Technology is supposed to make our lives better. When first-year dorms were installed with card key locks this fall, College officers promised a state-of-the-art, secure new future.

But the card key system, like other exciting technological breakthroughs (e.g. Frankenstein, the atomic bomb, the DeLorean), can be abused. Last month, members of the Civil Liberties Union of Harvard (CLUH) pointed out what George Orwell enthusiasts already suspected--Big Brother Harvard is watching you.

Every time first-years use their card keys to open doors, a central computer in Harvard University Police Department headquarters records their names and the times and locations of their entries. Although officials stress that this information will be used primarily for security--to indicate a propped-open door, for example--Dean of the College L. Fred Jewett '57 has said that this information may be used as evidence in Administrative Board hearings.

That has us worried. Dean of Freshmen Elizabeth S. Nathans, among others, said that students should trust the College to behave responsibly with the computerized information. We agree that the issue is trust. And we don't trust the data that card keys provide or the Ad Board to properly use it.

The information supplied by the card key computer is limited in scope. The computer cannot record how long students stay in a building. It does not know when one key card is used to admit a large group. It cannot tell when someone lends a card to a friend.

At best, this data is circumstantial and prejudicial. Early this fall, police shined flashlights in the faces of sleeping first-years at 4 a.m. The officers were searching for the student's roommate. The first-year in question had committed the crime of entering his dormitory shortly before other students reported an attempted break-in.

At worst, the data can be downright wrong. Last semester a Pennypacker prefect reported his card lost and was assigned a new one. When one of his first-years was unable to get into the dorm, she discovered that her card had been registered in her prefect's name.

Jewett has said that concerns over reliability are overblown because Ad Board officials recognize the limited nature of the data. He has also said that the information will be used only in cases of violent crime or theft and then primarily to corroborate other evidence.

But as long as the Ad Board stays locked in its Star Chamber ways, its use of all kinds of questionable data will only excaberate its image problem. Frankly, it makes us nervous when the Ad Board responds to student concerns by saying "trust us." We don't. And as the controversy over the Ad Board's date rape policy showed, many Harvard students share our concern.

We think the card key system has improved security at Harvard. But the Ad Board should not be able to use the information stored in the card key computer for use in disciplinary hearings.