From: tallpaul@pipeline.com (tallpaul)
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 13:56:17 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: free speech and the government
Message-ID: <199602050510.AAA21140@pipe5.nyc.pipeline.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Feb 04, 1996 14:40:51, 'Alan Olsen <alano@teleport.com>' wrote: 
 
 
 
> 
>Crypto relevence:  Some people regard the ability to hide "dangerous" 
>information to be as "dangerous" as the information hidden.  Freedom of 
>Speech includes the right to choose who can listen to that speech. 
> 
 
I do not think that his last sentence is accurate. 
 
The primary example os a group that exercises its freedom of speech (maybe
even fights in the courts for it) by holding a rally in the Village Green.
Does their right to hold their rally also include the right to choose who
can listen to the rally speeches in the Village Green? Of course not! 
 
Fundamentally, I think that speaking is a speech issue; determining who can
listen is a privacy issue. They are very much *not* the same thing. 
 
The separation is not done away with by things like the cellular phone
anti-eavesdropping or satellite cable broadcast laws. (Aspects of the
separation are, however, addressed by PGPhone, or rather should one say
made "unaddressable". 
 
 
--tallpaul 
 
PS: Olsen's post did have some good themes on the nature of the internet
"as public library."