From: tallpaul@pipeline.com (tallpaul)
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 22:55:17 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Only accepting e-mail from known parties
Message-ID: <199512280309.WAA23655@pipe10.nyc.pipeline.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


[I mistakenly failed to post the original message to which A.J. Stuckey
responded to the entire group. I have corrected this error. However, A.J.
Stuckey quoted enough of the original to have his questions comprehensible
so I'll reply to them here without waiting for the original to be sent to
the list.] 
 
On Dec 27, 1995 15:50:55, '"Anthony J. Stuckey"
<stuckey@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu>' wrote: 
 
 
>In uiuc.mlist.cypherpunks you write: 
>>We live in a post-Faustian world.  
>>  
>>It is divided into two groups of people. First are those who understand
the 
>>post-Faustian character and devote themselves to getting used to it and 
>>even having fun with the new opportunities while understanding that the
new 
>>world also generates new problems (like furthering data-narcicism).
Second 
>>are those classic-reactionary forces (from all parts of the political 
>>spectrum) who whine about how the post-Faustian world is personally
unfair 
>>to them and how everybody in the world has a personal obligation to them
to 
>>move the world back to its pre-Faustian origins.  
> 
>	Just what exactly defines a "post-Faustian" world?  That we're aware 
>people will sell their souls for power? 
>--  
 
I wasn't a matter of people selling their souls for power or that we're
aware of it. My original reference was to one view on our society (not
necessarily reflected on the list) that we must "avoid the Faustian
bargain." 
 
Gee, I hated to inform them that the Faustian bargain had already been made
and made anywhere from hundreds to tens of thousands of years ago. In this
sense, we live in a post-Faustian [bargain] world. 
 
The bargain, so to speak, was not about knowledge or power or other such
things. Those were involved only in the negotiating stages of the contract.
The *real* bargain occured when Faust stated: 
 
     "And if I should ever say, 
     "'Oh moment stay!' 
     "Thou art so fair!' 
     "I *deserve* to perish 
     "Then and there. 
          _Faust_, Part I, Goethe 
 
We are all caught in a process that can not be even stopped let alone
turned back without damnation. We need not like this; we need not support
it; we can even pull the covers over our heads and refuse to recognize it.
But the bargain and process exists nonetheless. 
 
There are Group One people, like (most) cypherpunks and others who
understand the bargain has been made, who accept the world, and who may
even have fun participating in a continuing and ever changing process. E.G.
the microprocessor was invented. This created the possibility of things
like PGP that in turn created the first opportunity in the history of the
world for the average man and woman to have privacy as (pretty) good as any
government *if they were willing to provide themselves that privacy.* The
same invention also meant the greatest invasion of privacy through
computerized lists at credit card companies, etc. 
 
Now personally I like PGP and do not personally like credit company's data
bases. But both exist in the world and I recognize the inevitability of
both. 
 
The you have Group Two people who whine about how the development of the
microprocessor created a world they don't like, that is unfair to them,
that is based on the Faustian bargain, etc. etc. 
 
To them, the world says (if it bothers to say anything at all) "Tough!" Now
am I inclined to give up either PGP or my Pentium because these necessarily
exist in the same world with the credit companies they do not like. 
 
To use another example: we have the internet and we have a _de jure_
freedom of speech. 
 
Group One people like the net, even if it means that a few people are going
to send "kiddie porn" over the wires instead of looking at the old "kiddie
underwear" ads in the _Sears_ catalog. 
 
Group Two people are fearful of the net and hate it, frequently attempting
to rationalize their fears by reference to "kiddie porn," "drugs,"
"terrorists," etc.   They want their fears to dominate both the net and
freedom of speech on a global level. "If it doesn't play in Peoria then it
shouldn't play in Denmark," etc. 
 
Group One people say in essence that "kiddie porn" is a small price to pay
for the net and expanded freedom of speech; Group Two people say in essence
that the net is too high a price for "kiddie porn" and let us also reduce
freedom of speech while we're at it. 
 
As I wrote, it is a post-Fastuain world and none of us can go home to the
pre-Faustian world ever again. 
 
==tallpaul