NYT Discovers the Panopticon
Erris writes "Should we be surprised at the NYT attacking search engines? This article seeks to blame Google for all privacy loss, as if someone else remembering and sharing the things YOU publish is worse than credit card purchase databases, phone records, credit records being created and shared by OTHERS without your consent. Libraries must really be evil."
NYTimes Login Generator, which I found thanks to Google. How ironic! :)
Actually, no. I couldn't get it to work, even after several tries as well as resetting the randomization. I ended up having to randomize the data myself. Bastards.
Of course, the culture jamming aspects of DIY NYTimes accounts are entertaining. I enjoy creating outliers, knowing full well that the more outliers are created, the more polluted their database becomes. Honestly, the idea of some dope dba having to visually look at and delete an account created by a female clergy/skilled laborer born in 1935 making 130k+ in French Polynesia, wondering all the while why he doesn't just run screaming into the street and actually considering doing so, well, that kinda amuses me. A lot.
political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
This reminds me about my girlfriend, she searched her name on the web and found p0rn. /.
Since I write web pages too, she immediately assumed that I made this page with here name between all the naked girls. She almost left me and it took some time until she understood what happened.
Now I need to be aware that she will find this post, and will be angry again because I blamed her at
>> Had I been going to bed earlier every night? Have I been sleeping later? Has Tyler been in charge longer and l
What's next? Pudge on John Stuart Mill's "On Liberty"? CmdrTaco dissecting "A History Of Sexuality"? The intersection of academe and Slashdot is too terrible to imagine ...
'jfb
To spur "enterprise Linux," Big Bang, the distributed two-phase commit.
A couple of weeks ago I entered my name on google and found that it accurately noted my current address, current telephone, and listed things such as my obnoxiously pretentious postings to a cyberpunk mailing list in the early 90's, advice on how to properly use cu-seeme for an early porn reflector, a couple of rather graphically violent short stories published in someone else's zine, and the random, near-libelous kvetching of an ex who thought of many interesting and practical uses for my still twitching corpse. A couple of small and slightly embarrassing appearances I made in the national media were also noted.
I really have no control over the appearance of any of the above. My name is relatively unique and therefore almost everything from google was definitely originating from me or was about me; my mailing list postings which can be definitely tracked were from my uni days when I was required to have my real name on the net account.
I'm not necessarily bothered by the presence of any of this data. I've asked that my address be removed and it seems as if it has. Any employer or potential partner, who is going to hold my ten year old musings against me, can kindly piss off and I hope they will enjoy an early demise. However, I can certainly understand how some of the article's subjects would feel a great fear and paranoia, especially when they have no control over their appearance on random petitions or various articles.
Google is a double-edged sword and I certainly don't hold their unease against them. Life has certainly been made much easier for stalkers and your office's gossip and that is not necessarily a good thing, despite all the other extraordinary benefits of Google.
I suppose I am a bit of a hypocrite; I confess I used Google to verify that my current gf wasn't Republican, a copyright lawyer, or an escaped ax murderer. Two out of three wasn't a bad result even though the chainsaws have to be kept under lock and key at all times.
Apparently, I own 100 acres in South Carolina and three slaves; Sam, Rachel and Lill. I guess Al Sharpton will be suing me next.
Someone hates these cans.
What I find more disturbing is that she has taken it upon herself to try to teach others about computer/Internet/OS platforms.
My God that google cache is evil! If google didn't have this "cache" scheme in place, then I never would have been subjected to briefly looking at this turtle story. This madness must stop. When people post things on their website, nobody should be able to even look at it, much less cache it forever. The nytimes is right. This is the greatest threat to privacy since some newspapers started reguiring you to log in to read their site content.