From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 1996 17:33:27 +0800
To: Esther Dyson <edyson@edventure.com>
Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times article on Helsingius and anon.penet.fi
In-Reply-To: <19960901220323595.AAA208@Esther.edventure.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960902024727.26034B-100000@polaris>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sun, 1 Sep 1996, Esther Dyson wrote:

> Now, speaking personally: I believe there are trade-offs -- which is what I
> told the LA Times.  I assume I was quoted accurately (although the word
> "enforce" is awkward), but out of context.   Anonymity can be dangerous --
> as can traceability, especially in/by repressive regimes.  Therefore I would
> favor allowing anonymity -- with some form of traceability only under terms
> considerably stronger than what are generally required for a wiretap.
> Anyone who seriously needs anonymity because of a repressive government is
> likely to use a foreign (outside whatever jurisdiction he fears) server, so
> that this is not a matter of "local" laws.  The tracer would have to pass
> through what I hope would be tighter hoops than we have now.  
> 
> Please note that this is not the same as the right to *private*
> conversations and the use of encryption; this is the issue of being
> accountable for what you publish in public.  

I've left the attributation list open because I think my view a majority
one.

The inclinations I had to be involved with or financially support EFF are,
after reading this, entirely quashed.

What is or is not your personal or EFF's official position is meaningless.
It is clear that the personal beliefs of those involved in EFF are
those of compromise, present day politics, and a general lack of moral
fiber.

The political assumptions and the degree of technical invasion that would
make the above scheme possible are either hopelessly naive, or insidiously
invasive.
 
A scheme to make every net goer traceable (albut with some undefined
mechanism to "safeguard" against abuse) is, even in its core requirements,
frightening.

Whatever respect I had for EFF collectively and the individuals working
within the organization is much deminished, if it survives at all.

> Yes, I'm aware of the complexities, and of the possibilities for
> miscarriages of justice.

Yet you address this where exactly, even now in your "apology" or
"explanation" statement?

> Speaking for myself, only (and publicly),
> Esther Dyson

Perhaps you should have spoken publically but anonymously the first time?
Having not done so, I think you have damaged yourself as well as EFF.

> Esther Dyson				Always make new mistakes!

I find the above amusing.

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn@schloss.li