Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ceres.physics.uiowa.edu!iowasp.physics.uiowa.edu!ns-mx!umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu!mreid
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Important Petition/Technology
Message-ID: <5442@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>
From: mreid@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Melissa Reid)
Date: 12 Apr 91 04:55:03 GMT
Reply-To: mreid@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Melissa Reid)
Sender: news@ns-mx.uiowa.edu
References: <14131@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU> <1991Apr11.034720.26091@uncecs.edu> <14144@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU>
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
Lines: 26

I have a major reservation about Data-PCS that I have not seen
discussed; if it results from a misunderstanding of the proposal,
apologies.

It sounds to me like you're talking about something like the
equivalent of hooking computers together by cordless phone.
(Yes, I know, but bear with me...)
Have any of you heard if there has been an outcome in the debate
about privacy issues related to cordless phones? Like, do you
HAVE any legal right to privacy for interchanges carried out
over cordless phone? The last I heard, the answer was NO!
The rationale is that cordless phones BROADCAST. Listening in
on a broadcast is, in the eyes of the legal system, different
from tapping a wire. I have visions of people with scanners
hooked up to computers, tracking everything sent over radio
links between computers, the same way as people now listen in
on other people's cordless phone calls. The thought leaves me
less than enthused about the plan.

Again, if there have been legal developments in this area that
I've missed, or I've misunderstood the plan presented, I apologize
for the wasted bandwidth.

Melissa Reid
mreid@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu
"If I had something useful to say, I'd have a .sig" -me