From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 08:44:20 +0800
To: Marshall Clow <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Denning vs. Gilmore
Message-ID: <199607302145.OAA24372@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 09:54 AM 7/30/96 -0700, Marshall Clow wrote:
>>Today, Monday, July 29, Dorothy Denning begins her debate vs. John Gilmore
>>over The Absolute Right to Privacy on Wired Online's Brain Tennis site. Do
>>citizens of the world have an "unalienable right" to privacy - or are there
>>reasons why governments ought to have access to our communications? This
>>debate will run daily through August 7. Follow along at
>>http://www.wired.com/braintennis/

>
>I noticed that she said "allows", not "would allow". That contradicts
><<I'm not ready to accept "the cat is out of the bag.">>, doesn't it?


Quite!  I wish somebody would ask her why such a tiny fraction of the 
population (government functionaries, and a small fraction of them to 
boot!) should get their way and force (with varying degrees of the word, 
force) their idea of heaven on the rest of us.  Despite their claims of an 
"emerging consensus", only an extraordinarily small group thought up GAK and 
has been promoting it.  Whatever benefits are claimed for that system, I've 
always contended that we (as citizens; or, as individuals) should have the 
right to reject it.  Are they unwilling to take NO for an answer?

 
Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com