dom at dynamite.co.uk
Wed Oct 6 16:31:00 UTC 2004
In message <20041006160822.GG29837 at vishnu.tridity.org>, Jo Walsh
<jo at abduction.org> writes
>this sounds very hard for you. are people objecting to the fact that
>their emails are being republished? (in the past i've tried to use
>mbox_sha1sum to encode other peoples addresses, but recently i've
>become lazy about it / hoped to see value in actually allowing people
>to contact each other) or are they objecting to the fact that they
>ego-surf and find depictions connected to their names? google images
>has plenty of these, derived not from FOAF files but from other peoples
>html collections of image annotations...
Plink has always sha1 encoded all email addresses (with the exception of
MSN Messenger IDs). It's finding themselves on a web site they don't
like. And more often than not, it'll have a list of their friends and a
map - so they KNOW it's them. And they know they didn't "join" Plink.
>i have a fairly strong 'get over it' reaction. it's all going to be
>cached and archived anyway. it seems a shame for you to have to back
>down on good work because of this....
Well personally, I think it's useful that they can see easily exactly
what information is being published about them. The trouble is, they
generally insist that I'm the one doing the publishing, rather than just
interpreting someone else's data.
Anyway, I don't have time to deal with the several requests/threats a
day that I'm getting now.
More information about the foaf-dev