Privacy ? Which privacy ?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=79383
Printed Date: February 03 2025 at 06:01
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Privacy ? Which privacy ?
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Subject: Privacy ? Which privacy ?
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 15:46
|
Arggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is actually fully legal and a private matter if you happens to be a rude, middle aged woman who think your coming daughter-in-law does not have manners. It is called "human rights". So why the hell does a middle aged woman, call her a stupid cow if you want, have to hide out of view in her house with many TV broadcasters parked up outside her front door ? I refer to http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13973331" rel="nofollow - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13973331 So she sent her soon to be daughter in law a pretty lame email. So what ? Whose here has not sent stupid emails ? I have. Tonnes of them. Downright braindead emails which I sincerely hope has been nuked by now. But that is again my human rights to do so without this email going around the world like a virus. It is actually a human right to be stupid and doing stupid things in privacy or in a one-to-one conversation as an email is. So, it now seems like emails is no longer private. In fact, they never have been. If you write an email, write it such that it can be read out by a news reader in CNN, FOX, SKY, BBC or on Mongolian TV without you having to emigrate to Baffin Island for some years. What is then the points of emails ? I cannot send any types of meaningful emails to others now. There is a Forward button on their email browsers now which is now being renamed to the Broadcast button. Or as in most cases; the Get Even button. I am prettty pissed off with this because a.) My privacy has just been eroded. b.) It makes this email tool pretty useless c.) The ones in the mental asylums with convictions for paranoia is really the sane people now and should be employed as dead expensive IT consultants from now on because paranoia has to become the IT standard from now on. In my case; I will have to use face to face when communicating issues I do not want to be broadcasted. And we are by then turning the full circle, back to the time before paper and IT was invented. Happy now, people ?
|
Replies:
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 15:59
|
So let me see if I understand this. You write something. You send this thing to somebody else. They in turn send it to more people and you think your privacy has been violated? lol ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 16:09
|
I thought this thread was going to be about something more serious, like cameras spying on free people or government control over the internet. Instead, it's about a forwarded email. Fail. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 16:11
|
The other day I told this guy at the bar that I didn't like his haircut. Then he went and told his wife. What gives him the right to do that? My privacy was violated. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 16:16
|
^oh what a b*****d... You should sue him for everything he's got.
On a related issue, I better not tell coworkers what I think about my boss, lest they violate my sacred privacy and get my sacred ass in trouble  -------------
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 16:44
|
In order not to violate anyone's privacy I chose not to read any of the posts in this thread. |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 17:21
Let's say that you write a letter to your girlfriend, in which you explain why you leave her (you prefer her sister, her roommate, her mother, one of your male co-worker, she has bad breath, who cares?) She decides to send this letter to some national newspapers, asking if it's right that you break up because of the said reason. Then, one of these newspapers accept to publish the letter and to comment it. So, is your privacy violated or not? |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: June 30 2011 at 18:32
Isn't that pretty much what advice columns are? As far as I'm concerned, once you write something on the internet you've broadcast it to the whole world and should consider it as such. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 04:30
|
I'm baffled why this story made the news at all. If the e-mail wasn't viral before it will be now.
When you think of everything that's going on in the world right now, how this found a slot on the main BBC news schedule is bordering on the surreal. It was like watching all those US presidential candidates the other day, being grilled by CNN about what sort of Pizza they prefer, while all around them their country is shutting down. A silly non story. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 07:26
|
If you send a letter in the mail to someone, they can easily photocopy it and mail it to someone else. You might not expect them to, but they can do it. They can do it 30 times, or 2000 times if they really wanted to. The internet has just made doing it more efficient and more mindless of a task. Just because it happened with email, it doesn't mean that it should be condemned. Should the telephone, paper and pens, the public postal service and fax all be considered useless? No. ...Wouldn't want her to be my mother in law, btw. ------------- 
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 07:29
| I don't consider an email or a private messenger any different to an old-fashioned letter in what privacy is concerned. Fortunately other people here think the same, and publishing PM contents here on the forum can be against the rules. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 07:37
|
I think this story is more about a shallow media than it is about privacy.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 07:42
It is not. Did I have her sign a contract saying that she can't share it? I gave her information. Once she has the information she can disseminate it. You can say that maybe she isn't a good person for doing so, but she didn't do anything close to illegal. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 09:50
etc...
gawd bless the bbc and all who email in her.  It is common where I work for an email-exchange's circulation list to exponentially increase as more and more people are cc'd in subsequent iterations of the email in a process my colleague and I have tagged "covering their arses". Much to our amusement we have seen an initially innocent and innocuous email sent to one person escalate into a company-wide chain-mail of subtexts and unspoken grudges between two sites or departments, with us caught in the middle wondering what the hell we said that was so inflamatory... apparently (in one case) offering to buy someone a beer in return for a favour is taken as attempted bribery and cheapening the value of a fellow employee - a counter offer of two beers didn't go down well either.
------------- What? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 09:54
------------- What? |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 10:07
 -------------
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 12:40
I'm not sure privacy is only a question of what's legal and what's illegal. I think it may have to do with... let's say good manners and social rules. But I'm not sure it's useful to talk about social rules. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 12:41
|
I said it was in bad taste, but it has nothing to do with violating privacy. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 12:49
Yes it does. Because if you send an email, it is between you and the recipient. Two persons only or the cc or bcc recipient. If you go public with a message, you publish that message in a blog, twitter, public forum, letter to an editor or on your own website as an open letter to... That to be strictly correct and in this day and age; nitpicking. In reality, that Forward button is a Get Even, Sulking Loser or Broadcast button. That is a sad thing because it should not be like that. But when the terrain is not like the map says, I rather re-adjust to the terrain than falling down a 1000 feet drop where there should had been a nice lake instead. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 12:53
|
I'm sorry, but no. You sort of relinquish your privacy when you tell someone something. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 13:02
Then, what would be YOUR definition of privacy and/or intimacy? Until what point do you consider some parts of your social life can be shared with thousands of strangers? |
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 13:02
|
Please explain to me what communication and inter personal relationships is. Please ! |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 13:13
I also think it was very poor taste but that's it. What do you want Torodd, regulation? Some confrol force checking that nobody says more about others than this control force allows? Explain YOUR definition of how you think this privacy that you so long for could be defended. -------------
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 13:28
|
I get a sense there may be different cultural expectations based on backgrounds here. I don't know that there's any natural rules regarding privacy, just social convention.
Ownership of information is pretty illusory IMO.
Someone who is high and mighty enough to think they can lecture another adult about their manners has lost their expectation of kind behavior in return.
Which is what most of this is about, people treating each other with kindness and compassion. That's what protects privacy. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 13:29
|
That emails between two persons remains private. That interpersonal relationships remains interpersonal relationships without being a public matter (as long as nobody is breaking the law). To be able to have sex or have a stupid argument without everybody in the public domain knowing the details some time after.
Absolute not. The cat is already out of the bag/the genie has escaped the bottle. This is like music piracy. Nobody can stop or even regulate it. Neither can we regulate email communication. We can only appeal to the good in the people. But regulations/legislation ? No way. I am totally against that. So the answer to your question is an affirmative no. For me, this is a matter of moral and to be able to communicate person to person without this communication entering the puclic domain. That according to the road map I have had so far. But the terrain tells me that all confidential emails can now enter the public domain and I am in my right to dislike that. So all my road maps has just been put on a funeral pyre. Burn, burn, burn !
Being a stupid cow is actually a pretty basic human right. Ditto for being an idiot and a moronic t**t. It is my view that everyone can enjoy these basic human rights (as describe over) without them being held to account in the public domain unless you hold public office or are a public person trading on a false good reputation. It is off course our human rights to avoid people like that as the plague they are. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 13:29
This is inconsistent with your position as I understood it from our discussions about cctv. By this logic, if you walk out of your house, you relinquish your privacy when you show yourself - hence videotaping your public appearance wouldn't be violating your privacy, yet you were against it. IMO discosing the contents of a letter of any kind depends directly on the letter's actual content - if the content was initially intended to be private, then disclosing it without permision is not ok. If I tell someone very personal, for example, I expect it not to hear it again from someone else after some time. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 13:49
|
You cannot assume email is automatically private. You need to have a reasonable agreement with the person you are emailing, not an implied one based on the nature of the medium. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 14:06
|
Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 14:08
|
Brian, I think you had to read Vomps' post in order to quote it. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 14:08
| It's important in this conversation to differentiate between the legal and the ethical. |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 14:30
Or even just common courtesy. Needless to say, when you berate someone, you're going to get less of that. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 14:35
|
Not that the young woman acted with decency, but the old one seems to be the type of person that deserves that treatment. -------------
|
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 14:37
|
Yes. I saw this on the Breakfast News. She's a middle-class annoying idiot. You can quote that too, if you like. -------------   
|
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 15:18
|
Well, I disagree with the sentiments expessed over. You are allowed to be an idiot in private without this being a matter of public ridicule. It is called basic human rights.
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 15:41
|
If you share a confidence with someone and that trust is betrayed, no amount of Privacy legislation is going to protect you from your own errors of judgement. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 15:50
I think Pat is against cameras because of the cost and pointlessness of them except for fascism (as I recall, they don't actually reduce crime), not for privacy. I can say that I personally believe that you have no privacy in public and can be videotaped or photographed. This is more or less the law in the US, unless you are a police officer...And people tend to throw a fit because they're irrational if THE CHILDREN are involved. But Pat and I agree that doing it makes her a jerk. We are objecting to this nonsense about violating human rights that torodd is talking about. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 15:57
True, I'm with you on all counts. |
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 16:10
So you have sex and your partner broadcast all details, no skinfold unturned, on the net the day after. That is not a violation of your human rights ? I think so, but I am talking nonsense anyway according to yourself so she/he is free to broadcast this event in emails, forwarded to everyone and on this and other forums. Or alternative; by using hidden web cams. You are welcome to a society like this since you think I speak nonsense. I have my moral standards though & political views. For me; any human beings has their rights to privacy, and that includes email communications. You brand this as nonsense. Well...... |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 16:20
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/" rel="nofollow - I don't see anything in the UN Declaration of Human rights protecting the details of your sex life, do you? To be honest, I think it trivializes actual human rights abuses that actual people are suffering from right now when you conflate them with something as trivial as sharing an embarrassing email. Morality has nothing to do with this. Nobody is arguing she did the right thing. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 16:25
| Funnily enough privacy and reputation actually are mentioned in the declaration of human rights (and in the context of correspondence). I didn't expect this. |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 16:27
|
Hate to break this to you, but most women do discuss every detail of their sex lives with their friends.
Oh wait, so do we men.
(To be honest, I actually haven't shared much detail about my married sex life with anyone but I'm a nerd and all my friend like to talk about music and science and are just as insecure and cagey about those details as I am. I'm certain my wife has discussed some details with her friends because they've told me. It wasn't as horrible as I feared.)
------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 16:31
------------- What? |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 16:33
Yeah, I didn't expect it either when I went to look it up, but I kept it because I am pretty sure it means a right to privacy from the government, which is very different from someone you know being a jerk. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 16:41
?????????????????? Your first claims was that my views on human rights is nonsense and then comes around again and says they are not nonsense.
I don't know which ones of Henry Plainview I am debating with now. Take a time out and find out who you are.
........... which is fair enough and I have heard comments about myself too. But not on the net, not on BBC News and not on all other broadcasters too. I accept the gossiping, but object to the broadcast. That is my whole point. Anyway; I have declared my position and the gap to the others here is too big to bridge so I will leave it like that. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 17:04
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/27/national/main20074643.shtml" rel="nofollow - TSA defends removing adult's diaper
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: July 01 2011 at 17:37
What are you talking about? You can be a bad person without violating human rights and that is what I am saying she did. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: July 02 2011 at 09:29
Yes and I agree with this as I've said many times before. I oppose surveillance mechanisms for other reasons. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: July 02 2011 at 09:30
Privacy and intimacy are too entirely different things. My social life can be shared with anybody. That's why it's a social life and not a private life. If I don't want something known, I won't tell it to people. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: July 02 2011 at 09:31
Please explain to me what those two things have to do with the discussion. Please ! ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |