carnevalemanfredonia.it
» » The Open Society Paradox: Why the Twenty-First Century Calls for More Openness--Not Less

eBook The Open Society Paradox: Why the Twenty-First Century Calls for More Openness--Not Less download

by Dennis Bailey

eBook The Open Society Paradox: Why the Twenty-First Century Calls for More Openness--Not Less download ISBN: 1574889168
Author: Dennis Bailey
Publisher: Potomac Books; First Edition edition (November 15, 2004)
Language: English
Pages: 240
ePub: 1508 kb
Fb2: 1304 kb
Rating: 4.2
Other formats: docx azw lrf lit
Category: Political
Subcategory: Politics and Government

The Open Society Paradox book.

The Open Society Paradox book. How do we ensure security and, at the same time, safeguard. The Open Society Paradox challenges the conventional wisdom of those on both sides of the debate-leaders who want unlimited authority and advocates who would sacrifice security for individual privacy protection.

The Open Society Paradox is a magnificent addition to the ongoing discussion about the proper balance . The book opens new vistas and is thought-provoking even for those who have long inhabited the many fields of study that the book encompasses.

The Open Society Paradox is a magnificent addition to the ongoing discussion about the proper balance between privacy and transparency. Dennis Bailey's analysis of privacy and society is comprehensive, lively, and persuasive.

Anonymity in an open society - Will the real John Doe please stand up? . Invasion of the data snatchers - Information does not kill people; people kill people - The open society of the twenty-first century.

Anonymity in an open society - Will the real John Doe please stand up? A warning about identity theft - Your papers please: the case for a homeland ID - Smile, you're on candid camera: the case for surveillance - There's gold in them thar data: the case for information analysis - Life, liberty and the pursuit of privacy - Privacy lost - Big brother is watching you -. - Invasion of the data snatchers - Information does not kill people; people kill people - The open society of the twenty-first century.

The Open Society Paradox: Why the Twenty-First Century Calls for More Openness-Not Less. Additional Information. The Open Society Paradox: Why the Twenty-First Century Calls for More Openness-Not Less. Published by: University of Nebraska Press. How do we ensure security and, at the same time, safeguard civil liberties? The Open Society Paradox challenges the conventional wisdom of those on both sides of the debate-leaders who want unlimited authority and advocates who would sacrifice security for individual privacy protection.

The Open Society Paradox challenges the conventional wisdom of those on both sides o. .

Anonymity in an open society Will the real John Doe please stand up? A warning about identity theft Your papers please: the case for a homeland ID Smile, you're on candid . The open society of the twenty-first century.

Anonymity in an open society Will the real John Doe please stand up? A warning about identity theft Your papers please: the case for a homeland ID Smile, you're on candid camera: the case for surveillance There's gold in them thar data: the case for information analysis Life, liberty and the pursuit of privacy Privacy lost Big brother is watching you Invasion of the data snatchers Information does not kill people; people kill people.

The Open Society Paradox. Why the Twenty-First Century Calls for More Openness-Not Less. Published November 15, 2004 by Potomac Books In.In early 2000, when Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hamzi moved into the Parkwood Apartments in San Diego's Clairmont District in California, they appeared to be two ordinary Muslims trying their best to fit in and stake their claim to the American dream.

How do we ensure security and, at the same time, safeguard civil liberties? The Open Society Paradox challenges the conventional wisdom of those on both sides of the debate-leaders who want unlimited authority and advocates who would sacrifice security for individual privacy protection. Separate tags with commas, spaces are allowed. Use tags to describe a product . for a movie Themes heist, drugs, kidnapping, coming of age Genre drama, parody, sci-fi, comedy Locations paris, submarine, new york.

Bailey talked about his book, The Open Society Paradox: Why the 21st Century Calls for More Openness - Not Less, published by Potomac Books

Bailey talked about his book, The Open Society Paradox: Why the 21st Century Calls for More Openness - Not Less, published by Potomac Books. In it, the author stresses the need to maintain America’s policy of openness but to do so while developing the technology necessary to keep track of the increasing population. The author recommends doing so via surveillance, data mining, and biometrics, the statistical analysis of biological specifications and phenomena.

How do we ensure security and, at the same time, safeguard civil liberties? The Open Society Paradox challenges the conventional wisdom of those on both sides of the debate―leaders who want unlimited authority and advocates who would sacrifice security for individual privacy protection. It offers a provocative alternative, suggesting that while the very openness of American society has left the United States vulnerable to today’s threats, only more of this quality will make the country safer and enhance its citizens’ freedom and mobility.Uniquely qualified to address these issues, Dennis Bailey argues that the solution is not to create a police state that restricts liberties but, paradoxically, to embrace greater openness. Through new technologies that engender transparency, including secure information, biometrics, surveillance, facial recognition, and data mining, society can remove the anonymity of the ill-intentioned while revitalizing the notions of trust and accountability and enhancing freedom for most Americans. He explores the impact of greater transparency on our lives, our relationships, and our liberties. The Open Society Paradox is a brave exploration of how to realign our traditional assumptions about privacy with a twenty-first-century concept of an open society.
Comments: (7)
Golden Lama
With 911 as its backdrop, this author takes "a difficult bull by the horns" and attempts to wrestle it to the ground by answering in a novel way one of the central questions of our time: How in an open society, do we protect ourselves from those who would use our freedoms against us to do us harm? Most impressively is the fact that the book examines how this issue has been deal with since the nation's founding and comes to a rather startlingly counterintuitive conclusion: that the answer lies in not less openness, but in more.

The theme of his basic argument is that in a free society, the question of the best balance between freedom and security is always paramount. Open societies are vulnerable to those who would bore their way into our society and use our freedoms against us. And thus the choice often boils down to one of restricting freedoms in order to increase security. The trick of course is finding the proper balance between the two. Mr. Bailey's main thesis, which is cogently presented, is that with new technologies, (the internet, satellites, cell phones, etc.) by making all of the public more open to government, it is then much more difficult for our enemies to hide in the shadows. And indeed it may be so.

Although his historical analysis suggests another concern equal to that of the terrorist's threat, Mr. Bailey consistently sees only one side of this avowedly two-sided problem. Taking an historical perspective, and in my view misinterpreting the main concern of the founding fathers, Mr. Bailey very quickly "zero-ins" on new technologies as the salvation of last resort. While in no way minimizing the threat of terrorism, or the important of new technologies, it still remains true that in the eyes of our founding fathers, a concern on par with this one was that of having confidence that our leaders would not use the specter of "external threats" as a "ruse" and a bogeyman to strip away our freedoms. This concern of theirs remains ever present.

On this very important issue the author's seems to have dropped the ball. He simply waves his hand at this critical issue, and thus at least in this reader's view, leaves the book only half done. When he rather incongruously comes down solidly on the side of the Patriot Act and other intrusive measures, without giving even a nod to the primary fears raised by the founding fathers, in my mind, his analysis raises more questions than it answers. Clearly our founders primary concern was that untrustworthy leaders would gain power through seeing the enormous political benefits of "playing the security card." And in light of the current administration's excesses, in my view, the author did not explore this important theme sufficiently enough.

Put simply, in order to find the correct balance between security and freedom, we must first have leaders we can trust; leaders who are themselves open and have the best interests of the country in mind. Rather than belabor the point, I think it is self-evident that our current leaders, both in the legislative and the executive, were less than trustworthy. In my view this book was not the time to "skate" pass this very important issue. What a missed opportunity!

Three Stars
Pameala
Well written and documented with a premise that falls short of convincing. The author's call for accepting intrusion into a private life he says does not exist left me more agitated than enlightened.
Jogas
I picked up this book intrigued by the title. There is no question in my mind that the balance of openness vs. security is a major question of the time. Today we are seeing more and more people calling for ever increasing security. The paper yesterday said that a new requirement for a drivers license will be to present four forms of ID. Where is a sixteen year old supposed to get four forms of ID?

There is a big flack about issuing drivers licenses to illegal migrant workers from Mexico. Do these people say that we want these people driving without a license. A drivers license is (perhaps was is a better word) supposed to be proof only that the person understands the little driving book. That's good if someone is to drive a car.

This book recognizes the problem of more government control, but says that the constitutional protections are sufficient to say that the Government won't run amuck. In view of the Patriot's Act and the Drug laws that says the carrying of 'significant' amounts of cash is presumptive of drug purchasing intent, I'm not so sure.

The author also puts his faith in an ID card with embedded biometric data. I have one of those. It was issued by the passport people and at selected airports a kiosk would let me come into the country without having to stand in the passport line. After 9/11 they stopped using these machines. Evidently the Government decided that measuring the biometrics of my hand was less secure than having an immigration person ask me a few questions.

A very interesting contribution to the story of our time, I'm just not quite convinced yet.
Anarawield
The book is enlightening. Many people feel that we have to choose between freedom and security for our future. The author argues that we can have both - freedom and security. The author calls this "The Open Society Paradox."

The driver's license is the identifying card that almost everyone uses to exist and navigate in our society. The driver's license is the ticket to acceptability in our society. Bailey explains that getting a paper driver's license is too easy and therefore it is too easy to switch identities.

The author argues for a secure biometric national ID card. He calls this the technologies of openness. He downplays the severe loss of privacy that this would cause. Bailey believes that with this secure national ID card we can be both free and secure. I do not think that he makes his case. He believes that giving up one's privacy does not endanger one's freedom. He is wrong about this. He says openness is coming and we can not stop it.

Political Issues (C-Span 354/1)
Yozshugore
This book was recommended to me by a guest speaker I had in my Technology/Terrorism/National Security Law class.

It was well written, and well argued. One of his points seemed to be that people get privacy and anonymity mixed up. I agree with this. People do get this mixed up, anyone who thinks there websurfing is truly private is mistaken, anyone can see you walking down the street. Its because people do not know you that makes you think you are granted privacy, when really you are just anonymous.... I did not agree with him though that we need more openess. I would prefer to have more liberty and actual privacy even if it meant more terrorist attacks or whatever is the fear of the day. The data collection industry is very scary and is a serious threat to everyone's privacy. For the opposite side of the coin read "No Place to Hide" by Robert O'Hara. I am not done with this one yet (another recommendation by the above person) but I agree with his premise alot more, so far.

Overall though I would agree this is well done book, that makes you think about the issue. I would recommend it.

Scott