Forgot your password?
Cyhist Jun 11 1997 B
Document Actions
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 08:17:17 -0700
Reply-To: "CYHIST Community Memory: Discussion list on the History of
Cyberspace" <CYHIST@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> Sender: "CYHIST Community Memory: Discussion list on the History of
Cyberspace" <CYHIST@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> From: "George Edw. Seymour" <seymour@NOSC.MIL>
Subject: Re: [archiving MUDs/MOOs] = Consent?
X-cc: drgeorge@home.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
______________________________________________________________________
Community Memory: Discussion List on the History of Cyberspace ______________________________________________________________________
At 09:52 AM 6/10/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Poster: Peter da Silva <peter@BAILEYNM.COM>
>Subject: Re: [archiving MUDs/MOOs]
>There are also privacy issues with archiving MUDs. People consider their area on the MUD their private property, and put all sorts of personal information there. I think it's unreasonable to violate this expectation of privacy.
This week, NPR (public radio) has a two-part series on InterNet privacy. One of the guests offered this imaginary scenario. --> You are sitting on a plane halfway between two cities, and the phone on the seat- back in front of you rings. Turns out the call is for you. It's the florist you use occasionally who tells you that typically you order a bouquet for your wife on your anniversary which is tomorrow, but that they did not get an order this year. They know that she is traveling to another city, and with your permission they will arrange to have a bouquet delivered to her room with a card from you. They have your credit card number from last year. Would you like them to have that bouquet delivered tomorrow?
Seems like people who hear this scenario fall into two groups. One group is horrified that anyone could have that much personal information about them, including where they are, the travel plans, including hotels, for them and their spouse, etc. The other group is ecstatic because they forgot, given the last minute business trip, and are relieved that they can have the flowers delivered on time.
The distinction, as was suggested on NPR, is consent, individual consent. And that makes sense to me, but I doubt that the topic is that simple. Lots of information is collected and recorded about people which benefits society but not the individual. Perhaps it is a matter of official use vs. marketing/private use.
BTW, can anyone suggest a good URL that discusses the technical and social distinctions between MUDs, MOOs, and chat rooms?
Thanks, George
______________________________________________________________________
Reply-To: "CYHIST Community Memory: Discussion list on the History of
Cyberspace" <CYHIST@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> Sender: "CYHIST Community Memory: Discussion list on the History of
Cyberspace" <CYHIST@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU> From: "George Edw. Seymour" <seymour@NOSC.MIL>
Subject: Re: [archiving MUDs/MOOs] = Consent?
X-cc: drgeorge@home.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
______________________________________________________________________
Community Memory: Discussion List on the History of Cyberspace ______________________________________________________________________
At 09:52 AM 6/10/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Poster: Peter da Silva <peter@BAILEYNM.COM>
>Subject: Re: [archiving MUDs/MOOs]
>There are also privacy issues with archiving MUDs. People consider their area on the MUD their private property, and put all sorts of personal information there. I think it's unreasonable to violate this expectation of privacy.
This week, NPR (public radio) has a two-part series on InterNet privacy. One of the guests offered this imaginary scenario. --> You are sitting on a plane halfway between two cities, and the phone on the seat- back in front of you rings. Turns out the call is for you. It's the florist you use occasionally who tells you that typically you order a bouquet for your wife on your anniversary which is tomorrow, but that they did not get an order this year. They know that she is traveling to another city, and with your permission they will arrange to have a bouquet delivered to her room with a card from you. They have your credit card number from last year. Would you like them to have that bouquet delivered tomorrow?
Seems like people who hear this scenario fall into two groups. One group is horrified that anyone could have that much personal information about them, including where they are, the travel plans, including hotels, for them and their spouse, etc. The other group is ecstatic because they forgot, given the last minute business trip, and are relieved that they can have the flowers delivered on time.
The distinction, as was suggested on NPR, is consent, individual consent. And that makes sense to me, but I doubt that the topic is that simple. Lots of information is collected and recorded about people which benefits society but not the individual. Perhaps it is a matter of official use vs. marketing/private use.
BTW, can anyone suggest a good URL that discusses the technical and social distinctions between MUDs, MOOs, and chat rooms?
Thanks, George
______________________________________________________________________
