I think you're supporting my point here. There is a decreasing amount of anonymity in certain cases, and a corresponding decrease in crimes etc. David Brin, the science fiction author, came out with a very interesting book a couple of years ago that dealt with this issue, called The Transparent Society: Will Technology Force Us to Choose Between Privacy and Freedom?
>From Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0738201448/qid=1033738084/sr=1 -4/ref=sr_1_4/002-9007594-8378411?v=glance David Brin takes some of our worst notions about threats to privacy and sets them on their ears. According to Brin, there is no turning back the growth of public observation and inevitable loss of privacy--at least outside of our own homes. Too many of our transactions are already monitored: Brin asserts that cameras used to observe and reduce crime in public areas have been successful and are on the rise. There's even talk of bringing in microphones to augment the cameras. Brin has no doubt that it's only a matter of time before they're installed in numbers to cover every urban area in every developed nation. While this has the makings for an Orwellian nightmare, Brin argues that we can choose to make the same scenario a setting for even greater freedom. The determining factor is whether the power of observation and surveillance is held only by the police and the powerful or is shared by us all. In the latter case, Brin argues that people will have nothing to fear from the watchers because everyone will be watching each other. The cameras would become a public resource to assure that no mugger is hiding around the corner, our children are playing safely in the park, and police will not abuse their power. No simplistic Utopian, Brin also acknowledges the many dangers on the way. He discusses how open access to information can either threaten or enhance freedom. It is one thing, for example, to make the entire outdoors public and another thing to allow the cameras and microphones to snoop into our homes. He therefore spends a lot of pages examining what steps are required to assure that a transparent society evolves in a manner that enhances rather than restricts freedom. This is a challenging view of tomorrow and an exhilarating read for those who don't mind challenges to even the most well-entrenched cultural assumptions. --Elizabeth Lewis --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title. -- larry -- Larry C. Lyons ColdFusion/Web Developer Certified Advanced ColdFusion 5 Developer EBStor.com 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204 Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 tel: (703) 393-7930 fax: (703) 393-2659 Web: http://www.ebstor.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. -- > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:13 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: A good thing > > > True, but I can't hold by any study that says this is the > normal reaction as > it is no longer true in NY. We've seen many cases where > people call, get > involved and even tape crimes. True it's many years later, > but the city is > very different now. The fear is no where near the same. > > > > MS. Genovese was not anonymous, but the witnesses were. > Moreover because > of > > the anonymity they abrogated responsibility to others. There is a > > difference. > > > > larry > > > > -- > > Larry C. Lyons > > ColdFusion/Web Developer > > Certified Advanced ColdFusion 5 Developer > > EBStor.com > > 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204 > > Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 > > tel: (703) 393-7930 > > fax: (703) 393-2659 > > Web: http://www.ebstor.com > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. > > -- > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 4:15 PM > > > To: CF-Community > > > Subject: Re: A good thing > > > > > > > > > True, but that's personal anonymity. In the Genovese > case, she wasn't > > > anonymous, the people hearing her being killed were. They had > > > the choice and > > > chance to call the cops and didn't. Her identity wasn't a > > > factor. It was > > > their own fears and sloth (I guess it is a deadly sin) that > > > helped kill her. > > > > > > > The interesting thing is the anonymity aspects. A similar > > > thing is watch > > > > people in their cars in traffic (only if you're not driving > > > that is :). > > > They > > > > think they are fairly anonymous. Thus you get all sorts > of private > > > behaviors > > > > that you don't normally see in public - nose picking etc. > > > > > > > > anonymity is a real disinhibiter. > > > > > > > > larry > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Larry C. Lyons > > > > ColdFusion/Web Developer > > > > Certified Advanced ColdFusion 5 Developer > > > > EBStor.com > > > > 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204 > > > > Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 > > > > tel: (703) 393-7930 > > > > fax: (703) 393-2659 > > > > Web: http://www.ebstor.com > > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:09 PM > > > > > To: CF-Community > > > > > Subject: Re: A good thing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I remember the case (psych major here) and while anonymity > > > > > was a factor, I > > > > > think that the factors of indifference to others and fear > > > of getting > > > > > involved were more important. As foolish as it may sound, the > > > > > city was a lot > > > > > darker then and there was a lot more fear around. The people > > > > > who heard the > > > > > attacks knew her, they just didn't do anything till after > > > she was dead > > > > > (almost 50 minutes after the first attack). > > > > > For those who want to know what we're talking about, do a > > > > > search on "kitty > > > > > genovese". > > > > > > > > > > If you want to go through the archives and write a profile on > > > > > me, have fun. > > > > > :) > > > > > > > > > > > Anonymity is also quite dangerous. People are far more > > > > > likely to be engage > > > > > > in unacceptable behaviors when anonymous than if they > > > were publicly > > > > > > identified. In the 1960's there was a case where a woman > > > > > was brutally > > > > > > murdered in New York in a development with quite a lot of > > > > > people looking > > > > > on > > > > > > from the surrounding apartment blocks. When investigated > > > > > later, most of > > > > > the > > > > > > people reported that they thought someone else would be > > > > > contacting the > > > > > > police. In an experiment in the 70's the researchers put > > > > > pictures of the > > > > > > residents beside their apartment balconies. The researchers > > > > > found that > > > > > this > > > > > > lack of anonymity resulted in far more pro social and > > > pro community > > > > > behavior > > > > > > than before. > > > > > > > > > > > > > If a psychologist went through our > > > > > > > posts they could probably build a rather accurate > picture of > > > > > > > each of us. The true us. > > > > > > BTW Michael, as a former psych person you want me to go > > > through the > > > > > archives > > > > > > then? ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > larry > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Larry C. Lyons > > > > > > ColdFusion/Web Developer > > > > > > Certified Advanced ColdFusion 5 Developer > > > > > > EBStor.com > > > > > > 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204 > > > > > > Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 > > > > > > tel: (703) 393-7930 > > > > > > fax: (703) 393-2659 > > > > > > Web: http://www.ebstor.com > > > > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:34 AM > > > > > > > To: CF-Community > > > > > > > Subject: Re: A good thing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The fact that the anonymity gives the people involve the > > > > > > > ability to interact > > > > > > > before any bias can come up is the good thing. Even if it > > > > > > > does later on, > > > > > > > hopefully it will result in the 'TV-like morality lesson'. > > > > > > > Even one person > > > > > > > treating another like a fellow human being is a > good thing. > > > > > > > And as for being sanitized, I think its quite the > other way > > > > > > > around when it > > > > > > > comes to email. We post our thought without much editing > > > > > for content, > > > > > > > grammer or social ques. The slips, rants and other things > > > > > we post tell > > > > > > > others a lot about who we really are. If a > psychologist went > > > > > > > through our > > > > > > > posts they could probably build a rather accurate > picture of > > > > > > > each of us. The > > > > > > > true us. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it a removal of bias when you deal with someone > > > > > > > anonymously? On the > > > > > > > > surface, it seems like it works, but as I see > it the bias > > > > > > > hasn't been > > > > > > > > removed, only obfuscated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The interaction is able to take place without a > > > > > > > preconception or prejudice > > > > > > > > based on appearance, and that can certainly be good. But > > > > > > > that doesn't > > > > > > > really > > > > > > > > mean that the bias doesn't exist. To take an obvious > > > > > > > stereotype example: > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > you put a prejudiced white person in a room with a > > > > > prejudiced black > > > > > > > person, > > > > > > > > the bias is there. If they interact online with no > > > > > knowledge of skin > > > > > > > color, > > > > > > > > the interaction may proceed normally, but what > happens if > > > > > > > they then meet? > > > > > > > We > > > > > > > > want to believe that a TV-like morality lesson will be > > > > > > > learned and that > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > racist person will realize that the other person's skin > > > > > > > color doesn't > > > > > > > > matter; however, in my experience the bias > comes rushing to > > > > > > > the forefront > > > > > > > > and the racist person may become even more > incensed feeling > > > > > > > they have been > > > > > > > > betrayed and lied to by the other person. It's not > > > > > > > rational, but I've seen > > > > > > > > it happen. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not saying that obfuscation is all bad. As Patrick > > > > > > > said, it may help > > > > > > > > break down the "Us and Them". However, does it > have a flip > > > > > > > side? Do people > > > > > > > > intentionally hide their color/race/religion/culture in > > > > > > > order to interact? > > > > > > > > Do those aspects become like a dreaded albatross and > > > > > > > something people come > > > > > > > > to wish to shed in order to become a nameless, faceless > > > > > "sanitized" > > > > > > > person? > > > > > > > > If we are sanitizing, does that cast those troublesome > > > > > qualities as > > > > > > > "dirty"? > > > > > > > > Where is the line drawn between being proud of our > > > > > > > differences and being > > > > > > > > hindered by them? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kevin Graeme > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
