From: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 19:27:25 +0800
To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Does information want to be free?
Message-ID: <199606170744.AAA13912@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>>I confess I was amused by how he described those Internet anarchists
>> who delighted in publicizing books that should in fact be restricted.
>        I am amused (though I am not taking sides) by the general lack of
>attention or rhetoric that "crypto-anarchists"/"cypherpunks"/whatever,
>otherwise privacy respecting people, usually espouse.

Many of us do care about those privacy issues - computers are very good
at combining information from multiple sources, and crypto is about the
only technology that lets you change the balance of power away from
computerized centralization to individual-controlled decentralization.

On the other hand, the phrase "books that should in fact be restricted"
is viewed by many of us to be a synonym for "the empty set"; "books about
government leaders which should be restricted" is an even emptier set,
whether they're true, bogus, or some of each.

In general, a Cypherpunk(tm) approach to protecting private information
is not to advocate laws against distributing it, but to build tools to 
let you protect it while giving it to people that you _do_ want to have it;
perhaps to use individual contracts to protect the information,
but also to build tools to support contractual agreements and
identify leaks.  In some cases, boycotting organizations that violate
privacy is a good idea (and building alternatives can support boycotts);
flaming them for rudeness is another approach :-), and helping organizations
understand the privacy implications of what they're doing and helping
them use privacy-preserving methods instead of hanging an SSN on everything
is another good cypherpunks activity.  On the other hand, building
anonymous publishing systems so people can blow the whistle on their
government officials is a good thing, even though it may be used by
people rude enough to pry into people's private lives.

Also, while publishing one politician's cancer experience may be rude,
publishing a recent American president's growing senility should have
been done more aggressively, as should publishing the moral failures
of his Vice president....

#				Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart +1-415-442-2215 stewarts@ix.netcom.com
# http://www.idiom.com/~wcs
#				Dispel Authority!