1996-12-11 - Re: Redlining

Header Data

From: nobody@huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 543d6fc7b2258b237a4af5d3802961d01cebae15ce69aef1d5442c42a72c837c
Message ID: <199612112315.PAA21045@mailmasher.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-12-11 23:15:28 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 15:15:28 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: nobody@huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 15:15:28 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Redlining
Message-ID: <199612112315.PAA21045@mailmasher.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

At 11:47 AM 12/11/1996, Timothy C. May wrote:
>1. The _general_ subjects of "bigotry" and "redlining" are not
>closely related to themes of this list, though the implications of
>strong privacy for these issues is certainly on topic. (And my views
>on these implications are well known...I've seen no point to step in
>to the debate to repeat them, and don't plan to argue with Matt M.
>about the "evils of bigotry.")
>2. Many of the posts by Matt M. and "Red Rackham" and others have
>been so massive, containing paragraph-by-paragraph rebuttals of
>political and ethical points, that I've just given up on trying to
>follow the points.
>If anyone has well-formed questions about how redlining and "bigotry"
>is affected by strong cryptography and crypto anarchy, fire away.
>Just don't bury them deep in a long diatribe about the evils of
>"prejudice" and "discrimination."

Didn't Tim May originate the "Generation of Science" thread or,
earlier, the sliderule thread?  I don't think either topic can said to
be strictly cypherpunk unless a discrete logarithm sliderule has been

The truth is that I enjoyed those threads as did most others on the
list.  I would like to see more like them.  And, I dare say that my
posts are more worthwhile than 7 out of 8 posts we've been seeing on
the list lately.

>(Personally, and off-topic for the list (so I'll be brief),...

Point 1: You obviously find the subject interesting enough to comment
on it.  Others probably also find it interesting.

Point 2: Excuse me if I am wrong, but your comments look to me to be
precisely on topic for this list, anyway.

>...the ills of our society seem to me to have _very little_ to do
>with "prejudice." In fact, most people are not "discriminating"
>enough, in the sense that discrimination implies value judgements and
>assessments of probable success based on data available. As someone
>noted, the Asian communities in the U.S. are doing well and are quite
>"discriminatory" in lending policies. Get used to it, as crypto
>anarchy will make coerced transactions even more difficult. The
>racial and ethnic groups which are most into "victimology" are the
>least successful--which is _cause_ and which is _effect_ may be
>debatable to many of you, but the correlation is very clear....maybe
>it's time they try something different, like getting their culture to
>embrace learning, reading, science, math, and business success,
>instead of glorifying victimization, crack cocaine, basketball stars,
>and pimps.)

This obsession of "on topic/off topic" is not healthy for the list.
It stifles brainstorming and the free exchange of ideas.

Red Rackham

P.S. Sorry for the length of some of the messages.  That Miszewski had
the temerity to actually stand up for his beliefs, so it was