Re: Don Kerr: Call Charlie Allen

Michael Tanji blogged recently about Don Kerr’s recent statements that privacy no longer can mean anonymity. While I often find myself agreeing with Tanji’s assessment on current national security related issues, I disagree with his assessment that Don Kerr believes Americans must surrender their privacy for government to ensure their safety. In fact, the very proposal that Michael suggests as an alternative to Kerr (i.e., assigning a unique identifier to be used in place of a real name so whether you’re an FBI Special Agent or NSA analyst, you can talk about an entity freely because you’re not violating “anyone’s” privacy) to me is exactly what Don Kerr was saying. The definition of privacy may no longer mean anonymity–because we give up the what, when, where, and how everyday with daily transactions. Bottom line: I think Donald Kerr is saying we have to think about privacy differently, and not in terms of anonymity, and if we do so, privacy and security need not be paradoxical forces. The rise of one does not mean the unraveling of the other. Both are achievable. Let there be no dobut: the U.S. must continue the legacy of protecting the rights of Americans.