photos + security

Or maybe we just honestly disagree with you.

He called you foolish and thats all you can come back with? Consider your smarmy internet credentials revoked.

I PMed him to send me pictures of him and his significant other naked; for nothing.

You just asked me for the same thing. Its like you're a pornographic fed or something.

Some folks think if you've already been made public the key to remaining fine is to act like an ass and make jokes about everything...

the most critical component of "security culture" is not letting McAnarchyists know how to contact or associate themselves with me or anything I do.

(1) It is not a matter of being unnoticed by the state, it is the extent of the notice.

(2) The 'personal reputation' argument doesn't hold water. The purpose of a publication is to communicate with people who do not know you - Joe Bloggs lives in Cardiff, the readers of 'Socialist Whatever' in Aberdeen will not know him as a good fellow worker etc..

(3) This is not something which is of import in regard to some far off future where we might be fortunate enough to be rounded up...I have witnessed or heard of several occassions where some people got prosectuted or assaulted and others did not where the variable factor was, most likely, the respective size of the files on the different individuals - that is how the police think - 'who are the ringleaders'.

That would be a good name for a publication.

people here are disgracefully skirting over the real issue; the extent to which posting photos of yourself and your so-called 'hot' girlfriend and, indeed the photographic form itself, are all shocking examples of lookism. I for one am tired of seeing so called "progressive" people continue to replicate these structures of oppression on a daily basis, through the use of slang terms such as 'pretty', beautiful, and even 'hot'.

http://www.lookism.info/

read it.

Oh us Platformists have been tailgating reformist anti-Lookist struggles for years now.

I object to your use of the term "girlfriend", i prefer the more progressive and gender-liberationary term "fly-ass bitch".

damnit! i hoped people would take me seriously, libcom would have been up in arms for weeks!

I hope David doesn't object to my posting this picture of us. (He's the thin one, I'm the handsome guy)

You know unix, Randy?

Is that a person or a language?

edit: Is that a person, a computer language, or a Baltimore area punk band?

The answer is no.

I don't think it makes sense to treat security as something that can have a universal answer regardless of where you are, what the political situation is and how visible you are.

If I was in Turkey where not only is their a reasonable danger of a coup but there are all sorts of laws about even political expression (am I right in thinking its an offence to refer to a geographic region as Kurdistan?) plus there are (were?) fascist and semi-state outfits that killed radicals being careful about revealing your identity seems sensible.

However if your in Ireland where at least in the south there are no serious fascists, no such political terminology laws and a very active special branch that knows who everyone is already then playing at being a secret agent might actually be counter productive in marking you out for attention. The only major concern is obscuring your identity enough so your employer doesn't identify dozens of postings you have made on their time or so that lazy journalists can't quickly grab a load of out of context quotes.

But if your a non EU migrant in Ireland then you are in another situation as your political activity might be used to threaten your status.

What I think is missed from this discussion is that there is always a negative side to 'security'. At the simplest level having a secret identity can make you look odd, paranoid or even sinister to those you work with or live around. Publishing an article under your real name means people can then talk to you about the contents of that article - I do a lot of publication under my name and as a result I get friends of my parents or others people talking to me about them. If they were published under a false name this wouldn't be possible. If your being serious about trying to protect your identity from the state then this places enormous limitations on the sort of political activity you can engage in at all which has major repercussions for the efficency of revolutionary organisation.

I also write under this name, more so these days because crossing borders has become a bigger concern. Which is the final point - the answer to this question changes over time. One problem with online posting is that what your post 15 or 20 years ago stays online and googlable, often in places where no one you know has access to editing. With border guards now using google this is an issue although it will probably become less so as more and more people get online and so any name throws up results for several people.

Geek. Down here, root is vernacular for a male phalange.

What do people think of putting photos up on indymedia, by the way? Half the stuff on Redwatch has been pulled from Indymedia.

Is it a good idea to obscure faces where people are easily identifiable? I can see the argument for it, but it does give an impression of "something to hide" to any casual observer? Being that generally obscurred faces are the preserve of people on the news/documentaries involved in something sinister who can't be identified for legal reasons.

Yeah alright for you people with normal names

It makes photos look like shit.

If you're taking a photo and worried about anonymity, you can do it so that it's not a mugshot, if you can't do that, don't bother.

Photos with blurred out faces do seem a bit suspect so I'd not post them, when I have taken photos of events I've tried to take demo photos from either far away or from behind.

Some of my friends are aware that I have a blog and that I write articles, although I've not given the link to any personal friends since the CPE blog (apart from one).

I don't think using a pseudonym on the internet makes you seem odd most people I know wouldn't use their real name online (or at least not identifiably) If the pseudonym is a regular one that you use for articles again I don't see that to be a problem either.

Like I said, my family, people at my old job, the interview panel for my new job, most of my friends - all know I work on this site (if not my username). In the public sector and in the field I'm moving into I think this is the best kind of security, I wouldn't mention anything about it if I was applying for different kinds of jobs though.

Nah, you got me confused with Wayne Price.