[extropy-chat] privacy rights

[David Lubkin]

Spike wrote:

>For instance, I cannot be certain I never blammisphied online any religion
>that could have adherents who may akbar a knife between my ribs at any
>future date.  I think all my blammisphy has been restricted to the common
>domestic varieties of religion, but I honestly cannot recall.

As some one raised Jewish, I wondered what the appropriate answer 
would be were I in Northern Ireland, stopped by armed men of unclear 
allegiance, and asked if I was Protestant or Catholic.

The best answer I came up with was, "Religion wasn't really a part of 
my life growing up, but I'd like to get closer to God now. Do you 
have any suggestions for a church I could attend?"

>This next generation thing has me thinking bigtime: I have pondered
>abandoning the nickname spike, which I have carried for over 20 years now,
>and carried through my entire professional career.  Reasoning: I could leave
>behind all traces of everything I have ever posted on the internet.

After 27 years on the Internet, I've left a lot of spoor. 
Disappearing would be tough.

I recently joined a new organization, and someone posted a welcoming 
email to their list which included a link to a bio I'd written years 
ago. Someone else responded with an echoic welcome that embedded a photo of me.

>While I may sign up for openness, young Isaac may not.  My openness 
>compromises his privacy.

I was in young Isaac's position. When considering whether to work at 
Livermore, I had to decide whether I wanted to undergo the scrutiny 
and dossier acquisition inherent in obtaining a "Q" clearance. But I 
realized that, with my father's much higher clearance, I was 
certainly in a file somewhere. Now I have about a dozen close 
relatives with clearance, so my daughter, nieces, and nephews have 
even less choice in the matter.


-- David.