User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 101

  1. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crevalleJack View Post
    Do you care about the "Death of Privacy"?

    Depends on whos privacy we will invade and destroy first. Privacy is a fundamental human right and a lack of it will leave people vulnerable. I think the future of the human race will be in danger from electronic dictatorships(1984,google,microsoft,intel,CIA).
    Yeah but what do you think about the the fact that the sorts of spying and surveilliance powers depicted in 1984 and, yes, weilded by some of the agencies or firms you mention have effectively been socialised because they are so widespread?

    For instance you're as liable to have your phone tapped/hacked or be filmed in your own home by some neighbourhood punk or perve or delinquent as those guys you mentioned.

  2. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    Privacy is for people with something to hide.

    As such, I care about my IRL privacy more than I do my internet privacy.
    You know you're right but what's wrong with hiding something?

    I had a debate on this very forum with Jennifer among others about the rights of transexuals with regard to their identities, I'm not sure I fully agree with all of the perspectives yet but I do agree that they may wish to keep certain information to themselves to avoid certain commonplace reactions to it and so long as no harm is done why wouldnt that be respected?

    That's not even the most commonplace examples I can think of, if people read pulp thrillers or trashy horror novels when they otherwise cut an intellectual or refined profile or even for the people who access porn, why should they be compelled to go public about that?

  3. #73
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Apparently it's because they love us now. Joy!

    [youtube="ybyHW3PK0nQ"]the Spies who love you![/youtube]

  4. #74
    null Jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    FREE
    Posts
    2,485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    First you suggest that not having privacy is a good thing, then you suggest that we ought to take out insurance against breach of privacy. That's inconsistent of you, to say the least.
    Personally, I refuse to pay into some insurance scam to protect myself from other scammers. "Identify theft" insurance is a huge con. And financial losses are not the only, or even the most important, considerations when it comes to privacy.
    1. I think that complete information would be better than the current situation, but that does not mean that I don't understand the current risks of an imbalance in privacy. You assume much.
    2. It's about cost benefit, dear. Just because you have a problem with a concept in principle does not mean it isn't financially beneficial. Yes, the threats are man made, but what you are saying is akin to not wanting to pay for comprehensive car insurance because you don't think you should pay thieves (insurance) to financially protect you from other thieves (car stereo, etc). Also, just because one agency is obviously a scam does not mean others are. You use the single example of Identity theft insurance, which isn't sufficient.
    3. I know financial losses are not the only, or most important factor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    Also, you are failing to understand the ways in which the direction of modern technological developments undermine our ability to protect our personal privacy and security. Developments like social networking, cloud computing, mobile computing, offshore out-sourcing (to name a few) make it impossible to control what happens to our personal data. Anyone who thinks they can protect themselves with a/v s/w and a "strong" password is completely deluded.
    And you are failing to understand that cows and chickens can't reproduce with each other. Oh wait, just because you didn't explicitly state something doesn't mean you don't understand it? Stop assuming, and failing to give the benefit of the doubt, please. Yes, I understand that information travels at the speed of light now, that there are witnesses everywhere, and that there is a new culture of "sharing everything you do with everyone else." The fact is that relative to other people, I don't share, don't have friends who share, and don't do things which would get me into trouble if known publicly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    That is some very faulty logic. Government does not need unrestricted access to personal data in order to be able to formulate an assessment of risk and make provision for that risk.
    Secondly, government is not protected by the same rights (or subject to the same responsibilities/constraints) as the individual, just as corporate bodies are not. I'm not sure why you are mixing up these legal entities. In the UK we have a Data Protection Act (to protect the privacy of the individual) and a Freedom of Information Act (to provide citizens with access to information held by public bodies).
    If it's anything it is a faulty premise, not faulty logic. Your assessment of my statement is filled with hyperbole and assumption. Unrestricted access=/=adequate access, unless you feel that for the government to prevent the stealing of personal information they would need unrestricted access? How exactly would government provide for the unauthorized release of personal information, after the fact? Is the US government going to raise that gay boy's corpse from the dead, after he killed himself for being outed by a roommate?

    Also, I'd like you to clarify where exactly I mix up government rights, individual rights, and corporate rights? I don't see where you could have possibly gotten evidence for that assumption, but then again, you are the queen of assuming. [/quote]


    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post

    Already, people are both confessing that a profit-driven tool like Facebook has the power to alter their social behaviour AND are suggesting that this is a good thing. I find that pretty disturbing...
    You find it disturbing that people are influenced by the external environment? Get used to it. The human being is founded upon the profit driven model (i.e. self gain, profit used loosely here for effect), and we have been influenced by ourselves for millions of years, it's called cultural evolution. The up side is that people tend to shy away from what really hurts them, given adequate knowledge. Anything malicious and harmful that stems from the influence of facebook will probably be made public by one of the many facebook-hate crusaders out there, and then people will respond accordingly.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  5. #75
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    ^I tried to respond to you seriously and overlook the fact that you are a self-proclaimed troll. That was a mistake. Your argumentation is worse than moronic and your tone is absurdly patronizing, given the extent of your ignorance. I'm not going to waste any more time on you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  6. #76
    null Jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    FREE
    Posts
    2,485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    ^I tried to respond to you seriously and overlook the fact that you are a self-proclaimed troll. That was a mistake. Your argumentation is worse than moronic and your tone is absurdly patronizing, given the extent of your ignorance. I'm not going to waste any more time on you.
    Imagine a situation wherein a supposed dog stood upright, recited Plato's The Republic, and found a cure for AIDS. With regards to definition, we may either reassess our application of the term dog to this creature, or expand upon the meaning of dog to include this creature. What we may not do, as rational men, is to suppose that because we classify this creature as a dog, and because dogs cannot speak of Plato or cure AIDS, that what this dog recited cannot possibly be Plato, and what he produced was most definitely not a cure for AIDS.

    What I have done in my responses to you is mirror your attitude. Any condescension you perceive directed at you is simply a reflection of your attitude towards me. The fact that you refuse to converse with someone who speaks in such a manner means 1. That you cannot take what you dish, and 2. That you are probably a smart lady, because who would voluntarily associate with such a foul human being?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  7. #77
    Senior Member Beargryllz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    Privacy is for people with something to hide.

    As such, I care about my IRL privacy more than I do my internet privacy.
    Incorrect unless you concede that every detail about a person is in that person's best interest to remain hidden. A decrease in privacy means an increase in the information about that person, which means that whoever has that information has an advantage over that person. Privacy is a defense mechanism and it should not be emphasized only by those with something to hide, but rather by everyone with something to lose.

  8. #78
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    Incorrect unless you concede that every detail about a person is in that person's best interest to remain hidden. A decrease in privacy means an increase in the information about that person, which means that whoever has that information has an advantage over that person. Privacy is a defense mechanism and it should not be emphasized only by those with something to hide, but rather by everyone with something to lose.
    Very well put!

    Here is Schneier response:
    The Eternal Value of Privacy

    The most common retort against privacy advocates -- by those in favor of ID checks, cameras, databases, data mining and other wholesale surveillance measures -- is this line: "If you aren't doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?"

    Some clever answers: "If I'm not doing anything wrong, then you have no cause to watch me." "Because the government gets to define what's wrong, and they keep changing the definition." "Because you might do something wrong with my information." My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect.

    Two proverbs say it best: Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? ("Who watches the watchers?") and "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

    Cardinal Richelieu understood the value of surveillance when he famously said, "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." Watch someone long enough, and you'll find something to arrest -- or just blackmail -- with. Privacy is important because without it, surveillance information will be abused: to peep, to sell to marketers and to spy on political enemies -- whoever they happen to be at the time.

    Privacy protects us from abuses by those in power, even if we're doing nothing wrong at the time of surveillance.

    We do nothing wrong when we make love or go to the bathroom. We are not deliberately hiding anything when we seek out private places for reflection or conversation. We keep private journals, sing in the privacy of the shower, and write letters to secret lovers and then burn them. Privacy is a basic human need.

    A future in which privacy would face constant assault was so alien to the framers of the Constitution that it never occurred to them to call out privacy as an explicit right. Privacy was inherent to the nobility of their being and their cause. Of course being watched in your own home was unreasonable. Watching at all was an act so unseemly as to be inconceivable among gentlemen in their day. You watched convicted criminals, not free citizens. You ruled your own home. It's intrinsic to the concept of liberty.

    For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable.

    How many of us have paused during conversation in the past four-and-a-half years, suddenly aware that we might be eavesdropped on? Probably it was a phone conversation, although maybe it was an e-mail or instant-message exchange or a conversation in a public place. Maybe the topic was terrorism, or politics, or Islam. We stop suddenly, momentarily afraid that our words might be taken out of context, then we laugh at our paranoia and go on. But our demeanor has changed, and our words are subtly altered.

    This is the loss of freedom we face when our privacy is taken from us. This is life in former East Germany, or life in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. And it's our future as we allow an ever-intrusive eye into our personal, private lives.

    Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  9. #79
    Yeah, I can fly. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILE Ti
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Bah, liberty has to be the most overrated concept in existence.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Teacher (Idyllic), ESE-IEI (Si-ESFj), SLue|I|, Sanguine-Melancholy
    Sage, True Neutral (Chaotic Good), Type III Anti-Hero
    Inventive > Artistic > Leisurely > Dramatic
    7w6 > 4w3 > 9w8, weakside sp/so

    Dark Worker (Sacrificing)
    Freewheeling Designer

    Hayekian Asshole


  10. #80
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    I have nothing to hide, therefore I have no reason for privacy. I will talk about what I want, when I want too. If it seems strange to people, or offends them in any way I may apologize to them, as I probably didn't mention I'm a very blunt person and say the first things that come to my mind. This is not to say that others should feel this way, only that if privacy was taken away then so be it, if they want to watch me have sex then let's do it. Kinda kinky really. I mean...

Similar Threads

  1. What do you think about the massive tax evasion story out of Panama?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-15-2016, 07:32 PM
  2. Replies: 398
    Last Post: 11-11-2015, 03:30 AM
  3. What do you feel about the phenomenon of spoilers or complaints about the same?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-10-2015, 09:28 PM
  4. Why do YOU care about the presidency?
    By Magic Poriferan in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-17-2012, 09:41 PM
  5. How do you feel about the future of gaming?
    By uncommonentity in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-03-2011, 11:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO