Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Feb 1, 2008, at 11:29 AM, Tom Piwowar wrote: Which gets us back to that well-worn phrase: the banality of evil. The big muckety-mucks may get the wine and the dine, but it is the 'front line' employees who do the deed. And when the facts get out it is the 'front line' employees who get blamed by the big muckety-mucks and are called to account for their misdeeds. The big muckety-mucks keep wining and dining. The person who installed the NSA splitter will be blamed for the entire affair. I understand the point you are making. In defense of those front line employees, they generally are simply following orders, often with no knowledge that they are doing anything illegal. Will it be the poor front line employee who loses their job, serving as the sacrificial lamb? Most certainly. Will the big muckety-mucks take a hit? Not at all. Even as I write this, Congress is leaning toward agreeing with the White House that the telephone companies should be protecting from being prosecuted or even having to face civil suits for breaking the law. Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
No need for that. As said earlier, none of this was undertaken by the front line employees. It was all approved and ordered by the big muckety-mucks, the same ones who wine, dine, contribute to and play golf with administration bigwigs. Which gets us back to that well-worn phrase: the banality of evil. The big muckety-mucks may get the wine and the dine, but it is the 'front line' employees who do the deed. And when the facts get out it is the 'front line' employees who get blamed by the big muckety-mucks and are called to account for their misdeeds. The big muckety-mucks keep wining and dining. The person who installed the NSA splitter will be blamed for the entire affair. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:19 PM, Eric S. Sande wrote: Whether this was in response to a National Security Letter or not is unspecified. What is clear is that, assuming the source is accurate, the apparent violations of normal practice may have occurred on a small scale. One claim that you can probably look up yourself, since you may know the proper words to search on, is that Verizon provided access to the NSA so that agency could install a splitter within one or more of Verizon's own buildings, thereby enabling telephone calls to be routed straight to the NSA as well as to pass through via their normal routes. I am pretty sure that this was established as being a fact in Congressional testimony some months ago. Again, this was done without the required court orders, and if I am not mistaken, provides the basis for most of the pending or proposed lawsuits. That eavesdropping that took place is what is now being referred to in numerous press reports as well as in Congress as the illegal wiretapping. Of course, it was all of that, in great part, that led to the resignation of Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General. The fact that Verizon and ATT sent the letters in the first place seems to argue that the telcos believed they were acting in good faith and within the law. I think it was more of a PR stunt in preparation for what they knew would be testimony under oath. But I agree that just following orders is not an excuse. So you have my permission to take me out and shoot me, .0078 is .0078 too much, and as long as I take their gold I am responsible. No need for that. As said earlier, none of this was undertaken by the front line employees. It was all approved and ordered by the big muckety-mucks, the same ones who wine, dine, contribute to and play golf with administration bigwigs. Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 29, 2008, at 8:19 PM, Eric S. Sande wrote: Whether this was in response to a National Security Letter or not is unspecified. What is clear is that, assuming the source is accurate, the apparent violations of normal practice may have occurred on a small scale. Here is an article on the NSA splitter installation(s). http://tinyurl.com/26pnbm Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Yes, Tom, my mind corrected it for me as I read it, so I missed the mistake. I agree. Who said those who give up their rights hoping for security end up with neither? Our rights under our constitution are our only real guarantee of security! Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- From: Computer Guys Announcements and Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Piwowar Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:30 PM To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy I do not believe that when a government official approaches you and asks you to commit a crime, the proper answer should not be Yes Sir! Oops. I have an extra not in there. You probably understood what I intended anyway. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Read the book about the Duke LaCrosse trio that I am listening to on Public Radio would make the hairs on the back of your head stand up. Stewart At 06:40 AM 1/29/2008, you wrote: I'm so glad this was corrected. This kind of mistakes bugs the hell out of me. Recently noticed it once again while watching Law and Order. A loose qoute; Do you not agree that you slept with the defendant!? Yes! Ok, yes what? They either did or didn't. Do I really need to further explain for those who don't understand the way the question was asked for the desired result for an answer? Sorry, this seems way off topic, but it's really not. This list and the industry as a whole is so worried about being sued for this or that. Wording is everything. By the way, being sued is one thing. Making something illegal is completely different. One of the reasons I'm not a big fan of OJ winning the criminal case but loosing the other. I'm not an OJ fan and couldn't really give a crap, with the exception that the whole thing was total crap. Can't get them one way, get them the other, regardless. No wonder people hate lawyers and the legal system. Jeff M Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince of Peace Ozark, AL SL 82 * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 29, 2008, at 1:11 AM, Eric S. Sande wrote: It's easy to suggest impropriety. I think the burden of proof is yours, sir. I offer this. http://tinyurl.com/3xc5o5 * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
No wonder people hate lawyers and the legal system. To get us back on topic (sort of), this takes us back to an earlier thread Time Warner pay based on Data Usage. The point in both cases is greedy corporations starting propoganda campaigns to pollute our understanding of reality. Time Warner wants us to believe that there is a bandwith shortage so they can start to charge for an abundant resource. Corporations who break the laws want us to believe that lawers are bad people so we won't try to seek justice. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Mr Sande, your turn. Blinders are so very hard to discard... Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
I'm so glad this was corrected. This kind of mistakes bugs the hell out of me. Recently noticed it once again while watching Law and Order. A loose qoute; Do you not agree that you slept with the defendant!? Yes! Ok, yes what? They either did or didn't. Do I really need to further explain for those who don't understand the way the question was asked for the desired result for an answer? Sorry, this seems way off topic, but it's really not. This list and the industry as a whole is so worried about being sued for this or that. Wording is everything. By the way, being sued is one thing. Making something illegal is completely different. One of the reasons I'm not a big fan of OJ winning the criminal case but loosing the other. I'm not an OJ fan and couldn't really give a crap, with the exception that the whole thing was total crap. Can't get them one way, get them the other, regardless. No wonder people hate lawyers and the legal system. Jeff M On Jan 29, 2008, at 4:03 AM, Snyder, Mark (NGIT-CA) wrote: Yes, Tom, my mind corrected it for me as I read it, so I missed the mistake. I agree. Who said those who give up their rights hoping for security end up with neither? Our rights under our constitution are our only real guarantee of security! Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- From: Computer Guys Announcements and Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Piwowar Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:30 PM To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy I do not believe that when a government official approaches you and asks you to commit a crime, the proper answer should not be Yes Sir! Oops. I have an extra not in there. You probably understood what I intended anyway. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Bandwidth shortage...yeah. Cox is testing 30mbit here in phoenix. Friend of mine posted 28.7mbit test results via dslreports. Mike On Jan 29, 2008 9:51 AM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No wonder people hate lawyers and the legal system. To get us back on topic (sort of), this takes us back to an earlier thread Time Warner pay based on Data Usage. The point in both cases is greedy corporations starting propoganda campaigns to pollute our understanding of reality. Time Warner wants us to believe that there is a bandwith shortage so they can start to charge for an abundant resource. Corporations who break the laws want us to believe that lawers are bad people so we won't try to seek justice. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
I offer this. http://tinyurl.com/3xc5o5 Suggesting, if the numbers are accurate, that .0078 of the responses for data were without court order or subpoena in advance, which is the normal procedure. Whether this was in response to a National Security Letter or not is unspecified. What is clear is that, assuming the source is accurate, the apparent violations of normal practice may have occurred on a small scale. I don't know what constitutes an Emergency request, and I don't know whether appropriate documentation was secured ex post facto. This article caused a great deal of consternation in some circles. Some of it is slanted. We actually don't keep some of the data that was apparently requested. It's rare in these situations where there's agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendants -- that there are plenty of protections for telecommunications providers in the existing laws, said the EFF's Opsahl, adding that no new immunity is necessary. It appears that we both agree that the court should be able to look at the full situation, despite the state-secrets privilege. The fact that Verizon and ATT sent the letters in the first place seems to argue that the telcos believed they were acting in good faith and within the law. But I agree that just following orders is not an excuse. So you have my permission to take me out and shoot me, .0078 is .0078 too much, and as long as I take their gold I am responsible. I still don't buy the USA Today article, though. - Original Message - From: Steve Rigby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:26 AM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy On Jan 29, 2008, at 1:11 AM, Eric S. Sande wrote: It's easy to suggest impropriety. I think the burden of proof is yours, sir. I offer this. http://tinyurl.com/3xc5o5 * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Suggesting, if the numbers are accurate, that .0078 of the responses for data were without court order or subpoena in advance, which is the normal procedure. Are you not playing with statistics here? They admit to 720 illegal acts during a period of 2-3/4 years. There are about 690 business days in this interval so they were doing this on a daily basis. Plus, at least some of these requests were very broad. Not just who did this person call, but all the persons this person called and all the people those people called. That's going to be a big number. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Plus, at least some of these requests were very broad. Not just who did this person call, but all the persons this person called and all the people those people called. That's going to be a big number. Well, not exactly. It was stated that the telco didn't keep calling circle data. Also, the telco didn't say it responded to those requests, only that it received them. From a purely technical standpoint, assume the call is to Saudi Arabia or Fiji or even say Texas. Assuming the time and duration of the call is clocked, that's all very well. That's what the telco does, clocks time of call and duration. That's so the subscriber can be billed for the call. The telco has no control over the information transmitted and no knowledge of that information. All we know is that subscriber X called number Y for Z minutes/seconds on date whatever. And it costs whatever amount of dollars depending on the rate. That's it. We don't record traffic beyond that. How could say ATT know what was said in Saudi Arabia when an SA local number calls a Kuwait local number after a call from the U.S.? They can't. And they don't care. Yes it's possible for law enforcement to execute live taps. But as I've said, the telcos don't do this on their own. Google CALEA if you want to get the big picture of how this is implemented, this is all public record type stuff. I can assure you that I am not playing with statistics, what your government does with technology I am not responsible for other than to insist that the rules be followed in the areas that I am responsible for. Not only do I take this very seriously I am apalled that even a .0078 slip rate is admitted to and apparently allowed to exist. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Collusion with NSA? If the feds come up to me and say we need this, my first reaction, when and how soon! They are the government and I am responsible to them. (Remember Verizon operates under the privilege of the Federal government to use the airwaves and the phone lines.) You sound like a good apparatchik. I'm sure similar pressure is being exercised against programmers who work on electronic voting machines. Perhaps it is my eastern European heritage that makes me more sensitive to the fact that a government of the people may not be operating for the people. I do not believe that when a government official approaches you and asks you to commit a crime, the proper answer should not be Yes Sir! Some of you might find it interesting to watch the movie trilogy: Man of Marble, Man of Iron, and Man of Steel. In those films it is interesting to observe the attitude that this government has towards its citizens. Looks so much like what the neocons want America to be. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Rev. Stewart Marshall Whatever you want to believe. It has always amazed me that people want privacy but leave it all hang out (so to speak) In this day of technology you leave so many digital footprints out there. Kind of reminds me of the Head of google getting all bent out of shape when Cnet googled his info and let everyone know it. snip In Europe it is never expected to have the kind of privacy folks think they have here in America. I do not expect privacy. If I am doing wrong I expect to be caught. I do not expect anyone to cover my tracks. (Even if I am paying them, it is not their job to cover for my criminal activity.) It's my understanding that Europe and the US have privacy policies that are almost exact opposites. In the US, you have laws/policies against warrantless searches, they aren't allowed to aggregate your data. That is, the IRS can't compare your tax return with Social Security Administration records. Business on the other hand doesn't have those same kind of restrictions (see the aforementioned case where cNet got the scoop on the CEO?COO? of Google). In Europe, the government can get any information they want, usually businesses can't share personal data across boundaries. -- Take care | This clown speaks for himself, his job doesn't Wayne D. | supply this, at least not directly A clean, neat, desk is a sign of a sick mind * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Western European born, US Raised, but raised with an understanding that there are two realms you live in, spiritual/political-governmental. Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar and render unto God that which is God. 4th Commandment stuff. (Remember I come from a highly religious background) I never thought that government is for me. Government is for government. I owe them taxes and obeying laws. I serve the church and it gets my first allegiance. Do governments serve themselves? Yes all the time. Any institution that has been around becomes intrenched in institutional mentality. That does not mean I have to quite listening to them. Any government that operates under the delusion that you can have complete privacy will become a victim of its own delusions. If everyone put up a fence to protect their privacy and anyone crossed over that fence, we would fast become a victim of it. My privacy only exists until it butts up against someone else's. We have built a shibboleth out of privacy, something that has never really existed. Stewart At 06:21 PM 1/28/2008, you wrote: You sound like a good apparatchik. I'm sure similar pressure is being exercised against programmers who work on electronic voting machines. Perhaps it is my eastern European heritage that makes me more sensitive to the fact that a government of the people may not be operating for the people. I do not believe that when a government official approaches you and asks you to commit a crime, the proper answer should not be Yes Sir! Some of you might find it interesting to watch the movie trilogy: Man of Marble, Man of Iron, and Man of Steel. In those films it is interesting to observe the attitude that this government has towards its citizens. Looks so much like what the neocons want America to be. Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince of Peace Ozark, AL SL 82 * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
I do not believe that when a government official approaches you and asks you to commit a crime, the proper answer should not be Yes Sir! Oops. I have an extra not in there. You probably understood what I intended anyway. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Well, sir, all I can say is that you need to investigate the goings on within the very company that you apparently work for. It's easy to suggest impropriety. I think the burden of proof is yours, sir. I can tell you for a certain fact that no one under my command was ever given an illegal order under the laws of the United States or contrary to the Verizon Code of Business Conduct. Nor was I ever directed to give such an order. Somehow I feel that I'm in a courtroom at Nuremberg here, with no defense attorney :-). * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
[CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
In the news these days are stories about how our current administration is desperately trying to protect telephone companies from lawsuits that may be or are being filed as a result of their illegal participation in monitoring and wiretapping activities. I just paid my phone bill online with Verizon and was struck by this little bit of verbiage as I viewed the log out screen: As always, the privacy and security of your personal information is our #1 priority and is backed by our Internet Privacy Policy. It was the As always part that got to me the most. Pure horse manure. Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Whoa there hoss. You are mistaking two different sets of privacy. 1.) The privacy of your information as a customer and your financial information you share with them. (As just evidenced as you made you payment on your phone bill using a financial instrument.) 2.) You extrapolate this privacy to the privacy you enjoy or wish to enjoy on your use of the public airwaves and infrastructure of phone or wireless usage. There comments are to 1) only not to any thing else. I cannot speak to the administration and their need or want of looking into usage of phones. That is another subject. But you must understand I am in a profession that enjoys very little privacy. I am on display all the time and everyone critiques what I do, so I really could care less if anyone is listening in to my phone calls. Someone needs some sleep so whoever listens in to my calls gets tons of it. Stewart At 06:32 PM 1/27/2008, you wrote: In the news these days are stories about how our current administration is desperately trying to protect telephone companies from lawsuits that may be or are being filed as a result of their illegal participation in monitoring and wiretapping activities. I just paid my phone bill online with Verizon and was struck by this little bit of verbiage as I viewed the log out screen: As always, the privacy and security of your personal information is our #1 priority and is backed by our Internet Privacy Policy. It was the As always part that got to me the most. Pure horse manure. Steve Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince of Peace Ozark, AL SL 82 * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
It was the As always part that got to me the most. Pure horse manure. Verizon is committed to the privacy of communications. In the absence of a court order we will not divulge subscriber information or traffic details. That is how our front line forces are trained to operate. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Privacy has gone the way of the dodo. Technology rules. Get over it. Fred Holmes At 07:32 PM 1/27/2008, Steve Rigby wrote: In the news these days are stories about how our current administration is desperately trying to protect telephone companies from lawsuits that may be or are being filed as a result of their illegal participation in monitoring and wiretapping activities. I just paid my phone bill online with Verizon and was struck by this little bit of verbiage as I viewed the log out screen: As always, the privacy and security of your personal information is our #1 priority and is backed by our Internet Privacy Policy. It was the As always part that got to me the most. Pure horse manure. Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 27, 2008, at 8:20 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote: Whoa there hoss. You are mistaking two different sets of privacy. I do not think I am mistaking two different sets of privacy. Privacy guarantees as pertaining to my personal information is exactly what could have been violated by Verizon in their collusion with the NSA. I'll probably never know if my own personal information that was in the hands of Verizon was handed over to the feds, but such information on others was. The verbiage I saw on the log out page did not specify that only personal information as related to my online financial transactions was guaranteed to be held in private. That verbiage appeared to state the overall position that Verizon takes with its customers in general, and with myself specifically. As always, the privacy and security of your personal information is our #1 priority and is backed by our Internet Privacy Policy. At any rate, the basic privacy guarantees that Verizon has with all of their customers is and has been spelled out on their website and in other documentation for years. That most certainly was violated, thus the scrambling to find a way to get the administration to push for a law to place Verizon beyond the laws that existed at the time that the violations took place. Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
I was unaware that Verizon had resisted executive orders (sidestepping the relevant court required under FISA) to allow wiretaps on US citizens. Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
Whatever you want to believe. It has always amazed me that people want privacy but leave it all hang out (so to speak) In this day of technology you leave so many digital footprints out there. Kind of reminds me of the Head of google getting all bent out of shape when Cnet googled his info and let everyone know it. As I said in my occupation I have very little privacy. My pay is discussed by a board and voted on by all the congregation (By the way I do not know their financial information or salaries but they all know mine.) I have no say in it except to walk out the door if I am unhappy. My spending is watched over by everyone. Every slip up is discussed in public! In Europe it is never expected to have the kind of privacy folks think they have here in America. I do not expect privacy. If I am doing wrong I expect to be caught. I do not expect anyone to cover my tracks. (Even if I am paying them, it is not their job to cover for my criminal activity.) But I do believe you are wrong. What Verizon was assuring you was in conjunction with what they are required to do with your private data resulting from a transaction. It is what any respectable merchant will do when purchasing or divulging any financial data to them, assure you that they will keep this data private. Collusion with NSA? If the feds come up to me and say we need this, my first reaction, when and how soon! They are the government and I am responsible to them. (Remember Verizon operates under the privilege of the Federal government to use the airwaves and the phone lines.) Maybe it is because I have such a low expectation of privacy, but it did not disturb me one bit that someone might listen into my conversations. As I said before I have nothing to worry about in that regard. Stewart At 07:59 PM 1/27/2008, you wrote: I do not think I am mistaking two different sets of privacy. Privacy guarantees as pertaining to my personal information is exactly what could have been violated by Verizon in their collusion with the NSA. I'll probably never know if my own personal information that was in the hands of Verizon was handed over to the feds, but such information on others was. The verbiage I saw on the log out page did not specify that only personal information as related to my online financial transactions was guaranteed to be held in private. That verbiage appeared to state the overall position that Verizon takes with its customers in general, and with myself specifically. As always, the privacy and security of your personal information is our #1 priority and is backed by our Internet Privacy Policy. At any rate, the basic privacy guarantees that Verizon has with all of their customers is and has been spelled out on their website and in other documentation for years. That most certainly was violated, thus the scrambling to find a way to get the administration to push for a law to place Verizon beyond the laws that existed at the time that the violations took place. Steve Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince of Peace Ozark, AL SL 82 * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 27, 2008, at 9:30 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote: Collusion with NSA? If the feds come up to me and say we need this, my first reaction, when and how soon! They are the government and I am responsible to them. I think the opposite. I, and you, are the most dominant and important portion of government. A government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Those who we chose to represent us in Washington are responsible for carrying out the laws that we, through our representatives, have enacted. If the feds approach me and say we need this, my first reaction, why? Especially when their request is illegal. Maybe it is because I have such a low expectation of privacy, but it did not disturb me one bit that someone might listen into my conversations. As I said before I have nothing to worry about in that regard. Really? Even to your most intimate and perhaps revealing of conversations? Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 27, 2008, at 9:40 PM, Tom Piwowar wrote: I grew up being taught that ex post facto laws were prohibited by the Constitution (Article I, section 9). Or is this just another of those inconvenient truths? Some would say that you grew up in a different generation, that things are different now, and to just get over it. Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
In the news these days are stories about how our current administration is desperately trying to protect telephone companies from lawsuits that may be or are being filed as a result of their illegal participation in monitoring and wiretapping activities. I grew up being taught that ex post facto laws were prohibited by the Constitution (Article I, section 9). Or is this just another of those inconvenient truths? Generally speaking, ex post facto laws are seen as a violation of the rule of law as it applies in a free and democratic society. Most common law jurisdictions do not permit retrospective legislation... in a nation with an entrenched bill of rights or a written constitution, ex post facto legislation may be prohibited. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law) But I suppose Bush could just issue them all pardons. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 27, 2008, at 8:07 PM, Fred Holmes wrote: Privacy has gone the way of the dodo. Technology rules. Get over it. Yeah, well, I'm pickin' my nose right now, but you still can't see me do it, can you? Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
I have been married for 27 years. No longer a reason to worry. :-) Stewart At 09:21 PM 1/27/2008, you wrote: Really? Even to your most intimate and perhaps revealing of conversations? Steve Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince of Peace Ozark, AL SL 82 * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 27, 2008, at 8:42 PM, Eric S. Sande wrote: Verizon is committed to the privacy of communications. In the absence of a court order we will not divulge subscriber information or traffic details. That is how our front line forces are trained to operate. But, it was not the front line forces who violated those principles, was it? Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
I do not think I am mistaking two different sets of privacy. Privacy guarantees as pertaining to my personal information is exactly what could have been violated by Verizon in their collusion with the NSA. Could have? That's a weak argument as far as evidence that Verizon colluded with the NSA. The NSA doesn't need Verizon to get in your shorts. Demonizing a perfectly good telco is probably a bad strategy. At Verizon, I've had the opportunity to work with a very diverse community of very professional people. We take the whole privacy issue very seriously. So seriously that there are requred courses on this. For all management people. I don't think I'm excessively stupid, some may disagree. * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
Re: [CGUYS] Telephone companies and privacy
On Jan 27, 2008, at 10:17 PM, Eric S. Sande wrote: I do not think I am mistaking two different sets of privacy. Privacy guarantees as pertaining to my personal information is exactly what could have been violated by Verizon in their collusion with the NSA. Could have? That's a weak argument as far as evidence that Verizon colluded with the NSA. The NSA doesn't need Verizon to get in your shorts. Well, sir, all I can say is that you need to investigate the goings on within the very company that you apparently work for. Steve * == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in == * == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * List archive from 1/1/2000 is on the MARC http://marc.info/?l=computerguys-l * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header X-No-Archive: yes will not be archived
