Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Responsibility in Web Services
wraith808:
And you can't really expect to blame it on the person when it happens, can you?
--- End quote ---
Honestly? ...Yes.
-Stoic Joker (February 18, 2010, 09:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
So, to carry it a bit further, if I case your house, then let someone know when you're gone, and they happen to rob you, it's your fault. You let me know when you were leaving by driving out of your garage, so you can't blame me... right?
Stoic Joker:
And you can't really expect to blame it on the person when it happens, can you?
--- End quote ---
Honestly? ...Yes.
-Stoic Joker (February 18, 2010, 09:57 AM)
--- End quote ---
So, to carry it a bit further, if I case your house, then let someone know when you're gone, and they happen to rob you, it's your fault. You let me know when you were leaving by driving out of your garage, so you can't blame me... right?-wraith808 (February 18, 2010, 10:02 AM)
--- End quote ---
That's a bit to microcosmic for the sake of accuracy. A better analogy would be, if I were dumb enough to put an ad in the paper saying I was going on vacation, and that ad included sufficient personal information for my abode to be located. And you pointed out said ad to various people saying look at this idiot - He should get robbed for being that stupid.
Then, you would be 100% correct, and I would indeed be that stupid and (e.g. deserving of said blame).
steeladept:
Sorry Joker, but your example would be more appropriate without the aggregation. This site aggregating the information makes Wraith's example closer. Specifically, you provide a simple search for someone specific, so in a sense, you are "casing" the person. The information is already out there without the search capabilities, so that would be more analogous to you stating it publicly and only people looking in the right place could find it. It takes no additional work on the part of the criminal to search the aggregated site, just like someone casing your place would take no additional work to note when you leave. Whereas if it were not aggregated, then they would have to search all the information for each person independently, just like someone trying to find where someone posted the information in the paper.
EDIT: That said, it is stupid for people to place that info out there in the first place. But does that give someone else the right to exploit the information? Current law says no. And for this reason, the site should not exist in it's current form. It isn't like it couldn't be set up where you have to identify yourself and your account credentials before it would put the info out there on you. It could still aggregate the information from publicly available sources, but make it so it can log into any one account (so they have a reasonable way of determining you are who you claim) first to verify that you are checking only on yourself. That would be the right way to put this information out without being an accomplice, even an unwitting one. And yes, I know there are other issues with this approach, but it is still better than making it available to all people.
wraith808:
Quote from another site about how these socio-stalking-servicesTM is used:
Collectors and repo-men are using these social networking sites to skip-trace where you could be and will come take your stuff. They'll openly admit to "cyber-stalking" to find where you are.
--- End quote ---
Stoic Joker:
Sorry Joker, but your example would be more appropriate without the aggregation. This site aggregating the information makes Wraith's example closer.-steeladept (February 18, 2010, 11:45 AM)
--- End quote ---
Not really, Wrath's example leaves out one critical point. That is a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy. The example openly admits the Wraith is casing my house where I'm to have a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy. My example allows for the fact that the critical personal information is already being divulged in a public forum by me. There is no expectation of privacy in a public forum (real/reasonable or imaginary).
Therein lying my point, sheeple babble their entire life story in a public forum without any regard for how that information may be used by other people who are also active in said public forum (that may have ill intent). That quit simply puts them at the center of the causality of their downfalls (because they didn't stop and think about the ramifications of their own actions).
If somebody googles a persons name, and google pulls up comments made by that person saying here's my house and I'm on vacation ... Is google guilty of anything? No.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version