哥哥的女人哥哥不在家_哥哥在看着我们所有人

编程入门行业动态更新时间:2024-10-25 16:24:34

哥哥的女人哥哥不在家

Big Brother may already be watching us all.

老大哥可能已经在注视着我们所有人了。

Well, thank goodness, that horrible curse that has swept unchecked across UK television screens, mobile phone networks and gossip columns, has finally finished.

好吧，谢天谢地，可怕的诅咒终于席卷了整个英国电视屏幕，手机网络和八卦专栏。

Yes, I mean Big Brother, the now famous show where a television company selects a dozen idiots from the thousands of idiots that send in videotapes in a vain attempt to humiliate themselves internationally for 10 seconds of fame, throws them all in a house together and sits back to see if they’ll murder each other. Sadly, they don’t. In fact, so far as I could tell, they sleep. And sleep. And sleep some more.

是的，我的意思是说“老大哥”(Big Brother)，这是现在著名的节目，电视公司从成千上万的白痴中选择十几个白痴，这些白痴送录了录像带，以徒劳的方式侮辱自己，在国际上声名10起10秒钟，将它们全都丢在一个房子里，坐下来看看他们是否会互相谋杀。可悲的是，他们没有。实际上，据我所知，他们睡觉。和睡觉。多睡一会儿。

It still amazes me that anyone would want to peer into our dull little lives. We don’t do anything very interesting, or at least I don’t anyway. And yet it’s no secret that people in the IT world, and many more that aren’t, worry about privacy an awful lot.

仍然令我惊讶的是，任何人都想凝视我们沉闷的小生活。我们没有做任何非常有趣的事情，或者至少我没有做任何事情。但是，IT世界中的人们以及其他很多并非如此的人们担心隐私问题已不是什么秘密。

I remember a conversation with the IT manager at a company I used to work for about 5 years ago, in which we discussed a survey he’d picked up from an IT publication. Though I can’t remember the exact figures quoted, when asked what they feared most about the IT industry at the time, around 80% of IT managers said “Microsoft”. Why? Because Microsoft controls a huge chunk of the world’s information. And that’s a powerful position to be in.

我记得与我大约五年前一起工作的一家公司的IT经理进行的一次对话，其中我们讨论了他从IT出版物中获得的一项调查。尽管我不记得所引用的确切数字，但当被问及当时他们对IT行业最担心的问题时，约80％的IT经理说“微软”。为什么？因为Microsoft控制着世界上很大一部分信息。这是一个有力的位置。

For those of you now rolling your eyes, fear not. This isn’t another anti-Microsoft rant. This is more about the inevitability of the loss of privacy through technology.

对于那些现在转眼间的人，不要害怕。这不是另一个反微软的咆哮。这更多是关于通过技术失去隐私的必然性。

人们为什么对我们如此感兴趣？ (Why Are People so Interested in Us?)

People have always craved information. “Knowledge is power” is a very old adage, and, to rather state the obvious, it still rings true. In fact it’s probably truer now than it’s ever been, in this, a time when we no longer bash each other with sticks to settle an argument (unless we’re of a certain fraternity of soccer fans).

人们一直渴望获得信息。 “知识就是力量”是一句很古老的谚语，而且，显然，它仍然是正确的。实际上，这可能比现在更真实了，在这个时代，我们不再用棍子互相殴打来解决争执(除非我们有一定的足球迷兄弟般的情谊)。

Oh no, we’ve found better ways to get at each other. Legal disputes. The media. Cameras (if you don’t think a camera’s ever been used in anger, you’ve never seen those Websites where jilted lovers can post photographs of their rather unfortunate past tormentors).

哦，不，我们找到了更好的相处方式。法律纠纷。媒体。相机(如果您不曾在愤怒中使用过相机，那么您从未见过那些网站，那些被激怒的恋人可以在其中发布他们不幸的过去折磨者的照片)。

Make no mistake: information is the corporate weapon of choice, and the corporations are the new governments. But, interesting as that is, how does it affect Joe Public, or your average “Internet professional”?

毫无疑问：信息是选择的公司武器，而公司是新政府。但是，有趣的是，它如何影响Joe Public或您的普通“互联网专业人员”？

政府责任悖论 (The Paradox of Responsibility in Government)

In the mid to late ’80s, governments around the world started to get nervous about data protection. For example, in 1984 the UK government passed the Data Protection Act for the first time. The details are unimportant, but the sentiment is significant. This act was a direct response to the way Information Technology had suddenly made it far easier to store, access and search information in a frighteningly efficient manner. What kind of information? Any kind, including information about people.

在80年代中期至后期，世界各国政府开始对数据保护感到紧张。例如，1984年，英国政府首次通过了《数据保护法》。细节虽不重要，但感情意义重大。此举直接响应了信息技术突然以惊人的高效方式使存储，访问和搜索信息变得更加容易的方式。什么样的信息？任何形式，包括有关人的信息。

It was obvious that there were serious human rights issues involved. All of a sudden, a bunch of suited people, who still thought that a cookie was made by Aunt Sue and a browser was someone who spent a lot of time in bookshops, were waving bits of paper in the houses of parliament and shouting about civil liberty.

显然，其中涉及严重的人权问题。突然间，一群合适的人，仍然认为苏阿姨做了一个饼干，而一个浏览器却是一个在书店里呆了很多时间的人，他们在议会大厦里挥舞着纸屑，大喊着民间的话。自由。

As a result, a very comprehensive set of laws governing how companies were to gather, store and use personal data was devised. It was an inconvenience to systems administrators all over the country, but I guess it wasn’t a bad idea, all in all.

结果，制定了一套非常全面的法律来管理公司如何收集，存储和使用个人数据。这给全国的系统管理员带来了不便，但总的来说，我认为这并不是一个坏主意。

In 1998, those laws were pulled further in line with European law, and began to address issues surrounding the use of cookies, user tracking, ad ware, etc. Again, the laws were a nuisance (this time for Web developers and online advertisers), but at least they had a reasonably noble, if slightly misguided at times, outlook on things.

1998年，这些法律进一步与欧洲法律保持一致，并开始解决与Cookie，用户跟踪，广告软件等使用有关的问题。再次，这些法律是令人讨厌的(这对Web开发人员和在线广告商而言) ，但至少在某些情况下，即使有时有些误导，他们的态度也相当合理。

Western governments started working to ensure that personal data was protected on the Internet, not to mention in the vast corporate data bins. The various governments were squaring up to big business and protecting the little people… until something happened that rocked western society to its very foundations: the events of September 11th, 2001.

西方政府开始努力确保个人数据在Internet上得到保护，更不用说在庞大的公司数据仓中了。各国政府都在努力开展大笔生意，保护小人们……直到发生了使西方社会扎根的基础：2001年9月11日的事件。

The post-9/11 political climate has seen the inception of sweeping new “anti-terrorism” powers for many western governments, and most of these powers focus on control of information. For instance, many governments now have the right to read previously private correspondence and demand Internet usage data from Internet Service Providers.

9/11后的政治气氛见证了许多西方政府席卷新的“反恐”权力的开始，其中大多数权力都集中在信息控制上。例如，许多政府现在有权读取以前的私人信件，并要求Internet服务提供商提供Internet使用数据。

Prior to these changes, the authorities (in the UK at least) could demand information on a named individual backed up by a court order or a warrant. With the new, though in some cases, still only proposed powers, many authorities can simply demand, say, the entire log of relayed mail from a server for the last 6 months, and trawl through it for anything suspicious. Quite a difference, wouldn’t you say?

在进行这些更改之前，当局(至少在英国)可以要求获得由法院命令或手令支持的具名个人的信息。使用新的(尽管在某些情况下仍只是建议的功能)，许多机构可以简单地要求(例如)过去6个月中来自服务器的中继邮件的整个日志，然后对其中的任何可疑内容进行遍历。完全不同，您不是要说吗？

It suddenly seemed that government was no longer in the least bit interested in personal privacy (or, for that matter, human rights). “If you’ve got nothing to hide, why should you care?” became the cry of the people in suits. Within months, a bizarre double standard was born — and not just in the treatment of data. The paradox spread across the board: national security was now at odds with the rights of the individual.

突然之间，政府似乎对个人隐私(或就此而言的人权)不再有丝毫兴趣。 “如果您什么都没有藏起来，那您为什么要关心呢？” 成为穿着西装的人们的呐喊。在短短几个月内，一个奇怪的双重标准诞生了，而不仅仅是在数据处理方面。悖论遍布全境：国家安全现在与个人权利背道而驰。

And the knock-on effect for our industry? We store vast amounts of information about people, many of us without even considering it. Further still, much of the personal data that we do store, we consider to be insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

对我们行业的连锁效应？我们存储了大量有关人的信息，其中许多人甚至都没有考虑它。更进一步，我们认为存储的许多个人数据在整体方案中微不足道。

However, in many cases, it has the potential to be all too significant. This means the implications for us are potentially enormous.

但是，在许多情况下，它的潜力可能太大。这意味着对我们的影响可能是巨大的。

In the UK there was talk of Internet Service Providers being ordered to keep up to 12 months’ worth of data (as reported here, at Silicon) — an enormous task! And what’s the point of having carefully constructed legal paragraphs about the collection of data when ultimately, your ISP has to keep everything anyway and could hand it over to the government in an instant if so ordered? It’s a contradiction in the law books that is yet to be addressed (see this article for more), and leaves us in a sort of no man’s land. While we cannot promise privacy, we must be seen to do so in the eyes of our customers and site users.

在英国，有传言说互联网服务提供商被命令保留多达12个月的数据(如此处报道，在Silicon上 )，这是一项艰巨的任务！那么，当最终，您的ISP必须保留所有内容并可以将其立即移交给政府时，精心构造有关数据收集的法律段落有什么意义呢？在法律书籍中这是一个尚待解决的矛盾( 更多内容请参见本文 )，这使我们陷入了无人区。尽管我们不能保证隐私，但必须在客户和站点用户的眼中做到这一点。

底线... (The Bottom Line…)

I wish I could give you a bullet list of things to do and not to do, but I can’t. Given the current political climate in our respective areas of expertise, there are no answers. Only time will tell. All we can do really is try to comply with everything we can, and hope that we stay on the right side of the powers that be, both individually and as responsible parties in our respective workplaces. May common sense prevail.

希望我能给您列出要做的事情和不要做的事情的清单，但我不能。鉴于我们各自专业领域的当前政治气氛，没有答案。只有时间证明一切。我们真正能做的就是努力遵守我们所能做的一切，并希望我们在自己的工作场所中，无论是作为个人还是作为负责任的当事方，都站在权力的右边。可能常识占上风。

Speaking of common sense, they are planning another series of Big Brother. I, for one, am buying a bug gun, a fishing boat, and 25 years’ supply of tinned beans.

说到常识，他们正在计划另一系列的《老大哥》。我，其中一个，就是购买虫子枪，一艘渔船和25年的罐头豆供应。