From: nobody@huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 17:28:17 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: The Utility of Privacy
Message-ID: <199611190128.RAA29725@mailmasher.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 2:10 PM 11/18/1996, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>Note in the following exchange that HC firsts asks for examples
>of harm, then when clearly unambiguous examples are given, tries 
>to imply that the examples are rare, trivial or (most amazingly)
>that the victim did suffer, but must have deserved his/her fate!

You are building a straw man.  Nobody has been said to deserve their
fate.  Their fates appear to be unlikely events.

Contrary to what several privacy advocates have implied, I am not
claiming that people should not be allowed to protect their privacy.
Nor am I claiming that people who protect their privacy are criminals.

I am asking why I should protect my privacy.  Most people have
concluded that it is not worth the bother.  Why are they wrong?

(And, why are privacy advocates uniformly hostile to these questions?
Because they are asked anonymously?)

>> BTW, are you operating under your True Name?
>
>NOYB.

Fair enough.

>More importantly, since you seem to think privacy isn't
>all that important why don't you give us your true name, date of
>birth, SS#, mother's maiden name, address where you sleep at 
>night, pictures of you (and your family), etc.?  After all, as 
>you wrote, the "odds are low" anything will come of it.

Who me?  No way!  :-)

HC