Re: "why privacy" revisit

["Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>]

At 2:35 AM -0600 3/23/97, Jonathan Gaw wrote:
>the responses i've gotten have been all too theoretical and, i believe, too
>hypothetical and removed for most people. when asked if they value their
>privacy, the public overwhelmingly agrees. when asked what their privacy
>means to them, i don't think they have a solid answer. i get the sense that
>most people don't see the hazards of corporations analyzing their buying
>patterns, voter registration records and medical records. i don't think it
>has come home to most people.
>
>i don't disagree with the people on the list. i am just having a hard time
>translating it to the public in concrete terms.


Hmmmhhh. I don't recall seeing any messages from you stating that this was
your interest, finding simple hooks the readers of a newspaper can
understand.

I assumed you were interested in the issue as just another participant in
the list, not as a journalist looking for a story angle.

Frankly, readers of newspapers don't have the background to understand the
real issues, for the most part. Expecially given the brevity and
superficiality of most newspaper articles.  And if they ever really figured
out what most of the active participants here stand for, they would likely
vote to ban our existence.

--Tim May

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."