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

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #155175 > unrolled thread

book "1984"--modern privacy

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Contents

  book "1984"--modern privacy hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-14 06:57 -0800
    Re: book "1984"--modern privacy Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-14 10:21 -0500
    Re: book "1984"--modern privacy Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-12-14 07:40 -0800
    Re: book "1984"--modern privacy Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-12-19 09:09 +0000
      Re: book "1984"--modern privacy Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-19 10:02 -0500
        Re: book "1984"--modern privacy mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-19 16:07 +0000
      Re: book "1984"--modern privacy JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-12-19 12:31 -0600
      Re: book "1984"--modern privacy Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-12-20 09:25 +0000
      Re: book "1984"--modern privacy "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-12-21 14:19 -0600

#155175 — book "1984"--modern privacy

When I first read it, my initial reaction was the loss of privacy
from "Big Brother is Watching You" and the constant glare of the
telescreens.  At the time of my reading, CCTV was coming out as
a security monitor, and computerized record keeping was growing.

Back in the 1960s, C&A had essays on privacy issues relative
to the new power of computers.  One prophetic essay talked about
credit bureaus and their files, which at that time, was largely
unknown to the public.

Today, is it _really_ true that a college kid's antics posted
on social media will indeed come back to haunt him/her when
he applies for job?  There have been some articles on it, but
do modern employers really check that stuff for applicants
and blackball anyone with a nasty history?  (I don't know
what checking is done for young applicants today.)

Can personally posted stuff on things like Facebook be deleted
by the original poster?  Will Facebook delete libelous material
posted by other users?  (I don't use Facebook, so I don't know.)


IMHO, the big risk to privacy are the hidden and not so hidden
databases that may contain derogatory information about us,
be it accurate or not.  For instance, the newspaper reported
that doctors have a database about difficult patients, and
landlords have a database about difficult tenants.

Journalists push for these kinds of things--lack of privacy--
because it makes their job easier, indeed, helps create
opportunities.  If a Senator's son misbehaves at college,
now they can find out about it and report on it, something
that might have been buried years ago.


The danger about modern computers is that information
may be (1) easily accessed, and (2) stored for a long
time, and (3) accessed remotely.

So, someone who screwed up while in school in Montanna 
can't hide it from someone in New York City (or vice
versa).  years ago, something on a paper document would
be buried in a filing cabinet, never to be seen again.
But today, it is catalogued and widely available.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#155176

<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> When I first read it, my initial reaction was the loss of privacy
> from "Big Brother is Watching You" and the constant glare of the
> telescreens.  At the time of my reading, CCTV was coming out as
> a security monitor, and computerized record keeping was growing.
> 
> Back in the 1960s, C&A had essays on privacy issues relative
> to the new power of computers.  One prophetic essay talked about
> credit bureaus and their files, which at that time, was largely
> unknown to the public.
> 
> Today, is it _really_ true that a college kid's antics posted
> on social media will indeed come back to haunt him/her when
> he applies for job?  There have been some articles on it, but
> do modern employers really check that stuff for applicants
> and blackball anyone with a nasty history?  (I don't know
> what checking is done for young applicants today.)
> 
> Can personally posted stuff on things like Facebook be deleted
> by the original poster?  Will Facebook delete libelous material
> posted by other users?  (I don't use Facebook, so I don't know.)
> 
> 
> IMHO, the big risk to privacy are the hidden and not so hidden
> databases that may contain derogatory information about us,
> be it accurate or not.  For instance, the newspaper reported
> that doctors have a database about difficult patients, and
> landlords have a database about difficult tenants.
> 
> Journalists push for these kinds of things--lack of privacy--
> because it makes their job easier, indeed, helps create
> opportunities.  If a Senator's son misbehaves at college,
> now they can find out about it and report on it, something
> that might have been buried years ago.
> 
> 
> The danger about modern computers is that information
> may be (1) easily accessed, and (2) stored for a long
> time, and (3) accessed remotely.
> 
> So, someone who screwed up while in school in Montanna 
> can't hide it from someone in New York City (or vice
> versa).  years ago, something on a paper document would
> be buried in a filing cabinet, never to be seen again.
> But today, it is catalogued and widely available.
> 

A common theme in the old westerns was someone with a "past" moving a
couple of towns over and starting over, then someone who knew them when
shoes up and causes problems.  Probably couldn't happen today.



-- 
Pete

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

#155177

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> IMHO, the big risk to privacy are the hidden and not so hidden
> databases that may contain derogatory information about us,
> be it accurate or not.  For instance, the newspaper reported
> that doctors have a database about difficult patients, and
> landlords have a database about difficult tenants.
>
> Journalists push for these kinds of things--lack of privacy--
> because it makes their job easier, indeed, helps create
> opportunities.  If a Senator's son misbehaves at college,
> now they can find out about it and report on it, something
> that might have been buried years ago.

just finishing schneier's book: Data and Goliath
http://www.amazon.com/Data-Goliath-Battles-Collect-Control-ebook/dp/B00L3KQ1LI/

he glosses over a number of details like opt-in/opt-out ...  I've posted
before about being somewhat involved in cal. data breach notification
and cal. opt-in legislation ... having been brought in to help word
smith cal. electronic signature legislation ... while they were also
working on the other two pieces. The data-breach notification
legislation passed although since then there has been a number of
federal bills (none yet passed), about evenly divided between those
similar to cal's and those that would effectively eliminate notification
requirement.

Before the opt-in bill passes, a (federal preemption) opt-out addenda
was added to GLBA (now better known for repeal of Glass-Steagall).
Opt-in requires explicit authorization before an organization can share
your personal information, out-out can share your personal information
unless it has record of your objecting (opting-out).

I've posted before about being at a 2004 annual national privacy
conference in Wash DC and in a panel session with all the FTC
commissioners, somebody in the room gets up and asks them if they are
going to do anything about GLBA "opt-out" ... he says he is with a call
center technology company used by all the major financial operations
... and all of their 1-800 "opt-out" services provide no provisions for
keeping a record of a "opt-out" call (and with no "opt-out" record, they
are free to share your personal information).

posts mentioning electronic signature legislation
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#signature
posts mentiong data breach notification
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#data.breach.notification
posts mentioning Pecora Hearings &/or Glass-Steagall
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#Pecora&/orGlass-Steagall

recent posts mentioning opt-in/opt-out
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#17 Cromnibus cartoon
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#54 How do we take political considerations into account in the OODA-Loop?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#55 HealthCare.gov in Cahoots with Dozens of Tracking Websites
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#45 rationality

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

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

#155350

On Mon, 2015-12-14, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
...
> Today, is it _really_ true that a college kid's antics posted
> on social media will indeed come back to haunt him/her when
> he applies for job?  There have been some articles on it, but
> do modern employers really check that stuff for applicants
> and blackball anyone with a nasty history?  (I don't know
> what checking is done for young applicants today.)

That's what my morning paper says -- that everyone who's hiring
googles the name and checks Facebook/Linkedin/etc.

If that's true, I hope they apply some common sense.  People have
different persona; when at work, people won't behave as they does when
stoned and amongst childhood friends.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

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

#155358

On Sat, 19 Dec 2015, Jorgen Grahn wrote:

> On Mon, 2015-12-14, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> ...
>> Today, is it _really_ true that a college kid's antics posted
>> on social media will indeed come back to haunt him/her when
>> he applies for job?  There have been some articles on it, but
>> do modern employers really check that stuff for applicants
>> and blackball anyone with a nasty history?  (I don't know
>> what checking is done for young applicants today.)
>
> That's what my morning paper says -- that everyone who's hiring
> googles the name and checks Facebook/Linkedin/etc.
>
> If that's true, I hope they apply some common sense.  People have
> different persona; when at work, people won't behave as they does when
> stoned and amongst childhood friends.
>
We just had an election here in Canada in October.  At least one candidate 
(and I think more) had to back out of the election when something posted 
on Facebook was pointed out.

The one I remember was a teenager at the time, and was facing some 
"bullying" based on being Muslim.  So she fired back, in the way that 
teenagers do, and that caused her to give up the election.

It's interesting, someone older than a certain age doesn't have this 
problem, because that sort of thing didnt' exist.  Even if you were online 
fairly early, most of that stuff is gone, the BBSs and AOL and other 
outlets.  Maybe someone would regret something said on Usenet decades ago, 
but maybe that's less likely to be found.

People want their continuity now, so not only does the old stuff remain, 
but it's connected with them right now.

   Michael

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

#155365

On 2015-12-19, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2015, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2015-12-14, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> ...
>>> Today, is it _really_ true that a college kid's antics posted
>>> on social media will indeed come back to haunt him/her when
>>> he applies for job?  There have been some articles on it, but
>>> do modern employers really check that stuff for applicants
>>> and blackball anyone with a nasty history?  (I don't know
>>> what checking is done for young applicants today.)
>>
>> That's what my morning paper says -- that everyone who's hiring
>> googles the name and checks Facebook/Linkedin/etc.
>>
>> If that's true, I hope they apply some common sense.  People have
>> different persona; when at work, people won't behave as they does when
>> stoned and amongst childhood friends.
>>
> We just had an election here in Canada in October.  At least one candidate 
> (and I think more) had to back out of the election when something posted 
> on Facebook was pointed out.
>
> The one I remember was a teenager at the time, and was facing some 
> "bullying" based on being Muslim.  So she fired back, in the way that 
> teenagers do, and that caused her to give up the election.
>
> It's interesting, someone older than a certain age doesn't have this 
> problem, because that sort of thing didnt' exist.  Even if you were online 
> fairly early, most of that stuff is gone, the BBSs and AOL and other 
> outlets.  Maybe someone would regret something said on Usenet decades ago, 
> but maybe that's less likely to be found.
>
> People want their continuity now, so not only does the old stuff remain, 
> but it's connected with them right now.

Local couple were caught in an insurance fraud here when the 
insurance man discovered that her picture was in his Facebook page.
(It constantly amazes me that people with history that they don't
want to be known will still go for election)


-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

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

#155370

On 19 Dec 2015 09:09:41 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
wrote:
>On Mon, 2015-12-14, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>...
>> Today, is it _really_ true that a college kid's antics posted
>> on social media will indeed come back to haunt him/her when
>> he applies for job?  There have been some articles on it, but
>> do modern employers really check that stuff for applicants
>> and blackball anyone with a nasty history?  (I don't know
>> what checking is done for young applicants today.)
>
>That's what my morning paper says -- that everyone who's hiring
>googles the name and checks Facebook/Linkedin/etc.
>
>If that's true, I hope they apply some common sense.  People have
>different persona; when at work, people won't behave as they does when
>stoned and amongst childhood friends.
>
>/Jorgen

And they should make sure the profile they are looking at is one for
the applicant, and not someoine with a similar name.

-- 
JimP.

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

#155384

On 19 Dec 2015 09:09:41 GMT
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:

> That's what my morning paper says -- that everyone who's hiring
> googles the name and checks Facebook/Linkedin/etc.

	It's avery easy thing to do, it's not something I've ever done
before interviewing someone. I'll look at their LinkedIn profile if they
advertise it, I'm very happy for potential employers to look at my
LinkedIn profile - that's what it's for. I don't do Facebook etc. and
they're welcome to read my USENET postings as is everyone, but then I
always knew they were going to the world.

	I've been approached by an employer because of my activity on
certain mailing lists, the funny thing was I was already working for that
company - the recruiter hadn't bothered to check the internal directory -
we had a good laugh about that when I called her internal number.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

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

#155412

"Jorgen Grahn" <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote in message 
news:slrnn7a7mk.5q5.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid...
> On Mon, 2015-12-14, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> ...
>> Today, is it _really_ true that a college kid's antics posted
>> on social media will indeed come back to haunt him/her when
>> he applies for job?  There have been some articles on it, but
>> do modern employers really check that stuff for applicants
>> and blackball anyone with a nasty history?  (I don't know
>> what checking is done for young applicants today.)
>
> That's what my morning paper says -- that everyone who's hiring
> googles the name and checks Facebook/Linkedin/etc.
>
> If that's true, I hope they apply some common sense.  People have
> different persona; when at work, people won't behave as they does when
> stoned and amongst childhood friends.
>

The Facebook and Linkedin pages are judged as revealing the character of the 
person.  The scarcity of jobs is also a large factor.  If you've got two 
applicants for a job with almost the same backgrounds and education, and one 
applicant has multiple pictures on Facebook of drunken parties, who are you 
going to trust???  If you hire the "drunken party" guy and he screws up, 
what do you think *your* boss is going to conclude???

Boss:  "Do you mean you hired this person and you *knew* that he had 
drinking issues???"

Don't expect a big raise in salary this year!!!

-- 

numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers

csiph-web