Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (72608)	2/1/1999 2:39:00 PM
From: DownSouth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

You may recall that the Nazis didn't use names in the death camps but numbers tattooed into people's skins. You would think that Andy Grove with his experience would have put a stop to this number business. You have taken the argument against ID ser no way beyond any rational discussion. Speaking for myself, your comparison of hardware serial numbers to personal tattoos is insulting, preposterous, and destroys much of the credibility that your discussion has earned heretofore. On this issue, your discussion suddently seems irrational, imo. This is my opinion only, and I share it with you not to insult you, but to give you feedback as to how your arguments appear to someone who is concerned about privacy, understands technology, and looks to these threads for insight and facts.

To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (72608)	2/1/1999 2:40:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Mr. Fiondella, I suggest that you calm down ... <I'm shocked and amazed at the pathetic level of social responsibility shown by Intel engineers. This issue is not being blown out of proportion. It is a serious issue because it raises the problem of developing a secure digital identity which individuals and not corporations should control.> Individuals do control it, now that the ID is turned off by default. If that's not an acceptable solution, I'm sure Intel will bend over backwards finding a better one. <Uplifting idiots isn't my responsibility, however having been in the software engineering business for some time, I can now see that many of the Intel engineers and former engineers that post here did not study the US Constitution, haven't got a clue what it means to be an American(as opposed to a citizen of a totalitarian state), and do not understand the role they are carving out for all of us with the public as enemies of personal freedom.> Mr. Fiondella, so anyone who disagrees with you must be anti-American, a Nazi (see below), and an enemy of personal freedom? Unfortunately, you are not the only one to hold such a view. It seems that the privacy groups are also holding such a view as well. "Anyone that isn't for us is against us!" God forbid that someone may have a different viewpoint on such matters. <You may recall that the Nazis didn't use names in the death camps but numbers tattooed into people's skins. You would think that Andy Grove with his experience would have put a stop to this number business.> Comparing Intel to the Nazis, I see. Given Andy Grove's experiences in World War II, I find it rather distasteful that you trivialize his experiences by comparing the CPU ID to facism. Besides, it is generally assumed that an online debate is over when references to the Nazis are made. <Unfortunately this whole fiasco shows JUST WHAT KIND OF COMPANY Intel is.> Unfortunately, your post shows just what kind of person you are, Mr. Fiondella. Tenchusatsu

To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (72608)	2/1/1999 3:25:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

Fiondella - Re: " I can now see that many of the Intel engineers and former engineers that post here did not study the US Constitution, " The Constitution provides protection against unlawful search and seizure. What part of the U.S. Constitution specifically guarantees PRIVACY to any one? Paul

To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (72608)	2/1/1999 11:52:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

Fiondella - Re: "I can now see that many of the Intel engineers and former engineers that post here did not study the US Constitution, " Let's go Mr. Constitutional EXPERT ! We're all waiting for you to POST where in the US Constitution that PRIVACY is guaranteed ! As it turns out - IT ISN'T GUARANTEED ! You know less about the Constitution than the rest of us. I guess you must have studied it real well ! Ha ! Loser. Paul

To: Paul Fiondella who wrote (72608)	2/2/1999 6:43:00 AM
From: nihil	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

\|\|\|\|\|\Intel engineers and former engineers that post here did not study the US Constitution, haven't got a clue what it means to be an American(as opposed to a citizen of a totalitarian state), and do not understand the role they are carving out for all of us with the public as enemies of personal freedom.\|\|\|\| It is this kind of idiotic drivel that makes me despair of living in a free state. You obviously know nothing of what the Constitution guarantees and what it does not. You confuse the Government and private corporations. The vague attempt to extent Constitutional protections to private citizens against private corporations always fails. It is precisely that attempt that makes a state totalitarian -- i.e. that there is no distinction between public and private. Under our Constitution a private corporation not clothed with powers of government can do anything it damned well pleases as long as there is no violation of the law. What law is broken if Intel only sells chips to people who want "caller identification?" I can understand why child abusers and thieves and others are unwilling to have their machines identities known, but I find it a terrible nuisance to have to go through a bunch of certificates to log in to a brokerage or university. I would pay extra to be able to authenticate my presence through hardware or software. But the real problems is fascists like you insist on telling others how they shall trade and what they shall sell. No one is required to buy a PIII or Sun or any other ID machine. They can buy something, make something else, or go to hell. Privacy is under law and the Constitution only found under the "penumbras" of the bill of rights, as my main man Douglas declared many years ago. There is no direct protection under USC as there is under many state constitutions. In any event, the protection only applies against the state. Try to protect your email from your employer's prying eyes, or your crotch from the cameras in the john. Forget about it. Our vile courts consistently rule you have no expectation of privacy. Instead of sweating computer privacy (and you can always mail through Finland if you wish) why not spend your time protecting persons against intrusion from data banks, dat warehousing, and all the neat stuff that hands you your next purchase through the door before you've even chosen it. But most important, remember that the Constitution was not intended to protect anyone from other private persons. It was the Federal Government, and only the Federal Government that had to be restricted. Only with the 14th Amendment in 1868 were the States restricted. Never have private firms been constrained except for Prohibition.