Re: 15 year old "terrorist" for photographing a train station

On 2008-11-06 12:32:28 +0000, MIG <googlespam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:

On 6 Nov, 12:11, Chris Tolley <cj...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
MIG wrote:
As a trivial example, where I buy my socks is neither incrimminating
nor particularly private, but anyone asking me would have some kind of
agenda, and might work for an organisation that I didn't wish to
provide with free market research.

Or they might just like your socks, and want to buy similar. Surely only
a bride's mother would actively want to ensure that information about
where to buy similar clothes did not fall into the hands of an Enemy.

And it's my decision to answer, based on whether I think they are
doing research for an evil sock empire or wish to apply my taste in
socks for the benefit of mankind.

I've never understood the argument that information that is of no value to an individual is private simply because other people might benefit from it `for free'. The market research argument I find particularly weak: if there's information that is not harmful to you or others (you choice of socks) and that you are neither planning to nor reasonable able to monetise, I don't see a direct reason why you're not prepared to allow someone else to monetise it. Or do you refuse to throw rubbish away on the grounds that a recycling company might be able to sell it?

My point was that the decision is about judging the motives of the
person asking, rather than judging the person who has the information
(and what they have to hide).

`As well as' I might agree with, but solely? No way.

I'm happy to tell you that of yesterday's outfit, I bought my tee-shirt in Cotswold Camping in Birmingham last week (ob.railway: went into town by train!), my sweater in the Tescos Ponder's End at Christmas, my jeans in Uniqlo on Shibuya station (ob.railway: I was on my way to the Narita Express) in May, and my shoes in Macy's New York last Easter (on the way back from lunch at the Grand Central Oyster Bar, ob.railway again). Given there isn't a government programme to intern people who shop in slightly pretentious Japanese faux-Benetton shops, nor a UN-sanctioned boycott of shops in which healthy staff wear fibre pile gilets even when the heating's on, I'm happy to tell these facts to you, anyone reading this group, or a committee of Harold Shipman and Pol Pot. Or, more seriously, I'm happy to tell this to BARB or BMRB who can then go data-mining for the Ponder's End / Shibuya / New York connection and make whole pence out of the proceedings.

And let me recommend Berghaus Tech-T tee-shirts. I was wearing one under the thin cycling top as I lay on a canal towpath in December for an hour while the ambulance people sorted out getting me up to road level, and I remained warm throughout. Since then I wear one as a base layer when it's cold, just on the offchance...

ian

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Out to lunch?
    ... person would feel is something to keep private. ... probably a bit flustered unless they represent a stable of Nobel Prize ... We have an chew toy for auers in "popped 'round to the shops". ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Out to lunch?
    ... The fact that a person shops is not something that any ... person would feel is something to keep private. ... You're being Literal Jerry again. ... The agent, or whoever, should have said "Miss ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: The Photograph
    ... I recall in the late 70s/early 80s, a lot of raids ... on the "Private" chain of shops, ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Yet more pictures of Expo 2011
    ... I'm thinking this is a Private Party...I see alcohol and people in their ... socks.. ... Terry's from Pinball Life? ...
    (rec.games.pinball)
  • Re: English traditions: Early colsing day
    ... Shops Act 1911, I believe. ... staff wouldn't get much time off other than Sundays, ... >Private, or personal, messages should begin the Subject line with to ...
    (soc.genealogy.britain)