From: "DrZaphod" <ncselxsi!drzaphod@ncselxsi.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 07:47:50 PST
To: CypherPunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Future of anonymity (short-term vs. long-term)
Message-ID: <6341.drzaphod@ncselxsi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


In Message Mon, 1 Mar 93 21:48:39 -0500,
  Theodore Ts'o <Athena.MIT.EDU!tytso@netcomsv.netcom.com> writes:

> Well, let's see.... the most recent assumption I disagreed with was the
> claim that we could implement full-fledged postive reputation filters,
> complete with the use of RSA, and deploy it on the Usenet in some sort
> of time-frame less than ten years out

     So this doesn't seem possible to you, does it?  10 years to me seems
more than enough time to design the code and implement it in key places
like USENET and mailing lists.  10 years AGO we were happy to have the
tiny 5 1/4" floppy disk as opposed to the 8".  Now we have flopptical and
WORM..  Perhaps the world of mainframes moves slower than the rest of the
world.. but that doesn't matter because in 10 years the many PCs will be on
the internet with ISDN with plenty of free cycles to maintain [or consult] a
database of positive reputations.


> Fundamentally, however, there's the basic assumption that anarchy per se
> is good; ... however, complete and total anarchy goes far beyond what I
> believe is a reasonable or realistic way to run a society

     It's not a way to RUN a society... it just happens.

> that's basically a "might makes right" form of government.

     Isn't that what we have now?  If the DEA busted down your door could
you defend yourself?  If NSA wants to waste more of your money do they ask
you?  Because we have rules I think people are misled into thinking it's
fair.  Society will ALWAYS be a "might makes right" way of life.. the
"might" is not necissarily physical power but it's still might.  TTFN.

DrZaphod
[AC/DC] / [DnA][HP]
[drzaphod@ncselxsi.uucp]
Technicolorized