From: Godzilla's Home Boy <glidedw@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 94 16:48:11 PST
To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Remailers: The Next Generation
In-Reply-To: <199401222036.MAA10366@mail.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9401221616.A11550-d100000@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sat, 22 Jan 1994, Timothy C. May wrote:

reactions...

> Good point. My hunch is that "nothing is free" and the usual evolution
> will be followed: initially free-but-poorly-supported capabilities,
> followed by some flavor of commercial services which are in
> competition with the "free" services, and then a widening gap in
> quality/robustness between the free and fee services.
> 
> For example, my own Netcom service costs $17.50 a month and competes
> with local free or nearly free BBS services that offer some form of
> Internet access. The advantages of Netcom are sufficient to make it
> worth paying for. Another example, in a different situation, is the

I don't know if the two are valid arguments for a fee based service take
over. BBS services are limited, Netcom isn't. people who want to access
this Listserver have to have access to Internet, since a BBS would be
swamped if it were to have this list on it, you have to use Internet
services. I can do things with this server, that aren't available on a
BBS. A BBS doesn't compare to free services. 

> explosive increase in bookstores in the last 20 years, even when
> libraries offer books for free. People _will_ pay for convenience,
> features, robustness, etc. It may be a marketing struggle, but
> eventually fee-based services seem to win out over free-but-flaky
> systems. 

Libraries are a vital resource. Since budgets have gone for really statist
shit like the military, we have had less for other projects. Bookstores
have exploded in part because the library wasn't available. If we had
fully funded libraries, then perhaps your statement would hold up
completely. since we have a publishing bonanza going on in the use of
digital prepress technologies, we have many more books available.
Bookstores fill the gap created by Libraries lack of funding.
 > 
> Yes, I confess that my slant on things is toward the "ideal mix," that
> extremely strong system of distributed mixes that will provide the
> underpinning for the untraceable system we all want (for the reasons
> of protecting privacy in a surveillance society that Hal mentioned)
> and for the more radical stuff that some of us want.
> 
> Working toward the ideal digital mix seems to be the right thing to
> do, as a strong foundation will make so many other things easier.
> Making the systems easier to use is of course also important, and
> several of my points were oriented toward this. But I agree my focus
> is on making the next generation more bullet-proof.

As a syndicatalist, I find that the radical movement has less offer for
me. I seek to create an ecologically better balanced world, that the use
of technology, including encryption permits, as a natural outgrowth of
self interest assumptions. Encryption permits newspaper, without paper
use. It permits greater publishing capability, not only for the radical,
but also for the individual person who seeks self expression. Aside from
getting the NSA funding destroyed, so that the Green future of separation
of business and state can proceed (as I wish it would ;>), the shielding
seems to be in place.
 > 
> (As an aside, more people will be willing to run turn-key remailers if
> they are convinced the remailer functions are sufficiently robust to
> head off charges that they knew what was flowing through their
> remailers, that the system won't barf and dump a bunch of messages
> into the trash or into their machine logs, and that the software will
> run without their involvement. Such robustness will allow and
> encourage the spread of cheap remailer boxes. Price competition on
> remailer rates will make the burden of paying drop. This is the hope,
> at least.)

Remailers are only needed if government involvement is assumed. without
this, and respect for private enterprise provided for, then with minimal
security (250 bit keys or so) the average digital press can safely
operate. That somebody might hack it, isn't the biggest concern. If my
advertising based newspaper is free to any person who wants it, and I have
a special interface to hypertext things, then decompiling it would seem a
useless gesture. Nobody who pays the ads little mind or who doesn't mind
will scream for broken magazines. >