Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 08:30:58 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@uwm.edu Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V7#017 Computer Privacy Digest Mon, 28 Aug 95 Volume 7 : Issue: 017 Today's Topics: Moderator: Leonard P. Levine Re: Time to Tree the Tiger in the U.S.A. Re: A Netscape Story Re: An Abuse of Individual Right to Privacy? Trying to Find a Record of Marriage Re: Information Collection at Sears Info on CPD [unchanged since 08/01/95] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dennis G. Rears" Date: 23 Aug 95 17:37:24 EDT Subject: Re: Time to Tree the Tiger in the U.S.A. Bryan Nelson writes: We can't control their numbers, we cant fire them. We can't cut their purse strings,they hold the purse, and can weave more strings faster than we can cut them. It probably will do no good to complain about them, even to your State representatives,you will be talking to one of them over the phone. They are unionized governmentemployees. You may have thought that government employees were not allowed to unionize...think again. It's one of government's most closely guarded secrets. One of the most closely guarded secrets. Bullshit, like nobody has heard about: o Postal Employees Union - every time their contract comes up strike talks resumes. o air traffic controllers - They struck and Reagan fired them all o National Treasury Employess Union - beat Nixon in court over the wape and price freeze o various other government unions from teachers to police to administrations to professionals Once I read this piece of misinformation I question everything else in his post. The point of the unions is to protect them against their employer, in this case the government. God, I can't believe I am defending unions. -- dennis ------------------------------ From: glew@galstar.com (Gordon A. Lew) Date: 24 Aug 1995 14:49:20 GMT Subject: Re: A Netscape Story Organization: Galaxy Star - Northeastern Oklahoma Internet Evan Rosser wrote: I am not too concerned about undocumented playful hacks. It has a long history -- i.e. "MAKE LOVE"/Not war? on DEC-20's, developers' pictures in the Mac SE ROM's, etc. As a matter of fact, there are more such things in Netscape -- try typing "about:mozilla" as a URL to load. Further examples: about:JWZ about:authors about:jeff about:montulli ------------------------------ From: haz1@kimbark.uchicago.edu (bill hazelrig) Date: 26 Aug 1995 01:46:30 GMT Subject: Re: An Abuse of Individual Right to Privacy? Organization: The University of Chicago Robert Shorten wrote: Well, wouldn't such a thing be like the phone book? The phone company lists names and addresses of people and doesn't ask them first whether they want to be listed (such people have to contact the phone company.) As long as they A specious argument, since essentially every consumer is aware that phone books exist, and you must, in fact, contact your phone company and ask for phone service before you can be listed. *You* are the one who initiates the process, and you have the opportunity to prevent listing right there at the start, in that very same telephone call. You need never, even for a few days, be listed against your wishes. (the directory people) give clear information in their directory as to how one can be unlisted, I don't think it's an invasion of privacy. There are already paper directories that list names, addresses, phone numbers, and even places of work. Having random stranger being able to find me and try to sell me things is not what I think of as "privacy", thank you. If I must receive junk communications, I do prefer email to snail mail, and snail mail to telephone calls, but my real preference is simply not to receive unsolicited communications, period. If I want someone to be able to reach me, I'll tell them how. -- Bill (haz1@midway.uchicago.edu) ------------------------------ From: AJFried@ix.netcom.com (AJF) Date: 27 Aug 1995 00:16:27 GMT Subject: Trying to Find a Record of Marriage Organization: Netcom A friend of mine asked if I new a way to find out if someone is married. He thinks his ex-wife (to whom he has been paying alimony for 20 years!) is actually remarried. However, he has no proof. I have her name and social security number. Is there any way to search marriage license records, or anything else that might show some proof that this woman is married? I don't think this is illegal or even unethical since marriage licenses are probably public record ( I certainly wouldn't want to do anything illegal!) In general, I would think there is plenty of public record information on people. How can I use this cool internet to get at it? So, can someone point me in a good direction? This stuff is always seems easy in the movies! -- A.J. Fried. AJFried@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ From: dzubint@freenet.vancouver.bc.ca (Thomas Dzubin) Date: 28 Aug 1995 03:06:06 GMT Subject: Re: Information Collection at Sears Organization: Vancouver Regional FreeNet Nigel Arnot (NRA@MAXWEL.PH.KCL.AC.UK) wrote: Possible countermeasure. I have just produced a few perfectly recognisable copies of my own signature which would have *extremely* different pressure/velocity profiles, by the simple expedient of concentrating and deliberately writing slow/fast/extra heavy/light at various moments during the manufacture of the signature. One of the many many things that I like to do is have different signatures for different situations...my "signing for a parcel" signature looks like "John Smith". My "signing non-legal-type miscellaneous documents" signature looks like "Fred Jones" As far as I know, there is no requirement for you to only have one valid signature. Because my scrawl is pretty illegible at the best of times nobody can tell that my "John Smith" isn't really "Thomas Dzubin" However, my "John Smith" signature is certainly unique to me. I consider all of my "signatures" to be valid... I'm not trying to defraud anyone...I just happen to have multiple signatures... -- Thomas Dzubin Vancouver, B.C. CANADA ------------------------------ From: "Prof. L. P. Levine" Date: 11 Aug 1995 09:39:43 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Info on CPD [unchanged since 08/01/95] Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the effect of technology on privacy or vice versa. The digest is moderated and gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy (Moderated). Submissions should be sent to comp-privacy@uwm.edu and administrative requests to comp-privacy-request@uwm.edu. This digest is a forum with information contributed via Internet eMail. Those who understand the technology also understand the ease of forgery in this very free medium. Statements, therefore, should be taken with a grain of salt and it should be clear that the actual contributor might not be the person whose email address is posted at the top. Any user who openly wishes to post anonymously should inform the moderator at the beginning of the posting. He will comply. If you read this from the comp.society.privacy newsgroup and wish to contribute a message, you should simply post your contribution. As a moderated newsgroup, attempts to post to the group are normally turned into eMail to the submission address below. On the other hand, if you read the digest eMailed to you, you generally need only use the Reply feature of your mailer to contribute. If you do so, it is best to modify the "Subject:" line of your mailing. Contributions to CPD should be submitted, with appropriate, substantive SUBJECT: line, otherwise they may be ignored. They must be relevant, sound, in good taste, objective, cogent, coherent, concise, and nonrepetitious. Diversity is welcome, but not personal attacks. Do not include entire previous messages in responses to them. Include your name & legitimate Internet FROM: address, especially from .UUCP and .BITNET folks. Anonymized mail is not accepted. All contributions considered as personal comments; usual disclaimers apply. All reuses of CPD material should respect stated copyright notices, and should cite the sources explicitly; as a courtesy; publications using CPD material should obtain permission from the contributors. Contributions generally are acknowledged within 24 hours of submission. If selected, they are printed within two or three days. The moderator reserves the right to delete extraneous quoted material. He may change the SUBJECT: line of an article in order to make it easier for the reader to follow a discussion. He will not, however, alter or edit or append to the text except for purely technical reasons. A library of back issues is available on ftp.cs.uwm.edu [129.89.9.18]. Login as "ftp" with password identifying yourid@yoursite. The archives are in the directory "pub/comp-privacy". People with gopher capability can most easily access the library at gopher.cs.uwm.edu. Mosaic users will find it at gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu. ---------------------------------+----------------------------------------- Leonard P. Levine | Moderator of: Computer Privacy Digest Professor of Computer Science | and comp.society.privacy University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee | Post: comp-privacy@uwm.edu Box 784, Milwaukee WI 53201 | Information: comp-privacy-request@uwm.edu | Gopher: gopher.cs.uwm.edu levine@cs.uwm.edu | Mosaic: gopher://gopher.cs.uwm.edu ---------------------------------+----------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V7 #017 ****************************** .