1993-03-03 - Re: You Aren’t [I’m Not]

Header Data

From: pmetzger@shearson.com (Perry E. Metzger)
To: tytso@athena.mit.edu
Message Hash: 216d027dece1bf56efa5f03101cc7da4d573df380e68decc2985e2a3d8b9e593
Message ID: <9303031508.AA26458@maggie.shearson.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-03-03 15:58:07 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 3 Mar 93 07:58:07 PST

Raw message

From: pmetzger@shearson.com (Perry E. Metzger)
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 93 07:58:07 PST
To: tytso@athena.mit.edu
Subject: Re: You Aren't [I'm Not]
Message-ID: <9303031508.AA26458@maggie.shearson.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

> From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@athena.mit.edu>
> Sorry; typo on my part.  What I meant to say was "No, I am not arguing
> that free speach is bad."  Mr. Metzger was putting words in my mouth
> when claimed that I was saying that.
> Anonymity and free speach are *NOT* the same thing.  As I posited in an
> earlier message, which no one has yet to comment on, those two concepts
> are not the same thing.  

Yes they are, Ted. They are mathematically equivalent. If I can say
anything, I can say it in code. If I can say anything, I can repeat what
someone else said in code, possibly transforming it. Ta Da, remailers.

To stop remailers, you will need to stop free speech. Please at least
admit this much. It might be unpleasant, but in a society with no
prior restraints on speech it is likely not possible to stop cryptographic
systems to assure anonymity.