Well the shy northern Northern American species have gotten shyer..........
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32581192...ence-security/
:D:cool::eek:
Printable View
Well the shy northern Northern American species have gotten shyer..........
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32581192...ence-security/
:D:cool::eek:
I personally think it's a good idea. I'm a pretty private person and I've refused thus far to engage in social networking. I created a myspace page a while back just to see what it was all about. I removed it very shortly after creating it because I realized the privacy impacts.
I don't want people to be able to find out who I'm friends with and what they're into. I'd like to be able to control what people are able to see about me based on who they are. I can control what I put up, but I can't control what everyone else is putting up. Maybe once users have more control I'll participate.
I find these sites to be about as annoying as a ringing telephone.
Agreed ^. I don't see what the allure is in the first place. All it does is put you in touch with people that you lost touch with in the first place, for a reason.
I'll agree 50%. Myspace has done one thing I do like:Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
I can make a page, upload music to it, and get what I do out there easier. And on a site that has millions of people on it. For music, Myspace is OK, because not all bands have a web page, but they will have a Myspace, and you can find concert dates, new albums, and other stuff out, by using it.
Facebook... I deleted my account and didn't look back. I hated it. The pages of a typical facbook account are covered in apps now that someone thought was a neat idea. It's the ****ing blinking text HTML code of the Social Networking World.
It's actually not surprising. In Canada, there are privacy laws to protect individuals from both gov't and corporate misuse. In the US, there is no privacy laws period. (save for HIPPA IIRC). Gov't and corporations can do with your information what they want.
The best part of myspace is the 15 year olds claiming they are 18, and the 18 year olds posting pictures 1/2 nude and drunk.
roflQuote:
Originally Posted by souleman
yup, the word "privacy" does not even show up in the constitutionQuote:
Originally Posted by MsMittens
Doesn't have to be in the Constitution. HIPPA isn't and it protects your privacy in the health area. I'm amazed at the amount of information the gov't and private organizations can collect and FREELY distribute here without your consent.Quote:
Originally Posted by megawatt
Not the case. In the US, we have at least the following two Federal Statutes:Quote:
Originally Posted by MsMittens
ECPA - Electronic Communications Privacy Act
CCPA - Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984
These are what require law enforcement agencies to obtain a court order for subscriber records, and prevent the ISPs, etc. from releasing subscriber records without one. There are of course immediate danger exigencies, but they must be followed-up with a court order.
Truth,there is no such a thing as "privacy", It is not safe to keep any sensitive data on a PC which has internet connection:/ It is easy to dig any info about any person who has accounts in the internet and e-mail is the best way to start. The most of people think that newer web browser ensure their safety or newer firewall or anti-virus and they are absolutely wrong. Sensitive Info must be kept crypted in PC (personally I think TrueCrypt is a good choise), http isn't safe, only https, but the most of web-pages use only http protocol.
here is a list of web-sites and programs which helps to surf safer by hiding or encrypting your internet path:
http://ipinfo.info/html/anonymous-surfing_2.php
it can't ensure full safety, but it helps a lot:)
It is a big risk to have accounts on web-pages like myspace or facebook and etc..
The reason servers don't use HTTPS over HTTP is because some things don't NEED to be encrypted and it wastes CPU to encrypt useless info.
If you want Privacy online lock down your OS the best you can, use toss away email accounts with PGP and smack the hell out of any idiot still using their name as their password.
About 5 years ago I was using this:
SUSE Linux
Mutt for Email
2048 bit Encryption with Blowfish (While laughing because DES and RSA were both getting talked about as vulnerable at the time)
PGP worked fine because the only people cracking that in any reasonable time are doing so because you've screwed up some how.
For a browser ... Heh...Use links or lynx, they don't load images like Mutt doesn't. Images on a remote server were how Spammers could tell when you opened an email. By not doing that you had decent privacy.
Right. Did you forget the Patriot Act (Wiki version)which effectively makes those two useless when the words "potential terrorist" are thrown around?Quote:
Originally Posted by 11001001
True, there is no such thing as ultimate privacy (unless you go completely off-grid) but I really don't need the gov't or a corporation to make it worse. What **I** choose to throw around is my business and my risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Fun
Well, we weren't talking about terrorists... just the average user.Quote:
Originally Posted by MsMittens
Anyway, using the Patriot Act can be more involved, obfuscated, and time consuming than a regular subpoena.
Heh. Tell that to all of the people being wiretapped. :-P I didn't think the Patriot Act was so much about subpoenas, as it was evidence gathering. Which would lead to a subpoena anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by 11001001
I thought the patriot act was supposed to bypass a lot of the paperwork that the authorities had to go through.
As far as terrorist being the only targets... it kind of reminds me of that South Park episode where you could only shoot animals out of season if they posed a threat to you. So they would just scream "It's coming right for us!", before blasting the bunny, or deer, or whatever. All they have to say, is "He might be a terrorist!"...