Social Media - It's a riot.

The right to privacy.

You see, that's the problem right there. You do, and don't, have a right to privacy but it seems like a lot of people consider it to be an absolute. From a legal standpoint, every country treats privacy differently. Add the interwebs and it becomes a shithole.

To cut across and make a sweeping generalisation, you don't have as much right to privacy as you think you do. Unless your country is a totalitarian regime (in which case, odds are you can't read this anyway), you most likely have SOME right to privacy in certain respects. Things like private medical information are pretty locked down, so much so that getting your own file is an endeavour. Things like your name and address? Unless you take great care, that shit can be easy to find. The real bugbear is what you willingly put out there yourself, and this is where social media comes into play. If you release the information yourself, in a way you mean to (ie making a Facebook post), then you lose a lot of your already scanty protection - especially if, by the terms of service, you "give" that information to the place you're using.

Then there's the nature of the information. For example, personal information may be protected while business information is not. Deciding what's what can be a headache, but I've had presentations and slideshows I've delivered appear on the net, freely available, without my permission. I've been name checked in various places without reference. It's the way the world works out of necessity, and as long as it's not defamatory, passing off or some otherwise fraudulent use of your persona, there's not much you can do about it.

Next, add in the stuffups where your information is released because someone just plain fucked up. I'll give you a real life example to scare you a little. A few months back, a consumer legal centre in Australia did a big research study and published a paper which was framed around a big survey they had done. When they published it, they invited the world (via their website) to obtain the raw data they'd gathered. That's not particularly alarming, as the law requires it to be de-identified before being distributed as it often contains people's names (if given), addresses and other tidbits. What's alarming is that the copy of the raw data I obtained was not de-identified. They emailed me the complete data set, including home addresses, ages and phone numbers, for several hundred people. We emailed the person in charge to let them know of their faux pas. His email response was, and I quote, "FUCK."

He politely asked us to delete the data. I politely refused, on the basis that the law doesn't require me to and that it would be used as further evidence of their incompetency (which was already rather massive). I also indicated that I had no intention of using the information for any purpose other than that, and informed the government privacy commissioner of the same. All completely legal. That's because our privacy act primarily concerns the use of private information, not who has it. The centre was in trouble for giving it to me, and I was not because all I did was retain it.

Lastly, of course, are the people who just steal shit. Personal information is rather valuable, and as easy to crack as Nettdata has represented - especially when you add incompetency. Anyone in denial of this should just go and check the Sony PSN outage a while back.

The way I see it is this, especially in regards to social media: line up your mother, father, grandparents, kids, boss, spiritual/religious figure, local cop and town gossip. Now, if you won't say it in the presence of these people - either don't post it on the internet, or be prepared that some day they will find out.

 

Hmm, I have never googled myself and had limited results (praise black baby jesus), however the site called spokeo.com did have two of my prior addresses, a prior income (sigh) and (GASP), my horoscope. The fact that I am a Saggitarius and a female are the most currently correct info, that were free.

If I pay a small fee, it appears I can know much more specific information. A few dollars to stalking with ease, apparently...

 

This seems somewhat relevant to the topic at hand. I logged onto my Facebook last night, and I had a post that Adam [redacted] and Jeanna [redacted] were in a relationship. I looked at both of their pages; I am friends with neither of these people. In fact, after some further searching, we don't even have any friends in common and they live across the country from me. (They go to school in California, I live in Pennsylvania.) I could also read all of the posts that people were writing to, and about their relationship. How is that OK for me to know? There is a difference between publicly posting something, and it appearing on random strangers walls.

 

I'm very diligent about staying on top of my personal security online, and I use cut-out mail boxes to protect my physical security as well (the only known address for me online is my college frat house).

Like some of you, I have the unique responsibly of having a one-off name, so people can Google me easily. I travel under an alias when I can and rarely let people I meet in foreign countries know my last name. I just plain don't like the idea that someone can randomly find out a ton of data about me, especially what I do for a living and where I live.

 

The tv has one upped you, good sir. Your move...

FOCUS: I'm not naive enough to think that I haven't left an internet trail, but I am not so egotistical to think the world is out to get me and cares about how fast I ran a 5k.

I do wonder how I would ever explain (out of context) statements made on this and other websites...

 

Holy shit. Sorry to bump a dying thread, but this is worth it.

Link 1
Link 2

Jesus Christ. Can you imagine if he'd leaned out a window and shot the cop in his bushes? It is an interesting point though, that police can cut phone lines / wired internet access, but unless they have a signal blocker people with smartphones can still connect to the outside world.

 

Signal blocking mobile broadband is a relatively simple task. Mobile blocking devices are cheap and available. A hobbyist could build one relatively easily for under $50 with stock parts at a Radioshack. Their legality varies depending on where you live - but it's absolutely something that could be fitted to every police car if the department felt the need.

I suspect that keeping the communication channels open in this case was deliberate.

 

I hadn't thought of that, but given the drug distribution network and the Norteno gang link, this makes perfect sense. A nice, low manpower way to gather a list of known associates and sympathizers.

 

To me, I see crocodile tears and nothing more. A spoiled rotten brat that tried to blow up a fueled police car surrounded by hundreds of people and only after his picture pops up on the news...THEN he's "so very very sorry". You apologized, good for you. Take comfort in knowing you never had a choice.

He's no better than the rest of them, he just happened to get nailed first so he became the "face" of the riot. I sincerely hopes this ruins his scholarship (who gets a FULL scholarship for fucking water polo in the first place?) and terminates any friendships he had. AS far as I'm concearned, fuck him in the ear.

 

You're welcome.