[1] From: Haradda@aol.com (16)
Subject: Re: 11.0083 censorship: CDA decision
[2] From: Haradda@aol.com (14)
Subject: Re: 11.0085 privacy?
[3] From: K.SOHEIL@kcl.ac.uk (11)
Subject: RE: 11.0085 privacy?
--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:40:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Haradda@aol.com
Subject: Re: 11.0083 censorship: CDA decision
As a father of six children who allows them full access to the internet my
solution is to tell my children the type of sites that I consider to be off
limits to them and to have two caches of every page and downloaded file. Of
course my children like to pull my chain occasionally. The other day I was
going through the cache and I came across 12 jpegs that were entitled hot
chicks 1-12. When I looked at the jpegs they turned out to be jpegs of fried
chicken. Nice joke on me.
Are you aware that the concern about sexual material on the web has turned
those sites into some of the few sites on the web actually making money.
Because you now have to have some sort of proof that you are an adult to get
on. And usually that is a credit card number? As for sites which would not
be considered politically correct as well as the one's that are, I think that
we just have to live with them. You outlaw them and you find yourself
running into talk about black data banks and libraries and blocking off parts
of the web or services as Germany did with Compuserve and Communist China is
trying right now. Or you are going to have people using PGP or it's like to
communicated with whomever or whatever.
--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 10:58:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Haradda@aol.com
Subject: Re: 11.0085 privacy?
This is part of what I do in my business. About 80% of the items that are
mentioned are of public record and anyone who knows how can access them.
The remaining 20% are not. Unlisted phone numbers, credit reports and the
like are all governed by privacy laws that have heavy fines and prison time
for those caught breaking them. You run credit checks on people without
their permission and you are in major trouble if they find out. Why do you
think when you borrow money that you are required to sign a release?
Part of this is cause by the information that financial institutions and
governmental institutions ask in their applications and they are becoming
more intrusive all the time. But you don't have to answer them. Recently
the public schools in my area started asking for my children's social
security numbers so that their files can be indexed under those numbers. I
refused to do that. The social security number is what links up everything.
And anyone who has it can link up your entire life. Your school,financial
and medical records all become available to those who have it.
--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 16:13:27 BST
From: K.SOHEIL@kcl.ac.uk
Subject: RE: 11.0085 privacy?
In reply to Geoffrey Rockwell's (are you the son of Peter Rockwell?) forwarded
message re: privacy, is it for real, has anyone checked it out, doesn't it
sound too much like a scam?
Even if a scam, I'm pretty certain that the content is more true than not. I
once called an operator at the telephone company on some query and soon realisedshe had access to information concerning my bank and insurance accounts and
could trace my movements of the past 12 years. It requires no specific training
or qualification to get her job.
Short of breaking in and destroying all data, can anyone imagine a solution?
"Rollerball" seems to have been far too accurate a vision: big business and
sports. We need some positive checks.
K. Soheil
k.soheil@kcl.ac.uk