On Wed, January 15, 2014 16:54, John McClure wrote:
> Nelson Mandela's "Ubuntu" is essentially human-ness, those traits that
> distinguish us from animals. One of these certainly must be privacy,
> derived from common performance of many bodily functions (including
> digitized communications). Lower order animals we say have no such
> expectations do they and we certainly accord animals none. (01)
Nor they, us. A bug on the wall doesn't respect our privacy in
elimination, sex, washing, or eating. And very few people desire privacy
from non-human animals. (02)
> These
> 'rights' are not itemized in our Constitution -- it would make the 2nd
> amendment quite banal. (03)
The 10th Amendment recognizes that not all of the rights of people in the
US are spelled out in the Constitution. One big objection to adding a
Bill of Rights to the Constitution was that it didn't & couldn't list all
of the people's rights. Just specifying a limited set of powers that the
federal govt. possessed was argued to be enough. (04)
Note that the militias that the South wanted protected by the 2nd
Amendment were those that hunted down run-away slaves and that had
sufficient presence to prevent slave uprisings. Slaves didn't have a
right to privacy that owners needed to respect. (05)
> Do we have a right to marry another? It's not in
> the Constitution, but surely we can agree that we have that right. (06)
If only we would all agree that adults had the right to marry adults.
The Supreme Court had to find that right in the 10th Amendment in order to
eliminate racial miscegenation laws. Soon they'll be dealing with gender
miscegenation laws. (07)
> So
> the mere fact it is not spelled out "legally" is hardly an impediment to
> the fact of its ontological existence -- this is true of any
> non-substantial concept. (08)
Agreed. (09)
> ... Anyway, it is
> conceivable to me the 'privacy' of digital communications is addressable
> under copyright law, _for I own all that I say_. (010)
How does the ownership of communications interact with someone's privacy
right to copy items one possesses? (011)
-- doug (012)
> Which brings to mind an
> ancient design for what is now HTTP that identified ownership /in vitro
> /of each bit of digitized communications.
> /john
>
> On 1/15/2014 1:22 PM, John Bottoms wrote:
>> Duane,
>>
>> I have not seen an ontology of privacy. There have been some
>> discussions about this issue that might be informative.
>>
>> First, privacy is not mentioned in the Constitution as a right. It has
>> been argued that it is a derived right from other rights mentioned
>> including "...life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." and
>> "...freedom from search and seizure", (Fourth amendment) but even
>> then, there are limits to this freedom for searches using warrants.
>>
>> Yes, we do _/allegedly /_give up rights with Terms of Agreement.
>> However, there is a professor at Harvard who argues that TOA's are not
>> valid contracts in that they are not arrived at as an agreement
>> between equal parties. I don't think this has been tested in court.
>>
>> If I had to write an ontology for privacy I would attempt to do it as
>> a reflection of a contractual agreement, in that privacy is something
>> owed to me, either as a citizen or as derived from the Constitution. I
>> don't think it can appear "/vero eos et auras/" (out of thin air) from
>> living in a democracy. That is, I don't see it as a right imbued by
>> having residence within the borders of the U.S.
>>
>> While we are at it, I have been working on "roles" and have been
>> considering the term "imbued". It came up during a movie I was
>> watching. The bad guy was wondering "Is this Kaley's room? It seems
>> odd that that the room has 'Kaley' assigned to it." It sounded like he
>> was wondering if a room, a non-agent, can have a role assigned to it.
>> I decided that whatever it was, to be "imbued" is to have others
>> recognize that the room is assigned to a certain person, in this case
>> "Kaley". It clearly comes off as one of Austen's Speech Acts such as
>> christening a ship. It is an assignment that is recognized by a group
>> of people and is logged in a registry of ship names, just as the
>> members of the (Firefly) ship recognizes the room as Kaley's.
>>
>> Likewise, I think privacy is something that is culturally recognized
>> by groups of people. Even as children, before we have any notion of
>> contracts or law, we recognize that we need privacy. And the courts
>> should recognize this innate need. They already award anonymity to
>> investors who establish corporations, so shouldn't individuals be able
>> to claim this same privilege?
>>
>> -John Bottoms
>> FirstStar System
>> Concord, MA USA
>>
>>
>> On 1/15/2014 3:13 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>> On 1/15/14 2:51 PM, Duane Nickull wrote:
>>>> It is an invasion of privacy if you do not consent to have your data
>>>> used as such. In most cases, people willingly signed over those
>>>> rights. Check the ToS on Facebook for example.
>>>>
>>>> Secondly, opting in is not the issue, opting out is.
>>>>
>>>> There is also the concept of context and traverse ability. I may
>>>> have your weight recorded but in a manner where it is not directly
>>>> attributable to you without further correlation. Cookies are a good
>>>> example of this.
>>>>
>>>> Duane Nickull
>>>> ***********************************
>>>> Technoracle Advanced Systems Inc.
>>>> Consulting and Contracting; Proven Results!
>>>> i. Neo4J, PDF, Java, LiveCycle ES, Flex, AIR, CQ5 & Mobile
>>>> b. http://technoracle.blogspot.com
>>>> t. @duanenickull
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Privacy is self-calibration of one's vulnerability on or offline.
>>>
>>> "You" not "Them" decide to lock your front-door at night, for instance.
>>>
>>> Any situation in which "You" aren't the calibrator of "Your"
>>> vulnerability is an invasion of privacy.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Kingsley Idehen
>>> Founder & CEO
>>> OpenLink Software
>>> Company Web:http://www.openlinksw.com
>>> Personal Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>> Twitter Profile:https://twitter.com/kidehen
>>> Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
>>> LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Message Archives:http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>> Config Subscr:http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>>> Unsubscribe:mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Shared Files:http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>> Community Wiki:http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> To join:http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> (013)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (014)
|