[pp.int.general] Big Brother in NL?

[aloa5]

Reinier Bakels schrieb:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I want to ask if a pirate in the Netherlands can tell me(us) more 
>> about a hm... "green" project there to start kilometer-taxation of 
>> cars with a GPS onboard unit in every car.
>>
>> Aside that I am not a friend of such restrictions of mobility a GPS 
>> wich emitts a lot of data more then only driven kilometers is a no go. 
>> Our Constitutional Court forbid instruments allowing the state to 
>> create "movement profiles".
>>
>> I wonder how this is in the Netherlands.
> 
> It is an old ambition to implement some sort of "road pricing" system in 
> NL. The present proposal *pretends* to register only the data really 
> needed for pricing purposes. The progress of the project is problematic, 
> and the experience with a chipcard for the public transportation over 
> all of the NL due to privacy concerns became more or less a nightmare 
> for the government. So I hope they learned their lesson.

According to the German press it doesn´t seem so.(?)

> In my opnion, road pricing serves a purpose. Firstly, taxes on 
> automobiles are high (higher than in DE, afaik), and in the present 
> system, the tax is the same whether you drive a lot or not much. (Only 
> the fuel tax is usage-dependent (of course)). With a road pricing 
> system, one pays for the usage rather han for the posession of a car. A 
> second reason for road princing is the ability to differentiate, and 
> thus to prevent people from using their car during rush our on our 
> congested road network if not really necessary.

Mobility is essential for social interaction. Fuel tax is also 
usage-depent even if it is fact that in future wich hybrid and electro 
cars this may be changing. And it´s the decision of the people itself if 
they are in rush ours on the congested road. So: whats the Problem with 
being mobile e.g. with an electric car? "It´s not really necessary" is 
not a reason (if it would be we would have a problem with our whole life).

If mobility and individualism depends on how much money someone earns 
than we have somethink like ecological kapitalism (an ecological class 
society). Maybe not within a city or in a small country. For countries 
in wich the distances are not marginal it is a problem.

> Is it possible at all to build a system that respects privacy and still 
> complies with reasonable administrative requirements? I don't know. A 
> "black box" that only produces an (euro) amount may not be satisfactory 
> because then there is no way to settle disputes.

What are "reasonable administrative requirements" in this case? CO² is 
not a reason because ct per km ignore emissions. So only traffic jam is 
a reason for a possible(!) reason wich is not mentioned yet. It makes no 
sense at all. It just sounds like ecological socialism and/or only 
collecting money for the minister of finance under false flag (e.g. CO² 
) working like "child porn" against wich no one have the heart to say 
something against.


> For intanmce, 
> they repeatedly made proposals to register all cards passing certain 
> highways, and to implement an "electronic moat" around Amsterdam. Are 
> there perhaps vendors of (privacy killing) systems that excite police 
> chiefs? The good news is that the present government keeps more distance 
> from the police (recently the chief of the Amsterdam police loudly 
> complained about that in a newspaper interview).

We have also politicians mentioning a moat-system for everyone with 
onboard-units on highways. The units are in trucks. They were 
established "only for moat, nothing other". And the police tries to use 
it also for searching murders and so on (step by step). And so will it 
happen for every database (ever).

Big Brother does not come overnight. There was an old (controversial) 
"rechtsgeleerde":
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Schmitt

He mentioned that the absolut neutrality of the constitution in the 
Weimarer Republik opened the door for Hitler (totalitarism), opens the 
dorr for a legal revolution. The country is not "good" every time. There 
is a need for ethical values wich have to be granted (in constitution) 
and the authorities must(!) accept them also. He said that without this 
the country itself (we) loose the ability to seperate the "good 
ones"(tm) from the "bad ones"(tm).

I am a realist (I don´t tend to be paranoic so far) but I hope that we 
all (in Europe) will not find out if he was right (again).


Regards
Otmar





> 
> reinier
> 
> 
>