Re: Clarification for cpunks_anon@einstein.ssz.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jim wrote:
Modify your text style; review favorite words or phrases and avoid them completely. If possible run your text through a translation service (eg source -> Spanish -> source) and then edit the resultant. If you do use an online translation service use an anonymizing service for this access as well.
This is a great point, but it's worth remembering that even your opinions themselves can be used to find you. Real example (details changed for privacy): I have a friend who used to write for a financial magazine whom I wanted to get in touch with again. I had no idea which aliases he was using, so the first thing I did was look up a few keywords related to a current subject that, if he were still posting, he was unlikely to resist: dollarization and the financial crisis in Argentina. I knew his opinions on other subjects well enough to pick him out of a crowd, but chose Argentina first, since not many people posting online are well-informed and passionate enough to get a first-class tirade going about it. Hear somebody rant about something a couple of times and you know what to look for. Sure enough, I found him on the very first search, railing away and breathing fire as anticipated, almost as if on cue. All I had to do was jump right in the conversation and trot out my own crotchety old hobbyhorses in my own style...that afternoon, I got a "hey Faustine, is that really you?" message. He was quite pleased with himself to have found me! Harmeless enough, but I'm sure you can think of more sinister applications. Anyone who is really passionate about specialist subjects is at a distinct disadvantage to Joe and Jane Sixpack, whose opinions are largely interchangable and indistinguishable within various broad parameters. (How else could marketing turn this sickening conformity and predictability into a science?) Take an inventory of all the unusual things that push your buttons--the opinions that make you unique--and you'll be a step ahead. ~Faustine. *** He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. - --Thomas Paine -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBPDDZXPg5Tuca7bfvEQLpzgCgjs3DdbAyVjc+PD3iuD7R05naS/0AoKA3 ycqyfa7L9uPDUqqC5epGmOo1 =eNIe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Faustine wrote:
This is a great point, but it's worth remembering that even your opinions themselves can be used to find you.
True enough, if the fish bowl is small enough there ain't no place to hide. This is congruent with the 'number of anonymous remailer' issue. I guess the moral of the story is you can't hide if there ain't no crowd. ;) -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Faustine wrote:
Take an inventory of all the unusual things that push your buttons--the opinions that make you unique--and you'll be a step ahead.
But this is a well-established unsolvable problem in philosophy. It is impossible to examine your fundamental ideas for they are what you stand on to examine. What you think are basic are at least one step up from fundamental. Another person can see your fundamentals but not you, and vice versa. Faustine demonstrated this with her parable about locating a long-lost acquaintance, as did he her, uh, her he. He did not could not recognize what she saw in him, and she did not see how he identified her. What she saw was a secondary appearance he claims to have seen in her writings, not primary. There is no way out of the dilemma of not being able to see in yourself what others do, what they see in you is transparent to you. An unexamined life is the only possibility -- the joke of the opposite canard. Camouflage at will, but it will take another party to check how you blindly failed to protect yourself. That's why relying on your own secret remailer the first hop is futile.
But this is a well-established unsolvable problem in philosophy. It is impossible to examine your fundamental ideas for they are what you stand on to examine. What you think are basic are at least one step up from fundamental.
But you can cheat if there is a feedback. Suppose that an external party (as opposed to multiple personalities housed in the same wetware) diagnoses you with attribute A (eg. "you write in disconnected fashion and often mention "state") which you neither understand nor agree with. You then, blindly, do the opposite of A (~A) (write closely related sentences and never mention state). This is called acting and many can do it on regular basis. -- Damn, I must stop referring to Kubrick. ===== end (of original message) Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com
participants (4)
-
Faustine
-
Jim Choate
-
John Young
-
Morlock Elloi