PDA

View Full Version : You've just been deputized



bassvax
07-30-2001, 11:41 PM
Cosa fi???

First, I am no supporter of the topic in this (http://news.excite.com/news/ap/010728/13/computer-porn) link! But since when have any of you tech-folk sat a user's puter and shuffled through the contents of the HD to look for such things? I suppose there may be a share of you that have been told by management to route out the bad folks and thus have done some snooping, but...

I gather this article pertains to any puter (home or business) and any tech.

Don't forget to put on your shiny new badges when you roll up to that user's pc http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/frown.gif

Too much is too much...Big Brother...did I hear 1984?

Edit: If I feel like narc'ing the user out, I'll narc them out...but I don't need the government telling me to :angry:

------------------
Flush 'N' Forget
FE Stokes WWTP (http://www2.apex.net/users/hwuswtp)

[This message has been edited by bassvax (edited 07-30-2001).]

kaos
07-30-2001, 11:46 PM
I didn't catch if they have to look for it, or if it meant if they happen to see it? I think it should be a law that if they happen to seeit, they must report it, but to go looking for it? I don't think that would go over too well.

iisbob
07-31-2001, 12:04 AM
Good ol' south cack'a'lacky , as always leading the road to ignorance and bigotry. ( before you blast me about the state, i was born adn raised ther, and my parents still reside there-so i know first hand of it's shortcomings ).

AS for these tech's, i don't see how they could place this on services outside the goverment, i mean, if for some reason i took my system into Bestbuy ( fat chance of that happening! http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/tongue.gif ) and had them install a bigger harddrive and copy my data over from the old one; say for some reason i had objectionable matrial on it-by what moral or legal right do they have to report it?! This is a serious debate that's going on in businesses and other places of information transfer now.

I recall an article earlier about a convicted child molester who had a private diary in which he wrote a short story eluding to some erotic adventure between hisself and a child. It was found, and read by someone who turned him in; now the question is, even though he was a known criminal-he did not commit a crime by just using his imagination, you cannot use his previous actions as an excuse to invade his privacy for that sets a dangerous precedent where anyone can be convicted on just thinking about a crime. There have been some interesting cases based on similar events in the past century.

While child pornography is utterly disgusting ( and to me quite unfathomable ) what a person does in the privacy of their own mind is their business, until it impacts in the real world.

You know, if you think about it; this kinda links into our posts in the " after hours " section on the 2nd amendmant.

------------------
iisbob
"Soap and education are not as sudden as a massacre, but they are more deadly in the long run."

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." --Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

slo ride
08-06-2001, 06:01 PM
First this is a way for law enforcement to search where they would otherwise be forbidden having no warrant or probable cause. It is wholly subjective and illegally ambigous. For example, If I have familly photos of my 3 year old daughter running around naked in the house chasing the dog, and a computer tech finds them I could be arrested, submitted to a public trial, and dozens of people who have no business seeing my 3 year old naked, will have access to those images such as attorneys, police, judges, jurors, and file clerks. Any of whom may be perverts that could steal or make copies of these images, possibly distribute them. Since these people have access to my computer files they could also view content not subject to investigation, such as trade secrets, the viewing of which could be very damaging to myself as well as my employer. This is yet another case of ridiculous knee jerk legislation.

Vic 970
08-06-2001, 06:58 PM
I am in favour of helping the law enforcement with not only child pornography, but all crime.

BUT.

This is giving not only the Police etc. (as has been mentioned: without a warrant) access to our personal files on our machines. Which CANNOT be right.

In fact the law should PROTECT our rights to personal data, FORBIDDING technicians to ACCESS it, and that should they neccasarily or accidentally open or view any data, be bound by law to keep it confidential.

What's next, Doctors, Lawyers, Clergy? will they take away the right of client confidentiallity?

I have nothing on my machine of any sort of illegal nature, but if I felt that someone was viewing it without my knowledge or permission, it would be the same as if I had been burgled & ransacked.

Also I don't like the inference, are we being 'Tarred with the same brush' ie. like All home computers are only used for porn? which I have come across (occasionally) from 'unwise, non computer users' before.

This IS a violation of our rights!



------------------
for every question there's an answer. Then a load more questions.

Regards..,
Vic.

Gallaeglagh
08-07-2001, 05:13 PM
Having done service work in and around peoples houses for the last 20 years I've seen quite a few things but would never consider reporting anything. After all those people are my customers.

I'd be surprised if many techs will report anything about any files but I suppose sooner or later someone will. Maybe a few techs who work on the legislators comps should scrutinize those machines.

Of course making a law doesn't actually make it legal to search through someone's files. When the first case rolls in the law will be tested and probably found unconstiutional.

------------------
Sweet Intoxication