Jump to content

Anonymity vs Privacy vs Security


MyOwn

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Zen Traveler said:
Quote

    

Quite boring, actually.  And if you want to live off the grid in a bunker with MRE's, go for it.    I kind of like living in the Age of Information.  It's very convenient.

What? :huh: I never lobbied to live off the grid and have continuously pointed out the benefits of living in the Information Age....What seems to be "convenient" is when folks leave their intellect at the door and delve into hyperbole or rants.

I wasn't speaking of "you," but I digress...  The point I was making is that some of us actually like the fact that information is being collected (or at least more or less of it to some degree).   It's a tool when used for good purposes and a weapon when used for bad purposes.  Something tells me my entire life is so boring to the powers that be that I seriously don't expect any visits from government officials who've been collecting my information.  I can see, though, how people with more, shall we say, "radical" views might have some encounters that make them dislike data-gathering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Something tells me my entire life is so boring to the powers that be that I seriously don't expect any visits from government officials who've been collecting my information. 

 

It is not theirs to collect "EVER"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Steve_S said:

So when you enable NoScripit in your browser, Then click on  "Say a favorite link, all kinds of magic happens. You will become aware of what is happening in the background...

You mean like, for example, I will see Klipsch banner ads on sites which contain Google ads in the banners and at the margins?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Steve_S said:

 

It is not theirs to collect "EVER"...

In many respects, for example, permission must be expressly granted.  Olive Garden's website wanted permission to know my location.  I gave it.  I don't expect them to come looking for me.  I do expect they will find locations closest to me in order to spare me the need to conduct a search manually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

You mean like, for example, I will see Klipsch banner ads on sites which contain Google ads in the banners and at the margins?

 

No, I mean, when I bring up the Klipsch Forum website with NoScript enabled a couple things pop up in addition to klipsch.com

google-analytics.com

 

and

gstatic.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Steve_S said:

 

No, I mean, when I bring up the Klipsch Forum website with NoScript enabled a couple things pop up in addition to klipsch.com

google-analytics.com

 

and

gstatic.com

I thought Google was gathering information on your surfing behavior in order to improve your surfing experience, primarily through better targeted ads.  For example, it would not help anyone to put tampon ads in my browser.   It would be a waste of bandwidth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Something tells me my entire life is so boring to the powers that be that I seriously don't expect any visits from government officials who've been collecting my information.  I can see, though, how people with more, shall we say, "radical" views might have some encounters that make them dislike data-gathering.

 I still think you are missing my point. You may live as boring of life as myself but we have a history...In a nutshell, you had no idea who Steve Bannon was but I pointed out it was you who was bringing Breitbart to our discussions and now we find out he also was a key player in Cambridge Analytica and both had a hand in spreading propaganda to the degree that Special Council Mueller has questioned and is still looking at them.  It's not about your life being "so boring" but you are the only one who felt comfortable for actually supporting your candidate (who won the election) that I debated.  I showed him and you respect every step of the way while bringing up what is being exposed today--That's not "speculation" to address @BigStewMan concerns. It seemed weird to me at the time the subjects that folks were bringing to the table and now we are finding out why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zen Traveler said:

Respectively Jeff, I still think you are missing my point. You may live as boring of life as myself but we have a history...In a nutshell, you had no idea who Steve Bannon was but I pointed out it was you who was bringing Breitbart to our discussions and now we find out he also was a key player in Cambridge Analytica and both had a hand in spreading propaganda to the degree that Special Council Mueller has questioned and is still looking at them.  It's not about your life being "so boring" but you are the only one who felt comfortable for actually supporting your candidate (who won the election) that I debated and I showed him respect every step of the way while bringing up what is being exposed today--That's not "speculation" to address @BigStewMan concerns

You try to present that argument as if it's a big deal.  If you define your life or obtain your entertainment by what a bunch of politicos are doing to try to gain power and milk it for whatever it might yield, then, be entertained or alarmed as you see fit.  Me?  I know what you are describing, but this is something that always has been and always will be.  Only the names change.  

 

You expect me to take alarm because I read an article posted on a website by a guy of questionable ethics, if not a criminal?  Myeh.  Watergate does not bother me.  Does your conscience bother you?  Tell me true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2018 at 7:17 PM, Zen Traveler said:

I showed him and you respect every step of the way while bringing up what is being exposed today--That's not "speculation" to address @BigStewMan concerns. It seemed weird to me at the time the subjects that folks were bringing to the table and now we are finding out why..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

Btw, one of the telling anecdotes prior to the election was how many folks were expressing in the NO BS Forum how the women in their lives felt about a certain candidate by seeing what they were consuming on Facebook. :huh:

I posted about what women in my family thought but never said anything about them getting their information from Facebook.  I don't see why anyone would consider them a news source nor do I know anyone who would.  I guess that puts me in the minority. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jeff Matthews said:

If you define your life or obtain your entertainment by what a bunch of politicos are doing to try to gain power and milk it for whatever it might yield, then, be entertained or alarmed as you see fit.  Me?  I know what you are describing, but this is something that always has been and always will be.  Only the names change.  

I don't define my life that way but was pointing out in important discussions to me whose influence you were bringing to the table. If it was entertainment to you so be it, that doesn't change my opinion of the danger of "group think" in the internet propaganda age. Iow, we do live in an Information Age and I think it important to rally against propaganda--It's no longer about "The Media." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CECAA850 said:

I posted about what women in my family thought but never said anything about them getting their information from Facebook.  I don't see why anyone would consider them a news source nor do I know anyone who would.  I guess that puts me in the minority. 

For starters, what's the definition of "from" Facebook?  If I go on Facebook and post a link to a WSJ article and you look at my wall and click on the post to read it, did you get your news "from" Facebook?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CECAA850 said:
2 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

Btw, one of the telling anecdotes prior to the election was how many folks were expressing in the NO BS Forum how the women in their lives felt about a certain candidate by seeing what they were consuming on Facebook. :huh:

I posted about what women in my family thought but never said anything about them getting their information from Facebook.  I don't see why anyone would consider them a news source nor do I know anyone who would.  I guess that puts me in the minority. 

You weren't one of the ones I was thinking of. Anarchist and JWC come to mind.  (EDIT: Btw, if the women in your family are on facebook then they could very wiell fit into the category I am describing} 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zen Traveler said:

that doesn't change my opinion of the danger of "group think" in the internet propaganda age

That was probably even a greater risk before the internet.  Remember learning that McKinley made his argument in favor of annexation of the Philippines because we needed to uplift and Christianize the Filipinos?  (They were already Christians).

 

At least with the internet, you have competing sources of information with many more views, calling out bunk where they see it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

For starters, what's the definition of "from" Facebook?  If I go on Facebook and post a link to a WSJ article and you look at my wall and click on the post to read it, did you get your news "from" Facebook?

That is a good question and the answer isn't so simple. I explained earlier that I am getting quite a few unsolicited rightwing ads (no liberal) based on my search history and have been posting links from FoxNews with a few from strictly liberal sources. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zen Traveler said:

That is a good question and the answer isn't so simple. I explained earlier that I am getting quite a few unsolicited rightwing ads (no liberal) based on my search history and have been posting links from FoxNews with a few from strictly liberal sources. 

How unsurprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jeff Matthews said:

That was probably even a greater risk before the internet.  Remember learning that McKinley made his argument in favor of annexation of the Philippines because we needed to uplift and Christianize the Filipinos?  (They were already Christians).

Sorry, Jeff. That was before my time. On that note, the problem with what we've been discussing is that folks are finding solace in like-minded opinions and now we are finding out where those opinions are being generated from....Btw, did you see that Cambridge Anaytica is responsible for the term " Drain the Swamp." It really doesn't get more ironic than that for this discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

How unsurprising.

Again, what is so surprising is how Facebook information was used by Cambridge Analytica prior to the election and when you research what was done this discussion can't help but get political...I suggest waiting until more charges are filed but there is enough to explore from reliable sources on the topic until then. Have a good one Jeff and good night. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...