[Air-L] public/private

[Cameron Adams]

Edward writes:

"if you are chatting in the knowing presence of others, you know who
can hear you and you can moderate your volume based on who you want
to listen.

<snip>

so in the case of data collected from the internet . . . did the
subject have a reasonable expectation that YOU would be observing them?
Did they have the chance to modulate their transmission based on your
presence?"

I find this very interesting.  Clearly, most people will moderate their 
tone and volume in a coffee shop or other venue where others are 
around.  We can assume that what is easily heard is not "private," or 
relatively less so than communications made at a volume below the 
hearing threshold.  In web communications, it seems according to this 
thread, that which is available for millions of people to easily 
overhear can not be so easily considered to be "public" as the loud 
bragging of the oaf at the bar (though this can be overheard by only a 
few people).  I do not contest this, but I am curious as to why someone 
may consider an easily read document (or viewed pictures) to be at all 
safe from prying eyes.  I think there is something fundamental going on 
here that ought to be investigated.  Its not just blogs, but also the 
phenomenon of recording one's crimes on their phone, which makes 
prosecution astoundingly easy.

What's going on in a broader cultural sense that makes people publicly 
broadcast, or close to it, what they really intend to be privately 
held?

I just can't believe that there are that many deeply ignorant people 
out there....

Cheers,

Cam