From: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:42:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: TCM: mafia as a paradigm for cyberspace
In-Reply-To: <199605181943.MAA11760@netcom12.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960518200508.1623B-100000@smoke.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sat, 18 May 1996, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:

> an interesting thesis, quite revealing. "the mafia is fulfilling a 
> valid market purpose. the killings & violence are just minor secondary
> issues."  I believe in contrast I would define the mafia exactly
> the opposite. the violence and terror is the key part of the mafia agenda.
> the activities they involve themselves in are secondary to promoting
> the basic agenda of obtaining money in any way possible. how can you

	Replace "mafia" with government, and "money" with power/control.  

> what amazes me about people who tend to have a warped mindset is that
> they think new technology, such as cyberspace, creates a new morality.
> suddenly murdering, violence, drug dealing, or whatever are supposedly
> thrust into some new reality in which old rules no longer apply.
> you and Jim Bell are unbelievably similar, as much as either of you
> would hate to admit it. its just a cloak, in my opinion, for trying
> to evade culpability. the ultimate utopia for some on this list would
> be a world in which they can be held accountable for absolutely nothing,
> by absolutely no one. "anarchy" is as good a word as our reality can
> come close to, although I believe such a reality would be far more
> sinister than that adjective connotes.

	Who says a _new_ morality? Maybe it is just a wider expresion of
an already extant morality. If you will accept the defination of Murder
being "immoral killing", then most people really don't have a problem
with killing. They just draw the line between murder and killing in
different places. To me, killing is justified in 2 circumstances. 1) If
the [man animal]s threat potential exceeds a certain limit (variable) or
2) food/warmth is needed and will be derived from said killing. To kill
randomly or indiscrimantely, wether man or animal is Murder (i.e. immoral
killing) to me this _does_ include trophy hunting, but not if you utilize
the animal for food etc.
	Where humans are concerned, killing them for food is rarely an
issue, but they often present some sort of threat potential. Certain
pepole in government approach this threat potential. Thus, to me, killing
them isn't immoral, but it could _legally_ (i.e. a different defination)
be murder. 

	As far as I am concerned there really is no difference between the
government and the mafia. Both use the same threat to accomplish their
ends, the Mafia is just more honest about it. Both suck. Out loud. The
mafia just tends to be better run, and less invasive personally until you
violate their rules.  

> think about it really hard, TCM. work out those difficult problems
> associated with trying to kill people and get away with it, using
> new sexy advances in technology and theory. you

	Why do you need new technology? The old stuff works just great.
You just need the new stuff to hide you from the feds. 

> maybe talk to Jim Bell some more. perhaps
> eventually you will perfect the method of perpetrating the perfect
> killing!! I really do admire you, because killing people without
> getting caught is surely a great unrecognized art, and one of the
> most unappreciated and misunderstood.

	Happens all the time. 

> something that has only been a dream to the blighted
> wretches prior to our glorious new phases of cyberspatial technology, 
> which makes human morality completely obsolete.

	I am getting the impression that this last sentence was a little
sarcastic? 


Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@crash.suba.com