A State legislator in Michigan has proposed establishing a voluntary registry for reporters which would be paid for out of the fees charged to the registrants.

   There are mulitple things wrong with the above sentence, none of which are gramatical, spelling or otherwise related to it's structure. Nor are the problems related to accuracy of reporting. Rather, the errors are in the underlying assumptions made by the legislator in proposing such actions.

   Gary Wolf of Wired Magazine was interviewed in a recent NY Times Magazine article regarding his views on information technology.: “...until a few years ago, it would have been pointless to seek self-knowledge through numbers. But now, technology can analyze every quotidian thing that happened to you today. 'Four things changed,' explains Wolf. 'First, electronic sensors got smaller and better. Second, people started carrying powerful computing devices, typically disguised as mobile phones. Third, social media made it seem normal to share everything. And fourth, we began to get an inkling of the rise of a global superintelligence known as the cloud.' And the next thing you know, exercise, sex, food, mood, location, alertness, productivity, even spiritual well-being are being tracked and measured, shared and displayed."

   This view is a good synopsis of the nature of the Information Age and the rapidly approaching revolutions in privacy that are snowballing towards us with each passing day.

   His analysis may seem flawed to the layman, but is actually very accurate when parsed by those who track technological innovation.

  Researchers in Taiwan this week advocated for the implanting of Radio Frequency Identifiction microchips into people so that survivors could be more readily located during disaster response efforts.

   These chips are the same ones used to tag pets in the back of their necks, so that local animal shelters can reunite them with their owners when they become lost.

   These are the chips sewn into clothes at the chain stores to track people who try to steal items from their retail outlets.

   Since research takes many forms and can cover a wide range of records, let us first review the common records that researchers look at and then look at the newer resouces that empower us to dig deeper into the past.

   Primarily, our research in title is focused on the various Official Records of the County or Parish in which the property is located. Typically, a Grantor-Grantee (“-tee / -tor”)-style general index of Official Records is maintained by the elected or appointed “Recorder” for the county. This index will hold the deeds, liens, encumbrances, claims, notices, covenant and related matters regarding the land and property. The Property Tax Rolls are also integral public records which should be checked for current tax matters. The Assessors Rolls are public record and should be reviewed by the astute researcher for the period of time available thereon as they may offer insight into ownership matters. The relatively new Geographic Interface Systems (“GIS” portals) being rolled out across the land can provide insight into zoning, mapping, usage, ownership, claims easements and other matters that a researcher should take into account. The Assessors Parcel Maps can be helpful in understanding the current configuration, lot lines and location of land. Court cases can also be critical to understanding nontitle claims against the property and should be reviewed in the court indices during the course of research. In some states, municipal records for assessment districts, city taxes and zoning matters may require research too.

   Within the context of title research, some other records to consider reviewing include the historical / deadfiled Assessors Parcel Maps which can go back for decades, and might offer deed references written in pencil thereon for ease of use by the Assessors Office. This was a common practice up through the 70's in many areas when more modern copy and mapping technologies began to enter into their own. In some counties, old maps back into the 1950's and 1960's hold deed references that are quite helpful in guiding research.

A Russian hacker is selling over a million hacked FaceBook account details.

Researchers at a University discovered security flaws in one internet browers that allows hackers to recover private tracking data on web browsing habits.

A programming exploit allowed hackers to gain access to many WordPress blogs.

FaceBook was told to stop sharing private user data by a Senator.

Each of the above stories points to the ease of access that online data offers for both convenience of the user and the ease of exploitation by criminals.

Like the musical Hairspray said “You Can't Stop the Beat” and in this case it's the driving pulse of the internet revolution. It is a march toward information freedom that empowers the individual. It is also a clarion call for people to be responsible for their own information like never before.

How can the Common Man protect his inteests against a deadly onslaught of powerful hackers determined to force entry into his digitial domain?

Despite the short attention span of the average consumer, I must be the one to break the news to you that the answers are neither simple nor easy nor short nor few

The Digital Age forces us each to be vigilent about the new frontier.

The free speech of the online arena means that the only censor to our words are our own minds.

In the early days of public internet use of the 1980's and 1990's, electronic government held great promise to empower people with all sorts of access to public servants and their services. Building on decades of public access laws, database availablity on the internet, and open government regulations, “Government 2.0” continues to deliver a multitude of services with promises of more to come.

From Emergency Service departments that use Twitter and Text Messages to alert students to a shooting situation on college campuses, to online building and planning permits, to food inspection and safety reports, Government 2.0 has offered valuable services to the public. It's recent push to expand into social network spaces promises new and better ways to offer traditional services with the improved speed and efficiency that the online world has to offer.

A recent influx of “professionals” into the genealogy community has created bidding wars for projects on the Ancestry.com forums. These lowball bidders are offering nigh impossible services for pennies on the dollar. A $40 bid to establish an ancestral tree going backwards in time for three centuries is no less absurd than offering a title chain for the same price covering the same period. It is patently ridiculous.

Yet, the title research industry has seen it's share of these fly-by-night firms. The swoop in, offering cheap products that omit applicable records. They take the money and run. Two years later, a disgruntled client calls your firm to order an update on a flawed product. You can only tell the client, in polite but firm terms, that you cannot update something that was done incorrectly, nor can you do so on the cheap. Meanwhile the fraudulent competitor has moved on to their next scam.

Well, now you know where the worst researchers in the world have landed: the professional genealogy field.

In the field of genealogy, the only standards are those promulgated by a few voluntary nonprofit associations. The desires, hopes, dreams, and sometimes unrealistic expectations of the client help to shape the direction of the research. Most American genealogists have no government regulation, no educational prerequisites, and no trade school certifications as they are not a prerequisit to entry into this field. Unlike title researchers who must meet the specific corporate needs of an insurance industry, genealogists typically work for private individuals and families, making them less likely to be reported for bad practices to any regulatory agency, except the Better Business Bureau or Yelp if they really are caught red-handed.

The Library of Congress will archive all public Tweets from 2006 forward. This will be a researchable resource.

Within a week of this announcement, Twitter announced that it's roadmap wil soon be modified to add locations and user streams. This “real time data” will be available in the next few days through desktop applications.

Third party applications developed for Twitter users have shown commercial success and these announcements are expected to build on past efforts.

To the research community, this becomes yet another online resource. Applying simple filters like those being developed by Google (as noted recently in other Blogs by this author), it becomes possible to identify individual users of Twitter based upon associative interests and grammatical stylings. The unique “finger print” created by know “friends” on social sites, coupled with any specific data Tweeted on the account and a triple-whammy verification by way of writing analysis, creates a high level of assurnace that individuals, even those seeking to be private, cannot remain anonymous upon close examination and analysis. Understanding the derivation of your profile name might reveal something about you as well: AnimaeKitty, RoseSmith, StarWarsFan#12, etc... obvious interest references, huh?

In past years, tradionalists, Luddites, and privacy advocates have denied and decried public agency records going online.

Some members of the Source of Title community have operated in open denial of this ongoing march which is part and parcel to the progress of Western Civilization.

Five years ago, the rallying cry was “more records are going offline than coming online.” Clearly a situation of wishing in one hand and you know the rest.

More recently, the cry of “if it's going to happen then there is nothing anyone can do about it”, has been heard from the same dark corners of the world.

Neither whine is a fine one.

Yes,, technology is putting more records on the internet for anyone to access and this will continue to be the case. Yes, there are steps everyone can still take to secure privacy. This is not a lose-lose situation for anyone, despite the dour outlook some professionals have adopted.

People often feel helpless and throw their hands up in defeat, instead of mustering the courage to venture forth and investigate matters for themselves.

  The Miami Herald reports that a EBay seller has filed a defamation lawsuit against his buyer. A clock purchased for $44 arrived broken to the buyer who obtained a refund via PayPal and posted a negative review, warning other potential bidders and buyers about the seller. The seller, who is a lawyer, chose to look at this a ruining his “commercial reputation” and had process served on his buyer. He is suing for $15,000 in damages.

   As the old saying goes, anyone can sue anybody for anything at any time.

   Naturally, not every complaint will be sustained as having merit. Yet, some of the most interesting cases are those meritless cases that move forward. Sometimes such ongoing action is based on a small, but signficant point of law, and at other times a merely baffling ability of people to interpret and misinterpret that which should be common sense.

   The most dire consequence of this is the chilliing effect it has on the free market. Whether it is a jackass seller suing a buyer or a bad claim against a good service provider, we've all witnessed our share of stupid lawsuits.

   This sort of action to me is like the robber who falls through a skylight and sues the homeowner or the laywer whose suit is r uined and sues the drycleaner for millions.