Uh oh, it looks like the geocaching may be getting into dangerous territory with the authorities. For those not in the know, geocaching is a GPS game, where a person hides a “cache”, typically in a tupperware container or old ammo box, and provides the coordinates online. Other folks then use the coordinates and hints provided on a web site to locate the cache. This is a game that’s been around for a few years, and is played all around the world — as of this writing there are 236, 596 registered caches in 220 countries. Chances are good that if you live near a major metropolitan area and are in a nearby park that there’s a cache there. There in almost every recreational park I’ve visited in New England. It’s played by a lot of people and is very kid-friendly — this is frequently a Boy Scout activity. Since I like to hike, it gives me a little extra something to do, aside from just hiking a trail.

Unfortunately, as reported by The Morning Call, a geocacher was mistaken for a possible terrorist. I can’t say this is entirely a surprise, especially post 9/11. I mean, what would you think if you never heard of geocaching, then see some guy with a device for tracking global positioning wandering around secluded areas? Lt. Joe Chernaskey commented, ”From the bomb squad side of it, it’s something we really frown upon, because all these calls could cause havoc throughout the city. In this day and age, with people worried about terrorists, this isn’t the smartest thing to do.” That definitely typefies the muggle reaction. (A geomuggle is a non-geocacher, a reference to muggles in Harry Potter.) It’s a game, and a rather broad reaching game, yet many people still don’t know of its existence.

Also from the article: “Bethlehem will absorb the cost of Tuesday’s response, said Fire Commissioner George Barkanic, but if calls about suspicious packages continue to come in, the costs of investigating them will be paid by the people who hid the caches.” (Emphasis added.) Keep in mind these are caches that are hidden with permission from the proper authorities to hide caches on the land. If such policies were enacted, you would probably see a quick removal of many caches, due to liability — no one is going to want to have to risk footing that emergency service bill.

I understand the alternative view point: we’re in a state of heightened security, so things like geocaching seem, well, risky. However, one has to wonder where to draw that line. We can’t just keep hiding our heads in the sand. Should we live in fear of constant attack, staying inside and locking our doors; or should we go out and enjoy the world as it is? In which case do the terrorists win?

What’s the funniest show on TV? Not so fast, Arrested Development fans. From the looks of it, FOX may not be continuing this show on their network, which is unfortunate. Few shows make me laugh out loud with such regularity as this show, which makes me sad that its continued existence is coming into question. Even the casting makes me laugh, as a sort of who’s who of the eighties. Richie Cunningham (Ron Howard) doing voiceovers. Hey-Now Hank (Jeffrey Tambor) as the father. Is that really David Hogan (Jason Bateman) from Valerie? The Fonz (Henry Winkler) as the family’s lawyer, to later be replaced by Chachi (Scott Baio).

The show’s writing is incredible, so I won’t even bother trying to quote it. You just have to watch it. If you haven’t watched it, you won’t understand why this chicken dance is so funny:

While you can pick up season one and season two on DVD, you’re out of luck on seeing season three anywhere right now. This is especially unfortunate, because they’re showing the last four episodes of season three back to back this Friday 2/10, from 8-10PM EST. As if to sign the death certificate for this show, this is directly opposite the opening ceremonies for the Winter Olympics.

While there have been many efforts to save the show, the outlook is not good. Despite rumors of a move to Showtime, nothing is set in stone. Jason Bateman is signing onto another movie. Kristin from E! Online commented, “I’ve just had lengthy conversations with some moles who are deep, deep inside. I will tell you all in this week’s column, ‘kay? Bring a tissue.” Uh oh.

For folks in the United States of America, privacy is becoming an endangered species. After 9/11, there’s been a militaristic turn in public policy, in an effort to increase surveillance in the name of national security. Whether or not this is a good idea is arguable, but what is clear is that the privacy rights for individuals are being stripped away, little by little.

Consider, for example, the wiretapping scandal of late. President Bush authorized the wiretapping of US citizens making international calls without need for a warrant, disregarding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The problem here is that this sets a precedent for invasion of privacy, and certainly completely ignores the legal implications. “Alberto Gonzales says that the president’s warrantless wiretapping program is constitutional, necessary and legal,” commented Joshua Marshall, a contributing writer for the Washington Monthly and columnist on the Hill. “I can see where it may be constitutional, though that seems debateable. It might conceiveably also be ‘necessary’, though that’s a malleable term and it’s a difficult one to judge as long as the president won’t allow any oversight of what he’s doing. But it does seem to be clearly illegal.”

What people at large don’t seem to realize is that they can’t just let these issues slip, without considering the long term implications. If they let the President make the precedent that overriding laws is fine, what other laws could be overridden? Why not allow warrantless eavesdropping on domestic calls of “suspicious” people? (Consider also in that one what might be termed “suspicious”.) Why not email too? (*cough* Echelon *cough*) What sort of additional profiling can be done, and what information gets shared with whom? Yes, all sorts of paranoid delusions can be imagined, and most of them are silly, but keep in mind that sometimes, though rarely, the paranoid are correct.

The real problem here is not so much the wiretapping. Yes, it has civil liberties issues, and does ask some questions about legality. The problem is oversight. As envisioned by the founding fathers, no one branch of government is supposed to be able to override the others. There is supposed to be a balance of power. That’s why we have three branches of government: the executive, legislative, and judicial. A President isn’t supposed to just be able to override the legal doctrines of Congress, as he did with FISA. That’s the entire point of balance of power.

The reason that, say, law enforcement needs to get a warrant before searching a house is to get that little bit of oversight. To have someone else be able to stamp their approval means that people aren’t acting in their own self interests. It checks their actions. Warrantless wiretaps are an example of taking action with no oversight. There’s no check to it, with no sense of what people are doing with that information. How do you know that they’re monitoring the right people, for the right reasons, and doing the right thing with the information they learn, if no one is around to make sure they’re playing by the rules? There’s a saying that says “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” The reason is lack of oversight. You’re putting a lot of trust in all of the people involved. It’s hard to believe that anyone could trust a group that collects this information, especially over time. It certainly doesn’t help when rumors abound that those with access who object are “isolated, ridiculed and pushed out of their jobs”, or that Karl Rove might be leaning on Republicans in the Senate Judiciary Committee to not vote against the President in their wiretap investigations.

I frequently hear the book 1984 being referenced with regards to events today; in that book, George Orwell describes a dystopian, totalitarian state where everyone’s actions and thoughts were controlled. Big Brother is always watching. Apparently, Orwell missed his prediction by about twenty-two years. Don’t let your privacy get taken away. Whatever you let them take is never the last thing. It’s just the first step to the next.