Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!emory!rsiatl!jgd From: jgd@Dixie.Com (John G. DeArmond) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: OUTLAW ALL DATABASES!! Damn right! Message-ID: <5165@rsiatl.Dixie.Com> Date: 30 Nov 90 07:12:12 GMT References: <7425@hub.ucsb.edu> <5140@rsiatl.UUCP> <1990Nov29.220837.15166@Think.COM> Organization: Rapid Deployment Systems (making go-fast things and things that-go fast) Lines: 208 barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes: >>1984 is upon us and it won't even take view screens. Your life will be >>modeled well enough that the computer will predict what you'll buy >>before you do it. From what I've seen in my work, this will happen >>in the next couple of years. >The Nova show suggests that it is already happening. "They" know when your >baby was born, so "they" know when you'll be reading bedtime stories, when >you'll be interested in a preschool, etc. Very true. I've had the recent unfortunate opportunity to design a computer system that will do just this kind of stuff. The project started off as a rather innocuous statistical collection project and was only evolved into the personal data collection functionality late in the project. I'm mad at myself for being involved, I'm very sorry and I hope to never have another such involvement. But it did let me see how our enemies work. Frightening. (NO, I won't reveal the names of the clients. I DO respect confidentiality.) >>truth is that credit databases tell you practically nothing about the >>creditworthiness of a person. All it shows is the HISTORY which >>has NOTHING AT ALL to do with your ability or willingness to pay in >>the future. >Ah, the old "past history is no indication of future performance" paradox. >Unfortunately, past history is frequently the only objective information >available. Objective or not, the information is nevertheless practically worthless and is almost always damaging to the individual. >Credit purchasers are generally not willing to wait the length >of time it would take for the provider to get to know the purchaser well >enough to decide based on other information. Unnecessary, as I'll explain below. >>Secondly, having had large holdings in the rental real estate business >>and having had a storefront business, I'm quite familiar with personal >>credit. What I got from the credit reporting agencies was useless. >>My collection percentages went UP when I trashed the reporting services >>and simply made a SWAG (scientific wild-assed guess). Here's why: >There are two conclusions that can be reached from the inaccuracy of the >credit (and other) databases: 1) they shouldn't be used, or 2) they should >be made more accurate. The pessimist in me doesn't see these databases >going away, but the optimist believes that as society comes to rely on >these databases more there will be incentive to improve the accuracy. These databases will NEVER be accurate as long as there is competition in the industry. And besides, as I noted before, you learn practically nothing about a person's ability, and more importantly, his willingness to pay. Here's what I used in my wholesale/retail operation. Most of my customers were small businessmen, typically sole proprietor welders and fabricators. I required the applicant to supply me proof of income. Typically a check stub if on salary or last year's tax return. He signed an affidavit that certified that his representation of his income was accurate. He also provided on the affidavit the names and phone numbers of three other creditors and authorized me to contact them. I verified the standard average and highest balance and payment reliability. Lastly, I had him sign a UCC-1 form. That was it! No credit reports and no background checks. I then established a credit line based on the credit lines reported from other similiar creditors or $500 (swag) if the applicant had no other related credit. If I had an uncomfortable feeling about the applicant from any of these investigations, I'd require a deposit equivalent to 1/2 his credit limit, which was refunded after a year of perfect payment. I used a set of heuristics (again, SWAGs) to evaluate special circumstances. For example, I'd never extend credit to transient companies regardless of their size. Too much bad experience. In all cases, I had my 'lil ole CP/M computer watch the accounts. I put anyone who went even a day over the standard net 30 on stict COD until the entire account balance was paid off. And I used VERY agressive collection techniques. You will note that my system is highly subjective. EXACTLY THE SAME AS WITH THE BIG COMPANIES. They just hide the fact with hand waving. Since credit is granted mostly on a hunch, why allow the databases which invariably only hurt people? The interesting thing to note is that my deadbeat frequency went DOWN markedly after ditching the credit union and instituting the SWAG system. Sure a few deadbeats got by me but so what? I kept it low enough to not impact my bottom line and my collection attorney made their lives miserable. >I also dispute your claim that you are a bad credit risk. You have >repeatedly succeeded at the projects that required you to run up these >debts. I would assume that the development projects you finance in this >manner are generally successful. Since you seem like a financially savvy >person, I assume the fruits of these projects have a better return than the >exhorbitant interest rate the banks are charging you. Sure, the loans are >unsecured, but are venture capital or stock offerings much safer? With >your history, you should be able to Generally successful but not always. I've had the circumstances that would support a corporate bankrupcy more than once. Because of my personal conviction that debts should be paid, I DID pay them and avoided credit problems. BUT These ventures were and are some of the highest risk ones going. There is no effective collateral. New development is by definition, risky and each one is uniquely risky with the risks unrelated to the previous ones. An example is right now. Nowhere in my credit history is there any indication of how my company will perform if the economy goes on a war footing in January. I personally have no idea as to what will happen. And yet the unsolicited credit cards come rolling in. What is needed is some mystical magical test that measures a person's goodness. Since that will never happen, we're stuck with SWAGs. The databases do nothing to alter that fact, they only cloud the issue behind a storm of handwaving. >>I'll explain again. Ahem.... My proposal would ban the use of your >>personal information WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION. Got that? You could >>give ANYONE permission to use your information as you see fit. >Wouldn't that add an intolerable bottleneck to many transactions? Someone >who wants to look at information about you would first have to send you a >letter. This would sit on your desk for a week or month before you mail it >back with your signature. It would be streamlined in many industries, I'm >sure (I think that when I applied for my mortgage I signed something giving >them the right to look at my credit history). NO. What would happen is that the database collectors would develop systems to guarantee that any person in their database HAS given his permission to use the data and for what. >>An enhancement to my proposal could requre that a data collector get >>your permission and approval on EACH piece of data before it is >>added to the database. That way you'd have veto power over any >>data you did not want to have added. Sure this would kill adverse >>databases such as credit but so what? They are worthless anyway. >Hmm. What would this mean for things like supermarket databases? Would I >have a line-item veto for each purchase (i.e. yes, I bought the meat, but >don't list the Penthouse magazine)? What would the logistics of this be? >Would I veto the items right there on the checkout line, or would the store >send me a checklist in the mail every month? Understand the difference between collecting demographic data and collecting personal data. The supermarket has every right to record what is in your "marketbasket". It can record when and where you bought the items and even your physical traits such as your age, race and so on if you choose to give that information to them or it is obvious from observation (sex and race, for instance). What it should NOT be allowed to do is associate your NAME or ADDRESS with that information. This association can happen in many ways now. It is quite common to match your name with your personal data from your check or credit card charge. I recently caught a local computer store doing that here in Atlanta. I was in their computer in great detail even though I had forbidden them from putting my information in the computer. They had matched me against my credit card. This is DEAD WRONG and should be illegal. >Of course, you can't remove all vestiges of the database entry. The fact >that someone purchased a Penthouse magazine has to be recorded for >inventory purposes, and has to be used for planning purposes. But >>>WHO<<< purchased that penthouse is NOT necessary business information. There is the key. >If the process is truly random, then statistically it is expected to catch >the chronic offenders more than the rare cases. Also, since you consider >speeding tickets merely a taxation system, would you be less offended by >the insurance industry's use of this data if the punishment were >non-monetary (or do you think speeding tickets would be abolished if they >didn't produce revenue)? Sure they would. No one other than the federal government seriously claims that randomly nuking someone from prevailing traffic has any positive effect on safety. It is revenue ehancement for the locality and a cheap sexual thrill for the cop. >>Why cannot I not work at night and sleep in the day and still have a >>phone without an answering machine to screen out the trash that solicits >>me all day long? Why can't I leave it open in case there is a family >>emergency and not be awakened all morning long? Why the hell does the >>system allow the bastards to start calling at 8:00 am and continue >>through 10:00 pm as they did today? Why can't I post my phone and >>mailbox the same way I can post my property against intruders? >The Nova program featured a group of people who have told telemarketers >that they would be charged for the use of their phone as part of the >caller's business. I've tried that approach and many others. None seem to work very well over the long haul. A freon boat horn is about as good as anything to settle the immediate score but it does not address the long term problem. If the phone company would allow me to put the equivalent of a 976 charge on my line, THEN I'd be glad to take all the slime solicitors' calls that they could afford - at about $500 a call, added to their phone bill. The more I think about the concept of extending the tresspassing laws to your phone and mailbox, the more I like it. John -- John De Armond, WD4OQC | "Purveyors of speed to the Trade" (tm) Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | Home of the Nidgets (tm) Marietta, Ga | {emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd | "Vote early, Vote often"