Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #1118 > unrolled thread

Re: The RISC OS Blog

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 09:54 +0200
    Re: The RISC OS Blog theriscosblog@gmx.com - 2011-07-21 04:45 -0700
      Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 14:22 +0200
        Re: The RISC OS Blog "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 13:32 +0100
          Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 14:42 +0200
            Re: The RISC OS Blog "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 16:43 +0100
              Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 19:33 +0200
                Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 19:36 +0200
                  Re: The RISC OS Blog Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-07-23 21:10 +0100
                    Re: The RISC OS Blog Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-24 01:21 +0200
                      Re: The RISC OS Blog Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-07-30 11:34 +0100
                        Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-30 12:46 +0200
                        Re: The RISC OS Blog Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-30 18:50 +0200
                          Re: The RISC OS Blog "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-07-31 09:17 +0100
                            Re: The RISC OS Blog Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-31 18:11 +0200
                              Re: The RISC OS Blog Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-08-07 09:48 +0100
                                Re: The RISC OS Blog "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-08-07 10:10 +0100
                                  Re: The RISC OS Blog Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2011-08-08 11:05 +0100
                                Re: The RISC OS Blog Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-08 21:13 +0200
                                  Re: The RISC OS Blog Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-08-15 06:02 +0100
                          Re: The RISC OS Blog workstuff@mail.com - 2011-08-14 12:50 +0200
                    Re: The RISC OS Blog "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-07-24 09:11 +0100
        Re: The RISC OS Blog charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 14:52 +0100
          Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 16:10 +0200
            Re: The RISC OS Blog charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 15:21 +0100
          Re: The RISC OS Blog druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-07-21 21:43 +0100
            Re: The RISC OS Blog Martin Bazley <martin.bazley@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-07-22 02:35 +0100
              Re: The RISC OS Blog druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-07-22 23:49 +0100
                Re: The RISC OS Blog SG nws <nwsgrp@ntlworld.com> - 2011-07-23 00:54 +0100
                  Re: The RISC OS Blog druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-07-23 15:42 +0100
                    Re: The RISC OS Blog Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2011-07-23 19:09 +0100
        Re: The RISC OS Blog Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 20:14 +0200
          Re: The RISC OS Blog druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-07-21 21:29 +0100
            Re: The RISC OS Blog Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-22 13:34 +0200
      Re: The RISC OS Blog Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 13:54 +0100
        Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 17:07 +0200
          Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 17:30 +0200
            Re: The RISC OS Blog Vince M Hudd <vinceh@softrock.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 20:49 +0100
              Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 22:12 +0200
                Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 22:15 +0200
                  Re: The RISC OS Blog "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 22:23 +0200
                    Re: The RISC OS Blog Martin Bazley <martin.bazley@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 21:34 +0100
                Re: The RISC OS Blog Vince M Hudd <vinceh@softrock.co.uk> - 2011-07-22 00:54 +0100
          Re: The RISC OS Blog theriscosblog@gmx.com - 2011-07-21 10:39 -0700
            Re: The RISC OS Blog Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 19:28 +0100
      Re: The RISC OS Blog Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 20:08 +0200
        Re: The RISC OS Blog "Alexander Ausserstorfer" <bavariasound@chiemgau-net.de> - 2011-07-23 13:36 +0200
      Re: The RISC OS Blog glavallin <glavallin@gjlavallin.plus.com> - 2011-07-22 11:33 +0100
      Re: The RISC OS Blog "Alexander Ausserstorfer" <bavariasound@chiemgau-net.de> - 2011-07-23 13:24 +0200
        Re: The RISC OS Blog Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2011-07-29 16:57 +0200
    Re: The RISC OS Blog Brian Carroll <bric-nospam@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-07-21 12:17 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#1118 — Re: The RISC OS Blog

In article <ap.26260b51f6.a701a0a.m.conroy@argonet.co.uk>,
   <theriscosblog@gmx.com> wrote:

> I'm pleased to announce the launch of The RISC OS Blog, located at
> riscos.blog.com. It's a blog that I have decided to establish so I can
> voice my views regarding RISC OS and post little snippets of news that
> may interest you all in RISC OS land.

I'm surprised that the originator of this blog lacks a personal identity,
though being more than willing to share their culinary arrangements.

Is this just an oversight, or is there some reason why he/she wishes to
remain entirely anonymous?

I find it rather strange; is it in any way unhealthy or suspicious?  Or am
I being over-sensitive?

John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1120

On Jul 21, 8:54 am, "John Williams (News)" <UCE...@tiscali.co.uk>
wrote:
> I'm surprised that the originator of this blog lacks a personal identity,
> though being more than willing to share their culinary arrangements.
>
> Is this just an oversight, or is there some reason why he/she wishes to
> remain entirely anonymous?

At first an oversight yes, but I would much rather remain un-named. I
have nothing to hide but I would much rather remain anonymus, this has
nothing to do with the blog itself but is more down to my personal
preference. Without going into too much detail, I don't like the idea
of an individual or employer searching online for anything you've done
and it bugs me that you can easily find an enormous amount of personal
information about someone through using a simply tool like Google.

> I find it rather strange; is it in any way unhealthy or suspicious?  Or am
> I being over-sensitive?

I can appreciate your concerns John, but I'm more inclined to say the
latter.

Best Wishes,
The RISC OS Blog.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1124

In article
<c23c6897-8066-4b58-a942-9bee763dda36@f35g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
   <theriscosblog@gmx.com> wrote:

> I don't like the idea of an individual or employer searching online for
> anything you've done and it bugs me that you can easily find an enormous
> amount of personal information about someone through using a simply tool
> like Google.

> > I find it rather strange; is it in any way unhealthy or suspicious?  Or
> > am I being over-sensitive?

> I can appreciate your concerns John, but I'm more inclined to say the
> latter.

That I can understand.  I was recently prompted to write to a poster to
point out that a post they'd made gave me enough information about another
poster to easily find their address and even a picture of their house!  I
find that horrifying!

But the subject there was a public functionary, and it was the mention of
that which gave me the entrée.  But still - better to be circumspect.

The problem is that this provokes people like me to try and find out
through curiosity.

I have already done lexical searches on the newsgroups' past postings for
the expressions "an' all" and the misspelling "recieved" - with no useful
result, but I'm afraid you have issued a challenge which others may take up
(you may as well correct 'contempt' to 'content' whilst removing other
idiosynchracities).

So - I think you've made an error of judgement there!  Every word you blog
will be studied for clues by someone.

I fear the total anonymity you want is impossible to sustain (NB spelling:
anonymous!)

BTW - if you register a domain you'll have to be ultra-careful to conceal
your identity!  Slippery slope!

A spell-checker may help a little.

But you have my best wishes, 
 
John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1126

In article <51f64393d6UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>,
   John Williams (News) <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> That I can understand.  I was recently prompted to write to a poster to
> point out that a post they'd made gave me enough information about
> another poster to easily find their address and even a picture of their
> house!  I find that horrifying!

Perhaps you need to have it painted, then?

-- 
*Sorry, I don't date outside my species.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1128

In article <51f644757adave@davenoise.co.uk>,
   Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:

> Perhaps you need to have it painted, then?

Not me, Dave, but another Dave!  And not really chuckleable!

John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1141

In article <51f64571f5UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>,
   John Williams (News) <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <51f644757adave@davenoise.co.uk>,
>    Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:

> > Perhaps you need to have it painted, then?

> Not me, Dave, but another Dave!  And not really chuckleable!

Right. Is there another reason why someone shouldn't see a picture of the
outside of your house?

-- 
*Why can't women put on mascara with their mouth closed?

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1143

In article <51f6560407dave@davenoise.co.uk>,
   Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:

> Right. Is there another reason why someone shouldn't see a picture of the
> outside of your house?

        http://petit.four.free.fr/visitors/main.php

John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1144

In article <51f6601251UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>, John Williams (News)
<UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> > Right. Is there another reason why someone shouldn't see a picture of
> > the outside of your house?

>         http://petit.four.free.fr/visitors/main.php

But you don't have the address!

John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1200

In article <51f6604c9dUCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>, John Williams (News)
<UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <51f6601251UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>, John Williams (News)
> <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> > > Right. Is there another reason why someone shouldn't see a picture
> > > of the outside of your house?

> >         http://petit.four.free.fr/visitors/main.php

> But you don't have the address!

> John

That sounds like a challenge. Anyone have time to scour Google Earth for
the house? Perhaps we could divide Brittany between a few of us...or pose
as a punter?  ;-)

And then, armed with his address we could....we could....send him mail!

As an ex-banker I am always a bit puzzled by identity paranoia. Wait!
Banks have changed. Run for the hills....of Brittany?

-- 
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@

... "I hear, yet say not much, yet hear the more" Henry IV, Act iv, Sc.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1201

On 23/07/2011 22:10, Tim Hill wrote:

> That sounds like a challenge. Anyone have time to scour Google Earth for
> the house?

Don't bother. We drove past it twice when we were looking for it. :-/


> Perhaps we could divide Brittany between a few of us...

Brittany, eh? As in BZH written on the roadsigns. ;-) Even if you cheat 
badly and notice he's actually given a rough idea of location on his 
site (!), I bet you'd still arrive at a hundred possible matches in an 
hour or two. Trust me, it's all gonna look the same from above.

It's like our place, a long farmhouse, with fields around. Really, that 
totally narrows it down... ;-)


> And then, armed with his address we could....we could....send him mail!

Depends on the mail, I guess. Could be bad. You might be thinking "sex 
toys" adverts, but I'm thinking "Reader's Digest".


> As an ex-banker I am always a bit puzzled by identity paranoia.

Can't say the motives of the blog poster, it seems a bit OTT.

However, I think John and I both understand that while there's a certain 
amount of willingness to share information with the world, we also have 
to keep our exact locations off the radar otherwise we lose control of 
communications. Would I like to be phoned by some dumbass who thought 
it'd be fun to call, for free, on VoIP forgetting the time zone 
differences? How about random strangers turning up? You might think I'm 
being paranoid and crazy, but then that is probably what a lot of people 
might have said about a guy dressing up as a policeman and saying "i'm 
here to help" before shooting the person seeking help... until Friday, 
that is. There's a lot of seriously screwed up people around, and I 
don't plan on meeting any of them, thank you.


So is it paranoid to want to hide one's location? Or is it common sense?


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1234

In article <4e2b576c$0$30795$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray
<heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> So is it paranoid to want to hide one's location? 

Yes. Six billion people actually don't care. The existence of a few
random nutters in society shouldn't make you hide or live in an enclave.
We even have some completely mad people near here who live behind locked
gates with their fellow paranoiacs. I would imagine the local tea-leafs
target such gated communities as the people there must have lots of
lovely things worth stealing.

If a nut-case with a weapon decides on a random attack on members of the
public in a public place your privacy is completely irrelevant. That you
could be targeted by a loony at home may depend on your radical political
views, illegal activity, feuds, your involvement in vivisection or
membership of the republican tea party. I would imagine none of these
apply.  ;-)    

> Or is it common sense?

To look at in another way: we get flyers through the door for home
businesses, whether gardening, window-cleaning, carpet-cleaning, building
etc., etc. If they have no address and only a mobile number they go
straight in the recycling bin.

If you run a business from home, you can hide behind a POBox No., and a
mobile number but it won't always help attract business as it makes you
look amateur, not big. You need a 'public' street address and
geographical phone number to convince potential customers you are 'real'.

If you don't run a business from home you can try and hide if you like
but it wouldn't have stopped yesterday's door-to-door chugger who was
trying to guilt SWMBO into sponsoring a child.

My address has been published online for 15 years and not yet have I had
one extra unwelcome caller at the door as a result, AFAIK.

-- 
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@

... "Everything that grows holds in perfection but a little moment" Sonnet 15

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1235

In article <51fadc4241tim@invalid.org.uk>,
   Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:

> My address has been published online for 15 years and not yet have I had
> one extra unwelcome caller at the door as a result, AFAIK.

But then you do have video surveillance!

John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1238

On 30/07/2011 12:34, Tim Hill wrote:

>> So is it paranoid to want to hide one's location?
> Yes. Six billion people actually don't care. The existence of a few
> random nutters in society shouldn't make you hide or live in an enclave.

I'm not hiding, I'm just not blathering my exact location to the world. 
Small difference.

And while six billion people might not care, it only takes *ONE*. Just 
ask Norway...


> We even have some completely mad people near here who live behind locked
> gates with their fellow paranoiacs.

Missing the point. I never advocated a gated community. The only gates 
around here are what remains of field boundaries.


> If a nut-case with a weapon decides on a random attack on members of the
> public in a public place your privacy is completely irrelevant.

Missing the point, again. ;-) True, privacy is no use if a psycho is 
running around with visions of Zatoichi in his head, but again I wasn't 
talking about that.


> That you could be targeted by a loony at home may depend on [..snip..]

Ever been walking somewhere fairly boring (to Aldershot train station, 
for instance) and some adolescent prick decides to "make something of 
it", perhaps a pre-electronic sense of "lulz", or whatever? There are 
many reasons a person might have an issue with another person, half of 
which probably don't make sense. Couple this with none of us knowing 
exactly how many people will be reading this, and what might be going 
through their heads...

People learned pretty quickly that a signature with a valid email 
address was spambait, and that a signature with a valid contact number 
was great for morons to call at all sorts of odd times of the day. Well, 
what I am saying is unless you need to post a physical location (i.e. 
your business address), don't. Just... don't.

Accordingly, you can imagine that smartphone map thing that tells you 
where all your friends currently are is borderline horror as far as I'm 
concerned - if I can see you, I'll wave. If I'm invited, I'll be along. 
Otherwise...


> If they have no address and only a mobile number they go straight in
> the recycling bin.

That's fair enough. An advert probably ought to carry an address, if for 
no other reason than you don't want to engage a company and discover it 
is twenty miles away and will charge for distance...


> If you run a business from home, you can hide behind a POBox No.,

No you can't - at least not in the UK. Unless the rules have changed 
since 1998, contact the Post Office concerned, they are obliged to 
provide you with the correct postal address that the PO Box relates to.

I had 'issues' with mail I was sending to a PO Box, so I got the address 
and sent it recorded delivery to the home address.


> and a mobile number but it won't always help attract business

While I can understand mobiles meaning the person is more contactable, I 
would refuse to call a mobile for two reasons:

   1. I grew up in the era of Vodafone's "The phone you are trying to
      contact is not responding, it may respond if you try again" (while
      happily charging for the privilege).

   2. If there's a tradesman working for me, on time I'm paying for, I
      want 100% concentration on my leaky gasket or what-have-you, and
      not yacking on the phone, or worrying about whatever the most
      recent phone call was about.
      I ask people who come to the house to do work to turn their mobiles
      off. Some do, some don't.


> as it makes you look amateur, not big.

Indeed, any fly-by-night can buy a twenty quid phone from a supermarket 
and knock up a promo sheet on the computers of a public library...


> My address has been published online for 15 years and not yet have I had
> one extra unwelcome caller at the door as a result, AFAIK.

;-) Are you tempting fate? As I said, out of an entire SickSadWorld of 
people, it takes only ONE.

Plus, I'm yet another in a long list of dumbasses spewing half-baked 
opinions in a public forum. That, and porn, pretty much defines most of 
the Internet. I'm not a business, I have nothing to sell, whether 
tangible (product) or not (religion). Therefore, my having a postal 
address visible is not a necessity.


For a blog, as was the original point of this topic, I would say that a 
postal address is not necessary for a blog, but knowing a little about 
the author IS. For example, on my blog you'll find a fair amount of 
pro-Japanese stuff, but that isn't something I'm trying to hide. With 
the RISC OS Blog, if it was to review and recommend a product, how much 
faith would we have in a review made by an unknown person? For all we 
know, the review could be written *by* the manufacturer! Knowing who is 
not really a privacy issue, more a trust issue. But having his (or her) 
full contact details, etc, is a privacy issue, and is unnecessary.


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1247

In article <4e34366b$0$30751$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>,
   Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> And while six billion people might not care, it only takes *ONE*. Just 
> ask Norway...

Silly comparison. It wasn't an individual which was targeted, but a
location.

-- 
*A cubicle is just a padded cell without a door.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1260

On 31/07/2011 10:17, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

>> And while six billion people might not care, it only takes *ONE*. Just
>> ask Norway...
> Silly comparison. It wasn't an individual which was targeted, but a
> location.

Valid comparison, it was *ONE* person wot did it (guv).


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1377

In article <4e357e8e$0$30747$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray
<heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 31/07/2011 10:17, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

> >> And while six billion people might not care, it only takes *ONE*.
> >> Just ask Norway...
> > Silly comparison. It wasn't an individual which was targeted, but a
> > location.

> Valid comparison, it was *ONE* person wot did it (guv).

No wait just a mo.  Those attacks had absolutely NOTHING to do with the
knowledge of anyone's private address so is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Please instead post an example where it is knowledge of a private address
which caused Something Terrible to happen.

-- 
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@

... "It is the mind that makes the body rich" T of the S, Act iv, Sc.3

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1382

In article <51fef12e69tim@invalid.org.uk>,
   Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <4e357e8e$0$30747$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray
> <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > On 31/07/2011 10:17, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

> > >> And while six billion people might not care, it only takes *ONE*.
> > >> Just ask Norway...
> > > Silly comparison. It wasn't an individual which was targeted, but a
> > > location.

> > Valid comparison, it was *ONE* person wot did it (guv).

> No wait just a mo.  Those attacks had absolutely NOTHING to do with the
> knowledge of anyone's private address so is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Thank you.

> Please instead post an example where it is knowledge of a private address
> which caused Something Terrible to happen.

Indeed. And like all these thinks you have to weigh up the possibilities. 

It's rather like staying indoors because you're scared a meteor will fall
on you.

-- 
*If vegetable oil comes from vegetables, where does baby oil come from? *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1408

In article <51fef34028dave@davenoise.co.uk>,
   Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:
> It's rather like staying indoors because you're scared a meteor will fall
> on you.

Hmm. Calculation: My house is a much bigger target to hit than I am. If a
meteor hits my house then it is quite likely that I will in turn be hit by a
bit of my house. Conclusion: it is safer for me to be outside than in.

On the other hand, if I am outside than I am a much easier target for
motorists, muggers, rapists, murderers and earnest people with clipboards,
so I am much safer indoors.

On the other hand....

;-)

R.

-- 

  Richard Travers 
  richtnews@uwclub.net
  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1416

On 07/08/2011 10:48, Tim Hill wrote:

> Please instead post an example where it is knowledge of a private address
> which caused Something Terrible to happen.

Errr... Isn't that the going definition of cyberstalking?


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1528

In article <4e40354d$0$18772$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray
<heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 07/08/2011 10:48, Tim Hill wrote:

> > Please instead post an example where it is knowledge of a private
> > address which caused Something Terrible to happen.

> Errr... Isn't that the going definition of cyberstalking?

More than likely. But with the rarity of such an event, personal
knowledge of such a thing surely must make one afeard of one's own
domicile being public knowledge?

Each to his own, but I think these rare events are blown out of all
proportion by the press and subsequently people who don't need to hide
feel they should.

Unless they have something/one to hide from, of course.

Personally, I would rather not hide and give anyone the freedom to harass
me and then be subject to a court order if I thought it went OTT.

-- 
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@

... "Its not enough to speak, but to speak true" Mid N Dr, Act v, Sc.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.acorn.misc

csiph-web