Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/29

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] [OFF-TOPIC] re--privacy ?
From: "phong (Doan huu Phong)" <>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 14:07:57 -0500

Hi Charles,

      I agree with much of what you wrote below;  now we
      are talking about privacy issues, as opposed to monkeys
      and literature.  Please note that however distasteful the
      game is, I still play, as you do.

      On the other hand, I also respect the wishes of those
      who don't want to participate.   I also tend to omit
      names of other people in unpleasant context.  Doing
      otherwise is quite unnecessary.

     Take care,

- - Phong

- -----Original Message-----
From: <>

>Phong my friend, you miss MY whole point.
>If privacy is what you want, then do NOT put your thoughts, feelings,
>emotions, discussions or anything else on the Internet.
>You are broadcasting your thoughts to the world, and then asking for
>As to the guy [...]  who got caught with an alternate lifestyle
>on the web, well, there you are, that's the danger  of this new toy
>illustrated right there. You should NEVER expect privacy on the internet.
>Don't believe anyone's claims that it is possible. Legions of hackers are
>there to make sure that never takes place. Did you know there is software
>can seek out, and find, everything you've ever posted on the web anywhere?
>probably can list every site you've ever visited?
>The internet is a technological monster and no amount of demanding privacy
>it will change it -- such a demand is antithesis of the internet, sort of
>going into a crowded room and asking to be left alone.
>So face reality and use the LUG for what it is, a discussion of cameras.
>take things so seriously, and guard your privacy in the best way possible,
>keeping it private.
>I notice someone made a mention of the deterioration of the First Amendment
>back there somewhere and how government interference was hurting it. I
>you have a bad understanding of that right.
>As a daily practioner of the First Amendment's gifts and rights, I know
>freedom of speech always carries responsibility -- you are free to say
>whatever you want, but you are answerable for it as well and responsible
>any damage you do. Sometimes what people say in the past is dredged up and
>used against them, true, but that is the price we pay for the freedom of
>Perhaps the worst thing about modern political practice, where that is done
>often, is it doesn't recognize that, sometimes, people change their minds
>just put their feet in their mouths. Used to be it was good practice to
>what you wanted to say, stick it in a drawer for a day, look at it again
>then decide if you wanted to send it off. With e-mail that valuable process
>no longer followed, and the resulting bad feelings are another part of the
>Internet we all have to live with.
>As to DanC saying he can sign any damn name he wants to his posts, hey dan,
>for it.
>Want some discussion on topic? Leica hasn't made anything worth a damn
>my personal M-3  (#853*** made in 1956) came off the line and I'm still mad
>them for putting weird flash plugs in it that cost a fortune to have redone
>PC plugs. Discussion?
>  (If that doesn't carbonate some people's blood here, nothing will.)
>charlie trentelman aka
>Ogden UT