|
|
Don't know how many folks are into politics out there- me I'm a political junkie and election years always get my synapses firing  Since there's so much speculation going on in the msm I thought I'd ask it here- Who do you think Obama and McCain will pick as their runningmates? I could be wrong but my money's on Sen. Evan Bayh from Indiana for Obama. IMO he's the Gore to Obama's Clinton. McCain's a little harder to narrow down, my gut says Romney but I wouldn't count out Tom Ridge, Charlie Crist and possibly even Lindsey Graham either. So, what do you think? -- "Uppity Women Unite" The face behind these opinionated posts -- Edited by JackNAllysMom at 08/12/2008 3:03 PM PDT
|
Posts:
9,425
Registered:
11/17/03
|
|
(970 of 970)
Nov 20, 2008 8:23 AM
|
> Exactly what I was talking about. the net is a great
> thing yes. information is a good thing but
> unfortunately with all this free information we lose
> a lot of privacy. I doubt there is an answer for how
> to deal with this issue. It's like Pandora's Box.
> Once it's open it's open. No going back.
>
> Actually the book you mentioned is on my list. I take
> it you would recomend it then?
>
CQ,
Absolutely. I was reading it on the bus one day, and the guy sitting across from me said something about how scary it was. I thought he meant as a thriller (I'd just started it), but he didn't.
I'll read anything Jeffrey Deaver writes. He's got another coming soon...
--
Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. - Goethe
|
|
|
Posts:
823
Registered:
6/9/06
|
|
(969 of 970)
Nov 19, 2008 12:04 PM
|
> >
> > > Actually you can do more by speaking out
> and> > defending decency every chance you get.
> You can> also> > help lobby for laws that
> punish those who do> harm to> > others. . .
> . I>
>
> I agree with this regarding decency and the defense
> of it, however, when we are dealing people, we can
> never count on what THEY think is decent behaviour.
> Our world is too wide in the sense that 50, 40, 30,
> , even 20 years ago there were still people who never
> had ever left the town were they were born not even a
> single day, and died there. The same is not true
> today. Now the world is, at the same time as it
> being a big world, it is small in the sense that the
> internet, TV, movies, travel, has made it possible to
> take a 4 day week end, have breakfast in england,
> lunch in France and dinner in Spain and be back to
> work in NYC on Tuesday. . .
>
> When we are dealing with the internet, we cannot
> count on the decency of another person who'se culture
> might say "what I did was perfectly fine" How could
> anyone "police" something like that?
>
> --
> Bitches are not born. . . they are made.
Yup! That's the "beauty" of our brave, new world. It's a good thing, it's a bad thing. The cat is out of the bag and will never go back so I guess we just have to deal.
CQ
--
http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/
"I'm on to you Chico!"
- Lois Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
990
Registered:
8/10/07
|
|
(968 of 970)
Nov 19, 2008 11:52 AM
|
>
> > Actually you can do more by speaking out and> > defending decency every chance you get. You can> also> > help lobby for laws that punish those who do> harm to> > others. . . . I>
I agree with this regarding decency and the defense of it, however, when we are dealing people, we can never count on what THEY think is decent behaviour. Our world is too wide in the sense that 50, 40, 30, even 20 years ago there were still people who never had ever left the town were they were born not even a single day, and died there. The same is not true today. Now the world is, at the same time as it being a big world, it is small in the sense that the internet, TV, movies, travel, has made it possible to take a 4 day week end, have breakfast in england, lunch in France and dinner in Spain and be back to work in NYC on Tuesday. . .
When we are dealing with the internet, we cannot count on the decency of another person who'se culture might say "what I did was perfectly fine" How could anyone "police" something like that?
--
Bitches are not born. . . they are made.
|
|
|
Posts:
823
Registered:
6/9/06
|
|
(967 of 970)
Nov 19, 2008 11:48 AM
|
> A few years ago, I had a lesson in the kind of
> information that is available in the Internet.
>
> I was curious to see if someone who was a regular
> poster was telling the truth about his military
> service (he was).
>
> I started with his first name and home town, and
> wound up with his wife's name (turned out she was
> another poster on the same board, someone others
> didn't like and had no idea of the relationship), and
> some extremely personal information about their
> lives. And all I did was a couple of quick searches
> in Google - I didn't search any special databases or
> anything.
>
> Jeffrey Deaver's latest book, "The Broken Window," is
> all about data mining, and it's truly scary.
>
> There's another aspect to the international nature of
> the Internet. While it's true that servers located
> in other countries don't have to obey American laws,
> some countries have much stricter privacy laws than
> the U.S.
>
> I worked for a student exchange program. On our
> website, we posted pictures of the kids from other
> countries during their stay in the U.S. A European
> kid's parents caused a huge fuss because we included
> a photo of him, with his name. They were aghast that
> we had "broken the law," although it isn't the law
> here. We had to remove the photo and all names.
> --
> Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.
> Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. - Goethe
>
> --
> Edited by Marionj2 at 11/19/2008 6:21 AM PST
Exactly what I was talking about. the net is a great thing yes. information is a good thing but unfortunately with all this free information we lose a lot of privacy. I doubt there is an answer for how to deal with this issue. It's like Pandora's Box. Once it's open it's open. No going back.
Actually the book you mentioned is on my list. I take it you would recomend it then?
CQ
--
http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/
"I'm on to you Chico!"
- Lois Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
823
Registered:
6/9/06
|
|
(966 of 970)
Nov 19, 2008 11:41 AM
|
>
> I totally agree with this, but at the same time,
> internet laws are next to impossible to uphold. When
> I was doing my research on internet child pornography
> offenders, I was amazed at the loopholes used to go
> around the law in order to get away with what they're
> doing. Part of the problem is the fact that the
> internet doesn't belong to one specific country, it
> truly is an international thing, which means that
> someone can do something to your computer in the US,
> but live in China. Also, don't you worry that if
> internet police and laws come into place, the
> government will censor what you can and cannot say?
>
>
> I stand up for decency, but in more un-governmental
> ways, although I have been sending countless letters
> to the government about a proposal set forward that
> would help to end world hunger, which the Canadian
> (and US) government agreed to do, but hasn't done too
> much about it since. And really, I'm too busy with
> work, school, and the more local volunteering that I
> do, that I'd rather leave the internet issues to
> those that understand the internet and law. Although
> I have considered studying internet child pornography
> offenders further, but that will be later in my
> life.
I hear you AS especially about the fact that no matter what we all have access to only a lmited amount of time and an unlimmited amount of things to do. At least you do what you can. More than most.
You could be right that we just notice it more now too. I just get ticked off when my party claims to be the party of dissent yet they did everything they could to stifle it. I guess I just had too high of an opinin. Rose colored glasses?
Bottom line is people are people and there are good and bad in all of us and it was hard to see but the Dems are not immune to that. I really did have rose colored glasses before I guess.
>
> I think part of it depends on where you're posting.
> For example, this site is fairly lenient in its
> s rules compared to other sites.
>
> Also, I don't think that we're becoming less free to
> say what we want because of the internet. I think
> that it's perhaps always been this way (if not more
> so earlier in history), you're just now noticing it
> because it has happened to you, and now there is a
> place for people to talk about what's happening where
> the story can be heard around the world. I guess
> what I'm thinking about is people being fired for
> thinking that females should be allowed to attend
> universities, or having crosses burned on their lawns
> for saying that public schools shouldn't be
> segregated, or losing your job because someone
> claimed you said something against capitalism so you
> must be a commie. Even more extreme are the cases
> where people were killed for having a different view
> on religion than what the majority felt at the time
> (although I guess this mixes in with freedom of
> religion). Posting people's personal information and
> hacking into their email accounts has become the new
> way of burning a cross on someone's lawn.
>
> And I'm not justifying any of this. I think it's all
> disgusting. I'm just wondering if this is really
> anything new, or again, people bullying others into
> submission using a different form of media that we're
> all just noticing now because information is much
> easier to get to us now (thanks to the internet).
>
> But I think that as long as NAMBLA is allowed to have
> their own website and post extreme grossness all over
> the web, the majority of us don't have anything to
> worry about.
You are right about it being just the newest way to harass and bully people. It is sad that as our society ages it doesn't seem to progress much in terms of people being decent to each other.
>
> I'm all about job creation, and I wouldn't mind that
> job when I got out of university!
>
> But again, there is a huge problem regarding the
> international-ness of the internet. It's something
> the government would have to try and deal with. If
> your server is overseas, they don't have to follow
> American law and don't have to give up information on
> those who use their servers who are in the States.
> That's one of the issues with internet child
> d pornography. A lot of the servers are overseas,
> and they are not giving up any information to
> American officials because they don't have to. This
> is something the government would have to overcome,
> and they would need the cooperation of all countries
> (and since they're not having much luck when it comes
> to child pornography, I'm not sure if they'll care
> too much if you say something bad about the US. If
> anything, they'll probably protect you even more).
Not sure I agree with you on this one though. I saw a lot f people get their blogs hacked and shut down by coordinated "spam bombing" and other stuff. People were kicked off of sites they contributed to for years because they didn't support Obama. It should not be that way regardless of who you support.
I fear our civil liberties are and have been dwindleing for a long time. FISA for instance gives the government the right to tap our phones without a warrant. something that would never have been considered before Bush and 9/11.
Of course we want to be safe but most of us still expect that our privacy should be respected unless and until we have done something illegal and there has been a due process such as a warrant that allows it to be invaded. Not anymore. I don't blindly trust that they will only use this for "good". They (the government) have proven many times over that they can't be trusted to do so IMO.
>
>
> Again, it becomes an international issue. If the US
> government makes it too difficult for a site to
> function in the United States, they'll move it to a
> country that doesn't have those laws. Kind of like
> how big corporations are moving to countries with
> cheap labour. Then the US government will have the
> choice of somehow finding a way to make it so that
> American's can't go onto those sites(which I'm sure
> will piss off a lot of people), or the same problem
> will happen.
>
> I continue to use Google because it's an amazing
> search engine, but I rarely give a website my email
> address unless I absolutely have to, and then I
> normally use one that I have for that purpose
> (collecting junk that will sit in my inbox forever).
> I do the same thing with my mailing address and
> d phone number, because those things get sold as
> well, and I hate the phone calls and mail more than
> junk email.
>
> I think we have the same opinions about this, just
> view the situation differently, perhaps. The
> internet is still relatively new, and it is complex
> and brings up issues that aren't easily solved in
> just one country, but I think that as time goes by we
> will see changes. Whether or not we like those
> changes is a different issue! But there is an easy
> way of solving that, and that is to disconnect.
>
> --
> Don't Panic.
Well my hope is that people would follow the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. But unfortunately not everyone has good intentions and there is no way to legislate that.
I use a seperate email now for blogging ect but i used to sign in with my personal email which is my name @.com even though this never shows on the sites when you comment some people can hack in and gain access to it. Lesson learned.
I guess the real issue is people and decency but like I said you can't really legislate that especially with many. many countriesand governments to consider.
It's enough to make you run screaming from the PC but then again I can't live without it. Use the net for work and personal stuff every day. Go figure.
CQ
--
http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/
"I'm on to you Chico!"
- Lois Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
9,425
Registered:
11/17/03
|
|
(965 of 970)
Nov 19, 2008 9:11 AM
|
A few years ago, I had a lesson in the kind of information that is available in the Internet.
I was curious to see if someone who was a regular poster was telling the truth about his military service (he was).
I started with his first name and home town, and wound up with his wife's name (turned out she was another poster on the same board, someone others didn't like and had no idea of the relationship), and some extremely personal information about their lives. And all I did was a couple of quick searches in Google - I didn't search any special databases or anything.
Jeffrey Deaver's latest book, "The Broken Window," is all about data mining, and it's truly scary.
There's another aspect to the international nature of the Internet. While it's true that servers located in other countries don't have to obey American laws, some countries have much stricter privacy laws than the U.S.
I worked for a student exchange program. On our website, we posted pictures of the kids from other countries during their stay in the U.S. A European kid's parents caused a huge fuss because we included a photo of him, with his name. They were aghast that we had "broken the law," although it isn't the law here. We had to remove the photo and all names.
--
Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. - Goethe
--
Edited by Marionj2 at 11/19/2008 6:21 AM PST
|
|
|
Posts:
339
Registered:
4/8/08
|
|
(964 of 970)
Nov 18, 2008 11:00 PM
|
I'm not commenting on the Obama stuff because I haven't read the document in question to really make any kind of opinion. I don't want you to think I'm just ignoring the issue, because I really just don't want to talk about something I have no real knowledge of.
> Actually you can do more by speaking out and
> defending decency every chance you get. You can also
> help lobby for laws that punish those who do harm to
> others. I realize you are Canadian so our laws are
> probably not your priority but I mean it in the
> general sense. People must stand up for decency and
> fight against wrong or they will soon find out nobody
> will do it for them.
I totally agree with this, but at the same time, internet laws are next to impossible to uphold. When I was doing my research on internet child pornography offenders, I was amazed at the loopholes used to go around the law in order to get away with what they're doing. Part of the problem is the fact that the internet doesn't belong to one specific country, it truly is an international thing, which means that someone can do something to your computer in the US, but live in China. Also, don't you worry that if internet police and laws come into place, the government will censor what you can and cannot say?
I stand up for decency, but in more un-governmental ways, although I have been sending countless letters to the government about a proposal set forward that would help to end world hunger, which the Canadian (and US) government agreed to do, but hasn't done too much about it since. And really, I'm too busy with work, school, and the more local volunteering that I do, that I'd rather leave the internet issues to those that understand the internet and law. Although I have considered studying internet child pornography offenders further, but that will be later in my life.
> All true things that happen every day but we are on a
> slippery slope between having information and having
> an unfair advantage. Politically speaking we are
> supposed to be protected under the law and be able to
> discuss freely but lately I am seeing that speech is
> becoming less free not more.
I think part of it depends on where you're posting. For example, this site is fairly lenient in its rules compared to other sites.
Also, I don't think that we're becoming less free to say what we want because of the internet. I think that it's perhaps always been this way (if not more so earlier in history), you're just now noticing it because it has happened to you, and now there is a place for people to talk about what's happening where the story can be heard around the world. I guess what I'm thinking about is people being fired for thinking that females should be allowed to attend universities, or having crosses burned on their lawns for saying that public schools shouldn't be segregated, or losing your job because someone claimed you said something against capitalism so you must be a commie. Even more extreme are the cases where people were killed for having a different view on religion than what the majority felt at the time (although I guess this mixes in with freedom of religion). Posting people's personal information and hacking into their email accounts has become the new way of burning a cross on someone's lawn.
And I'm not justifying any of this. I think it's all disgusting. I'm just wondering if this is really anything new, or again, people bullying others into submission using a different form of media that we're all just noticing now because information is much easier to get to us now (thanks to the internet).
But I think that as long as NAMBLA is allowed to have their own website and post extreme grossness all over the web, the majority of us don't have anything to worry about.
> You might have been joking about it creating jobs but
> I'd bet that you're right and they probably already
> know and take advantage of that. Now I do sound like
> a tin hat wearer lol!
I'm all about job creation, and I wouldn't mind that job when I got out of university!
But again, there is a huge problem regarding the international-ness of the internet. It's something the government would have to try and deal with. If your server is overseas, they don't have to follow American law and don't have to give up information on those who use their servers who are in the States. That's one of the issues with internet child pornography. A lot of the servers are overseas, and they are not giving up any information to American officials because they don't have to. This is something the government would have to overcome, and they would need the cooperation of all countries (and since they're not having much luck when it comes to child pornography, I'm not sure if they'll care too much if you say something bad about the US. If anything, they'll probably protect you even more).
> That is sort of my point. They gather, sort and sell
> that info for gain. They really should not be allowed
> to without some sort of signed doc saying you
> understand what they do with it and agree but they
> have no such reqirements yet.
>
> Advertisers buy most of it but the potential is there
> for all kinds of mayhem and there are NO protections
> put in place to prevent it.
Again, it becomes an international issue. If the US government makes it too difficult for a site to function in the United States, they'll move it to a country that doesn't have those laws. Kind of like how big corporations are moving to countries with cheap labour. Then the US government will have the choice of somehow finding a way to make it so that American's can't go onto those sites(which I'm sure will piss off a lot of people), or the same problem will happen.
I continue to use Google because it's an amazing search engine, but I rarely give a website my email address unless I absolutely have to, and then I normally use one that I have for that purpose (collecting junk that will sit in my inbox forever). I do the same thing with my mailing address and phone number, because those things get sold as well, and I hate the phone calls and mail more than junk email.
I think we have the same opinions about this, just view the situation differently, perhaps. The internet is still relatively new, and it is complex and brings up issues that aren't easily solved in just one country, but I think that as time goes by we will see changes. Whether or not we like those changes is a different issue! But there is an easy way of solving that, and that is to disconnect.
--
Don't Panic.
|
|
|
Posts:
823
Registered:
6/9/06
|
|
(963 of 970)
Nov 17, 2008 7:10 PM
|
AS I never meant to imply you were justifying anything. I was talking about the majority of Democrats at least the ones who are now in power. Srry if you took it that way.
>
> > The thing is Obama has gone above and beyond the
> pale
> > on this questionaire. He is asking for every
> detail
> > about everything and everyone yet he could not
> even
> > pass his own process as several of his
> associations
> > have shown to be embarassing to the president
> elect.
>
> I haven't seen this questionnaire, but based on what
> you said he's asking for, it's no different than what
> other political parties in other parts of the world
> ask for. Like I said, during the past elections in
> Canada it was a common practice. People were more
> shocked that the parties didn't notice the lies than
> they were that it was being done. And as Marion and
> Withay have said, it makes sense that he would do
> this.
Of course he should vet pssible team members. i agree with that but i have seen this dcument and read the opinions of some people who have had experience in reading, filling out and/or reviewing completed docs of this type. I understand the Clinton administration had quite an extensive questionaire for instance but this one goes way past vetting and almost to the pint of Big Brother.
They want to know everything about spouses, adult children, extended family members and we're taling about all financial reports that you ever filed even for a home loan, as well as your family ect, all persons you lived with for the past 10 years, any diaries including paper ones I think. He asks for all kinds of recrds and some that don't really seem relevant but the thing that galls a lot of people about it is the fact that Obama won't allow questions about his own past or associations or any of his college records, theisis' any writtings from his school days even when he was president of the harvard Law Review.
You would think that stuff would be made public as it has been about most candidates. Zip, zilch, nada and then you look at how any mention of his associations was off limits, his wife's own words on video were off limits, he has employed and is paying a hansome sum to 3 law firms he has hired to fight the lawsuits over eligibility. Lot of money to pay when he could just show the documents. He publishes a fake, forged certificate of live birth on his fight the smears site instead and has high dollar lawers fighting for him.
Get this they are not arguing that he is "natural born" and therefore elgible, they are arguing that voters have no standing, no process and no legal means to make him prove it. I don't know if he is eligible or not. Probably is but why spend all that time and energy and money to argue that he should not have to prove he meets the lawful, constitutional requirements for the job when he could just be transparent like he claims and show the proof?
IMO the very fact that he won't just pony up shows he has little or no respect for the constitution and thereore I doubt he's the person to put in charge of protecting it. It will forever leave doubts and cause loss of respect and faith in our constitution and our laws. Yet this person who hides from all real questions wants to know everything about everybody it seems.
>
> > Sorry but there is supposed to be some decency
> among
> > people. people know they are invading someone's
> > privacy or stalking or harassing. Yes it
> happens
> > every day for all kinds of reasons but it is
> still
> > wrong and I for one will never go along with the
> "oh,
> > well that's life" thought process.
>
> I agree, there should be more decency in people. It
> saddens me that the world has turned out the way that
> it has, but until technology has improved itself, or
> there is some international law that applies to the
> internet and international police officers to enforce
> this law (which is pretty Big Brother), all I can
> really do is say, "That's not nice!" and try to
> protect myself the best I can.
Actually you can do more by speaking out and defending decency every chance you get. You can also help lobby for laws that punish those who do harm to others. I realize you are Canadian so our laws are probably not your priority but I mean it in the general sense. People must stand up for decency and fight against wrong or they will soon find out nobody will do it for them.
> Most employers don't ask if they can search your
> Facebook or Google your name, they just do. It's
> unfortunate that not everyone is smart enough to have
> some privacy settings on their Facebook account.
>
> Two years ago, the CA's (kind of like deans) at my
> residence were fired because their employer checked
> one of the Facebook pages of one of the CA's and
> found pictures of all of them drinking during a
> shift. He didn't ask if he could do this, he just
> did it, and they were caught.
>
> And I won't lie, whenever someone I know has a new
> boyfriend or girlfriend, I Google their name and
> check out their Facebook.
All true things that happen every day but we are on a slippery slope between having information and having an unfair advantage. Politically speaking we are supposed to be protected under the law and be able to discuss freely but lately I am seeing that speech is becoming less free not more.
What hurts me is I really though my party was above that stuff and I'm finding that they are not and have not been for quite a lot longer than I care to admit.
>
> > I fear the days of no internet police are
> numbered
> > though. It won't be long till our every move
> and
> > though is under strtict servailence. We have
> been
> > moving toward this for a long time but I think
> many
> > of our freedoms will be a thing of the past
> soon.
>
> Until they've dealt with all the internet child
> pornography offenders (and they're not even close),
> I'd like to think they won't worry about what I have
> to say. There are bigger fishes to fry than just
> opinionated people on the internet. And if you are
> really worried, you can buy stuff that will scramble
> your IP address and other fancy stuff that I don't
> understand.
>
> I guess I'm just more concerned with the random
> hacker than I am with the government. But, if the
> government ever did get into the serious hacking
> business of average citizens, it would create a ton
> of jobs! (I'm joking, kind of)
Totally with you on the kiddie porn people. Lock 'em up and throw away the key. My mom says give 'em 30 minutes to get off the world. Where do they go? She never has an answer for that.
You might have been joking about it creating jobs but I'd bet that you're right and they probably already know and take advantage of that. Now I do sound like a tin hat wearer lol!
>
> > As long as it's still a free country I will
> continue
> > to say what I want. My worry is how much longer
> it
> > will be that way. What do you think they do with
> all
> > that info the search engines gather every day?
> >
> > I'm sure there's a lot of advertising dollars
> spent
> > on it and who knows what other applications they
> have
> > or will find to use it for. The economy being as
> it
> > is they will want to use any other avenues they
> can
> > find to create revenue. Just sayin.
>
> They sell a lot of that information to marketing
> firms, people can buy their way to the top of most
> searches, and certain phrases are tracked and
> monitored to see if the searcher is trying to find
> child porn (and I'm guessing various other illegal
> things). Also, most websites that ask for your email
> address will later sell that address to various
> companies, and that's how you get those random emails
> trying to sell you something.
That is sort of my point. They gather, sort and sell that info for gain. They really should not be allowed to without some sort of signed doc saying you understand what they do with it and agree but they have no such reqirements yet.
Advertisers buy most of it but the potential is there for all kinds of mayhem and there are NO protections put in place to prevent it.
Bottom line I don't have much faith in government protecting our rights on this or anything else these days. FISA makes it legal for them to listen to us at any time for any reason without a warrant so why would they try to protect people's rights on the net?
CQ
--
http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/
"I'm on to you Chico!"
- Lois Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
339
Registered:
4/8/08
|
|
(962 of 970)
Nov 17, 2008 5:49 PM
|
> AS you're right the net is a public place but when
> people postunder screennames tehy usually expect t
> reman anonymous. What bothers me is the people saying
> well that's the way it is so there's nothing you can
> do about it anything goes and everything is justified
> because it's possible so it can't be stopped.
>
> That's the same "justification" that was gven when
> Sarah Palin's email was hacked. "Well it was there
> and I guessed the password so.." it is still illegal
> and more than that it is just wrong.
They also expect that what they post on one site will stay on that site, and not end up somewhere else without their permission. But that unfortunately doesn't always happen.
I'm not justifying anything. I know people who have had their email accounts hacked, and emails sent from those accounts to their friends and family. It's not cool. But at the same time, I don't have the technical knowledge to go out and make a safer program and the police have more important things to deal with than a hacker who sends porn to someone's father. All I can do is say to people, "That's not nice!", warn people to not talk openly on boards about personal information, follow my own advice, or stay off of the internet entirely.
> The thing is Obama has gone above and beyond the pale
> on this questionaire. He is asking for every detail
> about everything and everyone yet he could not even
> pass his own process as several of his associations
> have shown to be embarassing to the president elect.
I haven't seen this questionnaire, but based on what you said he's asking for, it's no different than what other political parties in other parts of the world ask for. Like I said, during the past elections in Canada it was a common practice. People were more shocked that the parties didn't notice the lies than they were that it was being done. And as Marion and Withay have said, it makes sense that he would do this.
> Sorry but there is supposed to be some decency among
> people. people know they are invading someone's
> privacy or stalking or harassing. Yes it happens
> every day for all kinds of reasons but it is still
> wrong and I for one will never go along with the "oh,
> well that's life" thought process.
I agree, there should be more decency in people. It saddens me that the world has turned out the way that it has, but until technology has improved itself, or there is some international law that applies to the internet and international police officers to enforce this law (which is pretty Big Brother), all I can really do is say, "That's not nice!" and try to protect myself the best I can.
> I'm not arguing with you here because you're right.
> Once you post something on the net it's out there for
> better or worse. My beef is people who want to know
> everything about everybody but don't want people to
> ask them any questions. Also I guess just the fact
> that I don't quite believe that they always"ask"
> politely. I'm quite sure they investigate
> independently as well so they can "catch" people
> ommitting things.
Most employers don't ask if they can search your Facebook or Google your name, they just do. It's unfortunate that not everyone is smart enough to have some privacy settings on their Facebook account.
Two years ago, the CA's (kind of like deans) at my residence were fired because their employer checked one of the Facebook pages of one of the CA's and found pictures of all of them drinking during a shift. He didn't ask if he could do this, he just did it, and they were caught.
And I won't lie, whenever someone I know has a new boyfriend or girlfriend, I Google their name and check out their Facebook.
> I fear the days of no internet police are numbered
> though. It won't be long till our every move and
> though is under strtict servailence. We have been
> moving toward this for a long time but I think many
> of our freedoms will be a thing of the past soon.
Until they've dealt with all the internet child pornography offenders (and they're not even close), I'd like to think they won't worry about what I have to say. There are bigger fishes to fry than just opinionated people on the internet. And if you are really worried, you can buy stuff that will scramble your IP address and other fancy stuff that I don't understand.
I guess I'm just more concerned with the random hacker than I am with the government. But, if the government ever did get into the serious hacking business of average citizens, it would create a ton of jobs! (I'm joking, kind of)
> As long as it's still a free country I will continue
> to say what I want. My worry is how much longer it
> will be that way. What do you think they do with all
> that info the search engines gather every day?
>
> I'm sure there's a lot of advertising dollars spent
> on it and who knows what other applications they have
> or will find to use it for. The economy being as it
> is they will want to use any other avenues they can
> find to create revenue. Just sayin.
They sell a lot of that information to marketing firms, people can buy their way to the top of most searches, and certain phrases are tracked and monitored to see if the searcher is trying to find child porn (and I'm guessing various other illegal things). Also, most websites that ask for your email address will later sell that address to various companies, and that's how you get those random emails trying to sell you something.
--
Don't Panic.
|
|
|
Posts:
823
Registered:
6/9/06
|
|
(961 of 970)
Nov 17, 2008 3:41 PM
|
AS you're right the net is a public place but when people postunder screennames tehy usually expect t reman anonymous. What bothers me is the people saying well that's the way it is so there's nothing you can do about it anything goes and everything is justified because it's possible so it can't be stopped.
That's the same "justification" that was gven when Sarah Palin's email was hacked. "Well it was there and I guessed the password so.." it is still illegal and more than that it is just wrong.
The thing is Obama has gone above and beyond the pale on this questionaire. He is asking for every detail about everything and everyone yet he could not even pass his own process as several of his associations have shown to be embarassing to the president elect.
Sorry but there is supposed to be some decency among people. people know they are invading someone's privacy or stalking or harassing. Yes it happens every day for all kinds of reasons but it is still wrong and I for one will never go along with the "oh, well that's life" thought process.
I'm not arguing with you here because you're right. Once you post something on the net it's out there for better or worse. My beef is people who want to know everything about everybody but don't want people to ask them any questions. Also I guess just the fact that I don't quite believe that they always"ask" politely. I'm quite sure they investigate independently as well so they can "catch" people ommitting things.
I fear the days of no internet police are numbered though. It won't be long till our every move and though is under strtict servailence. We have been moving toward this for a long time but I think many of our freedoms will be a thing of the past soon.
As long as it's still a free country I will continue to say what I want. My worry is how much longer it will be that way. What do you think they do with all that info the search engines gather every day?
I'm sure there's a lot of advertising dollars spent on it and who knows what other applications they have or will find to use it for. The economy being as it is they will want to use any other avenues they can find to create revenue. Just sayin.
CQ
--
http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/
"I'm on to you Chico!"
- Lois Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
339
Registered:
4/8/08
|
|
(960 of 970)
Nov 17, 2008 3:20 PM
|
> AS;
>
> That is exactly why this stuff bothers me so much!
> it's because privacy is becoming a thing of the past.
>
>
> OK I admit I also have a problem with Obma refusing
> to answer even the most basic of questions yet
> wanting to vet every tiny piece of info on the rest
> of us but that's another discussion for another
> time.
>
> (GRRR! My o's and i's are sticking! Have to go back
> in every sentence and add them back in! Maybe should
> clean my keyboard. Rolling eyes)
>
> it is really not cool with me that Google, for
> instance, collects tons of info on every person who
> uses their search engine. What you search for, what
> other things are related to your search. They even
> report searches on flu remedies to the CDC for
> "research purpouses" so the CDC will know before hand
> when people are feeling sick. Heard it on my local
> news this very morning.
>
> Sounds innocent enough at least on the flu thing but
> really what do they do with all the info they
> collect? More impotantly do we EVER have a private
> moment anymore? Shouldn't we be in control of info
> about ourselves and at the very least have knowledge
> of where it goes and why?
The thing is, the internet isn't a private domain. It's public. It has its flaws, one of those being that it's easy to track down information about other people, especially those who also use the internet. As long as you, or anyone else, is posting on the internet, anyone will be able to view it, find it, and exploit it for their own use. At least Obama and other employers are asking you about it, they could just as easily do it without you even being aware about it. And it's not just Obama who can do it, it's the creep who lives next door to me, the nerd in high school, and anyone else who has time to spare to learn how to do it.
If you want privacy, don't use the internet!
At my school, professors aren't allowed to post grades anywhere on the internet, including personal emails to students because of privacy issues.
The internet is just not a private place, and I don't like that, but there's nothing that can be done about it. Anyone who has a grudge against you, for any reason, can find a shit load of information on you. It's not just Joe the Plumber that this happens to, but also girls who accidentally looked at another girls boyfriend the wrong way, or an ex spouse who is looking for anything to use against their ex, or a student who wants to get back at their professor because they received a bad grade on a paper, or even someone who really dislikes the opinion of a fellow poster on a popular forum.
There are no internet police, or even international internet laws.
> Not trying to sell tinfoil or anything here but
> privacy is something I value highly. Ever read any
> Orwell AS?
I've read plenty of Orwell, but that doesn't change the fact that the way the internet is set up now, people can hack into it and find any information that they want. The best way to avoid this is to turn offline.
> Personally I don't want or need "Big Brother" or
> anyone else watching me. I tend to feel my personal
> thoughts, feelngs and even writtings are mine and
> should stay that way unless I choose otherwise. it's
> an American thing we call freedom.
Your writings are NEVER your writings if they are posted on the internet and not properly published. That's the first thing I was taught in high school English class, and unfortunately I had a run in with someone stealing something that I had written and handing it in as an assignment without my permission.
The internet is a creepy, public place and I think people don't really realize that. Every time I log on, I know that I'm taking a risk and people can use what I say against me, for me, or even for their own research. Hell, I even used (second hand) research that someone conducted by going onto child pornography forums when I wrote a paper on internet child pornography offenders (talk about real internet creeps!). If someone hadn't gone onto those forums and quoted the things that people had said on there, half of my paper would not have been completed, and we wouldn't have most of the information we do have on those guys if it weren't for the internet.
Again, I don't necessarily like that the internet is this open, but I'm still on here.
--
Don't Panic.
|
|
|
Posts:
823
Registered:
6/9/06
|
|
(959 of 970)
Nov 17, 2008 11:35 AM
|
> I think asking those types of questions, especially
> wanting to see a potential
> employee/student/roommate/inlaw, etc. facebook, is
> becoming more and more common. It's not just Obama
> who wants to know all that stuff!
AS;
That is exactly why this stuff bothers me so much! it's because privacy is becoming a thing of the past.
OK I admit I also have a problem with Obma refusing to answer even the most basic of questions yet wanting to vet every tiny piece of info on the rest of us but that's another discussion for another time.
(GRRR! My o's and i's are sticking! Have to go back in every sentence and add them back in! Maybe should clean my keyboard. Rolling eyes)
it is really not cool with me that Google, for instance, collects tons of info on every person who uses their search engine. What you search for, what other things are related to your search. They even report searches on flu remedies to the CDC for "research purpouses" so the CDC will know before hand when people are feeling sick. Heard it on my local news this very morning.
Sounds innocent enough at least on the flu thing but really what do they do with all the info they collect? More impotantly do we EVER have a private moment anymore? Shouldn't we be in control of info about ourselves and at the very least have knowledge of where it goes and why?
Not trying to sell tinfoil or anything here but privacy is something I value highly. Ever read any Orwell AS?
Personally I don't want or need "Big Brother" or anyone else watching me. I tend to feel my personal thoughts, feelngs and even writtings are mine and should stay that way unless I choose otherwise. it's an American thing we call freedom.
Add that to the "good for the goose" argument I have with Obama and I get a bit cranky. Just saying.
withay and marion made some good points about politics and how anyone who dares enter kinda opens themselves up to that. What bothered me most though was people who pulled this crap on those who weren't even running for office.
Think about Joe the Plumber, Obama stopped on the street by his home, the guy asked a question, the answer was controversial in the eyes of many people who object to wealth redistribution. Next thing you know he's a household name but even worse the Obama supporters, some who are actually elected officials being investigated now for illegaly obtaining info on the guy and it was spread thoughout the net.
We now know Joe is his middle name, his status with the licencing board, his child support leans, driving record, past addresses, present address and so much more. Why? Because he asked a candidate a question and caused a stir so the "team" decided to "discredit" him and "save" their candidate from his own words.
Joe did not run for office, did not "lie in wait" to ask his question, set a trap to cause a contrversy or anything other than ask a question of a potential candidate. Something any citizen should be allowed to do without fear of persecution.
I know a lot of people who have dealt with this kind of stuff over the last 2 years. It's real and it's scary. I had my own similar but not as serious run in with these types. They published my real name, IP address, had a general area for my location, my proffession, my former office listed with phone #, address and instructions to harass me or anyone they could find connected to me. They wrote threatening messages to me and about me and tried to "get me fired". I work for myself so that was a bit tough lol.
Why? because I dared to visit and comment at a blog of someone who spoke out against Obama and got alot of attention. And I dared to write on my blog that the very fact that there were no less than 3 websites completely devoted to taking this particular anti-Obama blogger down actually made me wonder if there could be truth to his claims. Otherwise why such a coordinated effort? That and I blogged about things I dislike about Obama. Those were my "crimes".
it's supposed to be a free country where we are free to believe and speak as we choose. Political free speech is the most protected of all yet it would be hard to prove that using this election cycle.
CQ
--
http://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/
"I'm on to you Chico!"
- Lois Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
339
Registered:
4/8/08
|
|
(958 of 970)
Nov 17, 2008 9:45 AM
|
I think asking those types of questions, especially wanting to see a potential employee/student/roommate/inlaw, etc. facebook, is becoming more and more common. It's not just Obama who wants to know all that stuff! For example, just last week I was warned in one class that if anyone plans on attending graduate school, they better be very careful about what they post online, because more school's are using the internet to check out potential graduate students, and Facebook is the prime source of information. I even know of friends who's boyfriends' moms has added them on Facebook to check them out before meeting them in person. University residences have seen a rise in parents asking for a room change for their son or daughter because the parent checked out the roommate's Facebook page and didn't like what they saw.
And these are all for minor positions, not the President's staff!
Something kind of related that I read about today, is that the RCMP are using lie detector tests when checking out potential hires. Apparently not having a criminal record isn't good enough, they want to make sure you haven't committed a crime and just not gotten caught. They also ask questions about whether or not you've ever seriously contemplated suicide. I wouldn't be surprised if this process is done after they've Googled your name.
--
Don't Panic.
|
|
|
Posts:
9,425
Registered:
11/17/03
|
|
(957 of 970)
Nov 16, 2008 10:11 PM
|
> Alien Summer,
> This is one of those "Damned if you, damned
> ou, damned if you don't", things. Obama saw how the
> opposition took the tiniest thing, the vaguest
> aquaintance and twisted it all around. So he is
> obviously trying to avoid that in his staff. If he
> didn't do this, there would be people saying he
> did not check his staff out.
I agree. Also, I haven't seen anything that says he wouldn't hire someone who gave the "wrong" answers. Only that he wants to know about any possible surprises.
Also, if he does a thorough investigation of anyone he hires, which he should these days, and finds that they lied on this questionnaire, he knows that person is a potential problem.
--
Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. - Goethe
|
|
|
Posts:
2,217
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
(956 of 970)
Nov 16, 2008 3:01 PM
| | | |
