5 ms·

Almost every city in the US has a GIS system which you can use to look up tax record ownership of property parcels. Sales history too even. This information i

by auiya 7y ago

Almost every city in the US has a GIS system which you can use to look up tax record ownership of property parcels. Sales history too even. This information is also available via FOIA requests. There's probably easy ways to scrape it out considering almost every city uses the same 2-3 GIS software systems. In the case of home ownership, the only choice you have for privacy is to register an LLC under a paid attorney as a proxy, and have the LLC buy the home. And even then you may run into issues trying to file for homestead exemption property taxes. You're not able to tell the city to unlist your property info in most cases.

Mountain_Skies 7y ago
Reading the Letters to the Editor and similar features in older magazines and newspapers reveals something that would be unthinkable today: it was common for the home address of the person writing to the periodical to be published along with their letter. As far as I can tell, no one had a problem with this. When I was young, drivers licenses included your Social Security number and it was common to have it printed on your personal checks. This no longer happens. Is it the information that's the problem or is the problem what others are willing to do with that information?
- turk73 7y ago
  Back then it was rare for anyone to try and get you fired from your job and cause other economic harm simply because you disagreed with them or held an unpopular opinion. These days, information warfare is the norm and everything is on the table because "progressives" believe they have some kind of divine right to push their agenda at all costs.
- playeren 7y ago
  Knowing the address of three strangers isn't very valuable, and thus less likely to be abused. Knowing the address of millions of people can be very valuable, and thus very likely to be abused. In cases like this the issue lies not in the specific datatypes, but the aggregation thereof.
- lubujackson 7y ago
  This is an interesting insight. I think most reactionary pro-privacy responses (the HN default perspective) really stem from a complicated internalization of data gathering/use capabilities that has been adjusted over time combined with a lizard brain feeling of invasiveness. Because almost always no one particularly gives a crap about YOU and your specific data, but they may profit from and misuse your information in passing or in aggregate. It is a lot like the feeling of having your car broken into or house robbed. You feel personally violated but more than likely you are a victim of circumstance. It can be hard to distinguish between faceless identification for (ad network data gathering, for the most part) and the risks of general data availability that makes anyone as capable as an old P. I. (especially when data leaks conflate the two).
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    "almost always no one particularly gives a crap about YOU and your specific data" It's really amazing how much time people spend these days trying to gather information on people, considering how useless it is. I don't mean mass surveillance, I mean like people that you want to do business with individually.
turk73 7y ago
Funny you bring this up. As a privacy advocate I've had trouble over this. On the one hand, it is public record. On the other hand, it used to be in order to access those public records you would have to drive to the County Seat, enter a government building, and be physically present to request that information. Nowadays, every time I forget one of my neighbors' last names, I can look them up on the GIS. I can also be nosey about all kinds of details like how much they paid for their house, and who is in arrears on taxes or their mortgage payments.
hn_throwaway_99 7y ago
> In the case of home ownership, the only choice you have for privacy is to register an LLC under a paid attorney as a proxy, and have the LLC buy the home. Note you can achieve a lot of this privacy benefit much more easily by transferring ownership of your house to a living trust (where your name isn't on the name of the trust). For companies that just scrape and correlate info (as opposed to doing a targeted search), that is good enough.

by auiya 7y ago

Mountain_Skies 7y ago

Reading the Letters to the Editor and similar features in older magazines and newspapers reveals something that would be unthinkable today: it was common for the home address of the person writing to the periodical to be published along with their letter. As far as I can tell, no one had a problem with this. When I was young, drivers licenses included your Social Security number and it was common to have it printed on your personal checks. This no longer happens. Is it the information that's the problem or is the problem what others are willing to do with that information?

turk73 7y ago
Back then it was rare for anyone to try and get you fired from your job and cause other economic harm simply because you disagreed with them or held an unpopular opinion. These days, information warfare is the norm and everything is on the table because "progressives" believe they have some kind of divine right to push their agenda at all costs.
playeren 7y ago
Knowing the address of three strangers isn't very valuable, and thus less likely to be abused. Knowing the address of millions of people can be very valuable, and thus very likely to be abused. In cases like this the issue lies not in the specific datatypes, but the aggregation thereof.
lubujackson 7y ago
This is an interesting insight. I think most reactionary pro-privacy responses (the HN default perspective) really stem from a complicated internalization of data gathering/use capabilities that has been adjusted over time combined with a lizard brain feeling of invasiveness. Because almost always no one particularly gives a crap about YOU and your specific data, but they may profit from and misuse your information in passing or in aggregate. It is a lot like the feeling of having your car broken into or house robbed. You feel personally violated but more than likely you are a victim of circumstance. It can be hard to distinguish between faceless identification for (ad network data gathering, for the most part) and the risks of general data availability that makes anyone as capable as an old P. I. (especially when data leaks conflate the two).
- perl4ever 7y ago
  "almost always no one particularly gives a crap about YOU and your specific data" It's really amazing how much time people spend these days trying to gather information on people, considering how useless it is. I don't mean mass surveillance, I mean like people that you want to do business with individually.

turk73 7y ago

Funny you bring this up. As a privacy advocate I've had trouble over this. On the one hand, it is public record. On the other hand, it used to be in order to access those public records you would have to drive to the County Seat, enter a government building, and be physically present to request that information. Nowadays, every time I forget one of my neighbors' last names, I can look them up on the GIS. I can also be nosey about all kinds of details like how much they paid for their house, and who is in arrears on taxes or their mortgage payments.

hn_throwaway_99 7y ago

> In the case of home ownership, the only choice you have for privacy is to register an LLC under a paid attorney as a proxy, and have the LLC buy the home. Note you can achieve a lot of this privacy benefit much more easily by transferring ownership of your house to a living trust (where your name isn't on the name of the trust). For companies that just scrape and correlate info (as opposed to doing a targeted search), that is good enough.