|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 55 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Time for a muzzle /
Re: Time for a muzzle /
Re: Time for a muzzle /
Re: Time for a muzzle / The online world of lies and rumor grows ever more vicious. Is it time to rethink free speech?
Re: Low-Tech Fixes for High-Tech Problems
====== 27 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.
===========================
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime. Geoffrey Welsh
===========================
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:47:41 -0500
From: MC <for.address.look@www.ai.uga.edu.slash.mc>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Time for a muzzle /
Message-ID: <Iyyol.7576$9a.6221@bignews1.bellsouth.net>
I think the essence of the problem is too much anonymity. The balance
of power shifts when the victims are definite, identifiable people, but
the hecklers (often quite sadistic) are anonymous, yet have access to
the whole world's media.
***** Moderator's Note *****
Like Thomas Paine?
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:08:11 -0600
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Time for a muzzle /
Message-ID: <c_adnY-Pf5PLSj_UnZ2dnUVZ_hWWnZ2d@posted.visi>
MC wrote:
> I think the essence of the problem is too much anonymity.
I know. We keep seeing news stories sourced to "a high government
official" or "a police spokesman" or "an industry source" that don't
identify the source by name. Let's start with them. After all,
what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, eh?
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:06:13 -0800 (PST)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Time for a muzzle /
Message-ID: <eee4078d-a2f8-4528-8c5e-cd6c13bd5b38@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 23, 1:18 pm, Dave Garland <dave.garl...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> I know. We keep seeing news stories sourced to "a high government
> official" or "a police spokesman" or "an industry source" that don't
> identify the source by name. Let's start with them. After all,
> what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, eh?
Some people are very strong supporters of the news media utilizing
such anonymous sources (including the news media). They say it's very
important to democracy protection.
But it must be remember that that very same technique has been used
many times in the past to smear political opponents with impunity.
A major use of the tactic were leaks to columnists who then accused
various public figures of being Communists, which then totally
destroyed their career, and even the person. This is a forgotten, but
very significant part of McCarthyism of the late 1940s and 1950s.
When the witch hunters didn't have sufficient evidence to drag someone
before a committee, they used leaks instead.
At the same time, many sleazy politicians used such leaks to attack
and destroy potential rivals.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:21:31 -0800 (PST)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Time for a muzzle / The online world of lies and rumor grows ever more vicious. Is it time to rethink free speech?
Message-ID: <4cb5a357-a35b-4700-9306-eedb3fed0135@l1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 23, 1:29 am, Monty Solomon <mo...@roscom.com> wrote:
The first thing we must remember there is no such thing as totally
free speech. We can't yell fire in a crowded theatre. We can't give
away defense secrets. We can't harass, libel, or slander another
person. We can't make accusations with malice and reckless disregard
of the truth. We must respect the privacy of private citizens. This
laws have been around for many years and the Internet did not
eliminate any of them, although some people seem to think those issues
do not exist.
> Time for a muzzle
> The online world of lies and rumor grows ever more vicious. Is it
> time to rethink free speech?
The existing laws on free speech, harassment, and libel/slander are
generally adequate.
The problem is that enforcing such laws in the online world is very
difficult.
If I were to personally print up and circulate a leaflet falsely
accusing a neighbor of heinous crimes, that neighbor could fairly
easily find me and successfully sue me, and perhaps take other legal
action as well.
But if I were to utilize a website to make such an attack and make use
cloaking mechanisms, it would be rather hard for that neighbor to find
out who I was and take action.
Unfortunately, the Web makes it very easy to hide one's identity and
easily and cheaply spread rumors and lies. Printing up and
distributing leaflets takes time and money, and even involves some
physical risk (if someone sees me doing it and objects, I could get
punched).
The ease of the Web has encouraged many people to post slander. Many
times social websites are used by kids to visciously attack other
kids. (They wouldn't bother if they had to do it with hard copy.)
An added problem of the Web is that many hosting sites are overseas
and beyond the reach of US laws.
Clearly, this is an area that needs reform.
> The argument
> over what to do about online speech, in other words, is an argument
> over whether the Web's unruly nature is something to be celebrated or
> tamed.
It seems that supporters of the "unruly nature" side do so mostly on
lofty principle, as opposed to any real substantiated practical
results that benefit everyday people or the public interest. But
those seeking to "tame" the web have many hard examples of abuse on
their side. As mentioned, this is not so much an issue of "free
speech', but rather protection against the equally legitimate issue of
libel, slander, and harassment.
[public replies, please]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:39:27 -0500
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Low-Tech Fixes for High-Tech Problems
Message-ID: <MPG.240cefac27afba4a98991c@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <hudsonl-A744B4.10315722022009@news.isp.giganews.com>,
hudsonl@skypoint.com says...
>
> In article <jB3ol.6905$i9.4371@bignews7.bellsouth.net>,
> MC <for.address.look@www.ai.uga.edu.slash.mc> wrote:
>
> > T wrote:
> > >> As customers begin to queue, he reaches beneath the counter for a
> > >> black plastic bag. He wraps one layer of the plastic around the card
> > >> and swipes it again. Success. The sale is rung up.
> > >
> > > It'a because the plastic creates drag so that the card reader actually
> > > has a chance to interpret the data on the card.
> >
> > Would simply sliding it more slowly do the same thing? I seem to recall
> > that some card readers want the card to be slid fairly slowly.
>
> I have never used the bag trick, but have used the slide the card
> backwards trick with very good success.
>
> As I understand it the data is on the strip twice and
> running the card backwards reads the other data set.
>
> Backwards being defined as swiping the card through
> the POS terminal bottom to top.
>
> -Hudson
Yes, most credit cards (ATM and Debit included) have two tracks of
information.
------------------------------
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
The Telecom Digest is currently being moderated by Bill Horne while
Pat Townson recovers from a stroke.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: mailto:telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
(or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)
RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
For syndication examples see http://feeds.feedburner.com/telecomDigest
Copyright (C) 2008 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
************************
---------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of The Telecom digest (5 messages)
******************************
|
or 