1993-11-09 - Real Identity: valid or worthless?

Header Data

From: “L. Detweiler” <ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: b0f8e5ad64285d8fa457b1e2b98cdd6e052b7face873753707e126edecc143ea
Message ID: <9311090910.AA05504@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-11-09 09:13:10 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 01:13:10 PST

Raw message

From: "L. Detweiler" <ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 01:13:10 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Real Identity: valid or worthless?
Message-ID: <9311090910.AA05504@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Many have sent me mail along the lines, `the concept of real identity
is fading away completely. It no longer has any meaning. You simply
don't get it. There are no distinctions between imaginary and real identities.'

But that is not my complaint, that you have an arsenal of imaginary
identities to play with. It is when you wish to pretend that they are
*real* that I object.

Society actually tolerates anonymity and pseudonymity. They say, `if
you are not willing to affix your name to your opinions, they WEIGH
LESS than if you do.' (some may say they are `worthless' -- but that is
their opinion, and they are entitled to it!) We cannot ever change
that. That is a Universal Law. If I volunteer to be responsible for
everything I write, that automatically carries far more intrinsic
weight and `reputation capital' than any monster's tentacle or Medusa's
snake. Identity, reputation, and value are interchangable! And the
choice of whether I am responsible for my writing and actions *can* be
made, recorded, and enforced!

It is not allowable that anonymous opinions be *globally* censored, but
it is entirely acceptable, and necessary, there be the capability for
individual, *local* filtering.

Many cypherpunks denigrating the value of *real* identity and blurring
the distinction of real and imaginary identities are casting out
wretched lies. They intrinisically recognize the implicit existence of
the fundamental distinction between real and imaginary identities, and
the extreme value of *real* identity between the two, while at the same
time denying it all. 

IMAGINARY IDENTITIES. they would gain no profit if no one trusted any
identity (the philosophy they simultaneously advocate and defame)! they
only gain so long as the system of trust they rob from is in place! If
no one trusted the system (as they exalt and defame, again, as the
context suits them), they would no longer be able to rob from it! In
their deceptive sham and confidence game, they *lie* that they are
accountable for their opinions! And defraud all the investors who believe it!

They understand: the distinction of real and imaginary identities is a
an extremely powerful mechanism that involves intense levels of trust.
And wherever there is value and trust, the criminals zoom in on! ``we
can steal real reputation with imaginary identities by corrupting any
system that distinguishes between real and imaginary identities.''
Nothing but the ancient criminal refrain, ``we can steal money from
honest people with criminal means by corrupting any system that
protects honest people's money.'' Or, in the root form, ``we can steal
money by tricking honest people.''

pseudospoofers are nothing but REPUTATION THIEVES. of course they exalt
the system they rob from! and deny that there is any way to embezzle
gold from the treasury! they even deny the gold has any value! why,
they are providing a valuable public service by relieving everyone of
their gold who is too ignorant to realize it can be stolen!

What utter, shameful, poisonous hypocrisy. I hope you all choke on your
own poison. I have news for you, psychopunks, THE TREASURY IS BARE.