-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Friday 29 August 2014 at 9:04:54 AM, in
mid:54003426.4030...@signal100.com, Mark Rousell wrote:
Social interaction inevitably involves some extent of
information sharing, and always has, but that doesn't
mean that privacy (and all the
On 27/08/2014 11:16, Jason Antony wrote:
What can't be controlled is when people who know you give out your
personal details on social networks.
It could happen because they may not see anything wrong with it, they
may be tricked into it [games/surveys], or they wish to harm you.
This is
On 27/08/2014 11:46, d...@geer.org wrote:
I fully agree with you, which means that I see few ways to preserve
the liberty that privacy represents than to withdraw from much of
civil society while it shares ever more -- sharing ever more on the
I've got nothing to hide premise. Technology
It is safe to say this thread has moved way off topic from being about using
gnupg.
Samir
--
Samir Nassar
sa...@samirnassar.com
https://samirnassar.com
PGP Fingerprint: EE76 B39E 0778 8F95 F796 B044 FE67 9A90 8E99 7AB2
Public Key: https://samirnassar.com/files/key.asc
signature.asc
On 27/08/2014 17:15, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Figure out what
*precisely* you're concerned with, and start talking about that -- but
privacy as a word has become so vague it's almost useless. If we
can't describe precisely what we're afraid of losing, we're going to
lose it and we won't even
(This did not seem to reach the list previously. Apologies if you've
seen it twice.)
On 27/08/2014 15:54, shm...@riseup.net wrote:
actually you chose to step out of the front door today i assume ?
you took the bus to work or maybe you drove ?
i don't know, maybe a tractors more your thing, but
On 29/08/2014 09:29, Samir Nassar wrote:
It is safe to say this thread has moved way off topic from being about using
gnupg.
Samir
Yes. My apologies for my part in taking it off-topic.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
| Is this not the core of the question? In a world of social media
| and sensor-driven everything, does not the very concept of private
| information fade, per se? I believe it does.
|
| No. Taking part in social networks and other media is a choice. One can
| a) choose not to take
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2014-08-27 15:02, Mark Rousell wrote:
No. Taking part in social networks and other media is a choice. One
can a) choose not to take part at all, or b) choose how one takes
part and what information one shares.
What can't be controlled is
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 06:46:13AM -0400, d...@geer.org wrote:
| Is this not the core of the question? In a world of social media
| and sensor-driven everything, does not the very concept of private
| information fade, per se? I believe it does.
|
| No. Taking part in social
Mark Carousel wrote:
On 23/08/2014 11:16, d...@geer.org wrote:
On 2014-08-22 at 21:13, Rejo Zenger wrote:
Open data and transparency should only be about what concerns everybody,
like government actions, trains schedule, etc. not private information.
Is this not the core of the
Jason Antony wrote:
On 2014-08-27 15:02, Mark Rousell wrote:
No. Taking part in social networks and other media is a choice. One
can a) choose not to take part at all, or b) choose how one takes
part and what information one shares.
What can't be controlled is when people who know you
I fully agree with you, which means that I see few ways to preserve
the liberty that privacy represents than to withdraw from much of
civil society while it shares ever more...
I see a couple, but much like Dan, I'm not optimistic about them.
The first is this: *stop talking about privacy*.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 27 August 2014 at 5:15:09 PM, in
mid:53fe040d.2080...@sixdemonbag.org, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
I've run into self-styled privacy advocates here in the
U.S. who are furious over how the U.S. has been reading
their email. The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 27 August 2014 at 11:16:24 AM, in
mid:53fdaff8.30...@gmail.com, Jason Antony wrote:
What can't be controlled is when people who know you
give out your personal details on social networks.
It could happen because they may not
Is there really as much of a distinction as some would have us
believe?
Yes, absolutely. If the problem is X and your advocacy loudly insists
that Y is happening, then you're (a) not solving X (although Y might
need fixing anyway), and (b) all the people you've persuaded to join
your cause
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 27 August 2014 at 8:37:10 PM, in
mid:53fe3366.6010...@sixdemonbag.org, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Is there really as much of a distinction as some would
have us believe?
Yes, absolutely. If the problem is X and your advocacy
But there will be significant overlap between the dataset collected by
somebody harvesting content and the inferences about somebody's life
that could be drawn by somebody harvesting metadata. I had hoped the
quote from the EFF website would illustrate this.
For some individuals, yes. For
On 23/08/2014 11:16, d...@geer.org wrote:
On 2014-08-22 at 21:13, Rejo Zenger wrote:
Open data and transparency should only be about what concerns everybody,
like government actions, trains schedule, etc. not private information.
Is this not the core of the question? In a world
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Friday 22 August 2014 at 3:17:30 AM, in
mid:53f6a83a.1050...@sixdemonbag.org, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
I respectfully submit that once the definition is
broadened that far, the word ceases to have probative
value. But if that's the
On 2014-08-22 at 21:13, Rejo Zenger wrote:
Open data and transparency should only be about what concerns everybody,
like government actions, trains schedule, etc. not private information.
Is this not the core of the question? In a world of social media
and sensor-driven everything,
On 2014-08-23 at 12:16, d...@geer.org wrote:
On 2014-08-22 at 21:13, Rejo Zenger wrote:
Open data and transparency should only be about what concerns everybody,
like government actions, trains schedule, etc. not private information.
Is this not the core of the question? In a world of social
| On 2014-08-23 at 12:16, d...@geer.org wrote:
| On 2014-08-22 at 21:13, Rejo Zenger wrote:
| Open data and transparency should only be about what concerns everybody,
| like government actions, trains schedule, etc. not private information.
|
| Is this not the core of the question? In
On 08/23/2014 08:08 PM, d...@geer.org wrote:
| On 2014-08-23 at 12:16, d...@geer.org wrote:
| On 2014-08-22 at 21:13, Rejo Zenger wrote:
| Open data and transparency should only be about what concerns everybody,
| like government actions, trains schedule, etc. not private information.
On 2014-08-22 at 01:16, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 8/21/2014 3:35 PM, Johannes Zarl wrote:
Compiling a collection of publicly available information is an
almost perfect description of the term surveillance. E.g. a
surveillance camera does exactly that: it collects publicly available
++ 22/08/14 11:38 +0200 - Garreau, Alexandre:
The difference in the relation we have with information is who does it
concern: when it concerns everybody (like Science, information about
politics, events, Philosophy, Art, etc. what generally is what Wikipedia
contains, aka “encyclopedic
Can I ask that the whole discussion of what is or is not surveillance
be taken off line somewhere? It really doesn't matter what we call it,
the interesting bit here is that we know all kinds of data are being
collected by all kinds of folks. That leaves open the (IMO much more
interesting)
Or, to put it another way: security through obscurity is ok. as long as no one
finds out, or goes looking for, public information, everything's hidden well
enough.
Regards,
Charlie
602.420.4123
-Original Message-
From: Gnupg-users [mailto:gnupg-users-boun...@gnupg.org] On Behalf Of
On 2014-08-22 at 21:13, Rejo Zenger wrote:
++ 22/08/14 11:38 +0200 - Garreau, Alexandre:
The difference in the relation we have with information is who does
it concern: when it concerns everybody (like Science, information
about politics, events, Philosophy, Art, etc. what generally is what
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- Original Message
Subject:GNU hackers discover HACIENDA government surveillance and give
us a way to fight back
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:02:21 -0400
From: Free Software Foundation i...@fsf.org
Reply-To: Free
GNU community members and collaborators have discovered threatening
details about a five-country government surveillance program
codenamed HACIENDA. The good news? Those same hackers have already
worked out a free software countermeasure to thwart the program.
A little late to the party. This
Robert J. Hansen:
[snip]
Also note that, contrary to the FSF's press release, this isn't
government surveillance. It isn't even surveillance in the usual sense
of the word. If you run a public service like HTTP, how is it
surveillance for someone, anyone, to say the server sixdemonbag.org,
I'm not happy with that definition/understanding of surveillance. It's
not just about reporting on what colors people's houses are - it's
more about someone going to every door, trying to open it, and noting
what kind of door and lock there is. Then, comes back with a key, opens
the door,
On Thursday 21 August 2014 11:41:40 Robert J. Hansen wrote:
If it escalates to an intrusion, then yes, that's definitely
surveillance in my book. Compiling a collection of publicly available
information is not.
Compiling a collection of publicly available information is an almost
perfect
On 8/21/2014 3:35 PM, Johannes Zarl wrote:
Compiling a collection of publicly available information is an
almost perfect description of the term surveillance. E.g. a
surveillance camera does exactly that: it collects publicly available
information.
So does the phone book, Wikipedia, and IMDB.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I'm sorry, I know this is OT for the list, but...
Am 21.08.2014 um 15:54 schrieb Robert J. Hansen:
GNU community members and collaborators have discovered
threatening details about a five-country government surveillance
program codenamed
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 12:46:38AM +0200, Gabriel Niebler wrote:
On the contrary, IMO this sort of thing is fully encompassed by the
word surveillance, at least as far as I have always understood it.
Otherwise any surveillance camera installed in a public or publicly
accessible place would not
Hi,
Name me any piece of non-trivial information which doesn't have the
potential to be used against someone.
What do you mean by non-trivial?
Regards,
Filip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Just to get pedantic, according to Wikipedia [1]:
First, thank you for citing a definition rather than using a loose
handle on a notion. I genuinely appreciate it!
That seems pretty clear to me that HACIENDA is indeed a surveillance program.
It also means that a newspaper reporting on the
39 matches
Mail list logo
