Sunday, October 23, 2005
Will you pay higher tuition to catch terrorists?
Colleges Protest Call to Upgrade Online Systems - New York Times
The New York Times reports that universities are protesting the federal government's mandate that they and every other internet provider upgrade their networks to allow law enforcement agencies to monitor internet communications in order to apprend criminals and terrorists.
The catch is that the government expects theses companies and institutions to pay for this upgrade themselves, which in the case of the hundreds of universities providing internet service to their communities is astronomical and could come out of your pocket:
The fascinating point about the opposition to this federal mandate is that it is an unfunded and not on any fear of Big Brother snooping through our email and listening in on internet phone calls. The universities are worried about the bottom line and do not see any threat to civil liberties here: "Because the government would have to win court orders before undertaking surveillance."
Should the govenment be allowed to control the architecture of the net for security purposes? Or should the private network providers and other institutions have some liberty here?
Do security concerns trump civil liberties in our current climate of risk? Forever?
Certainly the government of China is also seeking to make sure it can monitor every online communication by its population. Will our government do the same? Should we be worried about federal surveillance of political dissidents in this country or will they really limit this to the pursuit of criminals and terrorists?
The New York Times reports that universities are protesting the federal government's mandate that they and every other internet provider upgrade their networks to allow law enforcement agencies to monitor internet communications in order to apprend criminals and terrorists.
The catch is that the government expects theses companies and institutions to pay for this upgrade themselves, which in the case of the hundreds of universities providing internet service to their communities is astronomical and could come out of your pocket:
Technology experts retained by the schools estimated that it could cost universities at least $7 billion just to buy the Internet switches and routers necessary for compliance. That figure does not include installation or the costs of hiring and training staff to oversee the sophisticated circuitry around the clock, as the law requires, the experts said.
"This is the mother of all unfunded mandates," Mr. Hartle said.
Even the lowest estimates of compliance costs would, on average, increase annual tuition at most American universities by some $450, at a time when rising education costs are already a sore point with parents and members of Congress, Mr. Hartle said.
The fascinating point about the opposition to this federal mandate is that it is an unfunded and not on any fear of Big Brother snooping through our email and listening in on internet phone calls. The universities are worried about the bottom line and do not see any threat to civil liberties here: "Because the government would have to win court orders before undertaking surveillance."
Should the govenment be allowed to control the architecture of the net for security purposes? Or should the private network providers and other institutions have some liberty here?
Do security concerns trump civil liberties in our current climate of risk? Forever?
Certainly the government of China is also seeking to make sure it can monitor every online communication by its population. Will our government do the same? Should we be worried about federal surveillance of political dissidents in this country or will they really limit this to the pursuit of criminals and terrorists?
