1  |   Order by index

Jun 6, 2002, 10:44pm

*ponders*

What real rights to world owners and caretakers have? The right to protect
their investment, that is certain. But at the expense of the privacy of
their visitors?

Although I am not naive enough to think there is privacy on the internet, AW
and the worlds do give the illusion of privacy. Groups of 2, 3 or more
gather and discuss topics of all sorts - some private, some silly. However,
there are those out there that are unaware of all that goes on behind the
world and it's bots. They don't see the Administrative log that shows who
someone is whispering to (but not what). They don't see a bot log "open
chat". They are happily unaware that no matter where in a world they are, a
worldowner or caretaker can see what they say (open chat) and all they are
building. The latter is harmless, but I think the former is a sad
situation.

Will AW take away the "see-all" feature in Bots? I think not, It has it's
uses. But as a paying member, I would expect one right and curtesy - The
bots should announce that they are present and monitoring the world.

A comment on Privacy...
Real-time chat falls under the same privacy laws and guidlines as email.
For email a sysop may not read, copy or display the contents unless
malicious intent is suspected.

"The federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) makes it unlawful
for anyone to read or disclose the contents of an electronic communication
(18 USC § 2511). This law applies to e-mail messages."

Privacy In Cyberspace:
Rules of the Road for the Information Superhighway. Copyright 1995 - 2002.
Utility Consumers' Action Network / Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.
June 1995 / Revised Revised August, 2000
Fact Sheet 18: Privacy In Cyberspace
http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs18-cyb.htm.

Thoughts and flames welcome....but I probably will not read them. Good
wishes to all!

Jun 6, 2002, 11:31pm

Very intresting...bots can log in invisible and global mode and monitor chat
in an entire world without being seen. Although only ct's can use this
feature and if they won the world i dont see why they cant do so. Didnt know
that though.

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A message from Zeo Toxion
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[View Quote]

Jun 7, 2002, 12:38am

Personally, I find it hilarious how everyone's so up in arms over
privacy these days. Granted, privacy is important and there are some
things that just should NOT be violated, but at the same time you have
to wonder why everyone's so quick to use the "invasion of privacy"
excuse. What have we got to hide? And even if you do have some deep dark
secret, who do you think is really going to care besides those who know
you in real life? Certainly not the entire world.

As you said, privacy on the internet is an illusion at best. If you want
to share something private or personal with someone, the internet is the
LAST place you want to be doing that. Because of that, I think people
need to get the idea out of their heads that they are somehow safe on
the internet. As much as governments (especially American ones) would
like to think they can control it, the internet, ever since it was put
into public hands, has been the embodiment of anarchy. To think that we
can get it under control for long enough to have a few moments of
privacy is folly.

Then again, even amongst chaos one can find peace. With all the noise on
the internet, it can be quite easy to hide in plain sight and, with just
a few keystrokes, you can suddenly become a different person. But even
then, you'll have to cut yourself off from everything you knew before
and start from scratch in order to maintain the ruse. So, in that sense,
privacy can be had, but at the price of your true self.

So the question is this: How much is your privacy worth to you? Because
if you want to bring it with you into cyberspace, expect to pay a high
price for it.

[View Quote] > *ponders*
>
> What real rights to world owners and caretakers have? The right to protect
> their investment, that is certain. But at the expense of the privacy of
> their visitors?
>
> Although I am not naive enough to think there is privacy on the internet, AW
> and the worlds do give the illusion of privacy. Groups of 2, 3 or more
> gather and discuss topics of all sorts - some private, some silly. However,
> there are those out there that are unaware of all that goes on behind the
> world and it's bots. They don't see the Administrative log that shows who
> someone is whispering to (but not what). They don't see a bot log "open
> chat". They are happily unaware that no matter where in a world they are, a
> worldowner or caretaker can see what they say (open chat) and all they are
> building. The latter is harmless, but I think the former is a sad
> situation.
>
> Will AW take away the "see-all" feature in Bots? I think not, It has it's
> uses. But as a paying member, I would expect one right and curtesy - The
> bots should announce that they are present and monitoring the world.
>
> A comment on Privacy...
> Real-time chat falls under the same privacy laws and guidlines as email.
> For email a sysop may not read, copy or display the contents unless
> malicious intent is suspected.
>
> "The federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) makes it unlawful
> for anyone to read or disclose the contents of an electronic communication
> (18 USC § 2511). This law applies to e-mail messages."
>
> Privacy In Cyberspace:
> Rules of the Road for the Information Superhighway. Copyright 1995 - 2002.
> Utility Consumers' Action Network / Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.
> June 1995 / Revised Revised August, 2000
> Fact Sheet 18: Privacy In Cyberspace
> http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs18-cyb.htm.
>
> Thoughts and flames welcome....but I probably will not read them. Good
> wishes to all!
>
>
>


--
Goober King
He's an open book... but the pages are blank
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jun 7, 2002, 3:47am

(see comments below)

On 6 Jun 2002 20:44:12 -0400, "sheridan"
[View Quote] >*ponders*
>
>What real rights to world owners and caretakers have? The right to protect
>their investment, that is certain. But at the expense of the privacy of
>their visitors?
>
>Although I am not naive enough to think there is privacy on the internet, AW
>and the worlds do give the illusion of privacy. Groups of 2, 3 or more
>gather and discuss topics of all sorts - some private, some silly. However,
>there are those out there that are unaware of all that goes on behind the
>world and it's bots. They don't see the Administrative log that shows who
>someone is whispering to (but not what).

As this portion of the log doesn't expose what is being said, I fail
to see how it's a privacy invasion. All it does is tell you Bob
whispered to Sue.

>They don't see a bot log "open chat".

Open conversation is subject to logging by anyone.

>They are happily unaware that no matter where in a world they are, a
>worldowner or caretaker can see what they say (open chat) and all they are
>building.

Any other unannounced person nearby could also see this conversation,
as well as [invisible + global moded] bots and caretakers.

>The latter is harmless, but I think the former is a sad situation.
>Will AW take away the "see-all" feature in Bots? I think not, It has it's
>uses. But as a paying member, I would expect one right and curtesy - The
>bots should announce that they are present and monitoring the world.

There are bots that have purposes that do not require their physical
presence in a world. I myself prefer my bots remain unannounced even
when physically present.

>A comment on Privacy...
>Real-time chat falls under the same privacy laws and guidlines as email.
>For email a sysop may not read, copy or display the contents unless
>malicious intent is suspected.

There is no direct way to control activity on the Internet. Such laws
may only be active in one country, and not in any other.

>"The federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) makes it unlawful
>for anyone to read or disclose the contents of an electronic communication
>(18 USC § 2511). This law applies to e-mail messages."

Note that the said law applies to e-mail messages. Apparently, it
would not apply to a VR chat bot logging explicitly -open-
conversation.

>Privacy In Cyberspace:
>Rules of the Road for the Information Superhighway. Copyright 1995 - 2002.
>Utility Consumers' Action Network / Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.
>June 1995 / Revised Revised August, 2000
>Fact Sheet 18: Privacy In Cyberspace
>http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs18-cyb.htm.
>
>Thoughts and flames welcome....but I probably will not read them. Good
>wishes to all!
>
>

Jun 7, 2002, 1:01pm

"sheridan" <motleymouse at worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:3d0001dc at server1.Activeworlds.com:

><snipped>

Ugh, why is everyone so touchy about "privacy" right now? Bots could log an
entire world before global mode in 3.3, just that they'd have to have
instances positioned all over the world. Ever seen a world log? Doesn't log
the content of whispers, only that they happened, so if you whisper "my CC#
is #######" to somebody, the world owner won't know your CC number (even
though AW isn't designed to transfer this kind of information, and you
should NEVER do so, AW is just for chat, don't say anything you wouldn't
say on the street IRL). Privacy in AW is more than good, I don't see how it
could be made significantly better now that we got all our new privacy
features in 3.3. There are more important issues around.

KAH

Jun 7, 2002, 10:39pm

Why touchy? Ever hear of McCarthyism? It's running rampant again in the
US. But that's not the issue. I just like to know when a bot is present so
I can keep my chat in the correct context. If you noticed, ppl misconstrue
a simple sentence and next thing you know you have your chat log on display
in some newsgroup somewhere with a bunch of ppl judging you.

Live chat does fall under the same guidelines as email in the USA.

I personally resent the fact (I hope that isn't too strong an emotion) that
you can no longer tell if a bot is present. I thought the simple solution
would be to have a bot announce it's presence. I cannot imagine any reason
a CT would want to hide the fact that a bot is present. In anycase, AW
could manage the anouncement thru the same methods as a bot announces that a
new cit has registered.

A friendly Thanks to all for your thoughtful responses!


[View Quote]

Jun 7, 2002, 11:01pm

yeah i have a monitoring bot. i mostly look at the logs on objects (because
its a pu
blic building world). , however nothing is stopping me from eavesdropping on
every conversation. as for whispers. those cant be intercepted at all-by
bots OR the world server. the server logs says that there WAS a whisper, but
not what was in it. taking away global mode would be a bad idea. ive been
wanting it for ages so i can log object changes in case of vandalism. if you
want your chat private the best option is to go to aw or whisper
[View Quote]

Jun 7, 2002, 11:05pm

well i like to hide it because i dont want people to know IF i am logging or
not. i am not on 24/7 so if they knew when the bot was there... they could
just vandalize when its not
[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index