A Nation of Voyeurs

"How the Internet search engine Google is changing what we can find out about one another - and raising questions about whether we should"

Interesting article in today's Boston Globe Magazine

By Neil Swidey, Globe Staff, 2/2/2003 http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine/2003/0202/coverstory.htm

 

Hmm... "A Nation Of Voyeurs." This is something we'd all better keep an eye on.

 

IMPORTANT!!!

The article posted by DiscoGail is very important for all to think about long and hard. The ways to protect yourself should be given real consideration. I detail some good books below.

The article in the Boston Globe Magazine focusing on GOOGLE'S wide reach was superb! I agree with you, Checkout, it's the whole world that must think about this, it's not merely an American phenomena. DiscoGail, I am going to post the "one page" version of the story, I hope you don't mind - it just makes it easier to read:
http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine/2003/0202/coverstory_entire.htm

This is why in so many of my posts, I stress that you cannot separate computer privacy from everyday privacy measures. I have recommended several books here before dealing with general privacy and realized I should mention them again because it's not just the computers and databases that put our privacy at risk, the argument made in the article was right on the mark - Google can make your life an open-book that affects your life in so many ways you never had even considered.

As often as possible, don't feel bad about using a CyberIdentity. I don't mean "HustlerBoy" or a "handle" -- I mean a name like Franklin Joseph Pierce, just ANY name that you use consistently on the Internet - and sometimes in the "real" world. It's just like a "pen name" for authors, and a pseudonym, non de plume, whatever you want to call it - can go a long way toward keeping miners for your information at bay.

I have become a BIG believer in the use of the VISA "gift cards" that are accepted online with ANY NAME you choose. No name is necessary, no address - nothing! When buying on the net - use whatever you like. Ethics? I see nothing wrong with it. It is a defensive measure to protect your privacy and freedom.

So, for those who would like to learn how to maintain something that resembles privacy, here's a few book titles again:

(I'll use Amazon just for info purposes so you can read further info about the book):

1. Bulletproof Privacy
by Boston T. Party (EXCELLENT!)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888766026/

2. How to Be Invisible: A Step-By-Step Guide to Protecting Your Assets, Your Identity, and Your Life
by J.J. Luna
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312252501

3. Your Secrets Are My Business: A Security Expert Reveals How Your Trash, License Plate, Credit Cards, Computer, and Even Your Mail Make You an Easy Target for Today's Information Thieves
by Kevin McKeown
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0452282047/

4. It's None of Your Business: A Complete Guide to Protecting Your Privacy, Identity and Assets (4th Edition)
by Larry Sontag
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0967435439/

5. Invasion of Privacy : How to Protect Yourself in the Digital Age
by Michael Hyatt
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895262878

My personal favorites, by the way, are numbers 1 and 4. Can't beat 'em!

Thank you, DiscoGail, for posting the link to this very disturbing article.

Remember though, there IS armour - fight back! - and save your privacy.

John
Luv2BSecure

 

I'm so glad that I used my fake name for signing up for things online.

 

Google has become very powerful and knowlegeable !

bill

 

Pete (spy1) posted this last year. ....luv2bsecure organized it a bit further in the 3rd reply.....Good time to review.......

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=970

 

As far as I can see, the Google privacy protection is not that bad. I tried looking up my real name and some other well known names.
No better security than hiding real information in so many hits.

I guess that the chance of finding any true reference withing the first 10 pages is less than 1 percent

 

Applying certain filters that are readily available may increase the chance noticeably: example.

Regards,

Pieter

 

LOL (glad that most is not readily readable for non-dutch speaking members)

lot's and lot's of references, but none that refer to the real meneer (being me of course ) although some might be applicable (meneer is groot - (great) )

 

Couldn't resist.
meneer is drunk being the first one !!

But to stay on topic. More and more of these filters are showing up and it works so fast and it is easily accessible.
So watching our backs may not be a bad idea.

I'm glad nobody knows my name.

Regards,

Pieter

 

"Google me, baby!" lol!

 

I hope a lot of people took the time to read the article. It was unfortunately very long and all the really good information was in the second half.

One thing the author missed and was surprising - he talked a lot about employers googleing prospective employees and finding info that is very old, but doesn't look good. A post in a forum, an arrest in which there are few details, court records, etc. But what I thought he missed was something more insidious than an old conviction that has little to do with the person they are now. And that is this: Arrest records on Google that show the arrest info - but no court records to show the outcome! An employer might see the arrest information and count him/her out as a risk - not realizing (because the court records are not online) that it was all a case of mistaken identity! To me, that is where the use of Googleing for personal information can go so awry. The other thing that is really scary - the potential of someone sabotaging an "enemy" by posting inaccurate information on the web, awful things, fake resumes, etc.

A really good article on Google appeared in last months WIRED magazine. It shows the power that Google has to include/exclude on a whim and how they do it all the time! It raises the question about whether something as powerful technologically as Google should have the power it has. Should not society as a whole have a long, hard discussion about how this information, collated together by Google, is handled - or mishandled?
WIRED article online:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/google_pr.html



John
Luv2BSecure

 

It is ultimately unfortunate, and extremely sad, that the Internet has a chance to be an entirely new country that we all, as inherently democratic citizens, should have a voice in running. We have the choice in deciding whether this new country should be lawful or lawless. It is shameful that it is easier and cheaper to be lawless.

 

I haven't read the whole article yet, but enough. Besides my real name is all over the Internet. (And some things I wish I could remove.)

What is a writer supposed to do? You want to be well known yet
you don't want bad things happening to you either.

Thanks for sharing that article.

Peace,

 

Sort of a follow-up.

http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57897,00.html

Regards,

Pieter

 

I am not quite sure I understand. Does this mean you are vulnerable if you use the program "FileMaker Pro database interface ?" Are does this mean anyone with a website?

Thanks,

 

Oh, I have another question - I forgot. You may not know, maybe someone does. I use mailwasher. When I received your response to the post it was blacklisted by Outpost.

I was wondering why?

Peace,

 

The danger of being found in an online database is ever present. I think FileMaker Pro was only used as an example, because it is a popular program.

Regards,

Pieter

 

Even in a place like Smart Groups?

Peace,