[sudo-discuss] help: anti-DAC resources?

[eddan.com]

Hi David -

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by moral-political logic, but there has been vigorous debate about how to deal with the encroachment of surveillance in the digital sphere for several decades - most relevantly for the DAC debate the discussion taking place since NSA program revelations in 2006.

As for engaging beyond political posturing, I am pleasantly surprised at your interest. There are several conversations taking place with ACLU & EFF, Berkeley & Stanford academic experts, as well as discussions with individual City Council members addressing each particularly according to how they fit into this process. This is why I suggested you connect with the Oakland Privacy Working Group, where we can collaborate on these efforts rather than duplicate them, and at cross purposes.

There are several of us trying to put something together along the lines of what you're suggesting. The opportunity here is to tailor it towards the CA constitution & municipal contract negotiation limitations. But more generally - below are done resources that will likely be of interest.

I find the most powerful articulation of a non-collaborationist position in Jack Balkin's essay on the National Surveillance State. http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1224. For a more NSA apologist point of view, I would recommend you start by reading Orin Kerr (you can find what you think is relevant at http://www.law.gwu.edu/Faculty/profile.aspx?id=3568)

If you are interested in engaging with the apparatchiks in City Hall, you will need to move more into the legislative/regulatory modalities. There are multiple layers of hermeneutics taking place, but I would suggest the most directly relevant to the DAC would be Stephen Rushin's most recent work - Judicial & Legislative (2 different essays) responses to mass surveillance.

Hope to see you at one of these upcoming events so that we can have an opportunity to go more in-depth.

-Eddan


sent from eddan.com

> On Jan 22, 2014, at 11:53 AM, David Keenan <dkeenan44 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> eddan,
> 
> thank you for this! i will come to sudo tonight. Is the meeting at 6:30, or what is the time?
> 
> What is needed are white papers against the dac, that set out clearly the actual scope of the dac and stake out our position against it in point-by-point terms at the level of moral-political logic. Does anything like that exist?
> 
> Showing up at public comment at council meetings is fine, but frankly at the same time the attitudes of some at public comment also has had a tendency to just piss off the various people in govt who are also against the dac and mostly ignore the content. These people, various aides and such, who really are on our side, need be able to articulate arguments against the dac in a noncombative manner, that can be framed in a language that isnt polemical or too emotional but simply sensible. 
> 
> Im going to start a working group / class out of baps on this also -
> 
> best,
> david
> david
> 
>> On Wednesday, January 22, 2014, eddan.com <eddan at sudoroom.tv> wrote:
>> Hi David & Sudo folk -
>> 
>> Just wanted to remind folks that the Oakland Privacy Working Group (meeting tonight at Sudo Room) has been trying to coordinate a robust and effective response to the Oakland DAC funding in this crucial several week window at the City Council. 
>> 
>> It is of course important for everyone who's willing to work to try and stop this to do what they can. It might be helpful though to make sure coordination is taking place so that one part of our collective effort isn't seen as legitimizing a process we are trying to shut down by supporting it through fixing it.
>> 
>> Subscription to the listserv is at oaklandprivacyworkinggroup-subscribe at lists.riseup.net. It would also be great if you could support the petition at http://www.change.org/petitions/the-mayor-and-city-council-of-oakland-ca-don-t-sell-out-the-people-of-oakland-to-the-department-of-homeland-security-don-t-vote-to-fund-the-domain-awareness-center and continue spreading the word.
>> 
>> For those interested, there is also a meeting of the League of Women Voters on this topic tonight (http://www.lwvoakland.org/VOTER-January-2014.html). There will also be an event of relevant interest in Berkeley tomorrow night (https://www.eff.org/event/nsa-surveillance-and-our-almost-orwellian-state). 
>> 
>> -Eddan
>> 
>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 6:55 PM, David Keenan wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hey guys,
>>> 
>>> a friend of mine who works for the city of Oakland and is meeting with the ACLU on DAC stuff (to fix this nightnare) has asked me for 
>>> 
>>> - a coherent, semi-formal argument against the DAC.
>>> 
>>> - Language against specific aspects of the DAC like the shot spotters, facial recognition, etc. What they will be used for vs what they say they will be used for, etc.
>>> 
>>> What resources do we have on hand that I can forward or write up for them?
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140122/061dfca9/attachment.html>