Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[liberationtech] archives public

Greg Norcie greg at norcie.com
Sat Aug 11 16:38:25 PDT 2012


I am not suggesting legalizing murder

I am suggesting placing prominent signs in an area where many murders
occur :)

These signs could warn people to take reasonable precautions such as
avoiding travel at night, and dialing 911 to report suspicious persons,
and possibly choosing to obtain a concealed carry permit.

I don't think these signs would "normalize" murders. My own undergrad
used to post flyers in areas where muggings occured, and this didn't
make me think it was OK to mug people - it made me take a bus or a cab,
rather than walk through those areas late at night.

Also, we have a means to stop CCTV - privacy legislation. For example,
if London (CCTV "champion" of the world) changed their laws, the use of
CCTV could be eliminated very easily.

There is no easy fix to stop malicious individuals and/or intelligence
agencies from siphoning off posts. The intelligence agencies of the
world all have pretty much free reign to spy on the communications of
the rest of the world. Some of the less human rights respecting ones spy
on their own people as well :)

You talk about how terrible it is that these privacy violations are
occurring - and I emphatically agree, 100%.

Where we differ is that I think that it is better to warn people about
their lack of privacy, and perhaps help them avoid making a dangerous
disclosure, rather than pay lip service to some ill-defined idea like
"normalization" while some poor souls posts something that could get
them arrested or killed.

I value human lives over ideas, especially when those ideas aren't
backed with data. Can you show me proof that people's privacy attitudes
change when exposed to privacy warnings in the manner you fear will
happen? (If not - hey - potential study idea up for grabs :) )
--
Greg Norcie (greg at norcie.com)
GPG key: 0x1B873635

On 8/11/12 4:20 PM, André Rebentisch wrote:
> Am 12.08.2012 01:03, schrieb Greg Norcie:
>> There is what should be, and there is reality.
>>
>> Any mailing list that allows anyone to subscribe is effectively public -
>> some malicious actor will always siphon off posts, regardless of laws,
>> list policies, or basic social norms.
> 
> Radicalising "realism", why do societies sanction murder if all people
> have to die anyway? ;-)
> 
> But seriously, in the context of camera surveillance: Analogue argument,
> you are in public space, everyone could watch you at the streets, why
> bother camera surveillance? Shouldn't a citizen expect to be recorded on
> tape? etc.
> 
> I am all for "worst case expectations" but often it's a human slippery
> slope that we tend make these views "normative" and as a result promote
> practices that make things worse and discourage higher ambitions and
> standards.
> 
> Best,
> André
> _______________________________________________
> liberationtech mailing list
> liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
> 
> Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
> 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> 
> If you would like to receive a daily digest, click "yes" (once you click above) next to "would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest?"
> 
> You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> 
> Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator.
> 
> Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
> 



More information about the liberationtech mailing list