X-Loop: openpgp.net
From: Steve Schear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> When I brought this up in conversation yesterday a colleague said that
> there is a generally recognized assumption of privacy when two or more
> parties to a conversation take measures, for example closing the door to a
> room or encry
At 09:24 AM 3/24/00 -0500, Fisher Mark wrote:
>Reese wrote:
> >>What about if I purchase the Navaho module for my Dragon
> >>Dictate, voice input software, and have it translate the conversations I
> >>capture from by back porch?
> >>
> >IANAL. This may fall under illegal eavesdropping, whether yo
Reese wrote:
>>What about if I purchase the Navaho module for my Dragon
>>Dictate, voice input software, and have it translate the conversations I
>>capture from by back porch?
>>
>IANAL. This may fall under illegal eavesdropping, whether you make a
>recording MayOrMayNot be a determining factor
> Ed Gerck wrote:
> > As to the counter-example you ask, the general public profits by
> > lack of disclosure of the algorithm that allows nuclear bombs
> > to be made with 1 pound of enriched uranium. We have less
> > nuclear powers.
>
I'd like one of the real physicists on the list to weigh i
At 10:34 PM -0500 3/21/00, David Honig wrote:
>At 12:19 PM 3/21/00 -0500, Ed Gerck wrote:
>> Also, in the US as well as in most
>>countries, a newspaper can protect the anonymity of its source, a
>>private company does not have to disclose its statements, etc. --
> >all, expressions of privacy
Vogt:
>I don't think they had any of these deep thoughts. they were just pissed
>that the software wouldn't tell them what it did. I occasionally rip
>software apart for very similiar reasons, like finding out what it does,
>or how it does it. if curiosity is a crime, we should all go back and
>li
At 12:27 PM 3/21/00 -0500, Tom Vogt wrote:
>just wouldn't call it privacy, or better: the equivalent of privacy in
>german ("Privatsphäre").
What is sphäre?
At 12:19 PM 3/21/00 -0500, Ed Gerck wrote:
> Also, in the US as well as in most
>countries, a newspaper can protect the anonymity of its source, a
>private company does not have to disclose its statements, etc. --
>all, expressions of privacy rights.
That's going away now that everyone's a publ
At 03:53 PM 3/21/00 -0500, Sunder wrote:
>
>I'd say the general public of Taiwan would feel much safer in such a
situation.
It will be interesting to see, 20 years hence, whether
the Pakis' and the Indians' recent engineering feats are
stabilizing or used. One doubts they're irrelevent,
if only
Ed Gerck wrote:
>
> > in general, the general public profits if some secret algorithm gets
> > known. to be honest, I can't think of a single counter-example.
> As to the counter-example you ask, the general public profits by
> lack of disclosure of the algorithm that allows nuclear bombs
> to
At 09:58 AM 3/17/00, Ed Gerck wrote:
>"Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" wrote:
>
> > I think there may be a claim in defamation if your site was blocked and
> > the software claims you have some kind of nasty content...
>
>But, what happens (as is the case) when that software claims nothi
11 matches
Mail list logo
