From: hallam@w3.org
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 09:40:02 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Many Topics are Appropriate for Discussion Here
In-Reply-To: <acbf9ee00b0210044261@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <9511032235.AA13095@zorch.w3.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Hi folks,

	There is a bug in mh mail that causes all mails to be rejected after
there are more than 9999 in the same mailbox. I recieved 100 in two hours
today so I suspect the subject line may well be related to my earlier post.
They mostly fell on the floor. The rest are 50-50 pro/anti.

	Just a calibration point. The libertarians on the list do not seem
to shrink from expressing their political views. Indeed the entire discussion
on the NSA is a political thread pure and simple. My post related directly
to the question of personal privacy rights in a democratic, plural society.
I do not regard that it was off topic in any sense. I was not aware that
any agreement was in effect as to the method by which goals might be 
achieved. I chose to persue goals by the means most likely to succeed. In 
that I am a pragmatist. Government regulation often provides social benefits
it is not by definition an evil to be avoided. In any case regardless of the
rhetoric government regulation increases, I prefer to press for some
regulations I like rather than dream about there being none whatsoever.

	I do not separate the question of politics from technology. My 
reasons for working on the Web have from the start been explicity political.
I regard the persuit of technology without consideration of the political
consequences to be unethical.

	I am only in a position to influence the political process if I
understand the position of the administration and can demonstrate an 
appreciation of their concerns. As Sun Tsu said "you must build a golden
path along which your enemies may retreat". The problem with government
is not that it is a conspiracy, it is an interlocking series of
beuraucracies which all seek to avoid responsibility. 

	If you want to get Phil Z. off the hook or foul up the governments
escrow scheme plans you have tobe prepared to step into their mindset
and walk about on the inside a bit. somewhere inside the government there is
a jobsworth who is deciding to hassle Phil Z., this person will be a civil
servant, not a political appointee. Ie the dregs which get left behind each
time there is a new administration. What we need to do is to identify that 
person and nail their ass to the wall. It has to become apparent to the
administration that that individual has created an unnecessary source of
embarassment. 

	It seems to me that the purpose of key escrow is not to allow the US 
govmt to spy on its citizens. I think they want to stop strong crypto getting 
out because there are still a large number of governments cables they can break 
and they want the fun to continue a while. No external government is going to 
trust a system that is clearly subject to US govt. interference.


	If someone comes up with a crypto proposal to avoid paying taxes I
know it will never get anywhere. If they come up with a crypto proposal that
guarantees that a tax is paid but conceals the identity of the persons
involved I get much more interested.

	If somone makes contiuous political spiels themselves but object when
I make one they disagree with (as one person has done) I am not going to take
their objection as indicating anything other than an inability to argue their
case.

		Phill

PS I'm also none to impressed by people who make comments like "you are wrong 
about XXX but I won't explain why".