Dragnet Nation: Our Daughter's Book about Relentless Surveillance

Pervasive Surveillance

Dragnet Nation: A quest for privacy, security and freedom in a world of relentless surveillance was released this week.  Our daughter, Julia Angwin, wrote this book.

The book is about Internet surveillance, and how (if possible) to avoid it.

When we think about how our data is transmitted on the Internet, many of us think that data tracking is something mild and benign.  We think it is something like the way Amazon keeps a list of authors we read, and lets us know when one of our authors has a new book out.  That mental model is sweet but completely inaccurate.

There are at least 200 "data broker" companies building data profiles of people's activities on the Internet. They compete to sell this data to merchants, and will also share it with the government. Most of them won't let you see or correct your own data.

On Fresh Air (NPR) two days ago, Julia described how she tracked down some data broker companies and asked to see her data. Most refused to show it. She did get to see some of her data.  Some files were frighteningly accurate (her college dorm room number) and some files were completely inaccurate (she is not a single mother with only a high school education).  The company with the most inaccurate data about her was planning to sell this data to hospitals for "alternative credit scoring."  By law, traditional credit evaluation companies are required to share their data with you and allow you to correct it. Data brokers are under no such laws.  They own your data.  You have no rights to it.

And think about this: your smart phone is always in contact with the nearest cell tower.  Your phone is a location device, locating....you. You can be tracked through your smart phone.

The Lighter Side

Despite its difficult topic, the book is enjoyable to read.  Julia decided to try to opt out of the surveillance. She describes some things that worked, and some things that didn't work.  Keeping her smart phone in a Faraday cage so she couldn't be tracked: this sort of worked.  She couldn't be tracked, but she couldn't be called.  Many of her strategies backfired in similar ways.  If you are in the system, you are in it.

Powerful passwords are useful, though not against surveillance. However, there are still ordinary hackers out there, trying to steal your data. Her search for strong passwords led to me being mentioned in the book. Making a strong password is a fairly time-consuming process. Julia taught her daughter (our granddaughter) a system to make passwords, and paid her $1 for each password she created.  I didn't know about this.

Our granddaughter came up with the idea that this password thing could be a cool little business. Out of the blue, my granddaughter emailed me to say that she could make passwords for me at $1 per password.

This was one weird email, from my point of view. I grew alarmed and sent an immediate email to Julia.  Julia reassured me the email was legit: my granddaughter really was setting up a little password business in the family, based on Julia paying her $1 per password. Enterprising kid.

This incident ended up in the book.

What you can do

Julia has suggestions for at least partial protection of your on-line identity.  You can find out more by buying Dragnet Nation or by going to the privacy tools section of her website.

If you want to see the opposite of privacy, you can always go to her website section on Stasi files (East German Secret Police) files on spying on social networks.

More references:

A short Wall Street Journal video clip about helping kids avoid digital footprints.

WSJ article: How to Protect Your Kids' Privacy On-LIne.

Julia on CBS News: Erasing your digital footprints

NPR, Fresh Air, interview with Julia: If you think you are anonymous online, think again

Marketplace: Trying to go off the grid. Completely.

Columbia Journalism Review of the book Data Invasion: Julia Angwin's journey to the depth of data

Bill Moyers essay recommending the book: An Antidote to Big Brother's Chill

JWT Intelligence interview with Julia Angwin

Leonard Lopate Show WNYC: How to Protect (Some of) Your Personal Data in 10 Not-So-Easy Steps

A final word

Yes, George and I are very proud of Julia!

57th Carnival of Nuclear Energy Bloggers

The 57th Carnival of Nuclear Energy Bloggers has just been posted at ANS Nuclear Cafe. Dan Yurman assembled, arranged, commented and illustrated this compendium of nuclear energy blogs, and he did a splendid job. Yurman gives the Carnival a compelling story line.

Debunking: Does it Work?

Yurman starts by pointing out all the bogus news stories about nuclear ("weapons-grade plutonium ejected from Fukushima!") that crowd the internet. He then asks the question: Is Debunking nonsense likely to be successful? To answer that question, he refers to my post about Fuel Pools, Cheryl Rofer's post about the fake video about Fukushima, David Bradish of NEI debunking Grist's anti-nuclear campaign (especially the economics). Will Davis at Atomic Power Review describes "How the Misinformation Superhighway Affects Nuclear Energy" in a thoughtful post with many comments. At his own blog, Idaho Samizdat, Dan Yurman debunks the conspiracy theories around Fort Calhoun plant and the Mississippi River flooding. Meanwhile, Rod Adams points out that the German retreat from nuclear energy will not cause the renewables revolution. At ANS Nuclear Cafe, Ted Rockwell debunks myths about radiation harm.

Jaczko and Safety

NRC Commissioner Jaczko asked for a fifty-mile evacuation zone for Americans in Japan in the early days of Fukushima. Jaczko apparently ignored NRC staff to make this recommendation, and of course, ignores everybody about Yucca Mountain. In the Carnival, Brian Wang at Next Big Future comments on people who are calling for Jaczko's resignation, while Margaret Harding does some digging and concludes that Jaczko is untouchable. The only man who can fire him is President Obama, and Obama won't do it. Obama needs the support of Jaczko's former boss, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Meanwhile, two bloggers talk about real nuclear safety, not the Jaczko version. Gail Marcus of Nuke Power Talk discusses beefing up safety regulation in Japan. Having worked in Japan on nuclear regulatory issues, Marcus speaks with authority. Meanwhile, at Nuclear Green, Charles Barton assesses the safety of nuclear power (already the safest form of energy production) and how new generations of reactors can improve safety even further. He discusses (debunks) the Vermont Yankee tritium scare, the Fukushima escaping-plutonium excitement, and has a lovely picture of the first test of the storage of used nuclear fuel: the Oklo natural reactor, where nuclear byproducts were retained in place for a billion years. And new types of reactors will be even safer than our current reactors.

Good News

In the spirit of leaving on an upbeat note, Dan finished the post with some good news. Brian Wang describes the Economist Intelligence Unit seeing a decade of growth for nuclear, with capacity 27% higher in 2020 than in 2010. Brian also points out that he has won several bets (for example about the amount of uranium produced in 2010) against nuclear naysayers. Meanwhile, Rick Maltese of Deregulate the Atom looks at what Germany and Switzerland will have to do in terms of land use to substitute renewables for nuclear. And Steve Aplin of Canadian Energy issues talks about the excitement of working with students of nuclear and chemical engineering to solve the problems of the future.

Post Script

Like Brian Wang, I also had a chance to read the Economist Intelligence Unit report on nuclear power worldwide. The Economist titled the report "Two Steps Forward, One Step Back" and that sums it up. In the U. S. we tend to be focused on anti-nuclear sentiment and Jaczko and so forth. The Economist group looked at the whole world, and sees a different picture. Slower growth after Fukushima, but growth nevertheless. A 25% increase within 10 years is important and significant, and I found the Economist report both well done and reassuring.

Yesterday, Rod Adams reviewed Arnie Gundersen's incorrect statements about Fukushima. I wrote about some of these statements in my Fuel Pool post, but Rod reviews more: tiny particles, Gundersen on Al Jareeza, Gundersen's own website. Rod's post, Gundersen Going International, went up yesterday, and already has about 40 comments. I have noticed this rapid-comment phenomenon myself. In my post, Hot Climate and Cold Fish, I showed the folly of Gundersen's claim that there were a total of 16 shad in the Connecticut River. I got thirty comments very quickly, with a high percentage of those comments taking me to task for daring to claim that Arnie could be wrong! At any rate, I recommend Rod's post which is complete, helpful and authoritative.

Monday Mop-Up: More on Genes, Carnival, Podcasts and Internet Privacy

A Retrospective About Posts that I Posted and Posts I Meant to Post

Grannies and Genes: A Set of Blogs

At various public meetings, the Vermont Yankee "Raging Grannies" hand out a quote from Alice Stewart. This quote is basically a summary of eugenics. Over the past week I have had four blog posts on the subject. The first post described the grannies. The next three posts talked about how the quote fits into the eugenics agenda, and why we should care.

My first post, Older and Unthinking, described the Grannies trespassing and arrest at Vermont Yankee. Some of the women have been arrested at the plant nine times, but charges are never brought against them. I suggested that being old shouldn't give you a pass on repeated lawbreaking.

My next three posts were about the Alice Stewart quote and its implications. The quote is distributed at public meetings by the grannies. Stewart claims that any mutation will spread through the population and contaminate the gene pool. A "bad seed" will build "defective genes into the population" and these will "never be rooted out."

This is the standard form of the eugenics argument: discrimination against people who are "defective" and have "defective genes." The argument has been used to forcibly sterilize imbeciles. Often, "imbecile" is defined as "person of another race" (such as the Abenaki First Nation in Vermont).

When I objected to receiving the eugenics handout at a Public Service Board meeting, I was roundly booed by the plant opponents.

My first post on this topic described the prinicples of eugenics: Grannies and Eugenics, the Cruelty of Ignorance.

The second post talked a little about Alice Stewart and her philosophy, and also explained why Vermonters, especially, should avoid making the eugenics argument. Eugenics frequently starts by trying to rid the world of "defective" genes and people, but it usually moves on to outright racism. That is what happened in Vermont with the Abenakis. My post: Alice Stewart's Work. Also, How Eugenics Affected Vermont.

My third post described modern genetics, and why "defective" genes don't actually build up in a population: Genes in Populations: A More Modern View.

The bottom line on all of this: The eugenics model is not how genes spread. Believing that eugenics is the correct model is cruel and eventually racist. The grannies should stop handing out eugenics literature at public meetings.

A Retrospective on the Posts: What About the Grannies Themselves?

There is another bottom line. Do I think the Grannies themselves are racist? No. I think they are ignorant of what they are doing, rather than racist.

They found a quote from Alice Stewart, and it fit with their ideas about how bad radiation is: "See, one bad gene can ruin the whole gene pool!"

I think that the Grannies:

• know very little about science (modern genetics)
• know even less about the history of science (the rise and fall of eugenics)
• know very little about many aspects of regular history (Hitler and eugenics, Vermont and the Abenaki and eugenics).

I think they simply don't know they are distributing a quote that summarizes the world-view of eugenics, from a person (born in 1906) who may have written these words during the hey-day of eugenics in the 30s. That's why I titled my first post: the cruelty of ignorance, rather than the cruelty of racism. That's also why I refer to them as the "eugenics grannies" not the "racist grannies."

Ignorance can lead to very bad results, however. Including racism.

Carnival

I announced the Fifteenth Blog Carnival of Nuclear Energy in one of the eugenics posts. It was pretty well buried in the post, so I repeat it here.

The Fifteenth Blog Carnival of Nuclear Energy is up at Next Big Future. Nuclear Townhall notes that the Bellefonte plant at TVA is set to move forward again (construction was stopped in the 70s). Dan Yurman discusses the license process for Small Modular Reactors, and Charles Barton has a post about Australian climate scientist Barry Brook and his move to nuclear. Steve Aplin reviews the movie Countdown to Zero, about nuclear proliferation, including important insights about Iran's program. Brian Wang has put together a very interesting and eclectic mix of blog posts. Thank you Brian.

Come to the carnival! You always learn something, and it's fun, too!

The Atomic Show Podcast

I was honored and flattered to be on Rod Adams Podcast yesterday evening. Three of us discussed various topics, including the slowdown of the nuclear renaissance in this country. The three participants were Rod Adams of Atomic Insights blog, Charles Barton of Nuclear Green Revolution blog, and myself.

Download Atomic Show Podcast #160, Bumps in the Renaissance Road to hear what we said about the Renaissance, nuclear art, and more.

Internet Privacy

Yes. I'm off topic and talking about our daughter again.

In a previous post I noted that our daughter Julia Angwin is a Wall Street Journal tech editor. She just finished spearheading a major WSJ investigative project on "What They Know." This project explores what Internet marketers know about you. The WSJ web site for the project has databases and interactive graphics so you can explore your own experience.

Since then, Julia has been on several radio and television programs, talking about the project. Here is a link to see her on C-Span (forty minute interview). And here's a link to her appearance on the the NPR radio show On Point. This episode had the intriguing title of Creepy Commerce. In this program, Julia was on a panel that included an internet advertising executive. Nothing like controversy to make a show exciting!

Mop Image from Wikimedia

Carnival Image is the Carousel in the square at Avignon.

Energy, Prosperity, the Carnival and the Internet

The Importance of Energy to Prosperity

Yesterday, Rod Adams posted Power, Defined as Energy per Unit Time, Correlates to Prosperity. His post has a different slant than my post of two days ago: It's the Energy. Why I Love Nuclear. Our two posts make good companion pieces, and I especially like Rod's link to an IEA webpage with excellent graphics showing how people move from poverty to prosperity with energy use. The comments on his post are terrific. As always.

Meanwhile, the It's the Energy post is gathering comments and notice. A thank you and tip of the hat to Nuclear Townhall for listing the post among Best of the Blogs.

I also encourage you to explore the Nuclear Townhall site. The Townhall interview with Mr. Anti-Nuke and Anti-Global Warming, Joe Romm is particularly interesting. Last I heard Romm speak (at Dartmouth), he was against nuclear partially because it uses cooling water, and he was in favor of solar thermal, despite the fact that solar thermal also uses cooling water. Further, solar thermal works best in deserts where (surprise!) cooling water is in short supply. In the Nuclear Townhall interview, Romm seems to have joined the natural gas bandwagon instead.

The 13th Carnival Of Nuclear Energy is up at Next Big Future. It includes my post (as above) and a link to a post about a nuclear plant in China going on-line ahead of schedule, pictures of plasma in the fusion project at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, and more. Visit the Carnival!

Off Topic: Our Daughter and Internet Tracking

Our daughter Julia Angwin, is a Wall Street Journal tech editor. She just finished spearheading a major WSJ investigative project on "What They Know." This project explores what Internet marketers know about you. I thought I knew about cookies. I mean, who doesn't know about cookies? I was wrong. Third party cookies, hundreds of cookies downloaded from a single web site, websites that don't even know how many third party cookies they are downloading, companies that help websites track how many third party cookies they are downloading, beacons that track your keystrokes. A whole world I didn't know about.

As the first article in the series points out: the new internet gold mine is your information. The WSJ web site for the project has databases and interactive graphics so you can explore your own experience. Visit it and have fun.

A bipartisan congressional committee is now investigating on-line tracking.