On 2003-12-26 22:01, "Barry Wainwright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25/12/03 7:55 pm, "Dénes Bogsányi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 2003-12-26 5:58, "Barry Wainwright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On 25/12/03 8:13 am, "Dénes Bogsányi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> The problem as I see it is that search engines have been programmed to >>>> alert >>>> on words such as *bomb* regardless of context. >>> >>> You have a reference for this? Or is it just rumour? Whose search engines? >>> Who operates them? Who do they report to? >> Simply listening to radio and tv. > > Ah, those wonderful paragons of veracity and selfless disinterest! > > So, I come back to it - who is doing the searching? At what point in the > passage from my computer to yours is the message scanned by these > apocryphal search engines? At my ISP? What if I rum my own mail server so > the message doesn't pass through theirs? Is it intercepted by wire tap? Have > they tapped into your computer to scan the mail? Have they enlisted the > support of all foreign governments to do the same? > > >>> >>> What earthly good would it do to search for phrases like 'bomb', 'terrorist' >>> or 'attack' out of context. It would generate so many false positives as to >>> render the results totally useless. >> They are *positives* that have to be investigated further. In the meantime >> the authorities raise the level of *threat* creating fear and uncertainty.. > > You miss the point entirely. Any tests that generate too many false > positives rapidly become meaningless. The saying 'a needle in a haystack' > comes too mind. By the time any researcher has examined 10 million pieces of > hay, they are no longer looking for the needle, but merely passing things > through by rote. The quest becomes meaningless, devalued, and by > association, the object of the search become more distant and less pressing.. > >>> >>>> Thus thousands upon thousands >>>> of emails are *flagged* because of such words. This raises the level of >>>> unease and plays directly into the hands of thse who aim to create >>>> confusion. >>> >>> On the contrary, too many false positives would reduce the level of unease >>> because the data would very soon be viewed as worthless - even when it >>> contained one actual piece of information amongst all the background noise. >> An increase of such *noise* is used as the excuse to raise the level of >> *threat* and consequently the level of fear. > > And so government becomes an organ of repression. People become afraid to > talk openly, governments use the excuse of a perceived threat to control the > very langauge and conversations of it's citizens. 'Land of the Free' indeed.. > Orwell would have been proud of you. > >>> >>>> Dénes >>> >>> So, have you a list of words we should avoid? Should we not talk about (for >>> example) 'freedom', because that is a word that terrorists use? >> Simply we have to be aware that the unnecessary and loose use of such words >> increases the level of such noise. > > But, the original complainant asked that we refrain from he use of the word > 'bomb' when it was being used in an accepted and reasonable meaning ot the > term. It was used in context and posed no threat. The request, and > associated paranoia was simply too ridiculous to pass unchallenged. > > Since we are so far off topic, and you are so blind to the ridiculous nature > of the arguments you propound, this is my last word on the subject Off topic or not I OBJECT TO YOUR INSENSITIVE AND OBJECTIONABLE AND RUDE COMMENTS WHICH ARE NOT WORTHY OF THIS LIST which should be a discussion of entourage problems!!!!!!!! May be ZOU are BLIND to the import of my words!!!!! This is my last word on the subject and thank you for pontificating on something YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT!!!! Stick to your own subject. Dénes -- Dénes Bogsányi 133 Osburn Drive MACGREGOR ACT 2615 Australia Tel: +612 6254 3636 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: www.homepage.mac.com/denesbogsanyi -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
