Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
SCraig
Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
I notice that Ancestry has the California birth index for 1905 to 1995 back
up. It was taken down a couple of years ago because of privacy concerns.
Does anyone know what happened to allow them to up it back online? People
aren't concerned about privacy now?
Craig
up. It was taken down a couple of years ago because of privacy concerns.
Does anyone know what happened to allow them to up it back online? People
aren't concerned about privacy now?
Craig
-
Donna Roberts
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
I complained to them and this was their response:
We appreciate your message.
Please note that the information in the database you mentioned is from
public records provided by the state of California. This means that anybody
can access this information and this is perfectly legal according to the
laws of California. If you do not wish to have your name included in this
database, you will need to contact the California Center for Health
Statistics as we are not able to edit a database that was not created by us.
If you wish to consult our corporate policy regarding the content provided
on Ancestry.com, please go to the following URL:
http://www.ancestry.com/legal/terms.htm#Liability
Please Note: For additional information on the source of the database,
select the Database Title link found at the top of each page of search
results. The next page provides information on who compiled the database,
including a short bibliography and a brief description of the information
contained in the database. Here you will be able to locate the source
information for the database in question. This should assist you in
contacting the source directly on this matter.
Best Regards,
Clint
Member Solutions
Ancestry.com
http://ancestry.custhelp.com/
"SCraig" <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c9ke.19868$J12.8856@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
We appreciate your message.
Please note that the information in the database you mentioned is from
public records provided by the state of California. This means that anybody
can access this information and this is perfectly legal according to the
laws of California. If you do not wish to have your name included in this
database, you will need to contact the California Center for Health
Statistics as we are not able to edit a database that was not created by us.
If you wish to consult our corporate policy regarding the content provided
on Ancestry.com, please go to the following URL:
http://www.ancestry.com/legal/terms.htm#Liability
Please Note: For additional information on the source of the database,
select the Database Title link found at the top of each page of search
results. The next page provides information on who compiled the database,
including a short bibliography and a brief description of the information
contained in the database. Here you will be able to locate the source
information for the database in question. This should assist you in
contacting the source directly on this matter.
Best Regards,
Clint
Member Solutions
Ancestry.com
http://ancestry.custhelp.com/
"SCraig" <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c9ke.19868$J12.8856@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
I notice that Ancestry has the California birth index for 1905 to 1995 back
up. It was taken down a couple of years ago because of privacy concerns.
Does anyone know what happened to allow them to up it back online? People
aren't concerned about privacy now?
Craig
-
SCraig
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
Craig
"Donna Roberts" <dlrgen@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:fMake.5065$Lc1.2609@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
I complained to them and this was their response:
We appreciate your message.
Please note that the information in the database you mentioned is from
public records provided by the state of California. This means that anybody
can access this information and this is perfectly legal according to the
laws of California. If you do not wish to have your name included in this
database, you will need to contact the California Center for Health
Statistics as we are not able to edit a database that was not created by us.
If you wish to consult our corporate policy regarding the content provided
on Ancestry.com, please go to the following URL:
http://www.ancestry.com/legal/terms.htm#Liability
Please Note: For additional information on the source of the database,
select the Database Title link found at the top of each page of search
results. The next page provides information on who compiled the database,
including a short bibliography and a brief description of the information
contained in the database. Here you will be able to locate the source
information for the database in question. This should assist you in
contacting the source directly on this matter.
Best Regards,
Clint
Member Solutions
Ancestry.com
http://ancestry.custhelp.com/
"SCraig" <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c9ke.19868$J12.8856@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
Craig
"Donna Roberts" <dlrgen@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:fMake.5065$Lc1.2609@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
I complained to them and this was their response:
We appreciate your message.
Please note that the information in the database you mentioned is from
public records provided by the state of California. This means that anybody
can access this information and this is perfectly legal according to the
laws of California. If you do not wish to have your name included in this
database, you will need to contact the California Center for Health
Statistics as we are not able to edit a database that was not created by us.
If you wish to consult our corporate policy regarding the content provided
on Ancestry.com, please go to the following URL:
http://www.ancestry.com/legal/terms.htm#Liability
Please Note: For additional information on the source of the database,
select the Database Title link found at the top of each page of search
results. The next page provides information on who compiled the database,
including a short bibliography and a brief description of the information
contained in the database. Here you will be able to locate the source
information for the database in question. This should assist you in
contacting the source directly on this matter.
Best Regards,
Clint
Member Solutions
Ancestry.com
http://ancestry.custhelp.com/
"SCraig" <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c9ke.19868$J12.8856@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
I notice that Ancestry has the California birth index for 1905 to 1995 back
up. It was taken down a couple of years ago because of privacy concerns.
Does anyone know what happened to allow them to up it back online? People
aren't concerned about privacy now?
Craig
-
D. Stussy
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
Don't know, but some of us have had it up on our own websites in the meantime!
;-)
I notice that Ancestry has the California birth index for 1905 to 1995 back
up. It was taken down a couple of years ago because of privacy concerns.
Does anyone know what happened to allow them to up it back online? People
aren't concerned about privacy now?
Don't know, but some of us have had it up on our own websites in the meantime!
;-)
-
D. Stussy
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
-
SCraig
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230441230.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
_______________________
Well, Ancestry has it on their website. So where did they get it?
Craig
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230441230.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
_______________________
Well, Ancestry has it on their website. So where did they get it?
Craig
-
D. Stussy
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
They had it from before the official "withdrawl."
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230441230.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
_______________________
Well, Ancestry has it on their website. So where did they get it?
They had it from before the official "withdrawl."
-
SCraig
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@linkpendium.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd92oqp.8hd.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
What sources lead you to believe that access to birth information has
anything to do with a nontrivial fraction of what the media calls
"identity theft"?
I'll bet you that you can't find a statistical breakout of "identity
theft" that shows birth information was relevant to even 1% of cases.
Cheers, B.
__________________
I don't have any sources but it seems fairly logical that if you have some
information about a person who lives in California, it would add to that
source of information to know, for instance, what that person's mother's
maiden name is. That information is in the database. My daughter, a
teenager, now has her full name, birthdate and mother's maiden name in the
Ancestry database for all to see. I think that's quite inappropriate.
Craig
news:slrnd92oqp.8hd.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
Craig
What sources lead you to believe that access to birth information has
anything to do with a nontrivial fraction of what the media calls
"identity theft"?
I'll bet you that you can't find a statistical breakout of "identity
theft" that shows birth information was relevant to even 1% of cases.
Cheers, B.
__________________
I don't have any sources but it seems fairly logical that if you have some
information about a person who lives in California, it would add to that
source of information to know, for instance, what that person's mother's
maiden name is. That information is in the database. My daughter, a
teenager, now has her full name, birthdate and mother's maiden name in the
Ancestry database for all to see. I think that's quite inappropriate.
Craig
-
Dr. Brian Leverich
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
What sources lead you to believe that access to birth information has
anything to do with a nontrivial fraction of what the media calls
"identity theft"?
I'll bet you that you can't find a statistical breakout of "identity
theft" that shows birth information was relevant to even 1% of cases.
Cheers, B.
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
Craig
What sources lead you to believe that access to birth information has
anything to do with a nontrivial fraction of what the media calls
"identity theft"?
I'll bet you that you can't find a statistical breakout of "identity
theft" that shows birth information was relevant to even 1% of cases.
Cheers, B.
-
SCraig
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230549270.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
They had it from before the official "withdrawl."
_______________
What do you mean by the "official withdrawl"?
Craig
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230549270.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230441230.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft.
I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot
of
states do.
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
_______________________
Well, Ancestry has it on their website. So where did they get it?
They had it from before the official "withdrawl."
_______________
What do you mean by the "official withdrawl"?
Craig
-
D. Stussy
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
The announcement by the State where they said it would be available no longer
to the public. Before that, they had it for sale via their web site.
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230549270.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230441230.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft.
I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot
of
states do.
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
_______________________
Well, Ancestry has it on their website. So where did they get it?
They had it from before the official "withdrawl."
_______________
What do you mean by the "official withdrawl"?
The announcement by the State where they said it would be available no longer
to the public. Before that, they had it for sale via their web site.
-
SCraig
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230625570.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
The announcement by the State where they said it would be available no
longer
to the public. Before that, they had it for sale via their web site.
_______________________
I guess I'm lost. California stopped selling the database but Ancestry
figured since they bought it before California stopped selling it, they
could put it online? I recall this being an issue a couple of years ago so
what has Ancestry been doing with this database since then? Why put it
online now? And don't they think that people will object? As I recall they
had some Texas databases online as well and also pulled them. What has
changed?
Craig
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230625570.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230549270.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
"D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.0505230441230.63@kd6lvw.ampr.org...
On Mon, 23 May 2005, SCraig wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft.
I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot
of
states do.
California did - they "withdrew" the database from the public domain and
stopped selling copies.
_______________________
Well, Ancestry has it on their website. So where did they get it?
They had it from before the official "withdrawl."
_______________
What do you mean by the "official withdrawl"?
The announcement by the State where they said it would be available no
longer
to the public. Before that, they had it for sale via their web site.
_______________________
I guess I'm lost. California stopped selling the database but Ancestry
figured since they bought it before California stopped selling it, they
could put it online? I recall this being an issue a couple of years ago so
what has Ancestry been doing with this database since then? Why put it
online now? And don't they think that people will object? As I recall they
had some Texas databases online as well and also pulled them. What has
changed?
Craig
-
Ellsinore
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
SCraig wrote:
Actually, there was just an article in one of the genealogy magazines
about this very issue within the last couple of months -- and they DID
cite some statistics about the information from a birth certificate NOT
being a factor when people who were the subject of identity theft were
queried.
As I recall, it was mostly social security numbers, credit card numbers,
checking and savings account information that was the "root" of most of
the evil --
I'll see if I can find that --
"Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@linkpendium.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd92oqp.8hd.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
Craig
What sources lead you to believe that access to birth information has
anything to do with a nontrivial fraction of what the media calls
"identity theft"?
I'll bet you that you can't find a statistical breakout of "identity
theft" that shows birth information was relevant to even 1% of cases.
Cheers, B.
__________________
I don't have any sources but it seems fairly logical that if you have some
information about a person who lives in California, it would add to that
source of information to know, for instance, what that person's mother's
maiden name is. That information is in the database. My daughter, a
teenager, now has her full name, birthdate and mother's maiden name in the
Ancestry database for all to see. I think that's quite inappropriate.
Actually, there was just an article in one of the genealogy magazines
about this very issue within the last couple of months -- and they DID
cite some statistics about the information from a birth certificate NOT
being a factor when people who were the subject of identity theft were
queried.
As I recall, it was mostly social security numbers, credit card numbers,
checking and savings account information that was the "root" of most of
the evil --
I'll see if I can find that --
-
Dr. Brian Leverich
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
You don't have sources because it's not true.
(I already knew that when I asked you for sources, because I
spent years as the Director of Statistical Systems at the Zale
Corporation, have analyzed millions of credit applications
and transactions, and know a great bloody lot about the totally
mundane subset of credit and financial fraud that the media
hysterically calls "identity theft".)
Craig, you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
but Aunt Sally's desire to lie about her age has to be
balanced against the fact that closing records may corrupt
genealogies (and more serious historical analyses).
Cheers, B.
"Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@linkpendium.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd92oqp.8hd.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
Craig
What sources lead you to believe that access to birth information has
anything to do with a nontrivial fraction of what the media calls
"identity theft"?
I'll bet you that you can't find a statistical breakout of "identity
theft" that shows birth information was relevant to even 1% of cases.
Cheers, B.
__________________
I don't have any sources but it seems fairly logical that if you have some
information about a person who lives in California, it would add to that
source of information to know, for instance, what that person's mother's
maiden name is. That information is in the database. My daughter, a
teenager, now has her full name, birthdate and mother's maiden name in the
Ancestry database for all to see. I think that's quite inappropriate.
Craig
You don't have sources because it's not true.
(I already knew that when I asked you for sources, because I
spent years as the Director of Statistical Systems at the Zale
Corporation, have analyzed millions of credit applications
and transactions, and know a great bloody lot about the totally
mundane subset of credit and financial fraud that the media
hysterically calls "identity theft".)
Craig, you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
but Aunt Sally's desire to lie about her age has to be
balanced against the fact that closing records may corrupt
genealogies (and more serious historical analyses).
Cheers, B.
-
Dr. Brian Leverich
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On 2005-05-23, Ellsinore <ellsinore@nospamgmail.com> wrote:
Right, right, RIGHT!
An interesting statistic is what percentage of "identity theft"
is committed by people known to the victim. I've seen numbers
as low as 19.5%
http://www.creditinfocenter.com/identit ... tats.shtml
and much, much higher.
Bear in mind both that the "victims" are often motivated to
cover up for friends and family, and that reporting agencies
are motivated to underreport this fact because their funding
is dependent on the crime rate and legislators are NOT going
to find untangling domestic financial quarrels to be a strong
motivation for allocating more resources to law enforcement.
###
The main point here is that "identity theft" is way, way mundane.
Your visiting niece takes your credit card and goes on a shopping
spree. A thug steals your purse. A dishonest waitress copies
your credit card number and expiration date while ringing up a
meal. A sloppily-built Website where you bought something
exposes your credit card info to teenage script kiddies.
What doesn't happen (in a statistical sense) is some mysterious
genius gathering bits and pieces of genealogical data to build a
dossier on you and then commit fraud. There are just too many
easier ways to steal.
(BTW, the reason why I said "in a statistical sense" is that
some cheerful idiot is bound to work Google and find the one
anecdotal case where some crook really did use genealogical
data in a scam. Although I'm not aware of any such cases,
there's bound to be one or a few. The point is, anecdotal
evidence is largely meaningless: you gotta look at the statistics
to actually understand what is going on here.)
Cheers, B.
Actually, there was just an article in one of the genealogy magazines
about this very issue within the last couple of months -- and they DID
cite some statistics about the information from a birth certificate NOT
being a factor when people who were the subject of identity theft were
queried.
As I recall, it was mostly social security numbers, credit card numbers,
checking and savings account information that was the "root" of most of
the evil --
I'll see if I can find that --
Right, right, RIGHT!
An interesting statistic is what percentage of "identity theft"
is committed by people known to the victim. I've seen numbers
as low as 19.5%
http://www.creditinfocenter.com/identit ... tats.shtml
and much, much higher.
Bear in mind both that the "victims" are often motivated to
cover up for friends and family, and that reporting agencies
are motivated to underreport this fact because their funding
is dependent on the crime rate and legislators are NOT going
to find untangling domestic financial quarrels to be a strong
motivation for allocating more resources to law enforcement.
###
The main point here is that "identity theft" is way, way mundane.
Your visiting niece takes your credit card and goes on a shopping
spree. A thug steals your purse. A dishonest waitress copies
your credit card number and expiration date while ringing up a
meal. A sloppily-built Website where you bought something
exposes your credit card info to teenage script kiddies.
What doesn't happen (in a statistical sense) is some mysterious
genius gathering bits and pieces of genealogical data to build a
dossier on you and then commit fraud. There are just too many
easier ways to steal.
(BTW, the reason why I said "in a statistical sense" is that
some cheerful idiot is bound to work Google and find the one
anecdotal case where some crook really did use genealogical
data in a scam. Although I'm not aware of any such cases,
there's bound to be one or a few. The point is, anecdotal
evidence is largely meaningless: you gotta look at the statistics
to actually understand what is going on here.)
Cheers, B.
-
Dani
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
I'm on there and I don't have a problem with it.
LOL
Who's gonna steal my identity when I don't even go by that name anymore?
Besides many other websites have that same information - one for free that I
know of - but most for pay info.
Both the Texas and California databases are online - google 'em and you can
find them.
Dani
"SCraig" <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c9ke.19868$J12.8856@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
LOL
Who's gonna steal my identity when I don't even go by that name anymore?
Besides many other websites have that same information - one for free that I
know of - but most for pay info.
Both the Texas and California databases are online - google 'em and you can
find them.
Dani
"SCraig" <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c9ke.19868$J12.8856@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
I notice that Ancestry has the California birth index for 1905 to 1995 back
up. It was taken down a couple of years ago because of privacy concerns.
Does anyone know what happened to allow them to up it back online? People
aren't concerned about privacy now?
Craig
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
And then you turn around and essentially do the same thing yourself, by
appealing to another "fear": the corruption of genealogy & history.
"Identity theft" has been the straw man that has diverted this discussion away
from the true issue, in my opinion. I'm happy to see that acknowledgement of
privacy rights. We *should* close those records for personal privacy reasons.
Just about everybody, with some unfortunate exceptions, recognizes personal
privacy by indicating "Living" or something similar for people who are or could
be living. Most programs also provide the same option. Privacy shouldn't be a
difficult concept to grasp.
Aunt Sally is your straw man, along the lines of "identity theft" which has
previously diverted this thread from the privacy violation aspect. Do we really
release private information in order to stop people from lying about their age?
The pursuit of research may be important to people here, and it is to me, but
when it comes to a contest between research and personal privacy rights, it's
hands down in favor of privacy.
Bob
snip
"X", you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
And then you turn around and essentially do the same thing yourself, by
appealing to another "fear": the corruption of genealogy & history.
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
"Identity theft" has been the straw man that has diverted this discussion away
from the true issue, in my opinion. I'm happy to see that acknowledgement of
privacy rights. We *should* close those records for personal privacy reasons.
Just about everybody, with some unfortunate exceptions, recognizes personal
privacy by indicating "Living" or something similar for people who are or could
be living. Most programs also provide the same option. Privacy shouldn't be a
difficult concept to grasp.
but Aunt Sally's desire to lie about her age
Aunt Sally is your straw man, along the lines of "identity theft" which has
previously diverted this thread from the privacy violation aspect. Do we really
release private information in order to stop people from lying about their age?
has to be
balanced against the fact that closing records may corrupt
genealogies (and more serious historical analyses).
The pursuit of research may be important to people here, and it is to me, but
when it comes to a contest between research and personal privacy rights, it's
hands down in favor of privacy.
Bob
-
Ellsinore
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
Robert Heiling wrote:
Unless someone is on a cash only basis, there is no way to do business
in this country and retain your "right to privacy". Every time you
write a check or borrow money to buy a car, your "private" information
is revealed -- and if you don't think the finance guy looks at that,
you're wrong. When you're turned down for a loan, they might not be
able to tell YOU why, but THEY certainly know -- and you're kidding
yourself if you think it isn't discussed.
No one is going to run down to the local mall and rip you off with a
copy of your birth certificate. They can, however, do incredible damage
with the credit card number that you gave the clerk at the grocery store
when you wrote your check.
If one is going to complain about privacy being violated by a birth
information database, then you have to also complain to the department
store which requires the clerk to write your credit card number down on
your check the next time you buy a new suit, or the company that uses
your social security number for identification purposes, or the grocery
store that wants personal information from you (ala Kroger) to "save
money". To me, these are MUCH more serious violations of privacy.
It's none of their business -- and *I* tell them so.
But, frankly, how old I am is one of the little details I really don't
worry about -- it will help when I can't remember and I can look it up
myself!
Just my $0.02.
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
snip
"X", you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
And then you turn around and essentially do the same thing yourself, by
appealing to another "fear": the corruption of genealogy & history.
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
"Identity theft" has been the straw man that has diverted this discussion away
from the true issue, in my opinion. I'm happy to see that acknowledgement of
privacy rights. We *should* close those records for personal privacy reasons.
Just about everybody, with some unfortunate exceptions, recognizes personal
privacy by indicating "Living" or something similar for people who are or could
be living. Most programs also provide the same option. Privacy shouldn't be a
difficult concept to grasp.
but Aunt Sally's desire to lie about her age
Aunt Sally is your straw man, along the lines of "identity theft" which has
previously diverted this thread from the privacy violation aspect. Do we really
release private information in order to stop people from lying about their age?
has to be
balanced against the fact that closing records may corrupt
genealogies (and more serious historical analyses).
The pursuit of research may be important to people here, and it is to me, but
when it comes to a contest between research and personal privacy rights, it's
hands down in favor of privacy.
Unless someone is on a cash only basis, there is no way to do business
in this country and retain your "right to privacy". Every time you
write a check or borrow money to buy a car, your "private" information
is revealed -- and if you don't think the finance guy looks at that,
you're wrong. When you're turned down for a loan, they might not be
able to tell YOU why, but THEY certainly know -- and you're kidding
yourself if you think it isn't discussed.
No one is going to run down to the local mall and rip you off with a
copy of your birth certificate. They can, however, do incredible damage
with the credit card number that you gave the clerk at the grocery store
when you wrote your check.
If one is going to complain about privacy being violated by a birth
information database, then you have to also complain to the department
store which requires the clerk to write your credit card number down on
your check the next time you buy a new suit, or the company that uses
your social security number for identification purposes, or the grocery
store that wants personal information from you (ala Kroger) to "save
money". To me, these are MUCH more serious violations of privacy.
It's none of their business -- and *I* tell them so.
But, frankly, how old I am is one of the little details I really don't
worry about -- it will help when I can't remember and I can look it up
myself!
Just my $0.02.
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
Hardly a matter of life or death or serious financial harm.
Is it time to head for the lifeboats yet?
Just one man's opinion and a blanket unqualified statement at that.
Like from Choicepoint? Sure. Just ask the ~145,000 people whose private information
was sold to crooks.
We agree.
Then are you suggesting that because a large number of burglaries already occur, that
we should stop worrying about burglary? Are you suggesting that we not worry about
rape, since it already occurs?
Bob
On 2005-05-24, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
snip
"X", you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
And then you turn around and essentially do the same thing yourself, by
appealing to another "fear": the corruption of genealogy & history.
Your point is well taken, but there's not complete symmetry here.
The identity theft thing is a complete red herring, while just
about every serious genealogist has a few horror stories about
burnt courthouses and data corrupted by the fibs and mistakes
of our ancestors.
Hardly a matter of life or death or serious financial harm.
Losing access to information sources increases the probability
that the information will vanish or, by the time it's released
back into the public domain, there will already be a sea of bad
data that will be impossible to clean out of the published
genealogies (not to mention all the swapped GEDCOMs).
Is it time to head for the lifeboats yet?
###
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
"Identity theft" has been the straw man that has diverted this discussion away
from the true issue, in my opinion. I'm happy to see that acknowledgement of
privacy rights. We *should* close those records for personal privacy reasons.
Just about everybody, with some unfortunate exceptions, recognizes personal
privacy by indicating "Living" or something similar for people who are or could
be living. Most programs also provide the same option. Privacy shouldn't be a
difficult concept to grasp.
Scott McNealy, Chairman and CEO, Sun Microsystems, once made the
tart observation that "You have no privacy -- get over it."
Just one man's opinion and a blanket unqualified statement at that.
The reality of modern living is that your financial records,
health records, what you purchase at the store, and pretty
much everything else that's knowable about you can be purchased
for pennies from information brokers.
Like from Choicepoint? Sure. Just ask the ~145,000 people whose private information
was sold to crooks.
I'm a privacy nut myself, and I think the amount of private
information that's accessible by essentially anyone is a Really
Bad Thing. It would be nice if the American public woke up and
rioted about this.
We agree.
But given that literally tens of thousands of people could learn
whether you personally use Viagra or Cialis with just a modest
amount of effort, it seems flatly irrational to worry about whether
genealogists can find out when you were born.
Then are you suggesting that because a large number of burglaries already occur, that
we should stop worrying about burglary? Are you suggesting that we not worry about
rape, since it already occurs?
Bob
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
Ellsinore wrote:
Businesses need to protect themselves when extending credit. You or I would do the
same. It's reasonable that your history of credit worthiness play a role in that or
you might find yourself with the *necessity* of using cash if nobody would loan you
money.
Those people don't see personal information and those don't equate. My credit card
number is exposed every time I make a purchase. It is not directly a form of personal
information and, in theory<lol>, only authorized personnel could use it to view
personal information on a need-to-know basis.
They don't get my business either.
That's your choice. Different strokes for different folks, but it is *your* choice to
make.
Bob
SNIP
Unless someone is on a cash only basis, there is no way to do business
in this country and retain your "right to privacy". Every time you
write a check or borrow money to buy a car, your "private" information
is revealed -- and if you don't think the finance guy looks at that,
you're wrong. When you're turned down for a loan, they might not be
able to tell YOU why, but THEY certainly know -- and you're kidding
yourself if you think it isn't discussed.
Businesses need to protect themselves when extending credit. You or I would do the
same. It's reasonable that your history of credit worthiness play a role in that or
you might find yourself with the *necessity* of using cash if nobody would loan you
money.
No one is going to run down to the local mall and rip you off with a
copy of your birth certificate. They can, however, do incredible damage
with the credit card number that you gave the clerk at the grocery store
when you wrote your check.
If one is going to complain about privacy being violated by a birth
information database, then you have to also complain to the department
store which requires the clerk to write your credit card number down on
your check the next time you buy a new suit,
Those people don't see personal information and those don't equate. My credit card
number is exposed every time I make a purchase. It is not directly a form of personal
information and, in theory<lol>, only authorized personnel could use it to view
personal information on a need-to-know basis.
or the company that uses
your social security number for identification purposes, or the grocery
store that wants personal information from you (ala Kroger) to "save
money". To me, these are MUCH more serious violations of privacy.
It's none of their business -- and *I* tell them so.
They don't get my business either.
But, frankly, how old I am is one of the little details I really don't
worry about -- it will help when I can't remember and I can look it up
myself!
Just my $0.02.
That's your choice. Different strokes for different folks, but it is *your* choice to
make.
Bob
-
Dr. Brian Leverich
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On 2005-05-24, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
Your point is well taken, but there's not complete symmetry here.
The identity theft thing is a complete red herring, while just
about every serious genealogist has a few horror stories about
burnt courthouses and data corrupted by the fibs and mistakes
of our ancestors.
Losing access to information sources increases the probability
that the information will vanish or, by the time it's released
back into the public domain, there will already be a sea of bad
data that will be impossible to clean out of the published
genealogies (not to mention all the swapped GEDCOMs).
###
Scott McNealy, Chairman and CEO, Sun Microsystems, once made the
tart observation that "You have no privacy -- get over it."
The reality of modern living is that your financial records,
health records, what you purchase at the store, and pretty
much everything else that's knowable about you can be purchased
for pennies from information brokers.
I'm a privacy nut myself, and I think the amount of private
information that's accessible by essentially anyone is a Really
Bad Thing. It would be nice if the American public woke up and
rioted about this.
But given that literally tens of thousands of people could learn
whether you personally use Viagra or Cialis with just a modest
amount of effort, it seems flatly irrational to worry about whether
genealogists can find out when you were born.
Cheers, B.
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
snip
"X", you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
And then you turn around and essentially do the same thing yourself, by
appealing to another "fear": the corruption of genealogy & history.
Your point is well taken, but there's not complete symmetry here.
The identity theft thing is a complete red herring, while just
about every serious genealogist has a few horror stories about
burnt courthouses and data corrupted by the fibs and mistakes
of our ancestors.
Losing access to information sources increases the probability
that the information will vanish or, by the time it's released
back into the public domain, there will already be a sea of bad
data that will be impossible to clean out of the published
genealogies (not to mention all the swapped GEDCOMs).
###
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
"Identity theft" has been the straw man that has diverted this discussion away
from the true issue, in my opinion. I'm happy to see that acknowledgement of
privacy rights. We *should* close those records for personal privacy reasons.
Just about everybody, with some unfortunate exceptions, recognizes personal
privacy by indicating "Living" or something similar for people who are or could
be living. Most programs also provide the same option. Privacy shouldn't be a
difficult concept to grasp.
Scott McNealy, Chairman and CEO, Sun Microsystems, once made the
tart observation that "You have no privacy -- get over it."
The reality of modern living is that your financial records,
health records, what you purchase at the store, and pretty
much everything else that's knowable about you can be purchased
for pennies from information brokers.
I'm a privacy nut myself, and I think the amount of private
information that's accessible by essentially anyone is a Really
Bad Thing. It would be nice if the American public woke up and
rioted about this.
But given that literally tens of thousands of people could learn
whether you personally use Viagra or Cialis with just a modest
amount of effort, it seems flatly irrational to worry about whether
genealogists can find out when you were born.
Cheers, B.
-
Dr. Brian Leverich
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On 2005-05-24, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
Sure, that's my point. Although birth information poses a
(pretty much purely) theoretical risk, we're tolerating privacy
breaches that are causing tremendous harm.
Availability of birth information is a nonproblem; the real
problem is the ready availability of other information that
*is* used by fraud artists.
Yup. I routinely complain to my elected representatives about
this, and I trust you do, too.
No. (Nice rhetoric, but wildly illogical.)
Genealogical information is fundamentally harmless.
Apart from the odd anecdote, you aren't going to be able
to show otherwise. And the availability of genealogical
information has some positive value.
Financial, health, and other data have the potential
for causing significant harm, and we do a poor job of
controlling this information.
It is irrational to worry the harmless (and possibly
beneficial) in the face of real problems.
Cheers, B.
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
The reality of modern living is that your financial records,
health records, what you purchase at the store, and pretty
much everything else that's knowable about you can be purchased
for pennies from information brokers.
Like from Choicepoint? Sure. Just ask the ~145,000 people whose
private information was sold to crooks.
Sure, that's my point. Although birth information poses a
(pretty much purely) theoretical risk, we're tolerating privacy
breaches that are causing tremendous harm.
Availability of birth information is a nonproblem; the real
problem is the ready availability of other information that
*is* used by fraud artists.
I'm a privacy nut myself, and I think the amount of private
information that's accessible by essentially anyone is a Really
Bad Thing. It would be nice if the American public woke up and
rioted about this.
We agree.
Yup. I routinely complain to my elected representatives about
this, and I trust you do, too.
But given that literally tens of thousands of people could learn
whether you personally use Viagra or Cialis with just a modest
amount of effort, it seems flatly irrational to worry about whether
genealogists can find out when you were born.
Then are you suggesting that because a large number of burglaries already occur, that
we should stop worrying about burglary? Are you suggesting that we not worry about
rape, since it already occurs?
No. (Nice rhetoric, but wildly illogical.)
Genealogical information is fundamentally harmless.
Apart from the odd anecdote, you aren't going to be able
to show otherwise. And the availability of genealogical
information has some positive value.
Financial, health, and other data have the potential
for causing significant harm, and we do a poor job of
controlling this information.
It is irrational to worry the harmless (and possibly
beneficial) in the face of real problems.
Cheers, B.
-
Bruce Remick
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Robert Heiling" <robheil@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:429290B0.2CFD5368@comcast.net...
The burglary analogy would be more like buying an expensive lock for your
strongbox yet leaving your front door unlocked. Forest-trees. How best to
prevent burglaries/identity theft. I would agree that the public availability
of one's birth date is not a significant factor leading to theft of one's
identity. In addition to selected online databases, many small town newspapers
still list local births along with parents' names, and these public records also
are available to anyone determined to target a specific individual. It's much
more often our numbers-- SSN, bank account, credit card, etc. that make us
vulnerable to identity theft. Once a thief has any of those, our vital stats
are relatively easy to get to complete the package.
It is heart-wrenching to read stories about how thieves have used information in
death/funeral notices to burglarize homes while the occupants are likely to be
away mourning at the funeral or graveside. Yet these notices are still widely
published and accepted, leaving it up to any concerned individual to take
measures to have the home occupied during funeral and burial ceremonies. We're
vulnerable to crooks in so many ways.
Bruce
news:429290B0.2CFD5368@comcast.net...
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
On 2005-05-24, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
snip
"X", you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
And then you turn around and essentially do the same thing yourself, by
appealing to another "fear": the corruption of genealogy & history.
Your point is well taken, but there's not complete symmetry here.
The identity theft thing is a complete red herring, while just
about every serious genealogist has a few horror stories about
burnt courthouses and data corrupted by the fibs and mistakes
of our ancestors.
Hardly a matter of life or death or serious financial harm.
Losing access to information sources increases the probability
that the information will vanish or, by the time it's released
back into the public domain, there will already be a sea of bad
data that will be impossible to clean out of the published
genealogies (not to mention all the swapped GEDCOMs).
Is it time to head for the lifeboats yet?
###
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
"Identity theft" has been the straw man that has diverted this discussion
away
from the true issue, in my opinion. I'm happy to see that acknowledgement
of
privacy rights. We *should* close those records for personal privacy
reasons.
Just about everybody, with some unfortunate exceptions, recognizes
personal
privacy by indicating "Living" or something similar for people who are or
could
be living. Most programs also provide the same option. Privacy shouldn't
be a
difficult concept to grasp.
Scott McNealy, Chairman and CEO, Sun Microsystems, once made the
tart observation that "You have no privacy -- get over it."
Just one man's opinion and a blanket unqualified statement at that.
The reality of modern living is that your financial records,
health records, what you purchase at the store, and pretty
much everything else that's knowable about you can be purchased
for pennies from information brokers.
Like from Choicepoint? Sure. Just ask the ~145,000 people whose private
information
was sold to crooks.
I'm a privacy nut myself, and I think the amount of private
information that's accessible by essentially anyone is a Really
Bad Thing. It would be nice if the American public woke up and
rioted about this.
We agree.
But given that literally tens of thousands of people could learn
whether you personally use Viagra or Cialis with just a modest
amount of effort, it seems flatly irrational to worry about whether
genealogists can find out when you were born.
Then are you suggesting that because a large number of burglaries already
occur, that
we should stop worrying about burglary? Are you suggesting that we not worry
about
rape, since it already occurs?
Bob
The burglary analogy would be more like buying an expensive lock for your
strongbox yet leaving your front door unlocked. Forest-trees. How best to
prevent burglaries/identity theft. I would agree that the public availability
of one's birth date is not a significant factor leading to theft of one's
identity. In addition to selected online databases, many small town newspapers
still list local births along with parents' names, and these public records also
are available to anyone determined to target a specific individual. It's much
more often our numbers-- SSN, bank account, credit card, etc. that make us
vulnerable to identity theft. Once a thief has any of those, our vital stats
are relatively easy to get to complete the package.
It is heart-wrenching to read stories about how thieves have used information in
death/funeral notices to burglarize homes while the occupants are likely to be
away mourning at the funeral or graveside. Yet these notices are still widely
published and accepted, leaving it up to any concerned individual to take
measures to have the home occupied during funeral and burial ceremonies. We're
vulnerable to crooks in so many ways.
Bruce
-
Gjest
Identity theft
Dr. Brian Leverich wrote in a message to SCraig:
DBL> From: "Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com>
DBL> (I already knew that when I asked you for sources, because I spent
DBL> years as the Director of Statistical Systems at the Zale
DBL> Corporation, have analyzed millions of credit applications and
DBL> transactions, and know a great bloody lot about the totally
DBL> mundane subset of credit and financial fraud that the media
DBL> hysterically calls "identity theft".)
Can anyone tell me the difference between "identity theft" (about which there
is so much media hype these days) and (im)personation?
Using terms like "identity theft" seems to be trying to cash in on the hysteria
caused by conspiracy theories about alien abduction.
I've got news for you, folks: the Harry Potter books are *fiction*. The
dementors are a literary device. They are not wandering around the world (or
the cyberworld) trying to suck out your soul and steal your identity!
But in the real world there are (and always have been) impersonators. They can
pretend to be you, but they cannot *become* you. They can pretend to assume
your identity, but they cannot, like dementors, steal it away from you.
The only way that "they" can steal your identity is if they abduct you
physically and perform a leucotomy. They won't do it by finding your mother's
maiden name on the net (or anywhere else).
--
Steve Hayes
WWW: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com - If it doesn't work, see webpage.
--- WtrGate v0.93.p9 Unreg
* Origin: Khanya BBS, Tshwane, South Africa [012] 333-0004 (8:7903/10)
DBL> From: "Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com>
DBL> (I already knew that when I asked you for sources, because I spent
DBL> years as the Director of Statistical Systems at the Zale
DBL> Corporation, have analyzed millions of credit applications and
DBL> transactions, and know a great bloody lot about the totally
DBL> mundane subset of credit and financial fraud that the media
DBL> hysterically calls "identity theft".)
Can anyone tell me the difference between "identity theft" (about which there
is so much media hype these days) and (im)personation?
Using terms like "identity theft" seems to be trying to cash in on the hysteria
caused by conspiracy theories about alien abduction.
I've got news for you, folks: the Harry Potter books are *fiction*. The
dementors are a literary device. They are not wandering around the world (or
the cyberworld) trying to suck out your soul and steal your identity!
But in the real world there are (and always have been) impersonators. They can
pretend to be you, but they cannot *become* you. They can pretend to assume
your identity, but they cannot, like dementors, steal it away from you.
The only way that "they" can steal your identity is if they abduct you
physically and perform a leucotomy. They won't do it by finding your mother's
maiden name on the net (or anywhere else).
--
Steve Hayes
WWW: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com - If it doesn't work, see webpage.
--- WtrGate v0.93.p9 Unreg
* Origin: Khanya BBS, Tshwane, South Africa [012] 333-0004 (8:7903/10)
-
SCraig
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd94806.q6e.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
You don't have sources because it's not true.
(I already knew that when I asked you for sources, because I
spent years as the Director of Statistical Systems at the Zale
Corporation, have analyzed millions of credit applications
and transactions, and know a great bloody lot about the totally
mundane subset of credit and financial fraud that the media
hysterically calls "identity theft".)
Craig, you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
but Aunt Sally's desire to lie about her age has to be
balanced against the fact that closing records may corrupt
genealogies (and more serious historical analyses).
Cheers, B.
_________________
Since you aren't concerned would you please post your full name, date of
birth, birth place and your mother's maiden name here?
Thanks,
Craig
news:slrnd94806.q6e.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@linkpendium.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd92oqp.8hd.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-23, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
It just seems to me that this is a big invitation to identity theft. I'm
surprised that the state of California doesn't close the files. A lot of
states do.
Craig
What sources lead you to believe that access to birth information has
anything to do with a nontrivial fraction of what the media calls
"identity theft"?
I'll bet you that you can't find a statistical breakout of "identity
theft" that shows birth information was relevant to even 1% of cases.
Cheers, B.
__________________
I don't have any sources but it seems fairly logical that if you have some
information about a person who lives in California, it would add to that
source of information to know, for instance, what that person's mother's
maiden name is. That information is in the database. My daughter, a
teenager, now has her full name, birthdate and mother's maiden name in the
Ancestry database for all to see. I think that's quite inappropriate.
Craig
You don't have sources because it's not true.
(I already knew that when I asked you for sources, because I
spent years as the Director of Statistical Systems at the Zale
Corporation, have analyzed millions of credit applications
and transactions, and know a great bloody lot about the totally
mundane subset of credit and financial fraud that the media
hysterically calls "identity theft".)
Craig, you are trying to enforce a personal preference ("I
think that's quite inappropriate") by appealing to the fear
of the uninformed regarding identity theft.
Closing records is damaging to the field of genealogy (and,
more generally, history), and shouldn't be done in reaction
to baseless fears. There is no pressing "identity theft"
reason to close genealogically-relevant records. We may
want to close these records for personal privacy reasons,
but Aunt Sally's desire to lie about her age has to be
balanced against the fact that closing records may corrupt
genealogies (and more serious historical analyses).
Cheers, B.
_________________
Since you aren't concerned would you please post your full name, date of
birth, birth place and your mother's maiden name here?
Thanks,
Craig
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
But that statement reintroduces the "identity theft" baggage/linkage into this discussion.
My initial post to you on this thread agreed to drop that distraction. I had hoped that
there would be a recognition of individual *privacy* in and of itself. Is that such a
foreign concept as to require lengthy explanation?
Saying that doesn't make it so. There's a whole minefield there in that statement.
Our basic context for this whole discussion has been current generations born in California
and I don't care to put words in your mouth, so I'll ask if you are suggesting that the
"living" filter for websites should be dropped? i.e. If you approve of the disrespect that
Ancestry.com has shown for privacy, why should that same latitude be denied the individual
researcher?
Those 2 back-to-back statements are an attempt to establish a linkage that doesn't exist.
Individual privacy can stand on it's own merits. Get those individuals' consent to have
their birth information posted on the Ancestry website or take it down!
Bob
On 2005-05-24, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
"Brian Leverich" wrote:
The reality of modern living is that your financial records,
health records, what you purchase at the store, and pretty
much everything else that's knowable about you can be purchased
for pennies from information brokers.
Like from Choicepoint? Sure. Just ask the ~145,000 people whose
private information was sold to crooks.
Sure, that's my point. Although birth information poses a
(pretty much purely) theoretical risk, we're tolerating privacy
breaches that are causing tremendous harm.
Availability of birth information is a nonproblem; the real
problem is the ready availability of other information that
*is* used by fraud artists.
But that statement reintroduces the "identity theft" baggage/linkage into this discussion.
My initial post to you on this thread agreed to drop that distraction. I had hoped that
there would be a recognition of individual *privacy* in and of itself. Is that such a
foreign concept as to require lengthy explanation?
Genealogical information is fundamentally harmless.
Saying that doesn't make it so. There's a whole minefield there in that statement.
Apart from the odd anecdote, you aren't going to be able
to show otherwise. And the availability of genealogical
information has some positive value.
Our basic context for this whole discussion has been current generations born in California
and I don't care to put words in your mouth, so I'll ask if you are suggesting that the
"living" filter for websites should be dropped? i.e. If you approve of the disrespect that
Ancestry.com has shown for privacy, why should that same latitude be denied the individual
researcher?
Financial, health, and other data have the potential
for causing significant harm, and we do a poor job of
controlling this information.
It is irrational to worry the harmless (and possibly
beneficial) in the face of real problems.
Those 2 back-to-back statements are an attempt to establish a linkage that doesn't exist.
Individual privacy can stand on it's own merits. Get those individuals' consent to have
their birth information posted on the Ancestry website or take it down!
Bob
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
Bob
On 2005-05-24, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
Since you aren't concerned would you please post your full name, date of
birth, birth place and your mother's maiden name here?
Thanks,
Craig
Brian Eldon Leverich
04/30/56
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Greene
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
Bob
-
Dave Hinz
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On Tue, 24 May 2005 08:26:37 -0700, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
C'mon, Bob, you know this isn't a .binaries group...
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
C'mon, Bob, you know this isn't a .binaries group...
-
Dr. Brian Leverich
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On 2005-05-24, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
Brian Eldon Leverich
04/30/56
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Greene
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Cheers, B.
Since you aren't concerned would you please post your full name, date of
birth, birth place and your mother's maiden name here?
Thanks,
Craig
Brian Eldon Leverich
04/30/56
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Greene
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Cheers, B.
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
Didn't ask if you already had one. Digicams aren't all that expensive if
you don't already have one. But you tried to have it both ways with the
SS# also. Saying that you were "tempted to" post or "wouldn't be
particularly sensitive" and not doing either seems to indicate that
there is a barrier there that you're not admitting to.
That wasn't the idea. It was a matter of probing to determine if you
have any sense of personal privacy at all and, if so, attempting to
locate the threshold. It does vary from person to person, but most
people have some inherent sense of privacy. There is a reason that
windows have curtains & blinds and that rooms have doors.
Bob
On 2005-05-24, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
Bob
Don't have one, though I wouldn't be particularly sensitive
about it one way or another.
Didn't ask if you already had one. Digicams aren't all that expensive if
you don't already have one. But you tried to have it both ways with the
SS# also. Saying that you were "tempted to" post or "wouldn't be
particularly sensitive" and not doing either seems to indicate that
there is a barrier there that you're not admitting to.
Imagine a pretty much average middle-aged guy, slightly
deformed in the predictable ways by his penchant for
climbing mountains. Cheers, B.
That wasn't the idea. It was a matter of probing to determine if you
have any sense of personal privacy at all and, if so, attempting to
locate the threshold. It does vary from person to person, but most
people have some inherent sense of privacy. There is a reason that
windows have curtains & blinds and that rooms have doors.
Bob
-
Dr. Brian Leverich
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On 2005-05-24, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
Don't have one, though I wouldn't be particularly sensitive
about it one way or another.
Imagine a pretty much average middle-aged guy, slightly
deformed in the predictable ways by his penchant for
climbing mountains. Cheers, B.
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
Bob
Don't have one, though I wouldn't be particularly sensitive
about it one way or another.
Imagine a pretty much average middle-aged guy, slightly
deformed in the predictable ways by his penchant for
climbing mountains. Cheers, B.
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
Dave Hinz wrote:
Darn! I forgot. Guess that's a good out.
Bob
On Tue, 24 May 2005 08:26:37 -0700, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net> wrote:
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
C'mon, Bob, you know this isn't a .binaries group...
Darn! I forgot. Guess that's a good out.
Bob
-
James A. Doemer
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Dave Hinz" <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:3fgvooF7j6auU1@individual.net...
Or a disgust your neighbor group. :c)
news:3fgvooF7j6auU1@individual.net...
On Tue, 24 May 2005 08:26:37 -0700, Robert Heiling <robheil@comcast.net
wrote:
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
C'mon, Bob, you know this isn't a .binaries group...
Or a disgust your neighbor group. :c)
-
D. Stussy
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
On Mon, 23 May 2005, Ellsinore wrote:
Wrong (as to the birth certificate). With the crackdown on ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS,
especially those on the voting roles that goes into effect next year here in
California, I suspect that although this hasn't happened yet, it will: The
illegals will want to get "legitimate" fake information onto their forged
documents so they can execute even more rights they're not legally entitled to
(e.g to vote). As it is now, the Mexican government already aids and abeits
their citizens on how to enter and stay in the U.S. illegally - and all we need
is for some foreign government like that to get their hands on valid data like
this to really make these two states (CA and TX), and later, the rest of the
country, a living hell for those properly born here.
It's already been a known fact about the purchase of SS cards with valid and
matching SSNs to names on certain downtown-LA streetcorners. I had to sort
through such crap when I worked for the government a decade ago, before
"identity theft" was a household term.
Not all identity theft is for financial gain.
Your money is worthless here. Your identity is the key to more than just your
wallet.
...
No one is going to run down to the local mall and rip you off with a copy of
your birth certificate. They can, however, do incredible damage with the
credit card number that you gave the clerk at the grocery store when you wrote
your check.
Wrong (as to the birth certificate). With the crackdown on ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS,
especially those on the voting roles that goes into effect next year here in
California, I suspect that although this hasn't happened yet, it will: The
illegals will want to get "legitimate" fake information onto their forged
documents so they can execute even more rights they're not legally entitled to
(e.g to vote). As it is now, the Mexican government already aids and abeits
their citizens on how to enter and stay in the U.S. illegally - and all we need
is for some foreign government like that to get their hands on valid data like
this to really make these two states (CA and TX), and later, the rest of the
country, a living hell for those properly born here.
It's already been a known fact about the purchase of SS cards with valid and
matching SSNs to names on certain downtown-LA streetcorners. I had to sort
through such crap when I worked for the government a decade ago, before
"identity theft" was a household term.
Not all identity theft is for financial gain.
If one is going to complain about privacy being violated by a birth
information database, then you have to also complain to the department store
which requires the clerk to write your credit card number down on your check
the next time you buy a new suit, or the company that uses your social
security number for identification purposes, or the grocery store that wants
personal information from you (ala Kroger) to "save money". To me, these are
MUCH more serious violations of privacy.
It's none of their business -- and *I* tell them so.
But, frankly, how old I am is one of the little details I really don't worry
about -- it will help when I can't remember and I can look it up myself!
Just my $0.02.
Your money is worthless here. Your identity is the key to more than just your
wallet.
-
Rick Merrill
Re: Identity theft
Stephen.Hayes@fmlynet.org wrote:
....
Is your ignorance for real? ID theft is when they steal your money
while pretending to be you.
....
The only way that "they" can steal your identity is if they abduct you
physically and perform a leucotomy. They won't do it by finding your mother's
maiden name on the net (or anywhere else).
Is your ignorance for real? ID theft is when they steal your money
while pretending to be you.
-
Rick Merrill
Re: Identity theft
Steve Hayes wrote:
That is what they call it, that's not what it's name is, and that's not
what it really is. - Alice In Wonderland
On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:42:47 -0400, Rick Merrill <jaynehm@comcast.net> wrote:
Stephen.Hayes@fmlynet.org wrote:
...
The only way that "they" can steal your identity is if they abduct you
physically and perform a leucotomy. They won't do it by finding your mother's
maiden name on the net (or anywhere else).
Is your ignorance for real? ID theft is when they steal your money
while pretending to be you.
That sounds like (im)personation to me -- ID theft is when they steasl your
SOUL! When you become a nobody.
That is what they call it, that's not what it's name is, and that's not
what it really is. - Alice In Wonderland
-
Steve Hayes
Re: Identity theft
On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:42:47 -0400, Rick Merrill <jaynehm@comcast.net> wrote:
That sounds like (im)personation to me -- ID theft is when they steasl your
SOUL! When you become a nobody.
--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com (see web page if it doesn't work)
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/
Stephen.Hayes@fmlynet.org wrote:
...
The only way that "they" can steal your identity is if they abduct you
physically and perform a leucotomy. They won't do it by finding your mother's
maiden name on the net (or anywhere else).
Is your ignorance for real? ID theft is when they steal your money
while pretending to be you.
That sounds like (im)personation to me -- ID theft is when they steasl your
SOUL! When you become a nobody.
--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com (see web page if it doesn't work)
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/
-
Christopher Jahn
Re: Identity theft
Stephen.Hayes@fmlynet.org wrote:
(nothing remotely intelligent)
PLONK
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html
I just like to say quark, quark, quark, quark, quark, quark...
(nothing remotely intelligent)
PLONK
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html
I just like to say quark, quark, quark, quark, quark, quark...
-
geothermal
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
Robert Heiling wrote:
Are binaries allowed in this usenet group ? LOL (^:
Jonathan
--
"Show me someone who doesn't make mistakes and
i'll show you someone who doesn't do anything."
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
On 2005-05-24, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
Since you aren't concerned would you please post your full name, date of
birth, birth place and your mother's maiden name here?
Thanks,
Craig
Brian Eldon Leverich
04/30/56
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Greene
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
Bob
Are binaries allowed in this usenet group ? LOL (^:
Jonathan
--
"Show me someone who doesn't make mistakes and
i'll show you someone who doesn't do anything."
-
SCraig
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
"Dr. Brian Leverich" <leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd96f4j.8f6.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-24, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
Brian Eldon Leverich
04/30/56
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Greene
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Cheers, B.
_______________
Thanks. I've posted your information on the Ancestry message boards.
Craig
news:slrnd96f4j.8f6.leverich@askin-17.linkpendium.com...
On 2005-05-24, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
Since you aren't concerned would you please post your full name, date of
birth, birth place and your mother's maiden name here?
Thanks,
Craig
Brian Eldon Leverich
04/30/56
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Greene
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Cheers, B.
_______________
Thanks. I've posted your information on the Ancestry message boards.
Craig
-
geothermal
Re: Identity theft
Stephen.Hayes@fmlynet.org wrote:
Well, my identity was stolen and my credit rating was trashed for 2
years and for all intended purposes, I could not buy a house, rent a
car, or do much without my wife to cosign things, and all because my
wallet was stolen from me while I was on a ferry boat on vacation.
Obviously this has never happened to you or you would not say this
crap. Bank people looked at me different the first year and I'm sure
they thought I was a dementor from Harry Potter. The credit union
didn't trust me either and I felt like my soul WAS stolen ! Finally
the second year was when they caught the person and sent them to jail
for 4 months, and then the banks and credit unions treated me like
they used to treat me. Bank of America screwed my life over because
they don't compare the signiture on the SS card with the signature in
front of them on the credit card forms ! Ancestry.com has not screwed
me over yet, but if they do, watch out ! I thank the police for
recognizing a fake drivers license photo !
Jonathan
Using terms like "identity theft" seems to be trying to cash in on the hysteria
caused by conspiracy theories about alien abduction.
I've got news for you, folks: the Harry Potter books are *fiction*. The
dementors are a literary device. They are not wandering around the world (or
the cyberworld) trying to suck out your soul and steal your identity!
Well, my identity was stolen and my credit rating was trashed for 2
years and for all intended purposes, I could not buy a house, rent a
car, or do much without my wife to cosign things, and all because my
wallet was stolen from me while I was on a ferry boat on vacation.
Obviously this has never happened to you or you would not say this
crap. Bank people looked at me different the first year and I'm sure
they thought I was a dementor from Harry Potter. The credit union
didn't trust me either and I felt like my soul WAS stolen ! Finally
the second year was when they caught the person and sent them to jail
for 4 months, and then the banks and credit unions treated me like
they used to treat me. Bank of America screwed my life over because
they don't compare the signiture on the SS card with the signature in
front of them on the credit card forms ! Ancestry.com has not screwed
me over yet, but if they do, watch out ! I thank the police for
recognizing a fake drivers license photo !
Jonathan
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Carlifornia birth records on Ancestry
geothermal wrote:
They aren't (and maybe that one especially<vbg>), but I figured everyone here
knew and understood that and realized that I was referring to his webpage of
choice. It looks like we won't be treated to that though.
The test did, however, manage to demonstrate that the man has a need for and
understands the concept of personal privacy as an abstraction, even though he
hasn't admitted to it as yet. Oh well!
Bob
Robert Heiling wrote:
"Dr. Brian Leverich" wrote:
On 2005-05-24, SCraig <sassy@yahoo.com> wrote:
Since you aren't concerned would you please post your full name, date of
birth, birth place and your mother's maiden name here?
Thanks,
Craig
Brian Eldon Leverich
04/30/56
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Greene
I was tempted to throw in my social for good measure. About
the only thing that would have made me nervous is posting
credit card numbers, those check digits on the back, and
expiration dates to The Net.
Ok. Now post a picture of yourself stark naked.
Bob
Are binaries allowed in this usenet group ? LOL (^:
They aren't (and maybe that one especially<vbg>), but I figured everyone here
knew and understood that and realized that I was referring to his webpage of
choice. It looks like we won't be treated to that though.
The test did, however, manage to demonstrate that the man has a need for and
understands the concept of personal privacy as an abstraction, even though he
hasn't admitted to it as yet. Oh well!
Bob
-
Steve Hayes
Re: Identity theft
On Wed, 25 May 2005 17:31:18 -0700, geothermal
<jj206@remoooooovethisdrizzle.com> wrote:
A couple of years ago I was mugged and my credit cards were stolen during a
hijack attempt. The robbers couldn't work out how to undo the gearlock on my
wife's Toyota Venture, so they left it. They also took my passport.
I reported the theft of the credit cards to the bank as soon as possible, and
when the robers tried to use the cards the banks contacted me, and reversed
the transactions when I cvonfirmed that I had not made them. They would not
tell me when and where the cards were used, so I could inform the police who
were investigating the theft.
While the thieves tried to impersonate me when they used the cards, they did
not steal my identity. I was (and am) still me.
Also, no genealogical information on the internet made it more easy, or more
difficult for them.
--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com (see web page if it doesn't work)
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/
<jj206@remoooooovethisdrizzle.com> wrote:
Stephen.Hayes@fmlynet.org wrote:
Using terms like "identity theft" seems to be trying to cash in on the hysteria
caused by conspiracy theories about alien abduction.
I've got news for you, folks: the Harry Potter books are *fiction*. The
dementors are a literary device. They are not wandering around the world (or
the cyberworld) trying to suck out your soul and steal your identity!
Well, my identity was stolen and my credit rating was trashed for 2
years and for all intended purposes, I could not buy a house, rent a
car, or do much without my wife to cosign things, and all because my
wallet was stolen from me while I was on a ferry boat on vacation.
Obviously this has never happened to you or you would not say this
crap. Bank people looked at me different the first year and I'm sure
they thought I was a dementor from Harry Potter. The credit union
didn't trust me either and I felt like my soul WAS stolen ! Finally
the second year was when they caught the person and sent them to jail
for 4 months, and then the banks and credit unions treated me like
they used to treat me. Bank of America screwed my life over because
they don't compare the signiture on the SS card with the signature in
front of them on the credit card forms ! Ancestry.com has not screwed
me over yet, but if they do, watch out ! I thank the police for
recognizing a fake drivers license photo !
A couple of years ago I was mugged and my credit cards were stolen during a
hijack attempt. The robbers couldn't work out how to undo the gearlock on my
wife's Toyota Venture, so they left it. They also took my passport.
I reported the theft of the credit cards to the bank as soon as possible, and
when the robers tried to use the cards the banks contacted me, and reversed
the transactions when I cvonfirmed that I had not made them. They would not
tell me when and where the cards were used, so I could inform the police who
were investigating the theft.
While the thieves tried to impersonate me when they used the cards, they did
not steal my identity. I was (and am) still me.
Also, no genealogical information on the internet made it more easy, or more
difficult for them.
--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: hayesmstw@hotmail.com (see web page if it doesn't work)
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/
-
cecilia
Re: Identity theft
Steve Hayes wrote:
Having genealogical information in the public domain may even sometimes
be to a person's advantage.
My husband's organisation (educational) was asked recently to help in
contacting someone thought to be (by her godfather's executor) the
daughter of a long-dead Head of the organisation.
I was able to confirm parentage of the person concerned, and give her
University, and the Oxford colleges of each of her three brothers (ie 4
addresses for correspondence with requests to forward), from Burke's
Irish Family Records, 1976 edition - thus aiding the executor to contact
her about a legacy.
[...] no genealogical information on the internet made it more easy, or more
difficult for them.
Having genealogical information in the public domain may even sometimes
be to a person's advantage.
My husband's organisation (educational) was asked recently to help in
contacting someone thought to be (by her godfather's executor) the
daughter of a long-dead Head of the organisation.
I was able to confirm parentage of the person concerned, and give her
University, and the Oxford colleges of each of her three brothers (ie 4
addresses for correspondence with requests to forward), from Burke's
Irish Family Records, 1976 edition - thus aiding the executor to contact
her about a legacy.