OK or Borderline Illegal?

I have been using the internet for longer than most people. This is because way back in the mid to late eighties I was sending large quantum chemical calculations by FTP to the Cray supercomputer and getting my results back to the in-house micro-VAX. This kind of thing was what it was designed for. Since then, a lot has changed. I could quite legitimately walk into the nearest mobile ‘phone shop and say to the tech. savvy youth there that I was using the internet before he was born. But he would know a whole lot more about how the internet is now used by the vast majority.

The internet has opened up a whole new set of temptations to which many succumb and some of which are borderline illegal. The relative anonymity has emboldened many. I touched on the willy-nilly forwarding of private emails as one example of common practice which can be viewed as both an invasion of privacy and an infringement of copyright. Yet people do forward emails to others either for opinion or in a look what X has written ha-ha-ha manner. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that some of my emails have been forwarded in this way. Until I was in pastoral care, I was unaware that the IT section of my university monitored the usage of the internet by students and staff. I had to help resolve some dodgy use cases. We are being monitored by the very organisations we work for. This monitoring is very widespread.

Way back before the current social media giants existed there was “Friends Reunited” which was amongst the first ways of checking up on people from your past. Or in other words doing thigs like stalking an ex. People say that this is OK, it can become an obsession. Stalking others on the web can stray close to the borders of illegality. Deniability exists, the chances of getting caught can be low, but the implications for mental health are high.

I am aware that by writing a blog, my thoughts are out in the public domain. I cannot be responsible for how people interact with them, nor can I monitor well who reads my output.  Sane people drop by and if they like something they click like. They are not hiding behind the curtains or peeping through the Venetian blinds. They may use an alias, but they are not being secretive.

Being secretive leads one into darkness and the shadows.

If what I read in the media is correct other people monitor who likes what and if they are celebrities, this get reported in a News(?)paper. Who likes what becomes a talking matter! I don’t know about you but to me this is a bit foxtrotted up. People can be reticent to be authentic because that will be commented on, their post or like forwarded to others. There are online paper trails.

I’ll make a suggestion. I would feel very inhibited and unable to blog like this if I still had a proper job at a pucker university. Because people are so very brand obsessed anything which tarnishes the brand is taboo. In some organisations it can lead to getting fired. I have heard that some employment contracts now have internet use and social media clauses. This may not be factually correct, but it does sound plausible to me. I am not sure that such clauses are legal specifically in countries where freedom of speech is a constitutional right.

There is no need for the Stasi, other humans act as the thought police. What is allowed and what is taboo varies.

It is not beyond the realms of possibility that I am being monitored by people with a vested interest in the UK. The motive for that monitoring is not benign. It is not imbued with love and good will. There may be a control or damage limitation motive. Who knows? It is one explanation for the subjective “breakthrough” which I experience from time to time.

Theoretically, just as there is an online “paper” chain, there is a subjective chain stored in the Akashic record. This can be read easily by a clairvoyant or seer.

As I have noted previously people can apparently justify behaviours which are unsavoury, they can invent reasons and justifications to mitigate and oppress any notions which their conscience may raise against their behaviours. They can talk themselves into being the good guy when they are not. They can be adamant and convinced that they are in the right. Remember everything Hitler did was legal…

People are darned good at kidding themselves.

The level of interpersonal snooping and voyeurism has risen astronomically because of the internet proving the opportunity. We live in a surveillance culture. It is refreshing that here the CCTV camera density is way lower than in the UK.

Some of the surveillance behaviours are borderline illegal. Doorbell webcams may be technically infringing civil liberties, there may be test cases in the future.

Things which we deem OK may be borderline illegal. This notion of OK slips and slides because of the erosion of moral compass, the justification that everyone is doing it or following orders did not hold at Nuremberg.

I suspect that many a conscience is drowned by strident justifications and reasons. Ambition beats the shit out of it, desire for power kicks it in the teeth whilst it lies there already bloody on the floor.

From whence does the conscience emanate? It is the Soul.

We have lost Soul under the sea of temptation, ambition, and justification.