From: greg@ideath.goldenbear.com (Greg Broiles)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 94 04:50:59 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: RE: Shot 'Round the World
Message-ID: <m0pqcRE-0001RGC@ideath.goldenbear.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


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



Blanc Weber writes:

> From: Greg Broiles

> "... we don't need to demonstrate good behavior to convince it/them 
> that we deserve or can be trusted......"
> ". . . to bolster their flagging confidence, they need a good kick in 
> the teeth."
> "There is no rational argument that can force the non-trusting to trust."
> ". . . the point may be to create a state of irrationality, not a 
> particular rational conclusion."

> .   What you would be aiming for here, apparently, is neither their 
> psychology nor their intellect.   But actually if you are not intending 
> to communicate at all, then all of things which I mentioned are 
> irrelevant.  I would leave you to your own devices.

The only message I think is worth communicating is "We're doing our own
thing. You will not be able to stop us because of [ .. reasons ..] so
don't bother trying. Have a nice day." and I'm inclined to think even
that is unnecessary. Terrorism and psychological warfare could be
considered a form of communication; it is, after all, intended to create
or maintain a particular understanding on the part of others; but it is
not communication in the same way that a letter is. I don't know anything
at all about what Jeff is up to, so he'll have to speak for his own
(actual) motives and purposes; I was hoping to point out that what he's
up to can seem more useful when it's not considered in the context of
a rational discourse within polite society.

> "Perhaps this discourse about "images" isn't useful, and it's time to 
> talk about capabilities."

> .  What image do you get of the engagement of your capabilities under 
> normal circumstances  vs under a totalitarian regime?

I've got no idea what you mean by "normal circumstances"; if your point
is that totalitarianism sucks, I agree. I could chatter on about how I
think things ought to be, but I don't imagine most folks give a damn.
I believe we have a right to work towards a social/political structure
(or lack thereof) where our capabilities are fruitfully and fully
engaged, whether or not bureacrats and dictators find that convenient.
(Of course, they may have already found the state where *their*
capabilities are best engaged .. :)

> What sort of picture is created in your mind by the statements about 
> human nature, "endowed ...with inalienable rights", among which are 
> included "Life, liberty, Pursuit of Happiness", and what do you suppose 
> George thought about that?

Uhh .. a right to privacy (and to the use of strong crypto) whether or 
not that makes other people nervous or damages their fragile confidence?

> Some questions I would ask in regard to this warfare business:
> What sort of a win would you be aiming for, which served the purposes 
> of rational discussion poorly?  For how long would you be expecting to 
> live in the company of those whom you drove to irrationality?  And how 
> would you go about the business of returning everything back to a 
> viable, liveable state, supposing you achieved victory?

The usual pattern is destabilization, then a power grab by whatever
group is correctly positioned - either revolutionaries or the local
military. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Personally, I'm inclined vis-a-vis the NSA and TLA's in general to let
sleeping dogs lie, at least for the moment. Other folks (Grady, Jeff)
see opportunities differently; I encourage folks who think leverage and
timing is on their side to take advantage of opportunities as they occur.



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

iQCVAgUBLapGn33YhjZY3fMNAQHmZAP7BscprSqPUr4cIW+nxRv1z/Ym8l2qcF0N
Wav2xXK8R2D7ZlYb1fwTw+6Q85Z8fjh/8RXaWkfJzBLvcAj9dxIE+fYc8+USfAfV
SfCev9f8QcZ9hYNzkoU4CiwmAftGsZzpoEFVl/N9jjd+YEAbO6ChI5UeBY6+/yeu
Q5hVFg6fap0=
=y8mJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----