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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #1290 > unrolled thread

advice for an acquaintance

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps

Contents

  advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-15 14:47 +0000
    Re: advice for an acquaintance Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-04-15 10:00 -0500
    Re: advice for an acquaintance Steve Fenwick <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-15 08:34 -0700
    Re: advice for an acquaintance Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2011-04-15 12:16 -0400
      Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) - 2011-04-15 09:42 -0700
        Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-15 13:05 -0700
          Re: advice for an acquaintance Tim Streater <timstreater@waitrose.com> - 2011-04-15 18:30 +0100
            Re: advice for an acquaintance dcohenspam@talktalk.net (Daniel Cohen) - 2011-04-16 17:42 +0100
          Re: advice for an acquaintance erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2011-04-15 12:38 -0500
            Re: advice for an acquaintance Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2011-04-16 13:00 -0400
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-16 18:45 +0000
                Re: advice for an acquaintance Jim Glidewell <jim_glidewell@yahoo.com> - 2011-04-16 21:15 +0000
          Re: advice for an acquaintance BreadWithSpam@fractious.net - 2011-04-15 15:31 -0400
            Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-15 16:34 -0700
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-15 21:40 +0000
                Re: advice for an acquaintance Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> - 2011-04-16 00:35 -0500
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2011-04-16 16:50 +1000
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> - 2011-04-16 10:59 -0500
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-16 12:45 +0000
                Re: advice for an acquaintance jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2011-04-17 00:26 +1200
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-16 13:04 +0000
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2011-04-17 03:00 +1200
                      Re: advice for an acquaintance erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2011-04-16 10:55 -0500
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-16 20:25 +0000
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2011-04-17 07:51 +1000
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2011-04-18 07:50 +1200
                      Re: advice for an acquaintance dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2011-04-18 09:41 +1000
                      Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-18 00:35 +0000
          Re: advice for an acquaintance "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2011-04-15 22:07 +0000
            Re: advice for an acquaintance BreadWithSpam@fractious.net - 2011-04-15 19:23 -0400
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> - 2011-04-16 00:40 -0500
              Re: advice for an acquaintance "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2011-04-17 02:54 +0000
            Re: advice for an acquaintance pf@porkain'tkosher.oink (Paul Fuchs) - 2011-04-15 22:53 -0700
            Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-16 10:23 +0000
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-16 12:45 +0000
                Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) - 2011-04-16 08:40 -0700
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> - 2011-04-16 11:10 -0500
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) - 2011-04-16 10:21 -0700
                      Re: advice for an acquaintance Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-04-16 17:19 -0400
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-04-16 17:16 -0400
          Re: advice for an acquaintance Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2011-04-16 23:00 -0400
            Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-18 12:23 -0700
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-19 13:48 +0200
                Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-19 11:00 -0700
                Re: advice for an acquaintance Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2011-04-19 12:22 -0400
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-20 07:59 +0200
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-20 11:33 +0000
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-20 14:35 +0200
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2011-04-19 21:58 -0400
                Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-20 08:31 +0200
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-20 16:04 +0000
      Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-15 12:57 -0700
        Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam@see.signature (Richard Maine) - 2011-04-15 10:15 -0700
          Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-15 13:41 -0700
          Re: advice for an acquaintance Suze <replytome@thenewsgroup.com> - 2011-04-15 20:01 -0500
          Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-17 20:43 +0200
        Re: advice for an acquaintance Tom Stiller <tom_stiller@yahoo.com> - 2011-04-15 13:59 -0400
      Re: advice for an acquaintance dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2011-04-16 10:40 +1000
        Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-16 01:46 +0000
          Re: advice for an acquaintance dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2011-04-16 13:21 +1000
            Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-16 12:45 +0000
        Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-16 10:23 +0000
          Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-16 12:45 +0000
          Re: advice for an acquaintance Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2011-04-16 23:19 -0400
            Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-17 14:18 +0000
            Re: advice for an acquaintance Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2011-04-17 12:31 -0400
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> - 2011-04-17 12:55 -0500
                Re: advice for an acquaintance Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2011-04-18 11:51 -0400
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> - 2011-04-18 11:38 -0500
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2011-04-19 12:18 -0400
                      Re: advice for an acquaintance Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2011-04-19 22:05 -0400
                        Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-20 11:38 +0000
                          Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-20 16:04 +0000
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2011-04-19 07:30 +1000
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2011-04-19 12:19 -0400
                      Re: advice for an acquaintance dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2011-04-20 08:03 +1000
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2011-04-19 22:02 -0400
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-20 08:27 +0200
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-20 11:33 +0000
              Re: advice for an acquaintance Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2011-04-17 23:22 -0400
                Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-18 10:47 +0200
                Re: advice for an acquaintance Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2011-04-18 07:23 -0400
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-18 13:10 +0000
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance BreadWithSpam@fractious.net - 2011-04-18 11:13 -0400
                      Re: advice for an acquaintance Steve Fenwick <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-18 22:22 -0700
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2011-04-21 18:42 +1200
                  Re: advice for an acquaintance John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2011-04-18 09:37 -0700
                    Re: advice for an acquaintance Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2011-04-19 22:10 -0400
      Re: advice for an acquaintance Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> - 2011-04-16 10:15 +0000
    Re: advice for an acquaintance Suze <replytome@thenewsgroup.com> - 2011-04-15 11:36 -0500
    Re: advice for an acquaintance nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-15 13:08 -0700
    Re: advice for an acquaintance "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2011-04-15 21:45 +0000
      Re: advice for an acquaintance Paul Sture <paul.nospam@sture.ch> - 2011-04-17 19:18 +0200
        Re: advice for an acquaintance Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2011-04-17 18:59 +0000
          Re: advice for an acquaintance "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2011-04-20 20:50 +0000

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

#1341

dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> In article <ioasdb$km3$1@dont-email.me>,
>  Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> wrote:
> 
>> dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> ...
>>> It is easy enough to have an .dmg file that needs a password to 
>>> mount and *she* does not need to make create it. Once someone 
>>> helps her, all she has to remember is the password.
>> 
>> That would probably be me, though I've never tried to use one. i'm pretty
>> good at following instructions, however.  
> 
> Well, it is easy to set up. From Mac OS Help: 
> 
> ----------
> To encode information on removable media:
> 
>  1. If the files you want to encode in the disk image are in 
> different locations, move them to a folder.
> 
>  2. Open Disk Utility, located in the Utilities folder in the 
> Applications folder.
>    
>  3. Open Disk Utility 
> 
>  4. Choose File > New > “Disk Image from Folder.”
> 
>  5. Select the folder you want to encode, and then click Image.
> 
>  6. Type a name for the image, and choose where you want to save 
> it.
> 
>  7. Choose “read/write disk image” from the Format pop-up menu.
> 
>  8. Choose “AES-128 (recommended)” from the Encryption pop-up 
> menu.
> 
>  9. Click Save.
> 
> 10. Enter the password.
>    
> 11. Copy the encoded disk image to the removable media.

Saved for the advice file, but
> -----
> 
> I think I can help her however, tell her to send all her money to 
> me and to then live in a simpler, primitive, worry-free way, 
> while I get closer to living in the style to which I surely 
> deserve. A win win situation, yes. <g>

I don't think she'd go for this part.  Actually, I live in a simple,
low-worry way out here in the boondocks myself 8-)

-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist with iPad

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

#1335

dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> In article 
> <fmoore-7B7501.12163315042011@mx02.eternal-september.org>,

> You mean on a public computer or generally? Surely not the latter?

> In public libraries here, many local little ones, they often 
> allow free use of wifi, so you can take your own suitably 
> equipped laptop in. Not sure how this affects security? How 
> paranoid should we be?

If you are on public wifi and plan on logging in to ANYTHING, only do so
with a https connection that mains an https connection the entire time you
are logged in.

And only from your own hardware. Nver use a pub,ic computer to, for
example, login to Facebook or gmail or battle.net.

-- 
this is not a signture

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

#1339

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> wrote:
> dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> In article 
>> <fmoore-7B7501.12163315042011@mx02.eternal-september.org>,
> 
>> You mean on a public computer or generally? Surely not the latter?
> 
>> In public libraries here, many local little ones, they often 
>> allow free use of wifi, so you can take your own suitably 
>> equipped laptop in. Not sure how this affects security? How 
>> paranoid should we be?
> 
> If you are on public wifi and plan on logging in to ANYTHING, only do so
> with a https connection that mains an https connection the entire time you
> are logged in.
> 
> And only from your own hardware. Nver use a pub,ic computer to, for
> example, login to Facebook or gmail or battle.net.

I suspect this might be too complicated for her 8-). I'll be making a point
of this, of course, and it is yet another reason she needs an actual
computer of her own.


-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist with iPad

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

#1370

On 04-16-2011 06:23, Lewis wrote:
> And only from your own hardware. Nver use a pub,ic computer to, for
> example, login to Facebook or gmail or battle.net.

I'm starting to wonder if one should use ANY computer to log on to 
Facebook.  My Facebook profile has EVERY thing that might be sharable
set to "absolutely not" and most of them completely blank anyway.

Twice in the past five weeks a non-Facebook website has begged me
to turn some of that on.  The first one displayed my "profile picture"

In other words, when I said "Don't allow 'apps' to access my profile"
FB interpreted that as "Tell the apps who I am and that I've turned
off apps"

So, now I have to constantly delete Facebook cookies...

And then there's the fact that Facebook allows people to announce
their geographic location AND that of their friends, and _encourages_ 
children to do so!

-- 
Wes Groleau

   To share or not to share
   http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/BlindDog?itemid=4012

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

#1380

Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> On 04-16-2011 06:23, Lewis wrote:
>> And only from your own hardware. Nver use a pub,ic computer to, for
>> example, login to Facebook or gmail or battle.net.
> 
> I'm starting to wonder if one should use ANY computer to log on to
> Facebook.  My Facebook profile has EVERY thing that might be sharable
> set to "absolutely not" and most of them completely blank anyway.
> 
> Twice in the past five weeks a non-Facebook website has begged me
> to turn some of that on.  The first one displayed my "profile picture"
> 
> In other words, when I said "Don't allow 'apps' to access my profile"
> FB interpreted that as "Tell the apps who I am and that I've turned
> off apps"
> 
> So, now I have to constantly delete Facebook cookies...
> 
> And then there's the fact that Facebook allows people to announce
> their geographic location AND that of their friends, and _encourages_ children to do so!

You have just listed most of the reasons I refuse to go anywhere near
Facebook!  I've received spam "friending" requests even so because an
actual friend once asked me to join long ago.

-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist with iPad

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

#1384

In article <iodm85$8sr$1@dont-email.me>,
 Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 04-16-2011 06:23, Lewis wrote:
> > And only from your own hardware. Nver use a pub,ic computer to, for
> > example, login to Facebook or gmail or battle.net.
> 
> I'm starting to wonder if one should use ANY computer to log on to 
> Facebook.  My Facebook profile has EVERY thing that might be sharable
> set to "absolutely not" and most of them completely blank anyway.

This is not meant as a personal affront to you, Wes, so please don't 
take it personally; but I always liked the epithet:

     Twitter is for twits;
     Facebook is for fools.

Facebook has always made a joke of security. First you had to jump 
through a kazillion hoops to set the most basic protections. They fixed 
that, but not really, as you've found out. And that's not to mention the 
just plain seemingly incompetent security practices of Facebook itself, 
as manifested in all the breaches they've had. But then I've never 
understood why people want to pour their guts, and their personal info, 
out on a website. Does being 'friended' on Facebook somehow boost one's 
ego?!? If you want to share info with friends or family email them or 
get an account with a photo site and send just those people the address.

> Twice in the past five weeks a non-Facebook website has begged me
> to turn some of that on.  The first one displayed my "profile picture"
> 
> In other words, when I said "Don't allow 'apps' to access my profile"
> FB interpreted that as "Tell the apps who I am and that I've turned
> off apps"
> 
> So, now I have to constantly delete Facebook cookies...

QED

> And then there's the fact that Facebook allows people to announce
> their geographic location AND that of their friends, and _encourages_ 
> children to do so!

QED, yet again.

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

#1389

On 11-04-17 11:31 AM, Fred Moore wrote:

> This is not meant as a personal affront to you, Wes, so please don't
> take it personally; but I always liked the epithet:
>
>       Twitter is for twits;
>       Facebook is for fools.
>
> Facebook has always made a joke of security. First you had to jump
> through a kazillion hoops to set the most basic protections.

I think that much of this misses the point of Facebook. It is a 
mechanism for sharing/publishing information about yourself. If you 
don't want the information published, then don't post it to Facebook. It 
seems fairly simple to me.

They did fix the thing that I hated most about their privacy policy, 
that your "Friends" could be easily tricked into allowing data about you 
which you had restricted to "Friends only" would be passed to advertisers.

Shortly before they put in that fix, I wrote a blog post about Facebook 
selling "your data". It's here if anyone is interested. It also 
describes why, despite my knowledge of how they operate, I am happy to 
use Facebook.

 
http://liver.goldmark.org/post/625455300/the-deal-with-facebook-and-your-data

Cheers,

-j


-- 
Jeffrey Goldberg          http://goldmark.org/jeff/
I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts
Reply-To address is valid

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

#1439

In article <910nskF8jsU1@mid.individual.net>,
 Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> wrote:

> On 11-04-17 11:31 AM, Fred Moore wrote:
> 
> > This is not meant as a personal affront to you, Wes, so please don't
> > take it personally; but I always liked the epithet:
> >
> >       Twitter is for twits;
> >       Facebook is for fools.
> >
> > Facebook has always made a joke of security. First you had to jump
> > through a kazillion hoops to set the most basic protections.
> 
> I think that much of this misses the point of Facebook. 

Guilty as charged. I do NOT 'get' Facebook.

> It is a 
> mechanism for sharing/publishing information about yourself. 

Understood. What I don't understand is why any reasonable adult would 
want to do this. I realize that children, up to the age of 21 just for 
argument's sake, are young, dumb, inexperienced, and possessing an 
immature ego. They have to say 'I'm here! I exist!. This is me!' But the 
rest of the population?!? (Again, I'm not trying to be offensive to any 
adults who like Facebook. I'm just trying to understand it.)

> If you 
> don't want the information published, then don't post it to Facebook. It 
> seems fairly simple to me.

Exactly, which is why I don't understand why any adult uses Facebook, 
except in specific instances, say to promote a club or organization. 
Even a site such as Linkedin can compromise your security if you put a 
complete resume on your page. While you may feel completely comfortable 
giving a resume detailing all your education, work, and other 
experiences to a prospective employer, you probably ought not give that 
information to everyone on the planet, including potential identity 
thieves. Or have I been reading too many spy novels? Remember, it's only 
paranoia if there's nobody there. And there's ALWAYS SOMEONE there.  ;)

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

#1442

On 11-04-18 10:51 AM, Fred Moore wrote:
> In article <910nskF8jsU1@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> wrote:

>> If you don't want the information published, then don't post it to
>> Facebook. It seems fairly simple to me.

> Exactly, which is why I don't understand why any adult uses Facebook, 
> except in specific instances, say to promote a club or organization. 

Some of us are vain. I love using Facebook; maybe it's just vanity, but
it gives me an audience.

> Even a site such as Linkedin can compromise your security if you put a 
> complete resume on your page. While you may feel completely comfortable 
> giving a resume detailing all your education, work, and other 
> experiences to a prospective employer, you probably ought not give that 
> information to everyone on the planet, including potential identity 
> thieves.

I think that this is probably where we see things differently. I figure
that if some information is already "out there" then it isn't worth
worrying how "out there" it is. My home address can be found through
public tax records. Back when I had a land line my phone number was
listed in public directories. My own websites and usenet postings pretty
much gave my employment history already.

What I don't like is "connected" information being given to marketers.

I do have secrets, but you don't see them even hinted at here or on
Facebook or anything like that. But a great deal of information about me
is public in one way or another, so I don't worry about it.

> Or have I been reading too many spy novels? Remember, it's only 
> paranoia if there's nobody there. And there's ALWAYS SOMEONE there.  ;)

It's a matter of temperament.  I won't say that you are wrong to worry
about that, but I just don't share your level of concern.

Cheers,

-j


-- 
Jeffrey Goldberg          http://goldmark.org/jeff/
I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts
Reply-To address is valid

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

#1471

In article <9137omFtbnU1@mid.individual.net>,
 Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> wrote:

> On 11-04-18 10:51 AM, Fred Moore wrote:
> > In article <910nskF8jsU1@mid.individual.net>,
> >  Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody@goldmark.org> wrote:
> 
> >> If you don't want the information published, then don't post it to
> >> Facebook. It seems fairly simple to me.
> 
> > Exactly, which is why I don't understand why any adult uses Facebook, 
> > except in specific instances, say to promote a club or organization. 
> 
> Some of us are vain. I love using Facebook; maybe it's just vanity, but
> it gives me an audience.

Okay. Whatever works for you.

> > Even a site such as Linkedin can compromise your security if you put a 
> > complete resume on your page. While you may feel completely comfortable 
> > giving a resume detailing all your education, work, and other 
> > experiences to a prospective employer, you probably ought not give that 
> > information to everyone on the planet, including potential identity 
> > thieves.
> 
> I think that this is probably where we see things differently. I figure
> that if some information is already "out there" then it isn't worth
> worrying how "out there" it is. My home address can be found through
> public tax records. Back when I had a land line my phone number was
> listed in public directories. My own websites and usenet postings pretty
> much gave my employment history already.
> 
> What I don't like is "connected" information being given to marketers.
> 
> I do have secrets, but you don't see them even hinted at here or on
> Facebook or anything like that. But a great deal of information about me
> is public in one way or another, so I don't worry about it.

As any intelligence officer will tell you, there's all kinds of 
information out there, but it's not very useful until it's gathered 
together. Then you can do something with it. Facebook seems to make that 
MUCH easier.

> > Or have I been reading too many spy novels? Remember, it's only 
> > paranoia if there's nobody there. And there's ALWAYS SOMEONE there.  ;)
> 
> It's a matter of temperament.  I won't say that you are wrong to worry
> about that, but I just don't share your level of concern.

The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is 
working.   :-D

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

#1488

On 04-19-2011 12:18, Fred Moore wrote:
> As any intelligence officer will tell you, there's all kinds of
> information out there, but it's not very useful until it's gathered
> together. Then you can do something with it. Facebook seems to make that
> MUCH easier.

And the circle is complete with the repeat citing of

<http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-facebook-program-dramatically-cut-agencys-cos,19753/>

-- 
Wes Groleau

   Aw, it Ain’t Important …
   http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=58

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

#1504

Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> On 04-19-2011 12:18, Fred Moore wrote:
>> As any intelligence officer will tell you, there's all kinds of
>> information out there, but it's not very useful until it's gathered
>> together. Then you can do something with it. Facebook seems to make that
>> MUCH easier.
> 
> And the circle is complete with the repeat citing of
> 
> <http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-facebook-program-dramatically-cut-agencys-cos,19753/>

400 billion tweets and not one useful bit of information. 

I love the onion. 

-- 
this is not a signture

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

#1515

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>> On 04-19-2011 12:18, Fred Moore wrote:
>>> As any intelligence officer will tell you, there's all kinds of
>>> information out there, but it's not very useful until it's gathered
>>> together. Then you can do something with it. Facebook seems to make that
>>> MUCH easier.
>> 
>> And the circle is complete with the repeat citing of
>> 
>> <http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-facebook-program-dramatically-cut-agencys-cos,19753/>
> 
I had missed that one, thanks 8-)
> 400 billion tweets and not one useful bit of information. 
> 
> I love the onion. 

I have an Onion app on my iPad so I don't even need to use the bookmark on
my browser for it 8-)


-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist with iPad

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

#1445

In article 
<fmoore-82F2EA.11511618042011@mx01.eternal-september.org>,
 Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:

> They have to say 'I'm here! I exist!. This is me!' But the 
> rest of the population?!? (Again, I'm not trying to be offensive to any 
> adults who like Facebook. I'm just trying to understand it.)

Many people are particularly interested in themselves, and part 
of that interest is seeing how they are regarded. So Facebook 
would provide a means to do this. 

A motive for the self-obsessed who had a clue somewhere would be 
that making oneself one's whole world has downsides and maybe a 
forum where there could be more than oneself would counter this.

Another motive would be to have a means to express a dislike for 
others, to bully and abuse. 

There are a lot of motives. Perhaps you don't understand because 
you are looking for just one overall one.

-- 
dorayme

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

#1472

In article <dorayme-A07936.07305619042011@news.albasani.net>,
 dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article 
> <fmoore-82F2EA.11511618042011@mx01.eternal-september.org>,
>  Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> 
> > They have to say 'I'm here! I exist!. This is me!' But the 
> > rest of the population?!? (Again, I'm not trying to be offensive to any 
> > adults who like Facebook. I'm just trying to understand it.)
> 
> Many people are particularly interested in themselves, and part 
> of that interest is seeing how they are regarded. So Facebook 
> would provide a means to do this. 
> 
> A motive for the self-obsessed who had a clue somewhere would be 
> that making oneself one's whole world has downsides and maybe a 
> forum where there could be more than oneself would counter this.
> 
> Another motive would be to have a means to express a dislike for 
> others, to bully and abuse. 

All good points.

> There are a lot of motives. Perhaps you don't understand because 
> you are looking for just one overall one.

Well, because Facebook is so VERY popular, I was thinking there might be 
one overriding motivation. Perhaps not.

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

#1484

In article 
<fmoore-865921.12194319042011@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:

> In article <dorayme-A07936.07305619042011@news.albasani.net>,
>  dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > In article 
> > <fmoore-82F2EA.11511618042011@mx01.eternal-september.org>,
> >  Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > They have to say 'I'm here! I exist!. This is me!' But the 
> > > rest of the population?!? (Again, I'm not trying to be offensive to any 
> > > adults who like Facebook. I'm just trying to understand it.)
> > 
> > Many people are particularly interested in themselves, and part 
> > of that interest is seeing how they are regarded. So Facebook 
> > would provide a means to do this. 
> > 
> > A motive for the self-obsessed who had a clue somewhere would be 
> > that making oneself one's whole world has downsides and maybe a 
> > forum where there could be more than oneself would counter this.
> > 
> > Another motive would be to have a means to express a dislike for 
> > others, to bully and abuse. 
> 
> All good points.
> 
> > There are a lot of motives. Perhaps you don't understand because 
> > you are looking for just one overall one.
> 
> Well, because Facebook is so VERY popular, I was thinking there might be 
> one overriding motivation. Perhaps not.

On the other hand, popularity can be an argument for there not 
being one motive. The more the motives, the greater the chances.

-- 
dorayme

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

#1487

On 04-18-2011 11:51, Fred Moore wrote:
> Exactly, which is why I don't understand why any adult uses Facebook,
> except in specific instances, say to promote a club or organization.

For me, to keep in contact with relatives, as that is the media they 
have chosen.  I don't race around collecting more friends than I can 
remember.

Plus, it's one more thing I can complain about on Usenet.

-- 
Wes Groleau

   Semantic technologies
   http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=97

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

#1496

In article <ioles0$8r0$1@dont-email.me>,
 Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 04-18-2011 11:51, Fred Moore wrote:
> > Exactly, which is why I don't understand why any adult uses Facebook,
> > except in specific instances, say to promote a club or organization.
> 
> For me, to keep in contact with relatives, as that is the media they 
> have chosen.  I don't race around collecting more friends than I can 
> remember.
> 
> Plus, it's one more thing I can complain about on Usenet.

Your second reason seems like adequate justification to me. :-)

-- 
Paul Sture

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

#1501

Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> On 04-18-2011 11:51, Fred Moore wrote:
>> Exactly, which is why I don't understand why any adult uses Facebook,
>> except in specific instances, say to promote a club or organization.
> 
> For me, to keep in contact with relatives, as that is the media they have
> chosen.  I don't race around collecting more friends than I can remember.

Only reason I'm on Facebook. 

> Plus, it's one more thing I can complain about on Usenet.

That was just a bonus!

-- 
this is not a signture

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

#1415

On 04-17-2011 12:31, Fred Moore wrote:
>       Twitter is for twits;
>       Facebook is for fools.

I know little about Twitter.  Facebook could have been a good thing,
were it not for the security idiocies.  Yes, it's full
of crap, but that's not the fault of the site itself.

I resisted using it for a long time but finally gave in when
a relative got himself stranded in a small town with a computer
but no phone.

-- 
Wes Groleau

   To share or not to share
   http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/BlindDog?itemid=4012

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

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.apps

csiph-web