Category Archives: Technology

A (Media + Tech Industry) vs Govt. News Sandwich

I am hopeful that in 2014 we will see the fruits of Edward Snowden’s efforts to educate the public about the abuses of government surveillance. Yesterday the NYT Editorial Board published a piece titled, significantly, “Edward Snowden, Whistle-Blower”. The editorial’s purpose is to argue in support of Snowden being given a chance to return to the U.S. without facing a lengthy—and perhaps not any—prison sentence.

Considering the enormous value of the information he has revealed, and the abuses he has exposed, Mr. Snowden deserves better than a life of permanent exile, fear and flight. He may have committed a crime to do so, but he has done his country a great service. It is time for the United States to offer Mr. Snowden a plea bargain or some form of clemency that would allow him to return home, face at least substantially reduced punishment in light of his role as a whistle-blower, and have the hope of a life advocating for greater privacy and far stronger oversight of the runaway intelligence community.

Hear, hear!

The editorial summarizes the abuses and crimes revealed by Snowden, many of which have yet to be addressed by our government. The Board also provides further evidence for a point that I’ve been making on my show for some time: that Snowden had no realistic alternative available to him, given that his goal was to inform us and the world about our government’s violation of our rights. On my show, I’ve been referring to former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton’s remark that “all three branches of government have signed off” on what the N.S.A. is doing. If that’s really true, I argued, then Snowden did the right thing. The NYT Editorial Board buttresses the argument, pointing out that an executive order that Obama has touted as providing protection for whistle-blowers does not apply to contractors like Snowden, only to intelligence personnel. (I wonder if that executive order says anything about a whistle-blower’s email being hacked and deleted.) In addition, the Board noted, Snowden told The Washington Post that he had twice reported the abuses to his superiors, and that the complaints were ignored. The entire editorial is worth a read.

Seeing that the NYT is on the right side in the issue of pervasive government surveillance is heartening, especially in light of the almost continuous revelations about the NSA’s activities. Most recently, Der Spiegel revealed that the NSA was developing software that, as summarized by The Guardian, “would allow it to remotely retrieve virtually all the information on an iPhone including text messages, photos, contacts, location, voice mail and live calls.”

Apple not only denied knowledge of or involvement with this program, it also issued a strongly worded statement which reads, in part:

Whenever we hear about attempts to undermine Apple’s industry-leading security, we thoroughly investigate and take appropriate steps to protect our customers. We will continue to use our resources to stay ahead of malicious hackers and defend our customers from security attacks, regardless of who’s behind them.

If you read that really quickly, you can imagine that Apple is calling the NSA “malicious hackers,” which is something that I would call them. Still, it’s great to see Apple saying that it pledges to “defend [its] customers from security attacks,” even when those attacks come from our own government.

Happy New Year, everyone!

6 Comments

Filed under Politics, Technology

Two Spoonfuls of Sugar to Make The Budget Deal News Go Down

In my last News Sandwich, I said I was skeptical about what could be achieved, today, by convening legislators for an Article V Convention to amend the Constitution.

There is, nonetheless, a lot that state legislatures can do to protect their citizens from our rights-trampling federal government. South Carolina, for its part, is poised to end Obamacare in its state. The Daily Caller reports that the “South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act” has already passed in the South Carolina House of Representatives, and is likely to pass in the GOP-controlled state Senate in January. The legislation contains several key provisions designed to counteract all effects of Obamacare, including a state income tax credit for any Obamacare fine paid, as well as a provision prohibiting any insurance company receiving Obamacare subsidies from operating in the state. The Caller’s Bruce Parker speculates that, should the bill be enacted and upheld as within the state’s power, which seems likely, South Carolina could serve as an example for other states eager to protect their citizens from the onerous burden of this unpopular legislation. Read more here.

I think we’d best focus on the good news coming out of state legislatures for a while. It seems that the House GOP–which many of us had hoped would use its power of the purse to keep the growth of government and spending in check–has agreed to a deal that former OMB director David Stockman describes as “the final surrender of the House Republican leadership.” The House “leadership” apparently agreed with the rest of the statists in Washington that even the modest “sequester” spending cuts were too much for them to stomach. Instead, says the Washington Post, we’ll get “roughly $63 billion in other policies, including fee increases for airline travelers, cuts to federal-worker and military pensions and higher payments for federal insurance of private pensions,” etc. Senators Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have come out against the deal, and even Mitch McConnell–no doubt in a desperate effort to save his seat–has said he’d vote against it. But all of that is just showboating with a Democratic majority in the Senate. David Stockman says that what this budget agreement means, practically speaking, is that there won’t be another opportunity to significantly reduce spending until 2020.

After that depressing bit of news, we may all need a bit of retail therapy (assuming we can still afford it). A trip to the mall is normally the best way to get instant gratification, but that may change in the not-too-distant future. In an earlier News Sandwich I discussed Jeff Bezos’s plans to use drone technology to deliver Amazon.com orders in as little as 30 minutes. According to the Wall Street Journal, DHL is also testing its own version of a speedy drone delivery service, increasing the chances that we will eventually get to see, with our own eyes, little flying robots delivering packages to our door. Drone deliveries, however, as we learned from Bezos, won’t be a reality for at least a few years, thanks to our federal government prohibiting any for-profit use of drones until the FAA gets around to writing the “necessary regulations.”

In the meantime, the Wall Street Journal reports that some retailers (Home Depot, Amazon, and eBay among them) are planning to expand their offerings of same-day deliveries. No, not 30-minute deliveries, and no, not carried by cute flying robots, but deliveries of wanted and needed items within a matter of hours. I am often amazed and grateful that companies are continuing to find ways, even in this dreadful economy, to make money by improving their services (and our lives).

According to the Wall Street Journal piece some of these companies, along with FedEx and UPS, are betting that, once you have same-day delivery service available, there won’t be much value added by offering a 30-minute delivery service. My advice to them: ignore the flying-robot-cuteness-factor at your peril.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Technology

A Sanction-of-the-Victim News Sandwich

As someone who has been an outspoken critic of the NSA and the third-party doctrine that purports to make their intrusive data-collecting legal, I was heartened to read that several of the major technology companies–Google, Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter, AOL and LinkedIn–are calling for the United States to lead a worldwide effort to limit online spying. The companies are advocating “new surveillance principles…includ[ing] limiting governments’ authority to collect users’ information, setting up a legal system of oversight and accountability for that authority, allowing the companies to publish the number and nature of the demands for data, ensuring that users’ online data can be stored in different countries and establishing a framework to govern data requests between countries.”

Most notably, the companies urge that indiscriminate bulk data collection be forbidden. The Times’ authors describe the tech industry as a “powerful interest group” that could have a tremendous influence on this debate. Let’s hope so. It is great to see businessmen stand up for their and their customers’ rights for a change!*

I hope the healthcare industry will do the same. There is so much bad news about Obamacare right now, that it’s difficult to decide which story to include here as single item of “bad news.” There’s this story, in which the Financial Times reports that the new Obamacare exchange health care plans will exclude top hospitals, “including two world-renowned cancer centers.” Just to show you how far the medical care industry needs to go before it can get to where the tech industry is, note that the Financial Times says that “some hospital administrators” are worried about this development and “see the change as an unintended consequence of the ACA.”

You don’t need the equivalent of an Edward Snowden to reveal the true agenda of big government in medicine: the history and very nature of socialized medicine tells us to expect developments like this. And yet hospital administrators, people who should know the industry, and who have already been dealing with government intervention in it, see this as an “unintended consequence”? And then there’s the woman who heads government relations for the Mayo clinic, who says she’s concerned that NOW “the full spectrum from primary to top speciality care, [is becoming] commoditized.” Can someone please tell this woman that the whole reason Obamacare was passed in the first place is because a bunch of politicians whined that health care was too much of a commodity, and that the government needed to come in and fix that? Of course what she means is that, now with additional government involvement in the health care industry, costs have increased even more, making top quality healthcare something fewer and fewer will be able to afford.

And then there’s this story, in which an Obamacare Architect admits that if we’d like to “keep our doctor,” then we’ll just have to pay a lot more to do so. And this story, about the errors in the Healthcare.gov website forms, errors so significant and pervasive that one in four Americans who enrolled at the website in October and November may not even have health insurance come January 1!

Thankfully there is one segment of the health care industry that seems to be waking up to the truth about Obamacare–right here on the left coast! Richard Pollock of the Washington Examiner reports that “An estimated seven out of every 10 physicians in deep-blue California are rebelling against the state’s Obamacare health insurance exchange and won’t participate….” Apparently California doctors just learned in September of this year that their compensation rates for caring for exchange patients would be pegged to California’s Medicaid program–a program that has one of the lowest compensation rates in the country. To expect doctors who live in a state with one of the highest costs of living to accept one of the lowest compensation rates for their work is unconscionable. It’s no surprise that some doctors are considering not just refusing to participate in the exchanges, but, according to Dr. Theodore M. Mazer, a San Diego ENT doctor interviewed by the Examiner, they are also considering retiring early. Moreover, the Examiner reports, many doctors have been listed as participants in Obamacare plans on exchange websites without their permission! Covered California, which alleges that 85% of doctors will be participating in the exchanges, could not be reached for comment on the accuracy of that figure, or of the doctor listings on the exchange web sites.

Kudos to the doctors in California who are standing up for their rights and boycotting the exchanges. Shame on Covered California for concealing doctors’ compensation rates until the last minute, for trying to manipulate doctors into participating without giving them that information and for, apparently, lying about which doctors are participating in exchange plans. This is the sort of behavior that would get a private company brought before an alphabet-soup agency for investigation, fines, etc. I hope California’s doctors won’t let them get away with it.

*FYI, I’ve submitted a much shorter version of my forthcoming law review article on the third-party doctrine to a major blog for publication. As soon as it’s published, I’ll let everyone know. I hope it can have some influence on the debate as well.

Leave a comment

Filed under Medicine, Politics, Technology