Computer Privacy Digest Sat, 20 Nov 93 Volume 3 : Issue: 079 Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears Re: California Driver License and SSN Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls? Re: Computer Bulletin Boards should NOT be censored. Re: Graduate Program on Social Dimensions of Cmputing Re: Graduate Program on Social Dimensions of Cmputing 10,000 Phonebooks on CDROM The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy (Moderated). Submissions should be sent to comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administrative requests to comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil. Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil [129.139.160.133]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 18 Nov 93 13:07:58 PST From: "Dick Murtagh (8-465-4916)" Subject: Re: California Driver License and SSN > From: Chris Claborne > Go to the store and buy anything. It probably came over the road. Interesting point. First, hasn't someone already paid their use fee to get the products to the store ? And get the raw materials to the factory or cannery or meat packing plant ? I consider multiple taxation immoral. Second, how do I go to the store without using the roads ? When I went to the store before there were roads (bear with me) I would cross the fields and streams. In legal terms, this created an easement, - easement (noun 'e-z-m*nt) a nonprofitable interest in land owned by - another that entitles its holder to a specific limited use or enjoyment insuring that I would always be allowed to follow this path. Then the state came along and put a road in my path. Further, they say that I can't use their road unless I pay a use fee. However, my easement should and does override the states right to create a road. Perhaps now I'll sue and force them to rip up the roads between my residence and all the places I regularly go. But I might settle for free use of their roads. > From: Richard Roda > A scene from the future: Are you kidding ? This has been happening for years. Look at what the IRS is empowered to do. If they *think* you *might* have done something wrong, they can seize all your assets and garnish your wages. Then you have to sue to get it back. And since you're the plaintiff, the burden of proof (of your innocence) is on you. For another example, look at "administrative forfeiture" of property when any drug-related charge is brought against you. They (DEA, FBI, cops...) can seize everything in site of the drugs, (your car, your house ...) and then sell it BEFORE you're even charged. I read a story in the Wall Street Journal where law enforcement officials did a property assessment on a piece of real estate owned by the father of a man suspected of drug charges. They then flew over the property at 1000 feet and spotted something "that looked like a marijuana plant". So of course, they raided the property in the middle of the night. During the raid, the 65 year old owner was shot and killed. No drugs where found. Welcome to America. Dick Murtagh ------------------------------ From: pete ritter Subject: Re: Is there an effective way to stop junk phone calls? Organization: Brotherly Order of Odd Bellows (BOOB) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 02:08:55 GMT In article Dick Rinewalt writes: >In article pete ritter, >cpritter@netcom.com writes: >> At long last, federal law now requires telemarketers to remove from >their >> call lists, anyone who requests it. The law also requires them to give >> the name of the telemarketing firm, its address and telephone number if >> you request it. > >I would like more details. Specifically, > What is the citation? > What are the penalties? >Citing the statute and penalties to a telemarketer has some threat value. The law is called "The Telephone Consumer Protection Act". It was passed in 1991. Sorry, I know no more than what I've said. Anyone probably can obtain a copy of the law from her/his US senator or representative. > >Unfortunately, if the info they give does not check out >you have little with which to pursue a complaint. I think you do! Since a law was broken, law enforcement agencies with jourisdiction can obtain the telephone company's records. It is likely that the call can be traced if you know the time it ocurred. CID would be helpful here, unless the caller has disabled it. >Dick Rinewalt Computer Science Dept Texas Christian Univ >rinewalt@gamma.is.tcu.edu 817-921-7166 > -- *************************************** * Pete Ritter * cpritter@netcom.com * *************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 93 14:18:29 -0500 From: Dave Weil Subject: Re: Computer Bulletin Boards should NOT be censored. My thoughts on the issue of freedom of speech on BBSs... I've responded to a couple of articles here and edited heavily. I hope I have not done so so as to offend the authors. Donald Burr writes: > Hmm, this looks like something interesting to start a discussion on. > Following are MY viewpoints on the issue -- feel free to keep the ball > rolling. > [ Lyle Lexier's proposal for a vote deleted... ] > > Though I am a strong proponent of freedom of speech (for example, I strongly > disagree with censoring of USENET, i.e. the alt.sex.* type postings, nudity > and sex gifs, etc.) however, BBS's are another matter. I do not believe > that external authorities (i.e. the FBI, FCC, etc.) should censor BBS's, > because this would be in violation of freedom of speech. HOWEVER, I do > believe that the individual SYSOPS of each BBS should decide which is > appropriate and which is not. > I agree. A sysop I know stated it well: he said his BBS is his electronic living room. People drop by and hang out, discuss things, etc. But it's still his place, and he has to live with what goes on there, so his word is law. Post a get-rich-quick scheme and the posting and the user simply get immediately deleted. And he can do that - it's all his stuff, after all. [ Discussion of BBS content and management thereof, restricted access to "adult" areas... ] > -- > Donald Burr (aka Captain Picard, Picard, Picards, and SuperTribble) > EMAIL: picard@rain.org; AMERICA ONLINE: CapnPicard > A Trekker, and DAMN proud of it! -+- Want FREE Unix for 386/486? EMAIL ME!! > "We're just two lost souls / Swimming in a fish bowl" -- Pink Floyd and Bernie Cosell writes: > [ stuff about the usefulness of a vote deleted... ] > > Repeating your thesis: > > } Computer Bulletin Boards should not be censored. People should have freedom> } of speech in saying or writing what they want to say, even if the material has > } to do with sexual or racial matters. > > I disagree. I think that the folks that own and operate bulletin boards > ought to be free to run them *precisely* as they please, just so long > as they make the ground rules clear up front. As long as you're using > someone *else's* equipment, I think it is A-OK that they insist that > you play by their rules, but that once you agree on the rules they > should only be changeable by mutual consent [that is, treat such > as matters of contract law]. > You were doing fine up until the mutual consent bit. There is absolutely no reason that the users should have *any* say in the governance of a BBS. You can't map the way Usenet works onto a personal BBS - I could change the rules *daily* ("Today I get rid of all users whose names start with 'T'.") and that's my prerogative. Of course nobody will call my BBS, but that's *their* prerogative. > If you don't like their rules, as long as you're free to go to some > other forum or start your own, I claim you've gotten all that > you're entitled to in terms of "freedom of speech". > Correct, except that there's no such thing as "squatters' rights" to someone else's living room. Just 'cause you've been calling a board for 2 years you haven't got any right to a say in how the board runs. [ legal situation in US, moral questions... ] > > /Bernie\ > -- > Bernie Cosell cosell@world.std.com > Fantasy Farm Fibers, Pearisburg, VA (703) 921-2358 One more point. Although I think that a sysop can do whatever she wants on her own BBS, I reject all external (official or not) censors unconditionally. - Dave (Dave.Weil@cdc.com) ------------------------------ From: "Joseph Reagle Jr." Subject: Re: Graduate Program on Social Dimensions of Cmputing Date: 19 Nov 93 15:57:26 GMT Thanks for the CORPS information, would you happen to know of an e-mail address that I could contact to have general graduate (masters) information and application information sent to me? Regards, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. | ST: What's a self-locking stemp-bolt for? reagle@umbc.edu | SNL: You put your weed in there man. jreagl1@umbc8.umbc.edu | ------------------------------ From: Rob Kling Subject: Re: Graduate Program on Social Dimensions of Cmputing Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy Date: 19 Nov 93 16:17:39 GMT Hi ... You can obtain materials for applying to our PhD program from Theresa Klonecky .... at theresa@ics.uci.edu Best wishes, Rob Kling -------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Nov 93 17:27:21 PST From: Mark Bell Subject: 10,000 Phonebooks on CDROM I just bought a set of seven CDROMS which have most of the listed telephone numbers in the US. Six disks cover the nation for both residential and business, and a seventh disk has all the businesses listed again, also broken out by SIC code, etc. so you can scan them by industry. I fired it up on my PC at home and showed it to my wife. Pretty soon we were looking at disk after disk to resurrect people she had known from college and junior high. When I said, "Who's that fellow?" she explained he was a former boyfriend in seventh grade! Ah yes. (Well, she never actually *kissed* him...) So pretty soon I'm looking up an old girlfriend or two. They're harder to find because women are likelier to be unlisted, have a surname change or list by initials. But that's a separate issue. ;^) The index scheme is very user friendly; you get a subscreen with query fields and another with the names, addresses amd phone numbers. As you type in a name query, the list adapts immediately as you type. Beautifully easy to use. Interestingly, I wasn't in the list. I believe this is because, even though my telephone number is listed, it isn't in the reverse street listing directory. As you examine listings in closer detail it tells you from what year the phonebook was taken. Most of them were 1991 or 1992 listings. You can sort the entries and print them out to a printer or file, in letter or label format, or delimited ASCII. Finally, all you need to do to call someone is hit F2 and it makes the call through your modem. These disks were $85 for the set, 1993 edition, at my local computer swapmeet. I'd say this is one genie that's out of the privacy bottle. But if you're doing a high school reunion it is just the thing. Mark Bell IDE Applications Engineer bell@ide.com ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V3 #079 ******************************