The convergence of privacy-invading technologies and Washington's appetite for surveillance have put civil liberties on the run. This is especially true in the war against terrorism. Controversial initiatives have included biometric face cameras, wiretap enhancements, invasive computer-assisted airline passenger screening, . . .
The convergence of privacy-invading technologies and Washington's appetite for surveillance have put civil liberties on the run. This is especially true in the war against terrorism. Controversial initiatives have included biometric face cameras, wiretap enhancements, invasive computer-assisted airline passenger screening, escalated e-mail monitoring fostered by the USA Patriot Act, and the Pentagon's Total Information Awareness data-mining project (now renamed the "Terrorism" Information Awareness, or TIA). Even a national ID card was proposed.

In the right circumstances, data-mining technologies and "biometrics" -- such as voice prints, retina, iris and face scanners, digitized fingerprints, and even implantable chips -- can benefit us. That's because data-mining and biometrics, at least in principle, are about enhancing convenience, service, authentication, and individual security more than they are about invading privacy. Biometrics, for example, promises increased privacy and security by guarding against identity theft in our myriad marketplace transactions. We'll see their use in cell phones, laptops, car doors, doorknobs and office keys -- basically everywhere. They can increase security in online commerce, help locate a lost youngster, relay medical information to doctors, and much more.

The link for this article located at CATO is no longer available.