Oh, ma Gawd...Another Nullius thread - Steamtyme hates your privacy

[Steamtyme]

In Defence of Privacy

What else do I need to do to make sure you don't think badly of me?

Nothing. You are doing nothing wrong. Any negative feedback you receive would get sorted in a very similar fashion to the last instance.

Don't worry about what people think, and definitely don't go changing just because someone on the internet thinks you could possibly be infringing on someone's privacy by offering them the chance to answer questions. It's not like you are forcing people into this or combing through post histories to create a profile for individuals against their will.

My advice ignore this feedback. Even the threat of negative doesn't fit with what negative feedback is for. Should you chose to take an unhealthy obsession in Lauda and dedicate your days to trying to find out who they are, it's not against forum rules to seek out information. Are we tagging anyone who researches Satoshi? No.

The worst thing you can do, is change who you are and how you act in an attempt to please everyone.

In sum, not only do you not respect privacy, but you are even against anyone who does.

This is a cypherpunk forum, where the reasonable members value freedom and respect privacy.  It was Lauda’s ethos.  It is also one of my own strongest principles.  Although unfortunately, there can be reasons sometimes to seek information about people who did something to deserve that, I would never pry into forum members’ personal lives out of mere curiosity.

By your example:  If Satoshi’s friends expressed a concern for his privacy, then you should respect that, and back the fuck off!

Speculating about Satoshi based on public information is not analogous to my above question.  If somebody was fishing for The Real True Secret Story from people who were more or less close to Satoshi, then that would be a matter of grave concern to me.  Satoshi does NOT deserve that!

I didn’t pry into Lauda’s details, either—even though she was my friend, and she trusted me sufficiently that she probably would have leaked some info to me.  I didn’t ask—not seriously, never; and not at all, besides our long-running joke interrogation over whether she is male or female.  And that is one good reason why she trusted me.  On the flipside, I would have given her my full dox with KYC ID, selfies, and fingerprints if she had asked!  She never asked anything.  Never pried.  Not a curious cat, in that particular aspect.  “Superlatively trustworthy.”

Disrespect for privacy is untrustworthy—both in general, and most specifically on a forum where most of the members want to be more or less anonymous.  Really, Mr “Steamtyme”, do you want people digging around about you?  Do you want for people to “offer the chance to answer questions” (!) about you?  What’s good for the goose, is good for the gander.

I am a privacy activist, and I hold my principles consistently.  As for you, if you dislike respect for privacy, I suggest that you stop bugging the forum, and retreat to your true home on Facebook.

Don't forget your cape. Oh what luck the only defender of privacy has come for me, the anti-privacy incarnate.

Sorry to disappoint but the tales you are weaving are really doing you a disservice. I get it your anonymous internet friend has left you and there is a void. Maybe this is your path to grieving with the anger and lashing out I don't know... don't really care as a matter of fact.

You're right there are a lot of people here who have done a bang up job protecting their irl identities. There are hundreds more who value their irl privacy. The fact of the matter is though, every single person who has ever posted on this forum has given away a private part of themselves. You know why?? This is a public fucking forum, not Lauda's personal diary. So forgive me if I don't give a shit that someone who built up a "celebrity" type of reputation has peoples interests peaked by dropping a farewell bomb on the forum.

Lauda could have accomplished a much more private departure by simply departing. Drop a message down the old Batline from the Cat cave to theymos and privately had their account locked. So many private options it's almost unreal. Then there's the friend who is trying to stop people from doing perfectly normal things, but can't stop posting in, and as a by-product bumping the thread itself. Then gets upset when someone suggest getting it locked, possibly preventing it from becoming a spam megathread. Pretty sure Lauda hated spam as well.

Now discussing the forum and it's roots. Forum principles are heavy on the freedom, and definitely come with the message about how important ones privacy can be. I can't speak to the individuals who arrived near founding or their motivations, but the freedom aspect is easy. It's interesting how freedom to oh say ask questions, or inquire or speculate about someone, goes out the window as soon as it touches on your insecurities around privacy. The key here is people are responsible for themselves - this includes the level of privacy they maintain, the reputations they build and how they conduct themselves. Lauda made choices, including building a reputation they parlayed into great business opportunities for themselves. They also made choices to remain secure and unlinked to an irl personality, to a great degree I imagine, as there have been countless enemies attempting to unmask them. So if anyone ever unravels the mystery of Lauda it will have been through the cats own actions.

I don't know if your trying to threaten me mister privacy advocate. Thing is I'm not going anywhere, I would have ignored you long ago but the repeated threats around the misuse of the feedback system keeps me around. I clearly stated in my answers that I was blissfully ignorant to how poorly I guarded my privacy, but it also wouldn't have mattered. I have made decisions that have given up details about myself in the interest of trading and building relationships. So just because I made those decisions doesn't mean that I do not respect the privacy of others. That doesn't mean I am going to impose my opinion, beliefs or values on others, they are mine to internalize and live.

Someone may one day decide to dig into me, maybe they will call me Mr. Steamtyme, and I'll joke that's my dads name. Then I just imagine awkward silence as they realize I'm not that cool.

On the flipside, I would have given her my full dox with KYC ID, selfies, and fingerprints if she had asked!
~snipped~
I am a privacy activist, and I hold my principles consistently.

All while discussing an individual who may have been compromised in some fashion.

You do you, I'll do me. You can continue to draw false conclusions about me and what I write I don't really care. I will however not allow you to use me to derail an individuals thread. Oh and seeing as you consider me untrustworthy, just place ~steamtyme in your trust list, neutral feedback could also be reasonable.

[1715182444]

1715182444

[1715182444]

1715182444

[1715182444]

1715182444

[PrimeNumber7]

People have the right to privacy, but there is no reason why a person must have privacy if they choose to not guard their privacy. Many people decide they want to share details about themselves, including personal experiences for social interaction and other reasons. It is very normal to do this.

Similar to privacy, people can talk about, including ask about, anything they want. If you have something you want to keep private, some people may look for clues about this private information, and some people may inquire about this private information. If you want this information to remain private, you should not leave any clues, and you should share this information with those you are sure you can trust not to further share it.

If you are posting about where you went one summer, or other personally-identifying information, you should expect people to know about it, even if you try to delete it from the internet. You should expect anything you post online to remain forever.

[nullius]

I will however not allow you to use me to derail an individuals thread.

That is dishonest of you.  zasad@, the OP in that thread, made posts thereby addressed to me.  I replied to him.  You also replied to him; and I replied to you as part of my reply to him.  (And by the way, you are in no position to “allow” or “not allow” me.)

“Derail”?  If so, zasad@ derailed his own thread.  Which, by the way, has been described as a spam megathread by persons who are not me.

Oh, at that:

Then gets upset when someone suggest getting [Lauda’s thread] locked, possibly preventing it from becoming a spam megathread. Pretty sure Lauda hated spam as well.

n00b protip:  A spam megathread is a thread where sigspamming bounty chasers make insubstantive posts to bump their post counts.

That is what you are calling a thread where (mostly) sincere well-wishers are having what has been an almost wholly positive discussion about a well-loved person who is now gone.

Are you deliberately trying to be insulting toward Lauda?  I do not see how it could be otherwise.


I am busy right now.  Almost everything that you said is nonsense.  I may reply to it if/when time permits.  From the foregoing, it is clear that your creation of this thread is rather pointless.  Why not continue discussing this where zasad@ started the discussion?

Oh, ma Gawd...Another Nullius thread - Steamtyme hates your privacy

So why did you create one?

I think that you wholly misconstrued the nature of my concern.  Please take another look.

[suchmoon]

Lauda could have accomplished a much more private departure by simply departing. Drop a message down the old Batline from the Cat cave to theymos and privately had their account locked.

LOL so much this. Lauda wanted one last drama so Lauda did one last drama. Trying to paint as some genius satoshi-like departure only to be forever worshiped in the memorial thread is ludicrous.

As for nullius, ignore is the best approach, trust me. Saves hours of reading and miles of scrolling. What he says and does about the trust system doesn't make much sense... so tilde too is recommended... unless someone thinks that red-tagging for "trolling" and "defamation" is appropriate.

[nullius]

Lauda could have accomplished a much more private departure by simply departing. Drop a message down the old Batline from the Cat cave to theymos and privately had their account locked.

LOL so much this. Lauda wanted one last drama so Lauda did one last drama. Trying to paint as some genius satoshi-like departure only to be forever worshiped in the memorial thread is ludicrous.

It is obvious that both you and Steamtyme have personal grudges against Lauda.

If you disliked her, you are really going to hate me.  suchmoon, remember when I remarked to you (at the time, in a quite friendly discussion) that I was a “more extreme version of Lauda”?

People have the right to privacy, but there is no reason why a person must have privacy if they choose to not guard their privacy. Many people decide they want to share details about themselves, including personal experiences for social interaction and other reasons. It is very normal to do this.

Similar to privacy, people can talk about, including ask about, anything they want. If you have something you want to keep private, some people may look for clues about this private information, and some people may inquire about this private information. If you want this information to remain private, you should not leave any clues, and you should share this information with those you are sure you can trust not to further share it.

If you are posting about where you went one summer, or other personally-identifying information, you should expect people to know about it, even if you try to delete it from the internet. You should expect anything you post online to remain forever.

I think that PrimeNumber7 seeks earnest discussion—not about the forum drama, but about the principles that I raised in a classic nullius post.

Rather than specifically replying, I stepped back for a big-picture view and created, in the abstract, my Privacy Culture Manifesto—or at least, the beginnings of one.

Discussion of Lauda is generally off-topic in that thread, except insofar as (0) she herself was an exemplary paragon of cultural privacy virtue, and (1) her privacy should be respected.

PN7, I said earlier that I thought you misinterpreted my post.  I think that from my Privacy Culture Manifesto, you will at least partly see why.

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[LoyceV]

By your example:  If Satoshi’s friends expressed a concern for his privacy, then you should respect that, and back the fuck off!

I don't really care about "friends' comments". If satoshi wants to share something, he's free to do so by himself.

Speculating about Satoshi based on public information is not analogous to my above question.  If somebody was fishing for The Real True Secret Story from people who were more or less close to Satoshi, then that would be a matter of grave concern to me.  Satoshi does NOT deserve that!

I'm curious, but I accept satoshi's right to privacy. His choice. But even though I know people have been digging for years, I'm not at all concerned about it. First, there's nothing I can do about it, and second, as long as the information is publicly available, let them try.

I didn’t pry into Lauda’s details, either—even though she was my friend

Is that something Lauda has posted in public? I wouldn't call anyone on this forum "my friend", because I basically know nothing about them and I've never met anyone from this forum in person. Some are friendly, some are rude, and some even turned being rude into an art. There are people I appreciate, and people who's contributions deserve to be on my ignore list, but I wouldn't call anyone a friend. Also not an enemy for that matter (hence the thick skin thing).

On the flipside, I would have given her my full dox with KYC ID, selfies, and fingerprints if she had asked!

Interesting, that doesn't sound like what I've seen from you at all.

Too much drama

How hard can it really be to say "no" to someone? If someone asks you a question, they shouldn't need a disclaimer telling them they can choose not to answer. That should be common sense! The first interview was mine, it's this easy:

LoyceV (Legendary)
I'm not willing to share ......

Lauda made choices, including building a reputation they parlayed into great business opportunities for themselves. They also made choices to remain secure and unlinked to an irl personality, to a great degree I imagine

I have my own opinion on Lauda, just like I have on many other people. This is fine

[The Sceptical Chymist]

People have the right to privacy

Oh if that were only true.  Ever get involved in the justice system as part of an investigation (even if you were innocent)?  Tell me how much of a right to privacy you have then.  Tell the NSA or Facebook or Twitter how we're all entitled to privacy online....and on and on. 

I would love it if we really did have some legal protections to guard our privacy, but we don't--or we have the bare minimum at best.

So what's this new drama all about?  I'm so tired of all of this mud-slinging against members who don't deserve to get splattered.  I excluded nullius from my trust list because of his "troll" feedbacks, and that's something I wish I didn't feel I had to do, but those red tags are supposed to be handed out to members you wouldn't trust with money, not because they're shitposters, trolls, assholes, arrogant, psychotic, or anything else.

[Steamtyme]

I will however not allow you to use me to derail an individuals thread.

That is dishonest of you.  zasad@, the OP in that thread, made posts thereby addressed to me.  I replied to him.  You also replied to him; and I replied to you as part of my reply to him.  (And by the way, you are in no position to “allow” or “not allow” me.)

“Derail”?  If so, zasad@ derailed his own thread.  Which, by the way, has been described as a spam megathread by persons who are not me.

Dishonest, hmmm not likely a typo. So just back to misinterpreting and running with it as fact. Seems more likely, so I'll spell it out. I replied to Zasad@ as quoted about their actions regarding their thread and interviews. You did respond to them in part as well, then you dedicated half of your post to my attack on privacy - this subtopic had no pace in that thread. It would have quickly and easily pulled the topic away from the interviews.

So as a courtesy and inline with forum guidelines didn't post off-topic and created this thread. I guess I could have maybe tucked this into my reputation thread as I think about it. I'll link it here later. So I guess in a way you could say that I was in the exact position to "not allow" myself to be used to go off-topic.

Oh, at that:

Then gets upset when someone suggest getting [Lauda’s thread] locked, possibly preventing it from becoming a spam megathread. Pretty sure Lauda hated spam as well.

n00b protip:  A spam megathread is a thread where sigspamming bounty chasers make insubstantive posts to bump their post counts.

That is what you are calling a thread where (mostly) sincere well-wishers are having what has been an almost wholly positive discussion about a well-loved person who is now gone.

Are you deliberately trying to be insulting toward Lauda?  I do not see how it could be otherwise.

A spam megathread is any thread that becomes a long line of repetitive, unoriginal low value posts. Whether signatures or not exist, is irrelevant. Apart from me usually adding Sig spam in a report. So it's understandable that people can see the possibility of that thread becoming one. Here we are circling back to Lauda again, with no real reason; apart from you thinking anything short of a rainbow blowjob is a personal attack against them.

I am busy right now.  Almost everything that you said is nonsense.  I may reply to it if/when time permits.  From the foregoing, it is clear that your creation of this thread is rather pointless.  Why not continue discussing this where zasad@ started the discussion?

Oh, ma Gawd...Another Nullius thread - Steamtyme hates your privacy

So why did you create one?

Explained above. May come back to answer. You've already quoted and replied. No sense in attempting to drag this out further by spreading your replies to a single post over multiples. Again, your opinions are your own, and matter little to me. I am coming around on how pointless this thread might be, in that it seems pointless attempting to have a discussion with you so I guess we're closer to finding common ground.

n00b protip

Multiposting is against forum rules. The edit button works wonders for that.

LOL so much this. Lauda wanted one last drama so Lauda did one last drama. Trying to paint as some genius satoshi-like departure only to be forever worshiped in the memorial thread is ludicrous.
As for nullius, ignore is the best approach, trust me. Saves hours of reading and miles of scrolling. What he says and does about the trust system doesn't make much sense... so tilde too is recommended... unless someone thinks that red-tagging for "trolling" and "defamation" is appropriate.

I have avoided using "ignore" entirely and don't really want to start, but I've been close to using it a few times this year. I've had ~ on for a long time. I'm sure we could find "someone" who would agree with those tags in concept, it's not I.

Too much drama

Lauda made choices, including building a reputation they parlayed into great business opportunities for themselves. They also made choices to remain secure and unlinked to an irl personality, to a great degree I imagine

I have my own opinion on Lauda, just like I have on many other people. This is fine

My apologies. I legitimately do not like stirring it up or dragging it out. Sometimes I do feel a need to respond. I harbor no ill will against Lauda, they were an internet persona I disagreed with on some points mainly around conduct on an internet playground.

So what's this new drama all about? 

I got annoyed.

[nullius]

Edit 2020-10-29:  Added anchor tags.  No substantive changes.

People have the right to privacy

Oh if that were only true.  Ever get involved in the justice system as part of an investigation (even if you were innocent)?  Tell me how much of a right to privacy you have then.  Tell the NSA or Facebook or Twitter how we're all entitled to privacy online....and on and on.  

I would love it if we really did have some legal protections to guard our privacy, but we don't--or we have the bare minimum at best.

That is one of many reasons why we need privacy culture.  And yes, I am going to grind that axe.  I wouldn’t have much street cred as a self-described “privacy activist” if I didn’t—or if I didn’t have a long history of doing so.

Laws are made by people.  They do not just fall out of the sky.  If people don’t value privacy—if society as a whole does not have privacy as its cultural norm—then you can expect for the laws and the legal system not only to fail to protect privacy, but to actively abuse it!

Start at the grassroots level.  Start in your own life, in your daily interactions.  Demand privacy.  Change people’s values.  Praise people who have a “none of my business” attitude—and who keep confidences, in matters that are their business.  Shame people who gossip, nose around, or violate confidences.

If at least 10% of society consisted of active privacy fanatics like me, then everybody would have privacy.  I am not pulling that number out of the air; it is based on research.  It is the approximate proportion which, if unopposed (or if it’s more fanatical than its opposition), can move the whole direction of a modern society.  Because most people are sheep.  Inert.  Apathetic.  Weak.  Followers only, who fear conflict and cave to peer pressure.

Observe how many agendas slowly, gradually take over society—right or wrong—even if passive disliked by a supermajority of the population—for better or for worse!  It starts with a raging hard core of people who just WILL NOT SHUT UP about an issue, who push and push...  Do you want privacy?  Push it!  And even more importantly:  Live it!

Or on the flipside:  If you are one of the sheep, then even if you feel vaguely, passively concerned about violations of privacy, your opinion is completely meaningless.  If you don’t stand up for privacy—if you are not willing to fight for it—then vested interests who hate privacy will be unopposed.  Now, observe the results:  How much privacy do we actually have?  To be clear, the question is rhetorical.

So what's this new drama all about?

Correct answer:  Some people on the Internet don’t like me.  Waaaaah. :'-(''''''

I'm so tired of all of this mud-slinging against members who don't deserve to get splattered.  I excluded nullius from my trust list because of his "troll" feedbacks, and that's something I wish I didn't feel I had to do, but those red tags are supposed to be handed out to members you wouldn't trust with money, not because they're shitposters, trolls, assholes, arrogant, psychotic, or anything else.

No hard feelings.

Just to be clear, the feedback that I had issued in this case was neutral.  It has now been deleted, and replaced by feedback that sounds neutral in addition to being marked as “neutral”.  The controversy is now completely settled between its principal parties.

I didn’t pry into Lauda’s details, either—even though she was my friend

Is that something Lauda has posted in public? I wouldn't call anyone on this forum "my friend",

LOL, expecting Facebook-style social graph status announcements from privacy people.  Or discussion thereof.

I am only Lauda’s most notoriously obsessed fan, the one who just will not shut up about Lauda Lauda Lauda!  Except when I need to shoot down bad ideas or potential bad behaviour—a quest which is certainly not beneficial to my self-interest.  In that case, I am Lauda’s Cult Grand Prophet, vested with divine authority by the mystical revealed truth of how much that batty cat evidently liked my prolific Laudatory fan art.  I don’t remember if there was ever anything else between us; I’ve been drinking waaay too much, these past few days, drowning my miseries.  Gone full amnesiac here.


By the way, as a general observation, it is funny how this works:  Before she left, I was not infrequently accused of being a Lauda alt, which is ridiculous.  Now, some people...  Equally ridiculous.  Where are all of the conspiracy theories from Internet Sherlock Holmes wannabes with their obsessive scrutiny of real or imaginary connections?

I suppose it goes to show that either way, any which way, people tend to discover what they want to find, not what is actually there.


<snip>

I have no reason to reply to misinterpretations, evasions, beating of dead horses, missing of the point, and some people trying to Win An Argument On The Internet.  Not playing that game.