Comments on: IBM’s Watchful Eye http://philosecurity.org/2009/04/02/ibm%e2%80%99s-watchful-eye Mon, 13 Feb 2012 22:08:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Gary http://philosecurity.org/2009/04/02/ibm%e2%80%99s-watchful-eye/comment-page-1#comment-4917 Gary Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:59:10 +0000 http://philosecurity.org/?p=1266#comment-4917 Yep, that would be about right. A peoples worst enemy is always their Government! Good post :) Yep, that would be about right. A peoples worst enemy is always their Government! Good post :)

]]> By: sherri http://philosecurity.org/2009/04/02/ibm%e2%80%99s-watchful-eye/comment-page-1#comment-4586 sherri Fri, 03 Apr 2009 17:06:47 +0000 http://philosecurity.org/?p=1266#comment-4586 Hi Travis, Thanks for the heads up! I've gone back to research this further. My current impression is that Hollerith numbers were not generally in use as tattoos in Auschwitz-Birkenau (as Black himself already states), but there may have been a few tattoos early on which matched the workers' national punch card numbers, as Black claims was the case with a Polish timber merchant. Looking for the reference that led him to that conclusion, and will update this as appropriate one way or the other. > Not that this in any way invalidates your point about the dangers of > opaque mass surveillance- but I believe that the creation of > holocaust-like conditions is not yet one of Agreed. The Holocaust was an extreme outcome. I suspect the uses of our global surveillance systems will be more subtle, at least for the foreseeable future. Bribery, financial gain, threats, social manipulation, worker and consumer exploitation, are all common outcomes of unchecked authoritative powers. It's very important that the public have the ability to check the uses and management of our surveillance data, so that we can maintain the balance of power required for a democracy. Appreciate your thoughtful comment! Sherri Hi Travis,

Thanks for the heads up! I’ve gone back to research this further. My current impression is that Hollerith numbers were not generally in use as tattoos in Auschwitz-Birkenau (as Black himself already states), but there may have been a few tattoos early on which matched the workers’ national punch card numbers, as Black claims was the case with a Polish timber merchant. Looking for the reference that led him to that conclusion, and will update this as appropriate one way or the other.

> Not that this in any way invalidates your point about the dangers of
> opaque mass surveillance- but I believe that the creation of
> holocaust-like conditions is not yet one of

Agreed. The Holocaust was an extreme outcome. I suspect the uses of our global surveillance systems will be more subtle, at least for the foreseeable future. Bribery, financial gain, threats, social manipulation, worker and consumer exploitation, are all common outcomes of unchecked authoritative powers. It’s very important that the public have the ability to check the uses and management of our surveillance data, so that we can maintain the balance of power required for a democracy.

Appreciate your thoughtful comment!

Sherri

]]> By: Travis Hall http://philosecurity.org/2009/04/02/ibm%e2%80%99s-watchful-eye/comment-page-1#comment-4581 Travis Hall Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:29:49 +0000 http://philosecurity.org/?p=1266#comment-4581 Hi Sherri- quite the fan of your blog! I just wanted to urge a slight degree of caution in citing either IBM and the Holocaust or The Nazi Census- the former has been controversial in academic circles since it was published (on his own website Black proudly posts retractions he had obtained from a few publications, most notably the Journal of American History, but these are over factual details and not the substance of the critiques), and the later was (at the authors' own admission) a political intervention that was part of an anti-census campaign- see http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=10864. I think that both are good to mine for primary sources, but their conclusions should be taken with a grain of salt. Particularly dubious is the claim that the numbered tattoos corresponded to Hollerith indexing. First, it appears that Black may have been mistaken that Hollerith machines were in use at Auschwitz-Birkenau (http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=262&Itemid=8), the only camp that tattooed its prisoners. Second, tattooing was initially only used to identify registered prisoners- i.e. those not sent directly to the gas chambers- who were in the infirmary or were about to be executed. It was only used for general identification purposes with the influx of Soviet prisoners of war, and even then still only for those who were sent to work. The numbers given were sequential and unique to Auschwitz-Birkenau (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007056). Not that this in any way invalidates your point about the dangers of opaque mass surveillance- but I believe that the creation of holocaust-like conditions is not yet one of them. The biometric database created by the US off of the back of Sadam's records that is most likely accessible by local authorities, on the other hand.... Hi Sherri- quite the fan of your blog! I just wanted to urge a slight degree of caution in citing either IBM and the Holocaust or The Nazi Census- the former has been controversial in academic circles since it was published (on his own website Black proudly posts retractions he had obtained from a few publications, most notably the Journal of American History, but these are over factual details and not the substance of the critiques), and the later was (at the authors’ own admission) a political intervention that was part of an anti-census campaign- see http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=10864. I think that both are good to mine for primary sources, but their conclusions should be taken with a grain of salt.

Particularly dubious is the claim that the numbered tattoos corresponded to Hollerith indexing. First, it appears that Black may have been mistaken that Hollerith machines were in use at Auschwitz-Birkenau (http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=262&Itemid=8), the only camp that tattooed its prisoners. Second, tattooing was initially only used to identify registered prisoners- i.e. those not sent directly to the gas chambers- who were in the infirmary or were about to be executed. It was only used for general identification purposes with the influx of Soviet prisoners of war, and even then still only for those who were sent to work. The numbers given were sequential and unique to Auschwitz-Birkenau (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007056).

Not that this in any way invalidates your point about the dangers of opaque mass surveillance- but I believe that the creation of holocaust-like conditions is not yet one of them. The biometric database created by the US off of the back of Sadam’s records that is most likely accessible by local authorities, on the other hand….

]]>