HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 19:04:59 GMT
From: Don Simon <infmx!dsimon@uunet.uu.net>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Address required on checks
Reply-To: infmx!dsimon@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 088, Message 8 of 12


In article 8@pica.army.mil, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) writes:
>
>In article <comp-privacy1.85.1@pica.army.mil> on Thu, 24 Sep 92 14:02:46 GMT,
>amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn) writes:
>
>  > Of course, cash will always be accepted without your address on it.
>
>Oh?  
>
>1. Service Merchandise, a local catalog store gets quite unfriendly when
>I pay in cash.  They've told me they must have a name.  (So I give them
>'Mario Cuomo').
>
>2. Then there's Radio Shack.
>
>3. You must give id when spending over $10K with one merchant in, I
>believe, one year, or the merchant can get in serious trouble.
>
>4. I've heard stories about IRS offices refusing to accept cash, though
>I can't vouch for them myself.
>
>There is one loophole however, which is probably still open.  You can
>buy money orders anonymously, put whatever name you want on them, and
>then use them to pay people who refuse cash.
>-- 
>Wm. Randolph Franklin,  wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077;  Fax: -6261
>ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA


I believe that it is illegal to refuse US currency in the US, after all
it is the only *legal* tender in this country.  The IRS does require
that large cash purchases (> 10,000) have filed a special form, used
for tracking people with possibly illegal cash resources (drug-dealing,
extortion, theft in general).

If someone won't take my money, they won't get my business, there are
millions of businesses in America, and I can guarantee that you can
always find whatever you're looking for somewhere else.

Vote with your feet/wallet...if someone is trying to invade your
privacy, tell them how you feel, and that you will not shop their store
again until they respect your privacy choice.


don simon
Date: 12 Oct 1992 12:01 MST  
From: jms@carat.arizona.edu 
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: [Mike Brokowski: Re: Address required on checks]
Reply-To: jms@Arizona.EDU
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department - Mosaic Group
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 091, Message 12 of 13

In article <comp-privacy1.90.2@pica.army.mil>, abc@brl.mil (Brinton Cooper) writes...
> 
> Mike Brokowski <brokow@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> writes, in part
> 
>>>3. You must give id when spending over $10K with one merchant in, I
>>>believe, one year, or the merchant can get in serious trouble.
> .
> .
>I believe this is a misstatement.  IRS has a rule regarding the handling
>of large sums of money at a bank.  If you withdraw a sufficiently large
>sum ($10K?), they must file something like a 1099 with IRS.  

You're confusing two things here.  ("You" being several posters).  First
of all, the 10K limit is a per-transaction one.  Annual aggregation of
grocery checks is not something that anyone cares about.

Banks are required to report any transaction of $10K (or more) to the
IRS.  This is to make sure that you aren't hiding bucks. 

Additionally, merchants who accept cash transactions of $10K or more
are also required to report these, and are strongly urged to report any
large cash transaction, or, for that matter, any other transaction
which the merchant finds "suspicious."  The rationale given here is "War 
on Drugs" related.  

These are two separate sets of regulations, and are done for different
reasons.

Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719 
Phone: 602.882.4094 (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data)
BITNET: jms@Arizona  Internet: jms@arizona.edu  SPAN: 47541::telcom::jms
Yow!  I'm imagining a surfer van filled with soy sauce!
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:17:07 GMT
From: rodger@Cadence.COM (Rodger Hughes)
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Citibank photo credit card
Organization: Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 091, Message 11 of 13

Dave Grabowski <dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu> writes:

>In article <comp-privacy1.83.6@pica.army.mil> usenet_interface@almaden.ibm.com writes:
>>
>>
>>I am a late comer to this group...so...
>>
>>Has there been a discussion about Citibank's commercial where they state
>>that their CC's are the most secure?

>  Actually, I doubt that thieves would actually take the time to put
>your CC# on their card. There are LOTS of easier ways to make credit
>card purchases (I know.). Citibank claims that their cards are more
>"secure" for you, but in actuality, is seems to be a benefit for THEM.
>If your card is stolen, you are responsible for, at the most, $50. Big
>companies, like Citibank, probably wouldn't even make you pay that. So,
>supposing your card was stolen, and someone used it, it wouldn't hurt
                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>you ANYWAY. Citibank is actually protecting themselves, but is selling
 ^^^^^^^^^^^
>it on the premise that it will protect YOU.

>-Dave
>-- 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Kappa Xi Kappa - Over & Above!                         dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu
>9 Sussex Ave., Newark, NJ (car theft capital USA)   70721.2222@compuserve.com

And who do you think pays for all the credit card fraud?  Can you 
say membership fees, outrageous interest rates etc...?  I knew you could.

--
 --------------------------------------------------------
Rodger Hughes 	rodger@cadence.com   (408)894-3099
San Jose, California 95134 U.S.A.
Date: 4 Oct 92 18:32:38 GMT
From: "Wm. L. Ranck" <ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Address required on checks
Organization: Computer Privacy Digest
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 088, Message 6 of 12


Mike Brokowski (brokow@casbah.acns.nwu.edu) wrote:
: Radio Shack salepersons always ask "Can I have the last four digits of 
: your phone number?" and I just reply "No."  Apparently, RS keeps a
: customer database on its computers and sends flyers/ads to those on it.
:
I used to work for Radio Shack about 17 or 18 years ago.  At that time
we were told to *ask* for name and address on each sales slip.  The key
word was ask.  If someone said no or asked why we were to tell them,
quite honestly, that the name and address was for a mailing list.
The corporate policy was that you were supposed to get the name and address
on a high percentage of the slips or else the district manager would hassle
you about it.  Some stores didn't emphasize the voluntary part but did
emphasize the percentage 'required'.  This kind of pressure leads to
cranky clerks.  My manager said to just ask them for it and if the customer
didn't want to give it to not make it a big deal.  Other store managers
probably weren't that easygoing.   
: 
: I am curious about 3) and the money orders.  Does anyone know the rules
: for requiring id depending on the amount of yearly purchase?  It seems
: to me that a large family could possibly spend over $10k per year at a
: supermarket and simply pay cash (especially at these newer huge stores 
: where one can pretty much buy most of life's necessities e.g. food, 
: clothing, books, some furniture, toys, pharmaceuticals, et cetera).

An interesting question.  The intent of the law requiring reports of large
cash purchases was to catch drug dealers and the like using big wads of
cash to buy cars, boats, jewelry, etc.  Some got around the reporting
requirement by splitting up payments into multiple less-than-10K amounts.
So the law was changed to cover that.  Mike points out an interesting
consequence of that change.  There may be a lot of technical violators
who don't even now it.  I routinely write a check for groceries at a
local store, and that is usually the only store I buy groceries from.
I doubt that my annual food bill breaks the 10K limit, but to be honest
I don't know.  I would have to go back and add up probably 100 checks or so.
--

*******************************************************************************
* Bill Ranck     DoD #496  ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu                            *
*******************************************************************************
Date: 3 Oct 92 19:42:02 GMT
From: "David A. Andersen" <davida@bonnie.ics.uci.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: SSN and Airline Antitrust Settlement
Organization: Computer Privacy Digest
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 088, Message 3 of 12

In article <comp-privacy1.87.2@pica.army.mil> egdorf@zaphod.lanl.gov (Skip Egdorf) writes:
>In article <comp-privacy1.78.3@pica.army.mil> rudis+@cs.cmu.edu (Rujith S DeSilva) writes:
>
> The claim forms for the Airline Antitrust Settlement ask for `Social Security
> Number or Tax I.D.'.  I've read the SSN guidelines posted here regularly, but
> this case seems different.  I really don't want to supply my SSN, and I don't
> see why I legally have to.  The terms of the settlement clearly define a
> `Class' of members (loosely, passengers of some airlines during a certain
> period), and say that upon certifying their inclusion in this Class, its
>members are eligible to a share of the settlement.  Why should I supply my SSN
> to certify my claim?
>
>A "Settlement" of a monetary amount will be reported to the IRS as
>income for tax purposes. This is essentially the same requirement as a
>bank requesting the SSN so as to be able to report interest on a
>savings account to the IRS. This is permissable under federal law.


Yes, but isn't the value of the settlement going to be less than $600 for
most of the claims?  Since it isn't a financial institution, isn't the
$600 minimum in effect?

David Andersen
UC Irvine

[Moderator's Note:  Could someone who actually find out where the
requirement for SSN for the Settlement has come from?  I don't believe it
stems from a tax requirement.  I think this isssue has been beaten to
death.  ._dennis ]
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 23:33:50 GMT
From: Steve Forrette <stevef@wrq.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Computer access to SSN and bank accounts: 48hrs episode
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 088, Message 11 of 12

Several people wrote to say how easy it is to get a dialup account with a
credit bureau to get people's credit profiles.  But, isn't each inquiry logged
in the computer?  I, from time to time, will get a copy of my credit profile
in order to check its accuracy.   It also lists each inquiry that has been
made within the last year (2 years?).  If there were an inquiry from an
organization that I did not recognize or authorize, I would definately look
into it. 

Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:43 CDT
From: mea@ihlpl.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: SSN and Airline Antitrust Settlement
Organization: Computer Privacy Digest
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 091, Message 4 of 13

>A "Settlement" of a monetary amount will be reported to the IRS as
>income for tax purposes. This is essentially the same requirement as a
>bank requesting the SSN so as to be able to report interest on a
>savings account to the IRS. This is permissable under federal law.

The way I read the settlement, it sounded like a big marketing scam
by the airlines.  For the vast majority of cases, you could only
use the settlement money towards the purchase of new tickets and
it couldn't exceed more than 10% of the price of the ticket.
I really doubt that the IRS would consider this income.  

Ticket prices have been fluctuating alot more than 10% in the last
few price wars so I find this settlement kind of dubious.
Maybe I misinterpereted something though.


>They PROBABLY want the SSN for some reason other than the legal one...

It's a nice way to catalog your customers for the last five years.

I wonder how they got the court system to play along?

Mark Anderson
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 15:13:03 GMT
From: Khan <tmkk@uiuc.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Computer access to SSN and bank accounts: 48hrs episode
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 091, Message 6 of 13


In article <comp-privacy1.90.3@pica.army.mil> Eric Smith <erc@netcom.com> writes:
>
>There is something I don't understand about this.  If you see an
>unauthorized inquiry on your credit file, can't you use it as evidence
>to sue the deep pocket credit bureau for invasion of privacy?  But if
>you can, why haven't millions of disgusted consumers already done so?
>Surely the deep pockets of the credit bureaus and/or their client
>corporations such as banks etc. are enough money to motivate consumers
>to sue,

Perhaps those same deep pockets can afford more and better lawyers than
Joe Consumer is able to muster, thus intimidating the little people into
not bothering.
Date:  Wed, 07 Oct 92 17:53:32 PDT
From:  Dave Gomberg <GOMBERG%UCSFVM.BITNET@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject:    What is privacy?
Organization: Computer Privacy Digest
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 090, Message 1 of 7

I would like to post the following:

What is privacy?

If we are to discuss the interactions of technology and privacy, it seems
to me we must start with a definition of privacy.  This is of concern to
me not only as a consumer, and one would would like to keep private things
private, but also as a creditor, who would like to know a lot about folks
I am lending money to, and even more after they stop paying.

It seems to me that SOME privacy issues are potentially anti-business.  Now
that does not mean that we should take up one side or the other as a knee-
jerk reaction, but it does mean that we need to be concerned about all the
ramifications of any proposed policy before we take it too seriously.

So please be kind enough to post your definition of privacy as it applies to
this list.   Thanks.   Dave

Dave Gomberg    GOMBERG@UCSFVM  Internet node UCSFVM.UCSF.EDU  (415)731-7793
Seven Gateview Court, San Francisco CA 94116-1941
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:15:48 GMT
From: Jinfu Chen <chen@digital.sps.mot.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Comments on SYMC or FRAM
Organization: Motorola, LICD, SPS, Mesa, AZ
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 090, Message 7 of 7


In article <1992Oct8.214004.25766@cbnewse.cb.att.com> LOGIN@cbnewse.cb.att.com writes:
>Symantec, SYMC, which went down from high of $51 to about $6.
>What does the company do? How strong is the company in Software area.
>One reason, why the stock took so big dive may be due to institutions
>holding 20 million out of 22 million shares outstanding. It is almost
>too scary to own any technology stock now unless already beaten down.
>Another example Borland went down today as low as 25 1/2.

The Oct. 8th issue of Wall Street Journal has a cover article about Symantec
and not surprising, Borland International.  It's about arest of a formal
Borland senior executive Eugene Wang defecting to Borland with alleged trade
secret of Borland.  Local police arested Wang and searched Wang's house as
well as the house of CEO of Symantec and Symantec's headquarter.  Borland
filed a suit against Symantec shortly after the arest.

Briefly, the story is about Wang quited from Borland and several managers in
Borland were suspicous about his departure to Symantec.  Although this is not
first time Borland employee defecting to its rival but Wang's behavior a few
days(weeks?) before the departure caused some managers to suspect he might be
doing something to damage the company.  Since Borland (and Symantec?) is
using MCI for email and MCI keeps outgoing mail in back up up to five days,
Borland was able to retrieve Wang's outgoing mail after he left and several
of his messages were sent to Symantec's CEO whose name escaped my mind. 
Wang's secretary also defected with him and when she went back to Borland to
claim her personal belonging, she copies files from her PC to two disks as
watched by a Borland personnel person and erased files she copied from the
PC.  Ironically once she left, the erased files were recovered by using
Symantec's own best selling program (N?? Utilities) and the files are related
to Borland's three year product plans and other confidential documentations.

The story is very interesting from the hi-tech spy point of view and probably
boring from the financial side.  And it rases issues of (email) privacy and
hi-tech trade secret, which are already hotly debated these days.  I probably
leave out many details so go get the paper and read yourself.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:54:37 GMT
From: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai)
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Blockbuster & video rental records
Organization: Information Services, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA, USA
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 090, Message 5 of 7

mccoy@ils.nwu.edu writes:
> _Privacy for Sale_ (by Jeffrey Rothfeder, a must read for people who are
> interested in this stuff...).

   Type of Material: Book

     LC Call Number: HG3751.7 .R68 1992

             Author: Rothfeder, Jeffrey.

              Title: Privacy for sale : how computerization has made everyone's
                      private life an open secret / Jeffrey Rothfeder.

   Publication Info: New York : Simon & Schuster, c1992.
  Phys. Description: 224 p. ; 25 cm.

              Notes: Includes bibliographical references and index.

           Subjects: Credit bureaus--United States--Records and
                      correspondence--Access control.
           Subjects: Banks and banking--United States--Records and
                      correspondence--Access control.
           Subjects: Confidential communications--United States--Third parties.
           Subjects: Privacy, Right of--United States.
           Subjects: Computer security--United States.

     LC Card Number:    92000364
               ISBN: 0-671-73492-X : $22.00

--
hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai)    :     :    :   :  : :: ::: :::: :::::
Unix Geek for Swarthmore College        :     :    :   :  : :: ::: :::: :::::
Information Services, Swarthmore, PA, US.
I don't speak for Swarthmore College.

Newsgroups: comp.society.cu-digest
From: plummer@cs.swarthmore.edu (David Barker-Plummer)
Newsgroups: comp.society
Subject: Re: net.views -- computer crime
Date: 10 Oct 92 18:06:53 GMT
Organization: Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA

In article <1992Oct02.211324.12465@utoday.com> wagner@utoday.com (Mitch Wagner)
 writes:

MW> Do you consider computer crime to be a threat to your system?


MW> This question is being posted to gather responses for a regular
MW> opinion column in OPEN SYSTEMS TODAY called "net.views."

MW> By posting a response to this topic, you are granting
MW> permission for OPEN SYSTEMS TODAY to publish your response. A
MW> compilation of the responses to this post will be posted here about
MW> two weeks from today.

MW> Please include in your response your name, your employer, your job
MW> title, and location. Or, if you identify yourself as a student, please
MW> give your class standing (freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, grad),
MW> the school and its location. Please also provide a telephone number
MW> where you can be reached during the daytime (overseas readers note:
MW> that's daytime in North America).

MW> Please be brief; try to limit your responses to two screens
MW> (24x80) of text, not including headers and other administrivia.

MW> Thanks!

MW> -- mitch w.
MW> --
MW> Mitch Wagner, senior editor, Open Systems Today
MW> 2353 Massachusetts Ave. Suite 47, Cambridge, MA 02140
MW> wagner@utoday.com  (617)547-8485  CIS:70212,51  GEnie:MITCH.WAGNER
MW> For subscription information, please call 516/562-5882

So let me get this straight.  You are soliciting information from the
net.community at no cost to yourself, so that you can sell this
information as part of your magazine?

This sounds to me like a commercial use of the net, which (as I
understand it) is prohibited by the rules of NSFnet which forms part
of the Internet on which this post is distributed.

Even if it weren't prohibited, don't you think that asking people to
work for you without compensation is a tad unreasonable?

-- Dave

[Moderator's comment: I approved this posting despite the semi-commercial
nature of the OPEN SYSTEMS appeal because a promise to post result to
the net was included.  Also, net users will be able to make their own
conclusions about the response rate and copyright issues - if their are
few responses, will it be due to unwillingness to "work for nothing" or
simply a reflection of low interest in this forum?  If results are not
posted as promised, it will be the last such posting from OPEN SYSTEMS.
---
Greg Welsh, moderator, comp.society
Internet:  Socicom@american.edu
Bitnet:    Socicom@auvm.bitnet ]
From: kpm8447@tesla.njit.edu
Newsgroups: comp.society
Subject: Non-Drug Induced States via computer
Date: 30 Sep 92 15:35:06 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology

Hello,
  I'm starting to work on my senior thesis for art.  I'm interested in
"non-drug-induced tripping" or states of well-being.  I've been looking into
the use of such things by rotating mandlebrot/fractal color patterns (looks
like tie-dye patterns) and also by the effects of stereoscopic (3-d, crosseyed
view, etc) images.  There are other ways to go about this kind of stuff
(I think that Timothy Leary is getting involved with it)  Since I don't do
drugs, it's hard to know if I'm approaching the same results, although things
can still be "funky" to me.
An example of this effect of "pseudo-tripping":
  Once at the Limelight, in NYC I was sitting in a small side dance room.
There weren't too many people in there, this light was shining off a mirrored
disco ball and created hundreds of little lights on the floor moving around.
If I followed the lights around it was alright, but when I stared at one
spot on the floor, it felt like I was flying and spinning around.  If effects
like these are combined with stereo sound (oscillating between speakers..
to cause a rotating effect) total disorientation of the user/viewer will occur.
Do you know of any publications (books, magazine articles, etc) that deal
with this sort of thing?  Any information will be appreciated.
 - Thanks

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Kirk Membry             ( * * * T H I S   S P A C E   F O R   R E N T * * * )

kpm8447@tesla.njit.edu                                    kpm8447@teak.njit.edu
kmembry@andromeda.rutgers.edu                             kpm8447@maple.njit.edu
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
--

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Kirk Membry             ( * * * T H I S   S P A C E   F O R   R E N T * * * )

kpm8447@tesla.njit.edu                                    kpm8447@teak.njit.edu
kmembry@andromeda.rutgers.edu                             kpm8447@maple.njit.edu
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=