----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WHY? ----- ooops!!!!

> I still think we need to keep this discussion going for a bit. I have a
> question for you guys. Which do you think is better for all concerned.
> Do you think we should portray a false sense of security and anonymity?

What is this "false sense of security and anonymity?"    I have always told
my customers that

> Do you think we should tell our customers, "Hey do whatever you want
> online, nobody is tracking anything". Then when a customer trips up on
> an online resource that is a trap by the feds they get a court order and
> beat on us with subpoenas and the like until we give them whatever data
> we might have.

I have always told my customers that  << I >> don't track what they do, but
that should law enforcement get a court order, I will assist in any way

> I can tell you what I do online and on the telephone. I assume I am
> being monitored all the time. (No...not in that paranoid "they're out to
> get me" sort of way). Why should anyone think otherwise? It is not as if
> the legal system cannot listen in or watch if they really want to. All
> it takes is a court to approve a tap. It is not that big a deal to the
> legal system.
> I am not advocating that we help the government strip away our civil
> liberties. If I did not think they were part anti-Christ I would likely
> join and support the ACLU because our government is chiseling away at
> our civil liberties one by one, a piece at a time, slowly and
> methodically and none of us are really doing anything but watching it
> happen and whining about it occasionally. Just like that boiling frog
> analogy someone expressed on here recently (I really liked that analogy
> by the way).

Relax, John, they aren't the "anti-christ", but they do so precious little
for our real rights, I think it's counterproductive to ever support them...
maybe sometimes a particular action, but never "them".

> What I am saying is it would probably be a better service to our
> customers if we simply tell them the facts. Let them know that if they
> do something out of line on the Internet that there is a very good
> chance they will be tracked and caught. There are in fact legal efforts
> online setup to trap folks who are doing bad things. They exist and they
> catch lots of people doing bad things. I cannot help but think that part
> of the reason for this increase in criminal behavior is born from a
> false sense of security people have that they can go do things on the
> Internet that nobody will ever catch them or see them doing. They think
> they are invisible or somehow that the laws do not apply while they are
> online.
> Maybe if we warn our fellow citizens of the false sense of security
> about anonymity then maybe they will curb some dark repressed desire to
> go find little girls to chat with or try to setup that date with the
> hooker or download that bootleg copy of Snakes on a Plane. I do think
> people need to start using a little more self-control or they will
> actually bring on more erosion of their civil liberties. If we all work
> toward a better culture online then maybe the government will have less
> grounds to erode the open nature of this wonderful medium. This all has
> very little to do with how we might lobby for our own objectives
> involving the tracking of online activity but it makes for good debate
> none the less.
> Scriv

I do not want the legal liability of being responsible for having such logs,
keeping such logs, and having to prove such logs are absolutely accurate.
That's just that part.   I wholeheartedly believe that keeping such things
is definitely wrong, from a constitutional and moral standpoint.

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to