BEING SELF OTHER

[Gregory Byron Goble]

I have always had this debate going on in my head from time to time, “privacy vs. telepathy”. At times it has reared its head as conflict in my life. Why is, personal or workplace conflict considered confidential? I have seen the damage that type of reasoning causes; perpetrators not being contained by exposure and people not getting involved because it is a “personal matter” or because they are not “sure” what is going on. Both shit-slinging and abuse is better addressed on a platform of candidness and in depth communication. Total telepathy as a vehicle is un-arguably the best to address either. Privacy, in this regards, therefore holds little importance to me. Improving all communication till we have total and complete telepathy is what I pray, hope, work, and dream for. Privacy in regards to truth and information is useless to me.

The truth of privacy is contectual and holds a place of great import. Upon further reflection. Privacy of one's body, hearts' dream (path), sanctuary (home), and time (energy) is so important. I believe that this is the essense of sacred. I seek further reflection. It's no wonder we are each alone; together? Quandry...yes. Problem... no.

From: Facebook proves that the erosion of privacy is inevitable
Date: May 26th, 2010
Author: Donovan Colbert
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/tr-out-loud/?p=2053&tag=nl.e550
“And this does appear to reflect Mark’s own views of privacy, which seem to be that people shouldn’t care about it as much as they do – an attitude that very much reflects the attitude of his generation.”
This statement resonated with me. When I was younger, I had “friends” that used to call me up and use black boxes, war dialers, and tone generators to play all kinds of illegal games with the telco companies. These guys could set up party-line calls when party-line calling was supposedly “unavailable,” and that was just the tip of their iceberg.
My wife worked for Chip Gracey, CEO of Parallax and inventor of the IcePick, a memory-dumping device that existed solely to pirate Commodore video games. Because of the generation we grew up in, we’re uber-paranoid and nuts about being locked down and having the strictest application of security possible. Mark Zuckerberg’s generation, though, basically resigned itself to the fact that the erosion of privacy is the future – it’s as inevitable as death and taxes.
The thing is, as an early adopter of MySpace, I’ve felt driven to Facebook because it provided me privacy and security and a sense of well-being that MySpace was sorely lacking. Early on, I had Facebook locked down so well that no one could find me, and that was nice – not because I had anything to hide, but simply because Facebook worked on my terms. I was in control of my own personal privacy on Facebook.
And then Facebook changed their privacy settings. I didn’t lock it down in time, so people found me and sent me friend requests. Now, in general, this hasn’t caused a lot of problems – and in fact, it has reconnected to some people I’d lost touch with (and we’ll get to how I feel about that later) – but at the time, the loss of control bothered me. I actually prefer the way it used to be.
Facebook lost a little bit of freedom the minute it became so open that I had to behave, for lack of a better word, “professionally” on it. It wasn’t a private space where I could kick back, relax, and fully be myself. Instead, it became a place where I had to often mind my opinions and consider if I was releasing TMI.
And that is really what it comes down to. Jason Hiner, Mark Zuckerberg, Donovan Colbert – all of us have public, professional faces but also personal faces that we share only with our closest friends and in appropriate situations. Mark Zuckerberg’s e-mail correspondence with his friend was his personal face, the face he doesn’t disclose to the public. The fact that his private e-mail is now coming back to haunt him illustrates both Zuckerberg’s own point (ironically) and the concern of privacy advocates.
But Zuckerberg grew up in a generation that seems to be implicitly better at accepting that sometimes your private face becomes public, and that’s just how it works, especially if you chase fame and fortune – or if fame and fortune find you.
And here’s the kicker for me. When a previous round of Facebook privacy erosions took place and my wife found me, and my wife’s family found me, and my own family found me, and I found people – some of whom I was embarrassed to ask to be my friend and others of whom shocked me when they ignored my friend requests – at some point, I resigned myself to a fact, similar to what Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg said about Mark Zuckerberg’s attitude toward privacy:
“Mark really does believe very much in transparency and the vision of an open society and open world, and so he wants to push people that way. I think he also understands that the way to get there is to give people granular control and comfort. He hopes you’ll get more open, and he’s kind of happy to help you get there. So for him, it’s more of a means to an end. For me, I’m not as sure.”

Gregory Byron Sprout Amir Goble " ? Generation ? Gap ?"

[Gregory Byron Goble]

PEACE