PERSPECTIVE ON TECHNOLOGY

BIG BROTHER TRULY IS WATCHING YOU

The Orwellian Vision Of Repression Can Happen Only When The Citizenry
Permits It To Do So.

Fifty years ago, a bizarre and terrifying novel went on sale in bookshops
across the world. George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four" caught the
imagination of millions, and in the process catapulted Big Brother into the
international vocabulary. The phrase soon became shorthand to represent the
power of the state, and helped entire generations to express their fear of
intrusion by authority.

To the digital generation, the allseeing, all-knowing Big Brother is
represented by large computer systems. Each adult in the developed world is
located, on average, in 300 databases. As these databases converge with the
telecommunications spectrum, nearly everyone becomes entangled in a web of
surveillance enveloping everything from our bank accounts to our email.

Opinions vary widely on this subject, but it is the unwelcome exercise of
government surveillance that has bonded almost all points along the
political spectrum.

The relevance of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" to the world of the 21st century
has been ferociously debated. Orwell's biographer, Bernard Crick, says
Orwell never meant the book to be prophetic. It was, he says, largely a
satirical view of the abuse of power - most notably Stalinism - and was
certainly not a prophecy about the perils of technology.

Maybe so. But a prophet does not cease to be a prophet merely because he
fails to wear the name tag. To millions of people, Big Brother looms as a
chilling warning about the creation of a surveillance society through
information technology.

Superficially, Orwell got it wrong. 1984 came and went with many of our
freedoms apparently still intact. But a closer reading of the book reveals
that at a fundamental level, we are nearer to Big Brother than we might
imagine.

In Orwell's fictional Oceania, a mass of "telescreens," complete with
microphones and speakers, watched over every square inch of public and
private space. These devices, centrally monitored, began their life as
public information systems, and ended up policing the morals, thoughts and
behavior of all citizens. They enforced the will of the state.

Compare this with the present day, where hundreds of thousands of cameras
have been placed on buses, trains and elevators. Many people now expect to
be routinely filmed from the moment they leave the front gate. Hidden
cameras are now being installed unhindered in cinemas, alongside roads, in
bars, dressing rooms and housing estates. Once viewed as a blunt tool of
surveillance, such devices in the space of 15 years have become a benign,
integral part of the urban infrastructure. It is the integration of
surveillance with our day-to-day environment that is most telling. And it
is the passive acceptance of the surveillance that Orwell feared most.

Visual surveillance in the U.S. and Britain is becoming a fixed component
in the design of modern urban centers, new housing areas, public buildings
and even throughout the road system. Soon, people will expect spy
technology to be engineered into all forms of architecture and design. It
is, perhaps, only a matter of time before legal and community pressures
force the cameras into our homes.

Surveillance has become a design component in all information technology.
It is now viewed as a "value added" element of IT systems. Systems
architects are required to design technology that will capture, analyze and
present personal information. Accordingly, the workplace is fast becoming a
surveillance zone. "Electronic supervisors" analyze every minute of the
working day, checking on performance rates, toilet breaks and personal
activities.

We are routinely entrapped into handing over our data. Dozens of laws force
us to disclose personal information that is then used for unrelated
purposes. Government surveillance has infiltrated every element of our
communications networks. Telecommunications companies are required by law
to ensure that their equipment is "wiretap friendly".

Poorly drafted privacy and data protection laws are frequently used as
instruments not to protect rights but to mandate surveillance. The state
can do more or less as it pleases with our data in the name of law
enforcement, public interest, public health, national security or national
revenue.

The world of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" had completely eliminated the idea of
anonymity - a process that is replicated in many countries today. We are
obliged through an increasing number of laws and technologies to reveal our
identity. Refusal to disclose your details often results in denial of
service and even prosecution.

Disclosure of your identity sits at the heart of all technology. Earlier
this year, privacy campaigners revealed that Intel's Pentium III chip
contained an ID number capable of tracking the registered owner's movements
around the Internet. But the nightmare vision of Big Brother could only
transpire if every entity - citizen, state and corporation - was working in
partnership to achieve an alleged "common good." The world of "Nineteen
Eighty-Four" could occur only if everyone became agents of the state.

It does not require much imagination to see such a trend. Citizens and
businesses routinely are advised that they have a responsibility to support
authoritarian measures. At a variety of levels, we are all expected to
become partners in surveillance. And that is the crux of the Big Brother
nightmare.