Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(July 2000)

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: egroups
From: "Alan S. Harrell" <ashandrr @ mastnet . net>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2000 07:36:07 -0500
To: List-Managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <p04320403b58728bf4961@[]>
References: <39611FA6.29679.128B494@localhost>
Reply-to: ASHandRR @ mastnet . net

On 3 Jul 2000, 22:39, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: 

[Virus protection et al] 

> Nope. I protect myself against reasonable risks. But if someone says "I
> don't do that", and I have no reason to believe they lie, I don't put in
> protections assuming they do it anyway.

Rationale, reason and experience has led me to my postulations on Internet 
Privacy.  The truly paranoid stay away from the Internet.  And had you read 
the literature I recommended in my first rebuttal post, you would see that 
I am not alone in that thinking.  Your Government, in fact, now thinks that 


Privacy Online: Fair Information Practices in the Electronic Marketplace: A 
Federal Trade Commission Report to Congress (May 2000) 


If one guy comes up to you and says "the sky is falling," it would be 
reasonable to doubt that.  But if a thousand people come up to you and say 
"the sky is falling," I think one should look for cover rather than 
accusing the thousand of being paranoid.  

If I am the first person you ever heard warning you of the fallicy of 
blindly trusting all Privacy Statements, then I could understand your 
having a healthy disbelief of that which I speak.  I would then only ask 
that you keep your eyes open to the news.  You should see very soon plenty 
of articles that are written by privacy doubters, such as myself.

Surely you didn't think Sun Microsystems CEO and Chairman Scott McNealy was 
paranoid when he uttered his now famous soundbyte: "You already have zero 
privacy. Get over it." 

Now there is a corporate type that tells it like it is.  I like that.  I 
wish the CTO of eGroups that posted to our group would do likewise.  Just 
tell us the truth: "eGroups gives you zero privacy.  Get over it."

I could respect that since it mirrors my own beliefs, except that rather 
than "getting over it," I am going to instead "work around it."  That 
entails my message, Chuq.  Rather than denying yourself all that is good in 
the Internet, one should learn to distrust the privacy statements and then 
learn to work around your privacy concerns, just as we learn to work around 
our virus concerns.   

> And I like to bet that if someone says "I won't do this" they 
> actually won't do this. To assume that everyone around me is lying and
> protect myself from it is one step from paranoia.

Now, Chuq, I cannot believe you are that naive.  This is not your best 
friend telling you something.  This is a corporate stranger telling you 
this story.  You have to take his bias into consideration. 

You should ask yourself are you safer with blind faith or would a little 
healthy doubt serve you better?  People get run over when they cross the 
street with blind faith.  They are safer crossing the street by the light.  
My message here is not to avoid crossing the street, but rather to see the 
light and cross the street with caution.

> If you like being paranoid, be my guest. I think that kind of worry is
> overkill, but then, we all have to have hobbies.

My call here has not been "be afraid," but rather "be aware."  That is not 
paranoia, but just good common sense. 

Let me invite you and everyone to simply read the eGroups Privacy Statement 
from "cover to cover."  You will see the ambiguities; the two-faced 
language; the contradictions.  It simply is not a document that gives you 


  • Re: egroups
    From: "Alan S. Harrell" <>
  • Re: egroups
    From: Chuq Von Rospach <>
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: more on blocking/filtering MIME
From: James Lick <>
Next: Re: spam.
From: Russ Allbery <>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: egroups
From: Chuq Von Rospach <>
Next: Re: egroups
From: Tim Pierce <>

Search Internet Search