internet privacy fears

Mani

Hello,

I often go to sites like isohunt and torrentspy and see that in their ads
the name of my town is mentioned. I can't work out how they have been able to
find this out ?
Is there a setting I have missed ?

Thanks
Mani.

Daave

Mani wrote:
> I often go to sites like isohunt and torrentspy and see that in their
> ads the name of my town is mentioned. I can't work out how they have
> been able to find this out ?

See http://www.ip2location.com/

It's based on your IP address.

Daave

Mani wrote:
> I often go to sites like isohunt and torrentspy and see that in their
> ads the name of my town is mentioned. I can't work out how they have
> been able to find this out ?

See http://www.ip2location.com/

It's based on your IP address.

Stan

On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:51:56 -0400, "Daave"
<dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:

>It's based on your IP address.

Unless you are on one of the nationwide ISP's. Example, We live in a
rural area that does not have cable or DLS access so Dial up is the
only way while at home which is physically around 1500 miles from
where http://www.ip2location.com/ reports us being.

Regards,

Stan

On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:51:56 -0400, "Daave"
<dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:

>It's based on your IP address.

Unless you are on one of the nationwide ISP's. Example, We live in a
rural area that does not have cable or DLS access so Dial up is the
only way while at home which is physically around 1500 miles from
where http://www.ip2location.com/ reports us being.

Regards,

Daave

Stan wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:51:56 -0400, "Daave"
> <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
>
>> It's based on your IP address.
>
> Unless you are on one of the nationwide ISP's. Example, We live in a
> rural area that does not have cable or DLS access so Dial up is the
> only way while at home which is physically around 1500 miles from
> where http://www.ip2location.com/ reports us being.

I didn't say it was based on *your* IP address, but Mani's. ;-)

Daave

Stan wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 12:51:56 -0400, "Daave"
> <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
>
>> It's based on your IP address.
>
> Unless you are on one of the nationwide ISP's. Example, We live in a
> rural area that does not have cable or DLS access so Dial up is the
> only way while at home which is physically around 1500 miles from
> where http://www.ip2location.com/ reports us being.

I didn't say it was based on *your* IP address, but Mani's. ;-)

Daave

Stan wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 17:11:14 -0400, "Daave"
> <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I didn't say it was based on *your* IP address, but Mani's. ;-)
>
> That's why those that actually read and/or comprehended my message saw
> that I said "example" when I referred to mine. You know, right there
> in the message that you quoted but didn't seem to read and/or
> comprehend.
>
> That $10 word again is E X A M P L E
>
> It can be found in a dictionary for further study but then, hell..
> that can turn out to be a study in rocket science for some... You
> know, like those that quote an entire message but fail to read and/or
> comprehend it before blundering through the torment of a reply.
>
> Again, just in case you want to (or know how to) look it up, its
> called:
>
> E X A M P L E
>
> I can't offer you any further absolution beyond that so you're on your
> own there kid.

Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed...

I believe my comprehension is fine. You had correctly stated that there
are a number of times that one's IP address does not correspond to a
particular geographic location. This is fairly common knowledge.

And that being the case, I made a little joke. Perhaps you didn't see
the wink emoticon. Here is what was implied by my post (I'll spell it
out for you):

Although there are certainly exceptions to the rule of how IP addresses
correspond to certain geographic locations (your E X A M P L E being one
of them), I was answering *Mani's* question. *He* wanted to know how
*his* location was known. I gave him a satisfactory answer. You replied
with your contribution. I responded to your post with a joke
acknowledging your point, but pointing out that the purpose of my post
was not to provide an in-depth explanation of how IP addresses work, but
merely to let Mani know what was happening in *his* situation.

Rather than absolution, I believe you owe me an apology.

Daave

Stan wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 17:11:14 -0400, "Daave"
> <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I didn't say it was based on *your* IP address, but Mani's. ;-)
>
> That's why those that actually read and/or comprehended my message saw
> that I said "example" when I referred to mine. You know, right there
> in the message that you quoted but didn't seem to read and/or
> comprehend.
>
> That $10 word again is E X A M P L E
>
> It can be found in a dictionary for further study but then, hell..
> that can turn out to be a study in rocket science for some... You
> know, like those that quote an entire message but fail to read and/or
> comprehend it before blundering through the torment of a reply.
>
> Again, just in case you want to (or know how to) look it up, its
> called:
>
> E X A M P L E
>
> I can't offer you any further absolution beyond that so you're on your
> own there kid.

Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed...

I believe my comprehension is fine. You had correctly stated that there
are a number of times that one's IP address does not correspond to a
particular geographic location. This is fairly common knowledge.

And that being the case, I made a little joke. Perhaps you didn't see
the wink emoticon. Here is what was implied by my post (I'll spell it
out for you):

Although there are certainly exceptions to the rule of how IP addresses
correspond to certain geographic locations (your E X A M P L E being one
of them), I was answering *Mani's* question. *He* wanted to know how
*his* location was known. I gave him a satisfactory answer. You replied
with your contribution. I responded to your post with a joke
acknowledging your point, but pointing out that the purpose of my post
was not to provide an in-depth explanation of how IP addresses work, but
merely to let Mani know what was happening in *his* situation.

Rather than absolution, I believe you owe me an apology.