Re: "why privacy" revisit
the responses i've gotten have been all too theoretical and, i believe, too hypothetical and removed for most people. when asked if they value their privacy, the public overwhelmingly agrees. when asked what their privacy means to them, i don't think they have a solid answer. i get the sense that most people don't see the hazards of corporations analyzing their buying patterns, voter registration records and medical records. i don't think it has come home to most people. i don't disagree with the people on the list. i am just having a hard time translating it to the public in concrete terms. j.
At 09:50 PM 3/22/97 -0500, you wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
-=> Quoting In:jonathan@gaw.net to Harka <=-
In> when i talk to people like the Direct Marketer's Assn., they honestly In> don't understand what the fuss is about. Their attitude is, quite In> literally, "What's the harm being done here?"
In> what do you think the community interested in privacy protection can In> do to best illustrate to the general public the "harm" in the In> collection of personal information?
Information warfare. Collect information about DMA people, using their own weapons against them. Then post it somewhere on the Internet via remailers and cc themselves, Reuters and the New York Times...
Ciao
Harka ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2
iQEVAgUBMzSWbzltEBIEF0MBAQFOzQf/SmUYerwG8oIDVe+PucyAybBAYpMBl+JT eDl21Bs0jVa2+UXm8zDKQVDIkz004bTgpyX6vzockZ8cTUkW1UJJucjUfAXln1yB HmdR9Go5mdurGbXf4QSN47nbfPc5V5sq8h7Ok2frFRqKLBejPSuEdP2pZo0OUPQD bf0lE3l5lgTKlYqOzHt7NqHNAlcx3l0FOpflF+RR5DbLllBrIP7XYodMLMv+NR3T V0oEk0woReL4+/O8iQ1oZuQ3MHNXkwCqR8w2wXnlou9ysfS58nTXgoNyFYKouGlN Kc1bV2/G6mrG8PziTd3MsTL4TjdcmkdphZWVouo1LrEuhd3J5B4dBw== =rbtn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption...
****************************************************** Jonathan Gaw The Star Tribune Minneapolis, Minnesota jonathan@gaw.net *********Wasting Digital Bandwidth Since 1986*********
At 2:35 AM -0600 3/23/97, Jonathan Gaw wrote:
the responses i've gotten have been all too theoretical and, i believe, too hypothetical and removed for most people. when asked if they value their privacy, the public overwhelmingly agrees. when asked what their privacy means to them, i don't think they have a solid answer. i get the sense that most people don't see the hazards of corporations analyzing their buying patterns, voter registration records and medical records. i don't think it has come home to most people.
i don't disagree with the people on the list. i am just having a hard time translating it to the public in concrete terms.
Hmmmhhh. I don't recall seeing any messages from you stating that this was your interest, finding simple hooks the readers of a newspaper can understand. I assumed you were interested in the issue as just another participant in the list, not as a journalist looking for a story angle. Frankly, readers of newspapers don't have the background to understand the real issues, for the most part. Expecially given the brevity and superficiality of most newspaper articles. And if they ever really figured out what most of the active participants here stand for, they would likely vote to ban our existence. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
participants (2)
-
Jonathan Gaw -
Timothy C. May