11 Apr
2013
11 Apr
'13
12:59 p.m.
George in fact has stories about the crypto wars and Internet policy that are so valuable
that they should be documented here at Sudo Room because of its uniqueness and
technological depth. I also hope George gets some sleep today and remembers when he wakes
that we're all on the same side, even if we don't know it yet.
In regards to the snippet from the sudo-discuss info page, i actually read it to mean that
the list of members is private, not the discussion. But I will also admit that I had to
read it more than once to figure that out.
One useful thing we can do as we integrate privacy by design into the tools we develop is
to come to a more mutual understanding of what we mean by privacy. Disclosing my bias up
front, I find Helen Nissenbaum's contextual integrity way of thinking about it
resonates most with me (see her book Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the
Integrity of Social Life (2009) - http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=8862).
Given the key role context plays in privacy whether or not you agree with her whole
theory, we should parse out what our expectations of privacy are in the different forms of
communication we have and ways we associate. So .... what is your expectation of privacy
in some of the following contexts:
- at a Sudo Room RL meeting in the common area.
- at Sudo Room in the Sudo Room room in the back.
- while standing outside the building smoking something
- over the sudo-discuss mailing list & its public archives
- in one of our spin-off subject matter specific mailing lists
- at Sudo Square
- in the bathroom anywhere in the Sudo Room building
- inside a Sudo-related office, such as Roshambo's at the 2135 entrance, or the Public
School or the eddan.com office (suite 5)
- over IRC (or other chat)
- on the Wiki and on the etherpad
- conversations that start with: "Let me tell you this, but you have to promise to
keep it secret"
sent from eddan.com
On Apr 11, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Romy Ilano <romy(a)snowyla.com> wrote:
In the middle of all this I hope George doesn't
tone down. My biggest worry would that he stop being smart passionate and willing to speak
from the other end of things.
We need people with integrity who say the unspeakable. In the long run it ultimately
helps the companies that matter!
---
Romy Ilano
Founder of Snowyla
http://www.snowyla.com
romy(a)snowyla.com
On Apr 11, 2013, at 11:46, Sonja Trauss <sonja.trauss(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah i want to put in my vote as not sympathetic
with Georgio's outrage. I'm sympathetic with 'being mad at onesself for
overlooking something obvious,' but not with feeling tricked.
Dude, literally every email you get is two links away from the public archive!!!
Moreover, aren't mailing lists like the first thing the internet had? One of the first
things I ever read on the internet were mailing/ discussion list archives about ska music.
I generally expect to be able to read the archives of any list I'm on or interested
in, which means I expect them to be public and searchable.
If this was a list for grandmas I would maybe feel like it had a duty to be super
explicit, it could assume its members knew nothing about the internet or how to use links,
but this is a hackerspace email list.
If you guys want to make the archives private that's ok because it's easy to sign
up for the list.
On Apr 11, 2013 10:58 AM, "rachel lyra hospodar" <rachelyra(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
At the bottom of every email to this list is a link to 'listinfo' which opens
with an archive of every post to the list. If the boilerplate seems unclear to people we
can talk about changing it but I categorically object to removing anything from the
archive.
Transparency and openness are part of our core values, archiving emails is very standard,
the listinfo page makes it clear that this is done using completely standard language, and
if anyone wishes to have their statements go unattributed they are welcome to not enter
them into the Internet, or to use a pseudonym.
R.
On Apr 11, 2013 10:53 AM, "Georgio510" <georgio510(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Let's be really clear about this:
This is the explicit language in the sign-up document:
"Subscribing to sudo-discuss
Subscribe to sudo-discuss by filling out the following form. You will be sent email
requesting confirmation, to prevent others from gratuitously subscribing you. This is a
private list, which means that the list of members is not available to non-members."
"THIS IS A PRIVATE LIST, WHICH MEANS THAT THE LIST OF MEMBERS IS NOT AVAILABLE TO
NON MEMBERS."
That's a representation of a material fact. And the link to the archive says NOTHING
about that archive being anything that would violate or contradict the language I quoted
above: no disclosure, no nothing.
Blatant misrepresentation.
"May need to be doing a better job" is the understatement of the year.
The answer is, I'm going to hold SudoRoom to the terms & conditions I signed, and
that material is going to be taken down immediately until such time as anything I've
posted in it can be removed from any publicly searchable content. This is not optional,
any more than free repair under warranty is optional, or the absence of horsemeat in
"100% beef frankfurters" is optional.
I'm holding SudoRoom to its stated language.
-G.
======
On 13-04-11-Thu 10:42 AM, Marina Kukso wrote:
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss hi george,
i'm very sorry that you feel that you did not consent to having this information
public. this list has been publicly archived since it began and i think that we've
tried to make that clear (although it seems that we may need to be doing a better job!).
unfortunately i'm not sure to what extent the "welcome to sudo-discuss
list" email that new list members receive includes information about content being
publicly archived (could someone help with this?), but perhaps we may need to make this
more explicit in that letter.
for additional background on why we made the decision to publicly archive contents, the
idea is not necessarily to promote "transparency and openness" as a matter of
principle only, but because part of what we wanted to do with sudo room is to make our
history as easy for others to use as possible so that others who are starting and running
hackerspaces can learn from our experience and discussion. in other words, to facilitate
ctrl-c/ctrl-v of hackerspaces around the world.
- marina
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Georgio510 <georgio510(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Right, and when you slip LSD into the fruit punch at a party and don't tell anyone,
do you justify that by saying you're trying to encourage enlightenment? Who needs
informed consent anyway, right? Hey, who needs consent of any kind?
Sorry yo, that don't go. It's NON CONSENSUAL, like seducing someone and failing
to disclose to them that you have STDs. It's a trust-break in a big way.
I'm asserting my right to put this on the meeting agenda for next Wednesday, and pull
in any record of anything I signed that contained TOS.
Let me be really clear about this: I'm as serious as a fucking heart attack about
this, and anyone who thinks it's a joke is fucking sick.
This "open and transparent" stuff is starting to become a chant fit for a cult,
that short-circuits reason and critical thinking. In reality it's a house of one-way
mirrors foisted by the powerful on the masses to enable "prediction and control"
down to the level of the individual.
Enough was enough long ago, just like muggings and the rest of it.
-G.
=====
On 13-04-11-Thu 10:07 AM, mattsenate(a)gmail.com wrote:
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
We set the list up to be public in an effort to
remain as transparent and open as possible. This is a blessing and a burden. We should be
mindful of the scope of our language and interested in maintaining private conversation
off the list.
Additionally, if you seek a lot of privacy, I don't recommend communicating over the
internet if it can be helped.
// Matt
----- Reply message -----
From: "Tracy Jacobs" <kinetical(a)comcast.net>
To: "Romy Ilano" <romy(a)snowyla.com>
Cc: "sudo-discuss" <sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org>
Subject: [sudo-discuss] Michael Orange - film events - Battle for Brooklyn - any sudo
members interested in an intro?
Date: Thu, Apr 11, 2013 9:54 AM
Sudoers,
Why does our discussion list have to be published on the internet? I don't
personally want it to be that public. Who decided it should be done that way, and is
there another option?
Tracy
On Apr 10, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Romy Ilano <romy(a)snowyla.com> wrote:
> Hey here is one of the film events that Michael Orange from top 10 social is
presenting.
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/events/563556023675662/?notif_t=plan_user_invited
>
> Michael's also working with the Oakland Library as well,so I'll mention the
history wki people from sudoroom are there!
>
>
> this probably isn't necessary for anyone here... but in case one or two people
gets the temptation:
>
> -- Michael Orange is an all around good guy--please treat him well, minimize over the
top business plans, "industry type behavior", and approach him as you would a
family member. If we talk to him the wrong way it will be a smear on my reputation and his
opinion matters a lot to me. =D
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss