On privacy the net, and the law

[nadinbrzezinski]

First let me thank a lot of you who are concerned for my safety and my privacy.

But let's go into privacy and the net.

A lot of things that you may think are private... in the age of the net are not.

Examples of this are college degrees, names, as in real names, and even adresses. All these are a matter of public record, and about ten minutes you can actually find most of this. Posting a name on the web is not really actionable... nor is posting occupation... again they are matters of public record.

Where you enter into the area of actionable territory is if somebody actually posts an adress followed by an actual threat of physical damage. And even that one gets tricky.

Years ago we had this dance with somebody over at a Gaming Board, in Usenet... that is well before many of you heard of the web I suspect. I contacted the cops at the time, even the FBI... and they could not do a damn thing (since this crossed not just county lines but state lines) until she acted... and not even then. They have tightened the laws since then. and what she did at the time, sending us a lovely virus, would be actionable today. It wasn't back then.

So yes, I do post with my own name, one of the reasons is... quite brutally honest, anybody really interesting in knowing who any of you is... it takes ten seconds, twenty over a busy connection. The web is a place where we have an ILLUSION of privacy, but I know that any real privacy went away the day I first logged on to that Usenet account over AOL oh... in 1987. That is the brutal truth. Why what you posted ten years ago, can indeed come back to hunt you today.

This is just a note on this. I know everybody intends well, but unfortunately I got my eyes open to that reality, (thanks Camille) back then.

[RandomThoughts]

1. heh, that must explain why my internet usage has always been boring.

I never liked the idea of meeting people, or even really talking with people much on the internet. Although back then I would not have known it could have been possibly recorded, I now know even back then I was protected from doing stupid things that could come back on me.

:D

That is really cool to know :D


However on a larger note, if internet 'records' are recorded from as far back as the 80s then there needs to be civilian review of what that data is used for, since I would guess it is used for targeted justice for blackmail and unjust threats against people by lack of perspective.

Or to make it simpler, do they try to solve crimes, or do they find someone and try to wrongly or with targeted justice, smear them for some political purpose.

If that is a true fact, then you might know why so many in public life are scared to stand up for the people, if they are being threatened by any mistake they may have made decades ago.

Think of your entire life, then think if any moment in that entire life could be exaggerated to be thought to be what you are about. That is why that data collection is unjust, because of how it can be used. Although not about the internet, that is what they did to Rev Wright, try to paint his entire life by a 30 second clip.

That is why surveillance state is unjust until people can learn to ignore media that uses out of perspective smears on people.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. This is from 1998 at rec games mecha

Nutcrackr9
View profile
More options Jul 16 1998, 11:00 pm
In article <[email protected]>, NadinB
writes:
> I stand by what I said: anyone using my about the authors as a
>proof of time travel being included in BattleTech doesn't have two
>brain-cells to rub together. YOU, on the other hand, were working with
>OTHER information, therefore you are excluded from my comment.


Oh, so you lied to him. Okay.
Ken'
Will Flame For Food - Clan Ken
High Wise Ass of the Ministry of Battletech
Personally responsible for all women dissuaded
and pressured to not play role-playing games.
Clown Archon of RGM

Iam sure I can still find even earlier posts, but don't feel like going through the whole archive... everything you ever posted is still alive SOMEWHERE.

This is to make a point,

[RandomThoughts]

7. What?

What is that suppose to be? Don't even know what 'rec games mecha' is.

is that some email or something?

Who is NadinB

And what is the rest of the stuff, and what is Battletech?

Are you trying to say I posted that stuff? Because I did not, go for it, they are not my posts.

And you are entering the area of smear, or smear by proxy, and the last person that did that, I have spent 10 years on that topic.

But post away, make some point if you want. I don't know what Clown Archon or even what a RGM is.

Never heard of High Wise Ass, nor anything about any of that.


Your statement that 'you can find other post' after thinking about it is a direct comment that you believe I made that post, know that you are wrong in that comment, but if you wish to smear, that is your decision, make up, or post what other people make up if you want.

But know that you are being deceived, or are deceiving.


I get it, you are saying time travel in that post to allude to the concept of adding things to someones history. Do what ever you think you should, lies will not prevail.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. No I POSTED that stuff

that is an ONLINE forum in the old USENET system.

I could have found posts from myself, from as early as 1984... did not feel like going that back in the archive.

[RandomThoughts]

9. If such an archieve exist then it should be open to the public if you have access to it.

For a person to have access to some information set like that, then everyone should.

I though you were saying I posted that, and figured it was a typical type of thing said in many places, I have figured out what you are actually saying.


Ah I get it, 1984 reference, you make a secondary correlation to changing history, my first thought was correct. With the 'time' reference, and the indicator of purpose of such a thing, you are discussing changing of historical records.


LOL, if a group can claim to change historical records, they could correct the beer and travel money due to me, couldn't they.


Just add a bank account from 1400s with a few tens of thousands of dollars in it :D :rofl:

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Wherever you posted in the past, the posts are not gone

that was the point of the exercise.

So if you were a regular at usenet... go to the group and search under the handle you used.

[Obamanaut]

2. Amazingly, we do not live in cocoons: "...that is well before many

of you heard of the web I suspect..."

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. kick for education mostly

[IDemo]

5. Anytime someone laments the tone of the dialogue on DU

I just have to compare it to most of the Usenet threads I read and chuckle a bit.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Those WERE really bad.

And DU got the IGNORE feature.

[tkmorris]

10. Sometimes your posts give the impression...

That you believe everyone else on DU is an idiot. Seriously, Usenet? Internet privacy? Do you think you've told anyone anything they don't already know? I'd wager better than half the DU'ers that signed up in year 1 were Usenet veterans. Using your real name on the internet doesn't make you some sort of brave crusader. I have a book right here with tens of thousands of real names, phone numbers, and addresses. I can access just such a directory via that same internet for just about anywhere on the planet. Give me 5 minutes with a high-speed connection and I can give you information you would not believe. So what makes you feel that YOU'RE somehow in any special danger? For what exactly? Expressing a Liberal opinion on a website?

It comes down to this: Never say or do anything on the internet you wouldn't dare do IRL. The mistake new people make (very few anymore) is believing that the things they say are anonymous because they post behind a nickname. They aren't, obviously, but most everyone knows that by now.

I apologize if my tone seems harsh. I just don't understand the point of a post like this. It smacks of pure vanity to me.

[Obamanaut]

11. This is a response I could 'rec', with one alteration. Change the 'sometimes' to 'often'. nt

[smokey nj]

15. +1

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. And I am willing to bet to you that more than a few users

do not know what usenet is... nor do they know what I posted.

[taterguy]

25. Dude, compared to her, everyone is an idiot. Shut up and enjoy your education

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Ah personal attacks are ok I see.

[taterguy]

28. Only when I've been drinking

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Ah then, we will now when to avoid you

:-)

Fair warning... like I like my whiskey, will be appreciated.

[taterguy]

30. No can do. My drinking isn't on a schedule

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Gotcha!

:hi:

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheManInTheMac]

14. See, this is a problem:

"Years ago we had this dance with somebody over at a Gaming Board, in Usenet... that is well before many of you heard of the web I suspect."

You could've ended the sentence at Usenet, but you just had to add that clause of condescension, didn't you. I have a rule of thumb that has served me well over the years: The person who assumes they're the smartest person in the room almost never is. They usually fall in the bottom 10%, in fact. This rule not only keeps me humble, but lets me know who not to consult.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Here is the thing...

Most modern users of the Net went online as of 1995... that is a fact jack. That is not condescension. Most people, modern users of unsenetl DO NOT know what USENET is.

Now you also enjoy your stay.

Continuing the same jack shit, and you are reminding me of a few users THERE.

No, that is not a good thing.

[TheManInTheMac]

21. Bullshit...

I've met very few people who don't know what Usenet is (or should I say was). And yes, it is condescension to make a post on a board the size of DU and make an assumption that most of its members know nothing of Usenet or of Internet history and safety. I was commenting on only one statement you made and you take that criticism to infer that I am some sort of disruptor.

Offering education and information on history, current events, Internet safety, u.s.w. is always a good thing. You can do that without talking down to people.

[Obamanaut]

23. Here's a response I could give a 'rec' to. nt

[TheManInTheMac]

16. I will also add this:

Google X-No-Archive. It wasn't 100%, and since Usenet is effectively dead it's a moot point. Had you known about it in your pioneering days on Usenet (which never was part of the Internet), it might have spared you some heartburn.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. IT was... have a good day on the iggy list, you are a good soldier

I must say.

[TheManInTheMac]

22. No it was not.

Usenet was primarily accessed over the Internet, yes. But it always existed separate from the Internet. Subtle distinction, I'll admit, downright nit-picky semantics on my part, I'll admit. And for that, you've put me on ignore after likely hitting "Alert."

Such thin-skin for being a veteran of Usenet flame wars.

[Obamanaut]

24. Now you've done it! Banished to the 'iggy' list. nt

[TheManInTheMac]

27. I hang my head in shame...

:hide:

[fishwax]

20. why have people been concerned for your safety?

what'd I miss?