From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 06:37:25 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Oregon License Plate Site in the News Tonight!
Message-ID: <199608091917.MAA11397@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 08:48 AM 8/9/96 -0700, John F. Fricker wrote:

>I am not a great fan of social engineering and regulations. Yet the
>legisture in Oregon may get called for a special session to address this
>issue and I see this an opportunity for a grander arguement than merely
>acccess to the DMV data. And as much as we dislike the presence of the
>governments they do indeed exist. Living within their domain limits our
>choices to either: complacency through inaction (cynicism et al), attempts
>at isolation (back to the land), or taking an active role through voting,
>education, civil disobedience or participation in the process (a pox on
>party politics! the latter choice is easily the least enticing while civil
>disobedience can be truly fun! >g<). Ok so call me a statist and shove me
>out the door, but I am not argueing for the existance of a state. It does
>currently exist and I am not self-sufficient. But I digress.

Of course, in my opinion the "The State currently exists" observation is  a 
problem, but I believe it's a solvable one!



>#2) The records industry (for lack of a better term to encompass all
>companies that accumulate data on individuals) needs some standards and
>guidelines. Or walls and fences. Maybe even bars and a moat! And the sooner
>the better. Federally imposed software requirements are not uncommon in
>certain industries. It is time for standards for the personal data
>maintained by co-operating entities (ie agencies the public co-operates with
>such as doctors, the DMV, and so on).

Even better would be to simply stop the state from collecting the records in 
the first place, right?

>
>#3) The goal is the anonymous citizen. The first step it to secure the data
>currently exposed. Can this be done _without_ legislation?

Perhaps the better question is, "Can this be done _WITH_ legislation?!?"  
Legislation, by its very nature, tends to serve the interests of the 
government first, and possibly some of the citizenry trailing a bit behind.  
Remember the saying, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, you treat 
every problem as if it were a nail."  "Solving" the problem by legislation 
inherently tries to convert actions into crimes, or at least punishable 
activities.  Needless to say, it won't be GOVERNMENT people who get jailed 
or dissuaded.

A market and technology-based solution to the problem inherently involves 
cooperation, rather than confrontation, because the market has no inherent 
way to coerce people into acting