Hacker News Reader

Personally, I rather take my chances with the $FANATICAL_CAUSE and have a system in place where I'm able to get data about my government and to ensure proper behavior on their end.

"Let me use the freedom of information act to obtain the database that maps license plates to names and addresses. Next time you accidentally cut somebody off in traffic, expect him to be waiting at your house when you get home, after visiting my website. Maybe he's already had a little visit with your family while he was waiting."

If this person truly wanted to harm me if I cut them off, then they could already do that. By following me to my house and getting me there. Or how about this scenario. My hubcap falls off while driving and the person behind me pulls over and picks it up. I had a vanity plate that the driver noticed and so they go to your website find my address and then drop off my hubcap to my house. When I get home from work, I'm happily surprised and pop that sucker right back on the car. Both scenarios would be possible because of that list on the website. However, one is much more favorable than the other. It isn't the list that is bad, it is the intentions of the people using it. Those people who are going to use such a list for nefarious uses are most likely going to behave in the same way with or without the list.

    > Let me use the the freedom of information act to obtain the tax returns of every person in an area.

This is done in several Scandinavian countries seemingly without much ill effect: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-06-18-salarie...

IMO, there's not much difference between government employees and arbitrary members of the general public.

It's a safe assumption that if the government is collecting personal information then random strangers will have access to it.

Depends on what you call a difference. The nice lady at the DMV, or the IRS or the county assessor's office will likely know far more about you than you ever will about her because of access to data. A lot of that data is not publicly available.

What I mean is the people at the DMV, IRS, and county assessors are total strangers and have no connection to me. Giving them access to my information, publicly available or not, is no different than handing it out to any arbitrary members of the public.

I have no reason to trust them any more than I trust anybody else. Saying, "They won't misuse the data because it's their job not to," is as comforting as "Nobody will misuse the data because it would be illegal."

I think the difference is more that with FOIA-style public lists, that people who will misuse your data can look you up directly, whereas the clerk at the DMV actually is a total stranger who if anything cares about you personally even less than a total stranger might.

It sounds to me like this information was intended to be public and disseminated to interested parties (researchers, critics, etc). From the article: "Gun permit holding is public information in New York, and can be acquired through a mere request via the Freedom of Information Act."

So I think your example of DMV registrations or tax returns being obtained through a freedom of information act is a bit of a stretch because the DMV has explicitly stated on the myriad forms I've signed that they will only ever share your information with the court when required. Or in the case of a DUI they will also sell your information to ambulance chasing lawyers (personal experience).

Tax data is protected by Federal law and regulation. It's pretty secure.

DMV data, on the other hand, is for sale in most states, and is exchanged with other states and in some cases Canadian provincial entities as well. Telemarketers, marketing firms, etc all buy your personal information and registration data from the DMV, often getting it in near real time.

This is good to know. Out of curiosity do you have any experience with these sorts of agreements with state DMV's? Any more info?

About 35 years ago, someone acquired a list of all persons with a concealed carry license in New York City, and published it in a newspaper or magazine. It created a nine-days wonder and as far as I know has been forgotten ever since.

Lists don't harm people. People harm people.

$FANATICAL_CAUSE without guns? I'm not too worried about that.

Because it's unheard of for fanatics to use, say, bombs?