[net.followup] stop big brother stop

keith@uiucme.uiucme (07/01/85)

Here is the simple, pragmatic conclusion to the big brother discussion:

IF you're plotting  to over throw the government, or any other crime worth
   being noticed over
THEN you have something to worry about and should be VERY careful about
     sending things vi a email, USMail, phone, telex, etc.
ELSE IF you say things that could offend somebody or make them wonder about
        your philosophy, morality, or disposition
     THEN IF you are worried about what They think of you
          THEN you should be careful and tactful using the net, email, USMAIL,
               phone, telex, etc.
          ELSE you can say anything you want.


Now stop beating it to death



Keith
U of Ill Mech Eng
uiucdcs!uiucme!keith

jbdp@jenny.UUCP (Julian Pardoe) (07/06/85)

In article uiucme.1500004 keith@uiucme.uiucme writes:
> Here is the simple, pragmatic conclusion to the big brother discussion:
>
> IF you're plotting  to over throw the government, or any other crime worth
>    being noticed over
> THEN you have something to worry about and should be VERY careful about
>      sending things vi a email, USMail, phone, telex, etc.
> ELSE IF you say things that could offend somebody or make them wonder about
>         your philosophy, morality, or disposition
>      THEN IF you are worried about what They think of you
>           THEN you should be careful and tactful using the net, email, 
>                USMAIL, phone, telex, etc.
>           ELSE you can say anything you want.

I think he's forgotten at least one IF-clause; before the final ELSE insert:

IF  you  don't  trust  the Government and the law-enforcement agencies and all
employees involved in ``email, USMail, phone, telex,  etc'' not to take unfair
advantage  of  information  they gain from snooping or be otherwise corrupt OR
IF there are unjust laws in your country (*)  THEN  you'd  better  be  totally
boring or keep quiet ELSE ...

Julian Pardoe

(*) Here of course we lose all contact with anything definite,  but I'll throw
in laws against homosexuality for a starter.  How  many  causes  that  we  now
accept  as  ``worthy'' -- the abolition of slavery or child-labour for example
-- were not originally opposed by people in power who  would  have  been  very
happy to frustrate them by snooping if they could have?

-------------

The views expressed herein etc etc...

-------------

University of Cambridge         Tel:     +44 223 352435 ext. 265
        Computer Laboratory     Arpa:    <@ucl-cs: jbdp@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Corn Exchange Street            Janet:   jbdp@UK.AC.Cam.CL
CAMBRIDGE, CB2 3QG              UUCP:    mcvax!ukc!cl-jenny
Great Britain