Freedom has left the building!


PDA






Highland Ranger
October 11, 2005, 02:56 PM
Not sure if you guys have seen this or not, but this is one scary concept:

http://www.adcritic.com/interactive/view.php?id=5927

As an technology professional I can tell you it's possible, especially if we head toward Hillary's National ID . . . .

If you enjoyed reading about "Freedom has left the building!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
R.H. Lee
October 11, 2005, 03:05 PM
It's coming and most people will welcome it, because we've become a nation of helpless halfasses. GM advertises 'OnStar' as a benefit and people actually buy it.

Highland Ranger
October 11, 2005, 03:52 PM
Well at least you won't have to stop and wait for a cop to write out the speeding ticket - they can just print it right out of the dashboard . . . .

Mnemesyne
October 11, 2005, 04:13 PM
the day that becomes reality, I will live in a hole in the ground......last thing I want is some snot nosed kid fresh out of school telling me all my latest purchases and stuff....heh

Zedicus
October 11, 2005, 09:44 PM
if it does come, I will move to whatever state gives it the finger. :fire:

CAnnoneer
October 11, 2005, 10:01 PM
Thankfully, there still is a strong sense of privacy, which in the end would make people move away from electronic transactions in case intrustions become too rancid. That would hurt banks and credit card companies, which therefore would resist such a system. Only if cash disappears completely would we have a real problem, or if we get boiled alive slowly by small piecemeal changes towards that hell.

Alex45ACP
October 11, 2005, 10:20 PM
we get boiled alive slowly by small piecemeal changes towards that hell.

That's the plan.

cuervo
October 12, 2005, 09:27 AM
Read Database Nation : The Death of Privacy in the 21st Century
by Simson Garfinkel and realize it was written before 9/11 and the Patriot Act.

That's on the government side. On the private side is profit driving companies like Nexis-Lexis to collect and sell as much information about everyone as it can gather.

rick_reno
October 12, 2005, 11:02 AM
HIPAA rules currently are very restricitve about sharing health info. I doubt this will ever be a real situation.

R.H. Lee
October 12, 2005, 11:05 AM
Right. Under HIPPA you would have to give authorization to the pizza parlor to collect the information. Without it, no pizza.

thereisnospoon
October 12, 2005, 12:34 PM
HIPPA is an absolute joke, trust me, its what I do for a living. It was a giant ruse to convince you that your Medical data is safe and secure, so that your gov't could request , receive and spend millions and millions of dollars in their distriscts and cause Dr's and Hospitals to spend that much more to become "compliant".

Tell me...when have you ever heard of someone being busted for violating "HIPPA".

NONE of your information is safe from anyone who really wants it. Along with what I o in the Medical field, I help my next door neighbor who is a PI in Alabama. I call on Doctors offices all the time doing pretext phone calls and most of the time they'll give me anything I want, just by introducing myself as "so and so" from Doctor X's office.

dasmi
October 12, 2005, 12:48 PM
Thereisnospoon...
+1
I work for a healthcare group. Taken all sorts of HIPAA courses. No one ever gets busted.

Highland Ranger
October 12, 2005, 01:02 PM
Whether this comes to pass or not has a lot to do with what philosophy the next generation hits the ground with; will it be I want the nanny state to take care of me or live free or die?

Teach your children well . . . .

Wynterbourne
October 12, 2005, 01:03 PM
Under HIPPA you would have to give authorization to the pizza parlor to collect the information. Without it, no pizza.

Under current HIPAA guidelines, this is somewhat easy to get around. While it's true that they could not get the -specific- information on what you have, or what medications you are taking they can state that someone in the family has some disorder, disease, or takes some medication that puts them at some sort of risk in the certain situation. HIPAA only protects when specific information about a specific person is given. Saying that someone in the Smith family, or at such and such address, should not recieve said item, or should be charged a surcharge for it (or sign a release), due to a pre-existing medical condition or medication, is perfectly legal.

Wynterbourne
October 12, 2005, 01:10 PM
Tell me...when have you ever heard of someone being busted for violating "HIPPA".

Off the top of my head...

PharmaCare, Blue Cross Blue Shield - Rhode Island, Blue Cross Blue Shield - Anthem, Blue Cross Blue Shield - Alabama, Blue Cross Blue Shield - Tennessee, Caremark, Cigna Healthcare, Curascript, HEB Hospital (Beford, TX), North Hills Hospital (North Richland Hills, TX), the World Bank, John Peter Smith Hospital (Fort Worth, TX), and Baylor Hospital (Dallas, TX) have all been cited for violation of HIPAA.

PharmaCare, BCBS-RI, BCBS-Anthem, BCBS-AL, Caremark, Cigna Healthcare, the World Bank, North Hills Hospital, and John Peter Smith Hospital have each been fined for HIPAA violations at some point.

At my primary job, I work for one of the larger PBM's in the country. One of my many 'hats' involves HIPAA compliancy and investigations.

thereisnospoon
October 12, 2005, 02:06 PM
CITED????


FINED?????



No one was jailed or killed, correct?

If I cheat on my taxes they "fine" me too, big deal....HIPPA is smoke and mirrors and you know it. Tell me your name and where you live and I'll have everything I need to know in 48 hours, mostly from primary care doc. :barf:

However, keping this GUN related, how about the next time you show up at your doctors office for a check-up. Your doctor enters the room with a furrowed brow and you wonder which is higher, your BP or your Cholesterol. Then your doctor says, "George, I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but your going to have to find a new physician...we were notified through NICS that you purchased a firearm recently andI can't treat you knowing your putting yourself and your family at risk owning a firearm...".

Hasn't happened yet, but if you've got kids in the toddler age range I gaurantee you've been talked to, unless your doc is a shooter.

thorn726
October 12, 2005, 02:08 PM
from a place with caller ID???

it isnt much different.
you call once, from then on, you are in the computer

not that i like the nat'l ID or anything, but pizza isn't the best example

rick_reno
October 12, 2005, 02:33 PM
ell me...when have you ever heard of someone being busted for violating "HIPPA".

For someone who "works" in this area, I'm amazed you haven't seen some of these. In the case below, he got 16 months - which I asusme answers your other requirement of "cited".

The first publicly known criminal prosecution under HIPAA's privacy rule was a
Mr. Gibson, a Seatle phlebotomist who was employed by a covered entity. Mr. Gibson had direct contact with patients, and one of them had come to Seattle from outside of the State of Washington in order to receive treatment from the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, where Mr. Gibson worked. The patient found out that someone had stolen his identity, specifically his name, Social Security number, and date of birth, and used that information to get credit cards in his name. This clearly was unlawful identity theft, but it was also a violation of HIPAA's criminal provisions since the information had been collected from him because he was a patient. With the help of a local television station and local police authorities, Mr. Gibson was identified as the alleged perpetrator. In fact, the television station broadcast a video of Mr. Gibson allegedly using one of the illegally obtained cards, and fellow-employees of Mr. Gibson turned him in. Once it was known that the person identified was a health care worker, our office and the FBI asked to take over the case from the local authorities. They could have charged Mr. Gibson with unlawful identity theft, but the health care connection made it more important that a HIPAA crime should be charged. By charging him with HIPAA, they brought attention to the most troubling aspect of the case....that a vulnerable cancer patient was taken advantage of by someone who he had looked to care for him, not to harm him. We also brought attention to the HIPAA criminal statute itself, and perhaps this will raise awareness and help deter future crimes.

That said, under the justice dept. memo of 6/2005, which gutted the criminal penalties of HIPAA - Mr Gibson might have been wrongly prosecuted. It's between him and his attorney what course of action they take.

If you enjoyed reading about "Freedom has left the building!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!