One caveat, though. I once used a Vumber to determine where a particular caller was actually phoning from. When I called their number, I heard "You're calling from..." and my TRUE cell phone number! So, new technology is always being created to invade our privacy, usually in the interest in protecting privacy. In my case, I'm learning to find ways to use technology to achieve my privacy preservation ends. But, we should all be wary.

Finally, I think in the case of a domestic violence victim, using a VoIP phone behind a proxy server AND properly configured hardware firewall may help prevent them. Though VoIP phones are much like Vumber, a virtual phone, the user should have someone else with a properly configured (for privacy) VoIP phone call the stalker at a time when the stalker is not answering their phone and see what happens. ALWAYS be testing the technology to see if you can use it to protect your privacy.

I am involved with a liberty and privacy oriented group that's turned out to be rather popular on the various free sites and networking arenas as well as off-line. At a recent meeting, we discussed the idea of creating a website or two(news, discussion, solutions, covering local events and documenting them, etc.) Has anyone had any experience with creating an anonymous website with or without the use of nominees. We understand that a couple of years back, it was essentially made illegal to "use a pen name" when registering a domain. Is that true?

Also, since we'll most likely have a moderated discussion forum of some sort, it seems almost impossible to be completely private because if someone gets out of hand and posts something violent or illegal, the FBI will want to get that person's IP address, etc. from the website "owner."

If there is no absolute privacy when it comes to websites, is it worth it without an attorney?

2) Use a Vumber or Spoofcard for calling the court-ordered stalker ON TOP OF the Tracfone in #1.

If worse comes to worse, one could use the Tracfones listed in #1 on a one-time-only basis. That would be an expensive option, but possibly a necessary one. Like Wendy and Mr. Luna say: "How much is your privacy worth?"

The bigger issue to me, regarding court-ordered meetings with stalkers, would be the possibility of being followed physically (rather than electronically) after such a meeting. It would seem to me that guarding one's privacy in that circumstance would be much more necessary from the "rear-view mirror" rather than from the "cell towers."

I faxed a request to Intelius.com with a requested to remove my listings, per the instructions, but they have not acted upon it. It's been three weeks.

As I mentioned in the previous email you should check out NOVA's website on the spy factory, you can watch the program online. Every single email, phone call, internet traffic etc is stored by the NSA, (whether its legal or not) its the world we live in, so I guess my point of view is pessimistic as to the effectiveness of trying to block electronic information.

In my opinion the electronic end of things is the least of your worries as to identifying you. The NSA would have anything they need despite the blocking techniques discussed and internet sites are not going to use the information they gather to track you down and harm you. Google is gathering the information to make money. If protection in what you want your best bet is ghost address, bank account utilities, etc. If you are just talking time - I guess for me all the time it takes to block scripts would negate the extra time it takes to load a page.

Is the tracking annoying? Absolutely - I agree 100%. Worth blocking, maybe to you but not for me. I wish you all the best!

Submitted Link #1: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/...

So I have several specific questions about forms where privacy will be compromised. First, there is the application for a Federal Employer Identification Number which asks for the name and social security number of the principal officer of the company. The second is the California equivalent of the Federal Identification Number. The third is the state website which lists officers of the corporation. The fourth is postal form 1583 which asks for 2 forms of id when trying to use a mail drop. The fifth is setting up a bank account in California which requires all signers on the account to appear personally with 2 forms of identification. How would you go about incorporating? How do I get around these privacy breaches? I would really appreciate your insight on this matter. John

... NEVADA: Your CPA is correct. Don't do it.

... CORPORATIONS: You will forego your privacy if you insist on going that route.

... ALTERNATIVE: Do business with a personal account, using initials. The details are in Appendix C of my e-book Skip College: Go Into Business for Yourself. See the subheading "How to create an invisible owner for your new business."

Google reads my mail!

For example, if I receive an email that mentions Atlanta (or even ATL), there's going to be an ad for 'Hotels in Atlanta' on the sidebar or something similar (try it yourselves)

This means that (a) Google (or one of its applications) is reading my mail, and (b) the information (keywords) is kept, so I don't get a duplicate ad in the future.

I think even receiving on gmail is to be avoided...

I'm not saying you should give away your identity, but all this speculation about blocking ip addresses and dns etc. is futile.

Your best bet, set up ghost addresses, bank accounts, utilities, etc. and relax!

Facebook changed their terms and conditions to explicitly state they own your content and can do whatever they want with it. Forever. Binding arbitration was also added to the agreement.

Submitted Link #1: http://consumerist.com/5154745/facebook-clarifies-...

... Marc, I deleted your link and added my own, below, since others have responded to the screams from coast to coast. Check the links, including to the Chicago Tribune.

But whatever Facebook may say in rebuttal, my message remains the same: Keep your kids off Facebook.

Instead of a retail walk-in clinic, perhaps one might have more success at anonymity for a simple flu shot in a rescue mission clinic for homeless and indigent people in a downtown urban location? It does seem preposterous to me also that a person can't get a flu shot anonymously, however.

The only legitimate alternative might be to become a cash-paying customer at a regular doctor's office in a different town and hope that you're allowed to use a pseudonym. I seem to recall that one of the planks of the economic stimulus act was supposed to be the computerization of ALL medical records. This is the time to establish an alter-ego at a new doctor's office if you're paying cash for medical services and wish to remain "insurable" later or remain invisible to the electronic medical records.