do is call and send mail to every name they see.
I'm sorry if I wasn't specific, but spyware is a serious problem in whatever for. I think that people are arguing for the sake of it. They know I don't mean cookies. Heck, I didn't even know you could use them as spyware. I thought they just contained data.

There are cases of dead people and babies getting junk mail. You don't find their adresses in the phone book. All these companies do is call and send mail to every name they see.
I'm sorry if I wasn't specific, but spyware is a serious problem in whatever for. I think that people are arguing for the sake of it. They know I don't mean cookies. Heck, I didn't even know you could use them as spyware. I thought they just contained data.

But the point we are (or I am) making is that you did not define spyware to any degree. It could mean anything. So we might know you don't mean cookies, but other people might not.

And cookies do contain data. That is used by websites to monitor when you visit it, and (possibly) what you did on it. That is invading your privacy, without your permition. Which is spyware. A very mild form to be sure, but your proposal does not list degrees of spyware - you just want to ban it all.

Also dead people are listed in the phone book until a new phone book comes out :}

Yes, but when they call the number the'll soon find out that the person is dead and stop calling, whilst they can still get junk mail. Telling those compaines to stop is useless, as there is no law to stop them.
I'm sorry about the cookies buisness, I just hope that it doesn't change the results of the vote.

Well, look what I found:

Also, Microsoft offered Thursday a free program to remove "spyware," a category of irritating programs that secretly monitor the activities of Internet users and can cause sluggish computer performance or popup ads.

Well, look what I found:

Also, Microsoft offered Thursday a free program to remove "spyware," a category of irritating programs that secretly monitor the activities of Internet users and can cause sluggish computer performance or popup ads.

And you can find news reports that guns are used to kill people as well as shoot deer.

What is your point?

Well, I was just giving you a defenition of spyware. It doesn't include cookies and the like.

Well, I was just giving you a defenition of spyware. It doesn't include cookies and the like.

A definition that comes from one company who uses cookies quite a lot on their websites and has a vested interest in not defining them as spyware.

Web definitions for Spyware
A general term for a program that surreptitiously monitors your actions. While they are sometimes sinister, like a remote control program used by a hacker, software companies have been known to use spyware to gather data about customers. The practice is generally frowned upon.
blackice.iss.net/glossary.php - Definition in context

That's coming from the first page of goodle.

Web definitions for Spyware
A general term for a program that surreptitiously monitors your actions. While they are sometimes sinister, like a remote control program used by a hacker, software companies have been known to use spyware to gather data about customers. The practice is generally frowned upon.
blackice.iss.net/glossary.php - Definition in context

That's coming from the first page of goodle.

You do realise I don't care how many definitions you get, because I can find a number of people who will agree that cookies can be defined as spyware. Including a cleaning tool that removes them because they are classed as security risks.

It is not a basic human right not to get junk mail, the police should be able to stop and search people without having to go get a court order first, the government is not the police so by virtue of this proposal I can put government cameras in every house and private business to monitor them, and use the tapes as evidence for the police should they need it, I can argue that passports are illegal, all court cases are now illegal and asking anyone for their name at any time is illegal (these are all invasions of privacy which you said is a bad thing), and I can set up a small business that gets a copy of the census from the government, then sells it on to big businesses, since the proposal doesn't object to me doing that.

Generally speaking I think this proposal is far too intrusive in to the way I govern my country. And it fits in more than one category. And it is trying to restrict business practices as part of human rights, which is wrong and bad. And as I have shown above it is far too easy to find loopholes in so even if it is approved and it passes it is going to have no effect in the way I govern my nation.

I'm going to stop arguing, as I accept (to a point) your rejections of the proposal, and nothing I say will make you change your mind. Even so, it was only meant for the benefit of the people at the cost of large buisnesses, and I felt that it wouldn't be life changing to the government and citizens.