From: greg%ideath@uunet.UU.NET (Greg Broiles)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 94 20:49:32 PDT
To: sbb@well.sf.ca.us (Stewart Brand)
Subject: Re: PHILIP ZIMMERMAN ARRESTED [NOT!]
In-Reply-To: <199404040108.SAA02235@well.sf.ca.us>
Message-ID: <m0pneHy-0001W9C@ideath>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


> The Zimmerman prank---I'm sure not funny for him---hardens my line
> further against anonymity online.  At its best, as here, it is an
> unholy nuisance.

Interesting. The recent thread on alt.security re someone who mentioned
thoughts of suicide on Usenet and was held for 48 hours' psychiatric
evaluation hardens my line in favor of anonymity online.

In any event, "street tech" cares little for what you or I think. As I see
it, we've got two choices - anonymity or pseudonymity. (To be more accurate,
we can have both, or just pseudonymity.) Let's say we choose to ban 
anonymity online. How shall we do this? What political body will we go to
and propose a regulation or legislation mandating Real Names for
messages? The United Nations? The net.cabal?

How will we stop folks from setting up accounts with names other than
their "real names" .. or from stealing others' accounts .. or from 
forging mail? A $1000 PC can run Linux and SLIP an
 look to the rest of
the net like any other IP-connected site; how will we enforce our rules
on those systems?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLZ95dX3YhjZY3fMNAQEjSgQArODShMLu5RyOufwc5RAFVh+T9QflHnu9
C/9tKaEYNm1QIMpBqX9Qq5RvBJUuw2T0dhR4JkZS5Ym/U/HM3h0Oow7n+gwSfkUv
SWTTiPXYraEem9mp/rFyIIm4KOx3T4ARvDgueiUc3+hGIZbio6+1ReLIGSiDSnJC
GsfCj7Sr7fk=
=SWQZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----