[ExI] Weird!? - He's not on Facebook

[William Flynn Wallace]

I wish Spike and Bill would use the standard message quoting format. It
would reduce confusion.  dave sill

(I typed Still again - it's just in my fingers).  Sorry about he
misattribution.  What are Spike and I doing wrong?  I would be glad to make
it easier to do this.

The time will come for chasing tax money overseas.  I am already reading
articles about it.  Hope it's just a matter of time.  But what is to stop a
company from pulling up stakes and moving entirely to another country with
few or no taxes that would welcome them to provide jobs at rates the USA
can't compete with?

I am very likely for any sort of privacy bill that actually works, even
though I don't need it.

bill w

On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com> wrote:

> I wish Spike and Bill would use the standard message quoting format. It
> would reduce confusion.
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 12:51 PM, William Flynn Wallace <
> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I will turn it around and ask: has anyone here comments on the notion of
>> being terrified or comforted by constant surveillance?  Do you have
>> examples of kids now in their teens who have always been under constant
>> surveillance and get nervous when they are not?  USians, are you good with
>> all outside-your-home surveillance being 4th amendment compliant?  Does
>> surveillance protect us or threaten us, or both?  Does it enable government
>> wrongdoing, or expose and eliminate it, or both.  Do explain please.  dave
>> still
>>
>
> I think that means Bill thinks I wrote that, even though I didn't. And my
> last name isn't Still. That was Spike.
>
> I just don't care what they know about me, my friends, where I shop and
>> what I buy - so far that has been beneficial to me, in that suggestions for
>> what to buy next has been great.
>>
>
> Sure, as long as you trade your private info knowingly and willingly,
> that's a private matter between you and whoever is collecting that data.
>
>
>> I can't see that anyone who is not a tax evader or other criminal of some
>> sort has anything to fear.
>>
>
> Some people are just more private. That shouldn't be a problem.
>
> All we have to fear is someone coming after the innocent for some reason.
>> And being used in illegal ways, such has been done, I think, by the CIA,
>> NSA and so on.  It certainly enables wrongdoing.  So does owning a hammer.
>> On balance surveillance protects us, though not very much, unless the gov
>> is hiding data, which I assume they are.
>>
>
> There's a lot to fear: private companies or governments that intentionally
> or accidentally disclose people's personal data to third parties, threaten
> to do so, or otherwise use it improperly/illegally.
>
>
>> I do hope surveillance is being used to catch tax cheats, esp. the rich
>> who are hiding money overseas.  I am much more concerned about that,
>> because that is huge numbers of people and mountains of money, whereas
>> catching terrorists is a rare thing, if in fact we are told about it.
>>
>
>  Yeah, remember that time the billionaire got caught evading taxes? Yeah,
> neither do I.
>
> There is frankly a lot of paranoia about this and I don't see where any of
>> it is justified.  What can be done could be enormously evil.  It's a tool
>> at the other end of the scale from the hammer. And it is now a fact of life
>> and will not go away - period.
>>
>
> Right, there risks are great and they're not going away. Privacy reduces
> those risks. Laws that control the use of private data could reduce those
> risks.
>
> -Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20170201/0fdacc59/attachment.html>