From: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 05:24:09 +0800
To: t.griffiths@ic.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Democratic Assassination
In-Reply-To: <199706151420.PAA19195@cscmgb.cc.ic.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970615163902.2415A-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain





> > Speaking entirely hypothetically: If assasination bots were implemented, 
> > and I ran one, I would choose to keep a list of poloticians, DEA cops, 
> > censors etc. and only allow contracts on them, of course, there is 
> > nothing to stop anyone else running a server that accepted bets on 
> > anyone. I would just choose not to allow my equipment to be used for 
> > hiring assasins to kill innocent people. 
>  
>   But by using this system, aren't we removing the concept of what an
> 'innocent' person is anyway? A person 'deserves' to die when enough people
> or money dictates that they should. 

I believe in this sense a DAP system would be a bad thing, but anonymous 
digital contracts in the more direct sense (ie. just a normal 
assasination contract as agreed today in meatspace, but using digital 
cash and other systems to make payments untraceable) are a better option 
as they remove this democratic side to the killings (although the 
democratic method prevents frivolous killings).
I am not at all saying that a person "deserves" to die when enough people 
say they should, but merely describing the situation. It is currently the 
case that when someone becomes A. unpopular enough in public opinion, or 
B. unpopular with someone with a lot of money, they stand a chance of 
being killed for this.

> Effectively you're censoring votes
> for the assasination of a person who you don't feel deserves it - no matter
> how many people donate money to that cause.
> This destroys the whole 'democratic' idea of what this ideas about.

Whoa there! An assasination bot and the hardware it ran on would be 
private property, I can choose to censor whatever the hell I want on 
private property. I personally would not run an AP type bot that 
democratised the process of assasination, as I have said I favour the 
probable outcome of a more direct contract system, but whether I did or 
not it is my decision who I accept bets on. If I choose to only accept 
bets on innocent children and old ladies, that is my own decision on my 
own property. Business suceeds through reputation, remember the basic 
principles of the free market...

> Also, how do you tell the difference between an 'evil' and 'innocent'
> DEA cop?

ROFL, the very notion of an innocent DEA cop is a joke...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"