15, 20 you dont need to train everyone in research. Similarly, i think what we teach me to change. We need to have more management, learning how to work in teams. After all the future of healthcare is with nurses, nurse practitioners, dietitians, physical therapists. We dont train the teams. Similarly when you are a resident where do you train . Future of medicine is not in hospital care. It is in the care at home in the nursing facilities and we need to train doctors so i think this is good to be a contest in terms of how long we take it and where we are training people and what we are educating them about. I see that happening again medical education hasnt changed radically in 100 years but i think the next decade is going to see a big change. Host thanks very much. Guest thank you for having me. Host reinventing American Health care. It really is a tour de force. Guest thank you very much. Appreciate it. She talks about the many ways that governments private businesses and criminals can and do collect our private data and she argues due to the pervasiveness of the dragnet system we live in today we are in danger of becoming a society that censors itself instead of demanding the right. This is just under an hour ladies and gentlemen welcome to the National Constitution center. Its a pleasure to see you here. I am the president of this wonderful institution the National Constitution center is the only institution in america chartered by congress to disseminate information about the u. S. Constitution on a nonpartisan basis and as a part of this wonderful mandate we have three goals and in october we will be displaying a copy of the bill of rights and we are a center for Civic Education and we are americas town hall, the one place that summons all sides of the debate edwards at the society into mouths citizens to make up their own mind. In the weeks and months we have had such a remarkable exciting time in the program. Last week we had a debate between others whether the president has the constitutional power to target and kill american citizens abroad and after a rousing speech by Alan Dershowitz the audience changed its mind to yes. Tomorrow Jeffrey Toobin is going to come in for a great discussion on whether the constitution is broken and in the spring we are handing out the latest and im so excited i am so excited about this array of programs from Justice John Paul stevens making one of his few appearances on James Madison about the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act and the history of the Second Amendment here it is constitutional constitutional head in every day of the week and we are so proud to share it with you. Finally please look at the new website Constitution Center. Org all of these programs can be found on the home page and we hope you will enjoy them as much as weve enjoyed presenting them put it out of all of the topics i am privileged to discuss at the National Constitution center there boozman im more excited about than privacy or that ive been looking forward to meeting in person than julia angwin. We are soldiers in the trenches. Weve written about privacy and there is no reporter ive learned more than julia. Your pathbreaking reports in the wall street journal and elsewhere about the harm of online tracking and especially the details about how much is being collected are unparalleled. The three finalist finalists in 2012 because of your incredible wall street journal series on the subjects that revealed for the first time something that many pageant go and people charge though the people charged different prices online based on the profiles that the algorithms they send the knowledge of consent. She was a reporter from 20 as you go to 2013 into the finalist for the pivot surprise at the 2011. She was on the team of reporters that won the pulitzer in 2003 and in the coverage of the corporate production and is the author of stealing my space the battle to control the most popular website in america. We are so thrilled to have julia here to discuss the latest book dragnet niche in the quest for privacy, security and to the world of the system. Welcome. Ask a [applause] we have so much to does this im going to start with the obvious question what surprised you the most about how much the companies and government know about you . In my book dragnet nation i decided to take a privacy investigations at the wall street journal a step further by investigating myself. What is known about me and what can i protect and so i thought as many places i could find which was very few places so for instance i identified 200 data brokers but only a dozen but let me see the file because there is no law requiring them to but even in that setup files it was shocking how wrong some of them were and how right some of them were. Some companies were completely wrong. None of those things happened to be true. Others were incredibly detailed and have every address going back to the number in my member in my dorm room in college, which i do of the forgotten and every member of my Family Associated to me and offered the purchases i made including the ones i made fairly recently so on the whole they knew a lot about me and occasionally they knew all sorts of wrong things about me and i i couldnt could then decide what outraged me more. Were you surprised at the depth of the searchers ask it was incredibly shocking to me. They had been storing all of my searches and that is a long time and when i started to look at the searchers i realized how revealing they were because there was a map every single day i would wake up in the morning and google the weather and something with my kids school and then i would look what article i was researching then i would start shopping for Kids Clothing and you could see my mind making little weeks and the idea that there was a mad miss that goes on disturbed me and i quit using Google Search after that. There was more that struck me. Youve got your records that found the description of why you are going abroad was reported. Its one of the few files you can obtain in the government and if it means three months and writing letters. It was comprehensive of the wall street journal used a travel agency which used a system that basically automatically send some of the internal communications i had with my boss about why was i traveling, etc. And my boss would approve it and thats how my travel would get approved. By virtue of no one is paying any attention to communications were swept into the government file so they understandably flipped out because the advanced knowledge of where they were going so they stopped working with the travel agency that it took quite a bit of time and this is one of the many problems in this age we live right now people dont even know where its going. Its right here. They didnt know. The inaccuracies it would seem very hard to get a sense of control of how much was out there. It was difficult and im sure i dont have a handle on it. Ive seen the same year at the top because most companies dont have to share it into the archive of what they had on me. Its what i thought was less than what they have because the file had. Its what i saw with a more sanitized version. We are going to discuss the steps you take to protect your privacy but i want to ask a question both of us get all the time when we speak about privacy people say what is the harm nothing to hide nothing to fear im not doing anything wrong why should i care. The great virtue of the book is that you can enumerate the harms and give a specific example. Lets start with government surveillance. You talk a lot about Edward Snowden and collecting the metadata as well as the content of the conversations. Im not a terrorist. Why should i care . Usually i get that but it was a pleasure for me to ask you. [laughter] its interesting that we have this conversation because it is worth noting that in in europe in your biggest enemy to justify this. Its a human right and its getting. You dont have to have a conversation. Putting aside, you want to debate this so lets debate. The biggest harm for government surveillance is that it leads us to the left free without speech. I write about this guy in the books are available by survey of by the fbi. He and his friend were teenage young man in santa clara and his friend had written a sassy post on the social network reddit. He said i dont know why the tsa is so crazy i could just go to a mall and a bonnet which is actually true. A couple of weeks later this guy and his friend were at a car shop getting an oil change and the officers author was something in the car and it was a tracking device and the fbi put this on his car to survey him and he later found out it was because of his friends comment. But i got a really disturbing is what happened afterwards. After they found out they were being surveyed by the fbi friendship apart. She didnt want to be friends with a guy that might put him in danger and he became a circumspect in his actions and he doesnt feel free to talk about anything subversive and hes Muslim American and now uses a different name because he feels like it is less muslim and hes still detained when he comes across National Borders and he doesnt feel like he has the same free speech rights that i have as a central part of our country. Its not just privacy but free speech and what the framers were concerned about was enough practical obscurity to be able to engage in the political dissent and as you say they havent been sympathetic to the claims that it violates freespeech. There are a number of reasons theyve taken that path but largely its been over the issue of standing that you cant prove or show any harm. We have an interesting case coming up that is now after snowden people can prove they were surveilled. It will be interesting to see. But one thing i talked about in the freedom of Association Even more than speech i was concerned about these because he was afraid to associate with his friend anymore. What the big data is is a way to build the associations. People who crossed the data say what they love about it is is you suddenly realize that people that by so fast that under under their furniture are a credit risk and you would never see that in the other data because it was too small. But we do have a history of protecting the freedom association. In the alabama case they wanted the list of numbers and the naacp and if he upheld the right to keep the list private. Now the thing is they are no longer private because you have the young muslim man of santa clara who was entering into that by the digital trail that he left behind. In addition to those concerns cummings was identified Fourth Amendment concerns and you actually went to the former east germany and found out what they knew about its citizens and how much more was left to ban google knows about you. If they really wanted you, there were a couple of people that they had dozens of binders and they measured the binders so some people have 30 or 50 binders. But i looked at average files which were 20 to 50 pages long and hand written they were not as robust as a typical facebook profile because nowadays in the timeline it dates back several years. That isnt to say they didnt know how to be repressed it. They were far more repressive and i always want to be cautious with this which is we are better at surveillance but not as good as repression and i think we want to make sure that we keep it that way. You tell the story the government offered as an example through the prison surveillance and yet it isnt clear that the surveillance itself was the cause and he might not have been caught without it. That is the one the government uses the most defensible surveillance programs ever since the snowden revelations. And as ozzy delete or zazi wanted to blow up the subways. They identified him because hed written in an email overseas to a known terrorist. And they did go back through the prison program. Now you will read a program to monitor communications to the known terror arrests. We have a process for that. Basically they caught him by literally chasing him across the country in cars. He was driving from denver to new york and they had a team trailing him. It was incredibly oldschool. About gps device that was followed by was the search the Supreme Court struck down in the case that said you are not allowed to put the device on the bottom of a car and track peoples movements 24 backs have been. What about the future of the amendment as you talk about the fascinating cell phone tracking cases and see that its currently open whether or not the government is allowed if they can no longer put a device on the bottom of my car they can subpoena the geolocation all information stored by at t or verizon or whatever it is and some folks say you need a warrant for that and the government is pushing back. You are the best tracking device. They would love their targets to carry such a thing. The problem in the Fourth Amendment with the court has interpreted it is its been very much about the boundaries of your actual home. If you get your information to somebody outside of the home and the thirdparty you have a lesser expectation of privacy in those records and said that allows the government to get your cell phone record was less of a Legal Standard and that was known as the thirdparty doctrine. In the case that you referenced where we basically store all of the papers in the thirdparty servers that hasnt yet been opened up by the court. I dont know the answer but im interested in, because the alternative what is the alternative to the thirdparty doctrine . The justices we have a problem. Whats with the Supreme Court say if i took the data and i stored it in the database held by the thirdparty but i had no expectation of privacy that means none of us have any privacy but she didnt say what the court should do as an alternative. Well, i mean i dont know that i know the answer but its worth pointing out that all of the companies from at t to google and facebook are lobbying to get back that particular wall changed and they want a search warrant could to be the standard for the record email and Sensitive Data that currently because of the thirdparty doctrine is easy for the government to get. So congress could pass a bill saying you need a warrant to get access to that information that would help things. Im going to throw it out there and you can push it as well but i love the First Amendment argument so much and whenever i have a privacy question i ask what would brandeis do because he is my privacy hero and i think that he would have insisted the framers. The degree of the practical obscurity and anonymity was necessary for their participation the participation if the forms of pubic is tracking that defeat that expectation are unreasonable searches. I heard an argument recently that was interesting that maybe they should protect us the right to bear counter surveillance. It was a great idea because i have kind of armed myself with countersurveillance. And thats its been on a suspicious list. There is a level of anonymity needed for political discourse that would be prevented, that would be allowed. Told about the accessory all fashionable privacy advocates would carry them. It is basically a bag that is lined with something metal and the manifold prevents any signals from getting in and out so when my phone is in the bag it is not communicating with cellphone towers or any networks it is just off the grid and it saves me from having to constantly think of k. Have i have i got my location sitting on. I throw it in the bag and then i not tractable. Its worth pointing out you could turn the phone off to do this but the head of the cia chief technical officer went public a year ago saying you know, we can track you even when your phone is off which basically probably means remotely activating the microphone or some other part of it. So true privacy paranoids put their phone in a bad and this bag and this is something protesters do because they want to know who protest and it is a commonly used by occupying another people. Just because youre paranoid [inaudible] [laughter] that is a far more stylish alternative to your original approach wrapping your phone in tinfoil. You just wrap your phone in tinfoil. [laughter] it was embarrassing. By the end of the day it looked like that if my colleagues that i know someone that can get you a bad. You can get them on amazon. This one i got from a guy who does this with countersurveillance art in new york. I think that is a great idea. Based on the conversation so far, who in the audience would buy a bag . And who thinks that this is just too much and would not . That is almost two thirds. We have more work to do to persuade what the harms harms are so big and the great virtue of the book there are stories and practical tips about how to protect your privacy that gave us the harm so we talk about the harm of the government surveillance. Let us talk about the harm of the privatesector surveillance and being tracked by online companies. And i mentioned the great contribution of the wall street Journal Articles was to reveal people may be charged different prices online based on who the Companies Think they are. Tell us a good example of the differential pricing. The computer transmits information about you than you would think. You imagine yourself being anonymous but when you arrived on a website where someone is trying to sell you something they already have quite a bit of information and they can change the page to tailor exactly to you. This is the marketed personalization as a benefit and sometimes it is. When amazon tells you what books you which books you might want im fine with that although we already have them all. What i wanted to find out if some of the investigations how is this being used to provide different prices because i think that is ultimately what i would want to do if i was a retailer. So we did find in 2010 that capital one was using this information to change the credit card and we went to the website and theyve never seen you before and it was like here is the card for you. If sent in the traffic the instant analysis like low income or middle income and how much educati