Jim Lawrence
accessd at shaw.ca
Fri Nov 22 19:28:40 CST 2013
The question whether this concern for security is really worth it. Some announcer noted that the carnage, on the roads of Boston was worse that the death and injury count racked up during the Boston bombing event that day. If those figures are correct that would assume that the Boston bombing is less than than every day noise of the city. There is just a bigger emphasis put on certain type of deaths. Mind you the massive security net did not catch this event anyway? I think the whole panic and fear thing has pushed so far in excess that it could be argued the enemy has already won and without even having to firing a shot. No matter what security is enforced it can not be perfect protection, as that is impossible but it can strip away everyone's rights in the meantime and not affect the desired results in any measurable degree. I keep thinking of my strange neighbour, across the street, who takes a gun with him every time he crosses the border. You might think he is nuts but the truth is so do I. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rocky Smolin" <rockysmolin at bchacc.com> To: "Discussion of Hardware and Software issues" <dba-tech at databaseadvisors.com> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 3:12:47 PM Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] Google's Cerf Says "Privacy May Be An Anomaly". No - there are no absolutes (except for that one). All rights haven't been superseded nor can that happen in our system. There is always a balance between privacy and security - after 9/11 the balance swung, with the public's approval, towards more security at the expense of privacy. It now appears that there will be a move in the other direction - the public will begin to insist on more privacy at the expense of security. Either because they are willing to accept the increased security risk for less intrusive government. Or because they do not perceive (correctly or incorrectly) that the risk is great enough to justify the security measures. R -----Original Message----- From: dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jim Lawrence Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 11:59 AM To: Discussion of Hardware and Software issues Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] Google's Cerf Says "Privacy May Be An Anomaly". That does say it, but does the privileges given to law enforcement after 9/11, supersede all rights to privacy with the rights to security? Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Brawley" <peter.brawley at earthlink.net> To: "Discussion of Hardware and Software issues" <dba-tech at databaseadvisors.com> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 7:26:15 AM Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] Google's Cerf Says "Privacy May Be An Anomaly". On 2013-11-22 8:59 AM, Tina Norris Fields wrote: > It's interesting to me that the presumption of a right to privacy in > the U.S. stems from the assurances of the Fourth Amendment, to be > secure from unreasonable search and seizure, combined with the > assurances of the Ninth Amendment that rights that haven't been > enumerated still exist and are retained by the States and the People > themselves. Article 12 of the UDHR says "No one shall be subjected to interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence..." PB ----- > > Although the right to privacy wasn't supported by documentation until > the Supreme Court 1967 decision, the families I knew while growing up > all presumed they had the right to keep certain information to > themselves. The concept that some things were nobody else's business > is not a new concept. However, I would point out that the American > culture wasn't all that clear about its attitudes, as demonstrated by > laws on the books that regulated what persons could and couldn't do > within their own bedrooms. So, while I believe we have long had a > sense of ownership and choice concerning what we reveal to others, we > haven't been even-handed in our attitude when it came to prying into > the affairs of others. > > To paraphrase an old saying, it's not so much that we opposed > ox-goring as that we opposed having our own ox gored. > > Best to you, > TNF > > Tina Norris Fields > tinanfields-at-torchlake-dot-com > 231-322-2787 > > On 11/21/2013 6:47 PM, Salakhetdinov Shamil wrote: >> Hi All -- >> >> >> FYI: >> >> " Google's Cerf Says "Privacy May Be An Anomaly". >> >> http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/20/googles-cerf-says-privacy-may-be-an- >> anomaly-historically-hes-right/ >> >> >> Your opinions? >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > dba-Tech mailing list > dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ dba-Tech mailing list dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ dba-Tech mailing list dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com _______________________________________________ dba-Tech mailing list dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com