From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@access.digex.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 94 06:30:08 PST
To: blancw@pylon.com
Subject: Re: Breaking into girlfriend's files
In-Reply-To: <199412240959.BAA16608@deepthought.pylon.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.941224092326.29752C-100000@access3.digex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sat, 24 Dec 1994 blancw@pylon.com wrote:

> Date: Sat, 24 Dec 1994 01:59:07 -0800
> From: blancw@pylon.com
> To: cypherpunks@toad.com
> Subject: Re: Breaking into girlfriend's files 
> 
> Responding to msg by Black Unicorn, who is having a bad hair 
> day (and so close to Christmas!):

I nominate this for understatement of the season.

> "Had I encrypted with Norton encrypt?  I would have been 
> deserving of whatever attack ensued."
> 
> Are the cypherpunks all of one mind regarding ideals and 
> morality?   Had I inquired of the list how I could break into 
> my dearest one's privacy, I would have been deserving of 
> whatever commentary ensued regarding the disgusting 
> implications of that act.

In my view, this is absolutely so unless it is attached to censorship 
guised as moral correction.

As I said, a proper response should have been the technical answer, 
followed by sage advice about the legality, and potential moral 
implications of use of the information as was proposed.

> 
> "Disgusting.  Get off this list, you belong on 
> alt.codependency.recovery, or alt.bleeding.liberal."
> 
> (Say - isn't this why Tim left for a bit?   Oh, well.)  

It is, and for this I owe the individual and the entire list an apology.

Coupling an argument for censorship with some kind of moral judgement 
reacted so fouly with my concept of information freedom that I became 
rather enraged.  Not that this excuses my behavior of course.

Lesson learned, wait 20 minutes after composing a message before sending 
the final draft.

> "I may disagree with you, but I will defend to the death your 
> right to express your [sanctimonious] opinion." (or something 
> like that).
>

How does censorship align with this historic phrase?

Censorship based on opinion of what is and is not appropiate use?

>    ..
> Blanc 
> 

-uni- (Dark)

073BB885A786F666 nemo repente fuit turpissimus - potestas scientiae in usu est
6E6D4506F6EDBC17 quaere verum ad infinitum, loquitur sub rosa    -    wichtig!