At least “privacy czar” sounds better than “war czar”

In light of British activist group Privacy International’s scathing report saying that Google is “hostile to privacy,” CNetNews.com wonders: is the Mountain View company is “in need of a privacy czar?”

According to the Lawbean blog, “New Hampshire and Oklahoma joined Montana and Washington State in the passage of statutes that refute guidelines set forth in the [Real ID] Act.  […]  The actions by these states are increasingly putting pressure on Congress and the Department of Homeland Security to change or repeal the law.”

The Washington Post today has an interesting article on a new report by the Brookings-AEI Joint Center for Regulatory Studies which claims that “[t]he practice of estimating the costs and benefits of U.S. government regulations is ‘frequently done poorly,’ with scant evidence that it makes a difference on policymaking.”

According to Inc.com, “[d]espite disagreements over the fine print, small-business groups are urging Congress to revive a controversial immigration-reform bill  that collapsed in the Senate last week.”

The Register reports that, according to a study conducted by Carnegie Mellon University, “[e]commerce businesses could charge more for their wares if they implemented an established privacy technology.  […]  The study showed that online shoppers are prepared to pay more at sites that guarantee their privacy.”