Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael Black wrote:
"Chris" ) writes: On 11 Mar 2005 14:09:42 -0800, KØHB babbled: More like "chicken**** coward by choice" You obviously are totally ignorant of the recommendations for safe Internet usage published by government organizations such as www.ftc.gov. The U.S. FTC recommends against giving out personal information anywhere on the Internet or on Usenet, and instead suggests the use of handles or pseudonyms. It also suggests that people go to some lengths to keep their names private even in such formerly-public data bases such as domain name registrar "whois" records. That's why major registrars now offer private registration. So tell us how the internet is different form the "real world"? Hams have used their real names for decades, indeed the law requires it. They also have to identify themselves with their callsign, which is unique to each ham, and long before computers existed there were books where you could look up callsigns to get people's addresses. Every time I've had a letter published in the paper, it's had my name, and general location. Now admittedly I could be confused with others with the same name, but I sure don't use a pseudonym, or for that matter the paper is not likely to print the letter unless I use my real name (at the very least, they will expect a real name, and address, at the bottom of the letter, which in some cases they will not publish). When I had some small articles published in "73" decades ago, they included my name and callsign, and my address. I've posted to the newsgroups for a decade, and I've always used my real name, and even a completely legitimate email address that isn't mangled. In the local newsgroup, I've put in things over the years that deliberately place me in the real world; no stalkers have appeared at places where I clearly will be. Just because some government agency says something does not make it true. Now is the time that paranoia is encouraged, on an institutional and especially a personal level. Especially pernicious is the encouragement of paranoia, coupled with the "somehow this is your fault" syndrome. And yet, the real problem isn't posting on netnews. It is companies such as one in the US, that *willingly* gave out personal information of thousands and more customers to bogus companies that are doing the ultimate "phishing". And I could even possibly accept the anominity aspect of posting, if it wasn't for the fact that most of the anonymous ones are not exactly the most civil posters. How handy. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|