Too Much Information

[SLM]

Internet commenters ID alleged subway mugger

By QMI Agency

It turns out anonymous Internet commenters can be a force for good.
After cops in New York City released footage of a subway mugging Tuesday, Internet commenters put on their detective hats and identified a suspect.
A commenter on Gawker under the name secretscout produced a Facebook page featuring a man wearing what appeared to be the same hoodie, key-ring and purple bracelet as the suspect in the video.
The hoodie featured the name of the Facebook user's fraternity, Alpha Phi Delta, and was emblazoned with his pledge name, Stugots.
Separately, commenters at the Daily Intel found the same Facebook page, belonging to Aidan Folan, 21.
That page has since been removed, but not before hundreds stormed it to accuse Folan of the mugging.

According to Gawker, police have arrested Folan and charged him with robbery and assault.



Internet commenters ID alleged subway mugger - World - Canoe.ca


This made me think. It's great that the police have now arrested this alleged mugger and he faces charges. I'm assuming of course that they investigated outside of the "evidence" presented by online commenters. But here we have a situation where we have an official release of information by the authorities, the released footage of a subway mugging, and quite often the police do need to release some information to the public in order to solve crimes. That's not unusual. What is unusual and very much a current phenomenon, is that anybody with an internet connection can "find" this person and alert the police. So far so good, but this kind of disturbs me:

That page has since been removed, but not before hundreds stormed it to accuse Folan of the mugging.

I mean, what if they're wrong? Goodness knows, the police who are actually trained to evaluate evidence have gotten things wrong before, certainly the over enthusiastic general public can do so as well. How far can something like that possibly go towards really causing trouble if not completely wrecking someone's life? Depending on the what the pending charge is, that is a distinct possibility.



So have we reached a point now where, because we all have access to so much information at our fingertips, that we may need to curb official information because, quite frankly we just can't be trusted with it? The release of information from official authoritative sources is as much about keeping them honest and accountable as it is about simply informing the public, so that curbing that doesn't seem like such a good idea really.



Where is this information age really leading us and do we honestly want to go down that path? Thoughts? Comments?

 

[Cliffy]

Where is this information age really leading us and do we honestly want to go down that path? Thoughts? Comments?

Orwellian Big Brother: coming to a life near you! I believe there is a line in Revelations that says, in the end time all will be revealed. There are no more secrets, there is no more privacy. The human race has grown to epidemic proportions and totalitarianism is the only way to keep a lid on the insanity that it increasingly produces. Nothing short of an apocalypses will bring natural order back to the situation.

 

[Sal]

The police still have to prove it even after a suspect is pointed out. Evidence still must hold true.

 

[SLM]

The police still have to prove it even after a suspect is pointed out. Evidence still must hold true.

Yes on the legal side of things. But how much damage could even well intentioned people do with a little information and a lot of time on their hands? The average internet user is not going to follow evidentiary procedure. I'm not saying it's bad or good necessarily myself, just the way the individuals facebook page was bombarded with accusers gave rise to a lot of questions in my mind.

 

[Sal]

Yes on the legal side of things. But how much damage could even well intentioned people do with a little information and a lot of time on their hands? The average internet user is not going to follow evidentiary procedure. I'm not saying it's bad or good necessarily myself, just the way the individuals facebook page was bombarded with accusers gave rise to a lot of questions in my mind.

especially if you looked very similar

 

[SLM]

especially if you looked very similar

This is what I'm saying, police make mistakes, I'm sure a thousand eager beavers on the net can and probably will too.

We have all this access to information. Are we responsible enough to use it? Do we take it seriously enough? Imagine it was a alleged child abductor and the good citizens of the net got the wrong guy? How would that kind of damage be undone?

 

[WindWalker]

I would submit that any expectation of privacy (as in not being falsely accused) is out the window when you expose yourself on a Fakebook page.

But that's just me.

 

[Mowich]

Where is this information age really leading us and do we honestly want to go down that path? Thoughts? Comments?

Good question, SLM. I personally believe we will simply see more of this type of exposure by social media sites. One need only check back on the topic about the fallacy of the Newtown killings to see that anyone at anytime can post anything they want and some fool somewhere will take up the crusade whether righteous or not.

We are already way down the path and I see nothing changing in the future.

 

[Sal]

My concern is this new "cloud" so everything will be held in some virtual somewhere. How do I know it is secure. I know my computer isn't, not really, safeguards and walls, and passwords etc. If someone wants in, they are coming.

We were talking about this at work today. One person's son works at Amazon and he told her, if he were unethical the damage he could do was frightening.

So where do we go? Or is this just old folks paranoia? I seriously do not want to become that person that we all hated growing up because they had a warning and fear about everything and none of it came to pass.

So how do we determine, valid concern from fear, anxiety and paranoia?

 

[Mowich]

So how do we determine, valid concern from fear, anxiety and paranoia?

Another good question...........and one that hasn't an easy answer either. Maybe falling back on that old 'grain of salt' adage would help.

 

[SLM]

My concern is this new "cloud" so everything will be held in some virtual somewhere. How do I know it is secure. I know my computer isn't, not really, safeguards and walls, and passwords etc. If someone wants in, they are coming.

We were talking about this at work today. One person's son works at Amazon and he told her, if he were unethical the damage he could do was frightening.

So where do we go? Or is this just old folks paranoia? I seriously do not want to become that person that we all hated growing up because they had a warning and fear about everything and none of it came to pass.

So how do we determine, valid concern from fear, anxiety and paranoia?

I get very concerned over the propensity of younger people to just throw out personal, private information with what seems like complete disregard for any potential consequences.

So we're getting information from "traditional" sources: media, government, societies authorities. We have unprecedented access to information that we can access ourselves. And so many of us are just disregarding the impact of our own personal information. It's an information overload.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Mmm-kay, how is this different from "wanted" posters, really?

 

[Nuggler]

Let's hang the prick, and have a trial next week.

The appeal process could be a dead affair.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Sounds good to me.

 

[WindWalker]

Another good question...........and one that hasn't an easy answer either. Maybe falling back on that old 'grain of salt' adage would help.

I find in dealing with anything internet related I have to replace that "grain of salt" with an entire 'salt lick block'.

 

[SLM]

I find in dealing with anything internet related I have to replace that "grain of salt" with an entire 'salt lick block'.

If only more people would.
[/FONT]