Talk:Policeware

POV
I removed the POV tag as there is no discussion on what the violation is or how it could or should be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.16.128.126 (talk • contribs)


 * This is clearly a non-NPOV article as I read it. An NPOV article would describe the technology along with a neutral discussion of its possible or proven applications and an explanation of the controversial public policy issues.  Presumably, that would include the "crime-fighting" benefits along with concerns about privacy loss. The name "policeware" indicates an agenda all by itself -- unless it is a common term in the industry? (If it is, say so.) --Albany45 21:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree, the title itself sounds like an "anti" POV, as does the definition given. I propose merger with Computer surveillance. In the meantime, I tweaked the CBDTPA section to reduce "anti" POV there, and to avoid making claims that all of these "evil policeware" developments are related.  "We can't require DRM everywhere, so we'll just do NSA wiretapping instead?"  Please.  -- Beland (talk) 21:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Neologism?
Could we have a source please showing that this isn't a Neologism? Thanks. --75.35.79.113 23:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Is this article just a load of crap? I don't see any sources anywhere. --74.134.146.52 09:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Carnivore does exist. Not sure if the term 'policeware' does, though it may well after this article's having been linked to on /. –Xoid 15:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)