On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 12:02:24AM +0200, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote:
broaden this to society at large and you have everyone potentially
Yeah, everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.
watching everyone else, including the authorised watchers (or the
police), i.e. a transparent
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 06:35:24AM +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
Statistics in support of what you have said would be a real boon to any
crimefigthing department. In fact in any organization - such as a hospital,
it could be generally stated that nurses, physiotherapists, ward assistants,
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 07:36:26AM +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
Mumbai police are more likely to be criminals because of their low salaries.
not because of their low salaries alone, but because their salaries are much
lower in proportion to the power they have. whether due to reputation or
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 09:06:06AM +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
Using the correlation relative poverty==tendency to criminal behavior and
that's the wrong correlation (or at least not the one i made): the likelihood
of criminal behaviour is proportional to the ratio of the opportunity from
all the above arguments equate demanding bribes with criminality but somehow
exclude/excuse the payment of bribes? given the sheer number of bribe-givers
to bribe-takers and their respective classes, wouldn't it be fair to
conclude that it is, in fact, the middle and upper classes that are the
On 9/13/07, Ingrid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
all the above arguments equate demanding bribes with criminality but somehow
exclude/excuse the payment of bribes? given the sheer number of bribe-givers
to bribe-takers and their respective classes, wouldn't it be fair to
conclude that it is, in
FWIW, we already have criminal castes, registered and tagged, and dragged into
the local lock-up as the usual suspects whenever a crime takes place.
Nothing new, dates back to the British.
shiv sastry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 13 Sep 2007 7:13 am, Charles Haynes wrote:
On
On Friday 14 Sep 2007 6:30 am, Indrajit Gupta wrote:
FWIW, we already have criminal castes, registered and tagged, and dragged
into the local lock-up as the usual suspects whenever a crime takes place.
Nothing new, dates back to the British.
Exactly IG.
My problem is that I do not
how could he not have referred to bentham's _panopticon_ [1], which
outlined a system where everyone believes they may be watched at any
time, and the watchers are also wide open to the body of the curious at
large?
for those unfamiliar with the concept (the 18th century language is
hardly
that's also true about a significant proportion of people _not_
complaining. people who can afford private computer access aren't
affected. why bother about the privacy of people who can only afford to
use publicly accessible internet connections?
On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 14:18 +0530, shiv sastry
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 06:40 +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
I believe there is a social lesson here. Educated, well paid, computer savvy
individuals are generally seen as honest and upright.
education has little to do with it. well paid people are less likely to
be tempted by the same absolute
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 09:46 +0530, Udhay Shankar N wrote:
[1] not to get all Randroid here, but what, after all, is a police
force, if not a monopoly on the use of force?
i know saint ayn said a lot of things, but this was max weber defining a
state as the entity that has a monopoly of the
On Thursday 13 Sep 2007 4:42 am, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote:
well paid people are less likely to
be tempted by the same absolute amounts than poorly paid people (they
may be tempted by large amounts, of course)
I accept this as a valid opinion that you hold, but I would like to see more
clear
Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote: [ on 03:32 AM 9/13/2007 ]
how could he not have referred to bentham's _panopticon_ [1], which
outlined a system where everyone believes they may be watched at any
time, and the watchers are also wide open to the body of the curious at
large?
In fact, Brin does refer
shiv sastry wrote: [ on 06:35 AM 9/13/2007 ]
well paid people are less likely to
be tempted by the same absolute amounts than poorly paid people (they
may be tempted by large amounts, of course)
I accept this as a valid opinion that you hold, but I would like to see more
clear evidence that
On 9/13/07, shiv sastry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He has less absolute amounts of money than many of his peers and the people in
his new nation and is therefore more likely to be tempted to cheat or steal.
This would call for racial profiling as a way of tackling crime, and it would
be right.
On Thursday 13 Sep 2007 7:04 am, Udhay Shankar N wrote:
Other things are clearly not equal in the example you construct
below. To take one example, you ignore the effects of social
conditioning that pushes Indian (and others too!) immigrants to get
postgraduate degrees, and work hard in their
On Thursday 13 Sep 2007 7:13 am, Charles Haynes wrote:
On 9/13/07, shiv sastry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He has less absolute amounts of money than many of his peers and the
people in his new nation and is therefore more likely to be tempted to
cheat or steal. This would call for racial
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:42:42AM +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
On Monday 10 Sep 2007 10:05 am, Venky wrote:
Forgive me for a couple of naive questions - but just to clarify
things - are you actually okay with the government recording the
keystrokes of every person using a cyber cafe, and more
Amit Varma wrote:
aligned towards putting in place safeguards that do not allow its employees
access to sensitive data, and to make it too risky for those with access to
Banks in India are just beginning to implement security measures. Banks
have been swindled and this cannot be possible if
And Ars Technica wades in as well...
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070910-indian-government-forcing-cybercafes-to-install-keyloggers.html
Shiv, the points you raise are answered by Udhay and Venky, so I won't
repeat what they say. But I'm a bit surprised that while you object to
the government's actions, you don't support such protests. Journalists
should just cover page 3 parties then, no?
Venkat, you wrote:
Do you really believe
On Tuesday 11 Sep 2007 12:52 am, Amit Varma wrote:
But I'm a bit surprised that while you object to
the government's actions, you don't support such protests. Journalists
should just cover page 3 parties then, no?
Let me split the flow of assumptions here:
I object to the government's
shiv sastry wrote: [ on 06:34 AM 9/11/2007 ]
I do not support a protest that consists of those specific ill-chosen
examples that can be guaranteed to backfire. In this case the protest that is
guaranteed to backfire is in support of privacy in a public place to perform
ostensibly high security
On Tuesday 11 Sep 2007 10:04 am, Udhay Shankar N wrote:
Either you think that the notion of reverse transparency or
sousveillance does not address the above, or you're not yet
acquainted with it. Which is the case? That will help me modulate my
further contributions to this thread accordingly.
shiv sastry wrote: [ on 10:25 AM 9/11/2007 ]
Would you be able say why the information in the links you provided make the
specific flaws in logic of the protest that I pointed out any less
ineffective?
OK, I'll try again:
In brief:
* Technology and plain old greed (on the part of tech
On 9/11/07, Udhay Shankar N [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
You are claiming that you weren't able to plough through the links.
But I am claiming that these links actually do offer a refutation of
your thesis. Is that not enough incentive? Or are you just taking the
piss here?
I think Shiv
Amit and Schneier have write ups:
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/09/police_to_monit.html
http://indiauncut.com/iublog/article/indias-cops-get-orwellian/
And when it comes to security, we now have cows with ID's.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/09/cows_get_photo.html
On 9/9/07, shiv sastry wrote:
Does that make every one of
us cultural Nazis?
One person's security is another man's breach of freedom.
shiv
You are a brave man indeed. You must have utmost faith in the
competence of the police to handle such information.
On Sunday 09 Sep 2007 1:49 pm, ashok _ wrote:
You are a brave man indeed. You must have utmost faith in the
competence of the police to handle such information.
In fact there is an element of irony in the complaint that cyber-cafes are
going to come under big brothers eye. A significant
On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 10:21:05PM +0200, Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:
What a large-scale invasion of privacy. To top it all, India's most
Tell that to the NSA. Or to the nitwits we call the local government,
which are pushing for government malware, aka the bundestrojan. At
the same time,
On 9/9/07, shiv sastry wrote:
In fact there is an element of irony in the complaint that cyber-cafes are
going to come under big brothers eye. A significant proportion of people
doing the complaining either do not use cyber cafes or will stop using them
henceforth and shift to what they
On Sunday 09 Sep 2007 5:06 pm, ashok _ wrote:
So what you are saying is that because there might be some unscruplous
cybercafe operators who might be pimping my personal information from a
cybercafe... its alright
for the government to pimp everyones information from every cybercafe
?
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 07:59:10PM +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
Everyone is pimping information, and the citizens of this world are
cheerfully
catering to those pimps. To my knowledge, my fingerprints are not yet of any
official database. But they will get there sooner of later - when I apply
shiv sastry wrote: [ on 07:59 PM 9/9/2007 ]
Everyone is pimping information, and the citizens of this world are
cheerfully
catering to those pimps. To my knowledge, my fingerprints are not yet of any
official database. But they will get there sooner of later - when I apply for
some kind of
On Sunday 09 Sep 2007 5:06 pm, ashok _ wrote:
It wont be long before someone tries to legislate the same for a
private connection in
your home.
Incidentally - someone somewhere and some years ago stated (to me, or in some
list/forum) that if ISPs in the US found that you were using P2P
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 09:00:00PM +0530, shiv sastry wrote:
Incidentally - someone somewhere and some years ago stated (to me, or in some
list/forum) that if ISPs in the US found that you were using P2P clients to
download MP3s regarded as copyrighted your illegal action could be reported.
On Sunday 09 Sep 2007 9:13 pm, Eugen Leitl wrote:
There's an EU directive requiring all ISPs to log connection info
by law (it must become law 2008). This includes which IP
made which connection to which other IP at which time -- more
than enough noose to hang ya.
Lovely. Lovely.
In fact I
shiv sastry wrote: [ on 06:40 AM 9/10/2007 ]
The Mumbai police, like all police in India, consists of underpaid people
given excessive powers over others, with little accountability. So how do you
expect them to behave?
Unless a policemanâs self-interest is perfectly aligned with the public
On Monday 10 Sep 2007 6:59 am, Udhay Shankar N wrote:
Credit card company employees are also going to
be tempted. However, I have some kind of
recourse, in their case. I can take them to
court, if I suspect that they are misusing my
details. I can create bad PR in the press for the company.
Most of all, I can vote with my feet and use another company. (see the
accountability bit in the quote above, which you've - doubtless for
excellent reasons - not addressed in your rant)
Now being discussed on Slashdot.
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/09/09/2011240.shtml
--
*
Madhu
Udhay can you educate me on how voting with your feet or taking them to a
court in India can help if a Credit Card company employee spends Rs
100,000
on your credit card account and you get a bill 3 weeks later?
Shiv, since I wrote that piece, permit me to do to answer this question. The
Another important distinction, Shiv: I choose to associate with any credit
card company I deal with, and any risk I take is of my own volition. It is
not so with the government.
On 9/10/07, Amit Varma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Udhay can you educate me on how voting with your feet or taking them
On Monday 10 Sep 2007 8:47 am, Amit Varma wrote:
Another important distinction, Shiv: I choose to associate with any credit
card company I deal with, and any risk I take is of my own volition. It is
not so with the government.
Sorry if I have have caused hurt and it is a pleasure to address
shiv sastry wrote [at 07:55 AM 9/10/2007] :
Udhay can you educate me on how voting with your feet or taking them to a
court in India can help if a Credit Card company employee spends Rs 100,000
on your credit card account and you get a bill 3 weeks later?
Two things, which are interconnected:
On Monday 10 Sep 2007 10:05 am, Venky wrote:
Forgive me for a couple of naive questions - but just to clarify
things - are you actually okay with the government recording the
keystrokes of every person using a cyber cafe, and more
importantly, do you buy the argument that national security is
http://www.mid-day.com/news/city/2007/august/163165.htm
CARMS monitors web browsing, file transfers, news, chats, messaging
and e-mail, including all encoded attachments. In a sensitive
environment, CARMS can also be used to restrict user or group access
to only approved external and internal
The question we need to ask ourselves is whether a breach of privacy
is more important or the security of the nation. I do not think the
above question needs an answer, said Mukhi.
Security. Values. The two favourite words of our ministerial/cultural nazis...
Deepa.
On 9/9/07, Binand
On Sunday 09 Sep 2007 2:01 am, Deepa Mohan wrote:
The question we need to ask ourselves is whether a breach of privacy
is more important or the security of the nation. I do not think the
above question needs an answer, said Mukhi.
Security. Values. The two favourite words of our
shiv sastry wrote: [ on 11:08 AM 9/9/2007 ]
But Deepa, strong passwords, Firefox instead of IE, Linux instead of Windows,
encryption, locks, firewalls, anti-adware and anonymity that all of us love
to use every day are all about our own security. Does that make every one of
us cultural Nazis?
50 matches
Mail list logo
