Subj : Re: SSH on BBSes
To   : Spectre
From : boraxman
Date : Mon Apr 04 2022 21:54:51

 Sp> I'm the same with #1 son... no social media, although he's getting to be
 Sp> past my sphere of influence.  But these are exceptions rather than the
 Sp> rule.
 Sp> 

Children need to understand the dangers, not just the immediate ones, but the more abstract dangers of allowing a third party foriegn (in the case of Australia) company mediate human interaction.

 Sp> Yeah, nah... only the scope of the audience has changed, and with it the
 Sp> extended manners of distribution.
 Sp> Well yes it is available to any who care to look for it. The method of
 Sp> "normal" access makes it kind of a clique but it is none the less public
 Sp> information.  Otherwise there'd be no public echoes or message areas,
 Sp> just email.  I feel your view is naive.
 Sp> 

I think you are missing the nuance here.  You are equating any information which could be accessed by the public as equal, but they are not.  I could befriend you on Facebook, and get your information, I could dig around and get your address, I can find a lot of things about you.

What you are missing is that the subtle differences of access make a BIG difference.  It makes a big difference for automated systems, web crawlers, AI, etc.  It makes a big difference if a web search indexes it or not.  I get that someone, if they knew I posted here, could create an account and extract the data, but Google will not do that, neither would any other crawler which is trying to profile.

Anyone who is determined to get into your house could pick your locks, or use bolt cutters to break a padlock, but arguing that this is equivalent to leaving your valuables on the front lawn is incorrect.

 Sp> Essentially it is, the internet is a large public network. Regardless of
 Sp> protocol driving it.  You're not going to get the privacy you're looking
 Sp> for in that environment.  You're looking for a close system, near
 Sp> dial-up style bbs.. sorry they died a long time ago... with the advent
 Sp> of the first echonets.  This is one genie thats not going to go back
 Sp> into that bottle, the world had large appears to have mostly ignored or 
 Sp> become complacent about privacy.  The best you can achieve is to obscure
 Sp> your footprints.
 Sp> 

Wrong, demonstrably so.  We have encryption which allows people to ferry data from one network node to another.  Again, to use an analogy, it is the difference between sending a message through the post on a postcard, or in an envelope.

The fact there are 'public' servers ferrying the data is irrelevant.  We can choose privacy by means of encryption, where only the intended recipients can make sense of the message.

People do this ALL the time.  People access their bank accounts over the Internet, surely you are not suggesting this is "public" information, are you?

Your argument just doesn't match reality.  A lot of information on the Internet is PRIVATE.  Ask anyone working from home.

 Sp> Welcome to the real world, brings new meaning to "stop the world I want
 Sp> to get off".
 Sp> 
 Sp> Fight the good fight, its one thats already lost the hearts and minds of
 Sp> most of the participants.  What you hope to fight is already
 Sp> institutionalised. At the end of the day there is now very little
 Sp> difference between any data out on the internet, that originates from
 Sp> any source.
 Sp> 

"I give up, so you should too".  Is that it?

 Sp> Because people don't want it... to much herd mentality going on.
 Sp> 

No excuse for those who know better to set a better example.  I don't care for your defeatist attitude at all.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.