cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-06-03 - Re: May’s Banal Rant

Header Data

From: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
To: Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg@epic.org>
Message Hash: 783f7f3f45478d4651bc71ee684eca890037db8c26e09a9e96b921b569e5383f
Message ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970602140412.228B-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Reply To: <v03007800afb7f6a1b377@[207.172.46.254]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-03 08:00:56 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 16:00:56 +0800

Raw message

From: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 16:00:56 +0800
To: Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg@epic.org>
Subject: Re: May's Banal Rant
In-Reply-To: <v03007800afb7f6a1b377@[207.172.46.254]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970602140412.228B-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




> >so often suggested, analogous to "use of a gun" in a crime, nor to "use of
> >the public mails." It is much closer to the examples I cite, language and
> >religion, than to use of a publicly-regulated monopoly like the telephones
> >or the mail. The gun situation is presumably related to the threat of
> >bodily harm...I'm not saying I agree with "use a gun, go to prison"
> >sentencing enhancements, but a stronger case can be made than for "use a
> >cipher, go to prison.
> 
> I don't need the lecture. I've made the argument better than
> you have and I've made it longer than you have. 

Here we go, you have now given up on even attempting rational argument 
(not that you ever managed to achieve it in the first place) and turned 
to throwing insults and derogatory statements.

I think more than anything else your comment yesterday about SSNs and 
private retailers indicates your need for lectures.

> I don't recall
> you protesting the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (1984),
> working on the RTM case (a CFAA prosecution in 1988). You
> weren't involved in the FOIA case for 2600.

Don`t parade your experience of contesting cases within the system to me, 
I`m not remotely impressed. You, along with EPIC, along with all the 
other alphabet groups, have sold out to compromise, not because you 
intended to, but because that is the natural state to which such lobbying 
groups "evolve" when working with people who do not understand the nature 
of individual rights. Playing the game with the jackbooted motherfuckers 
and their masters in DC is the worst possible way to go about protecting 
our rights.

> >a. denouncing any "return address" requirements and refusing to cooperate
> >with any Congressthing who espouses such wrong-headed ideas
> 
> Great plan. I'll watch TV and let Congress pass a bill
> requiring mandatory identification for Internet users.
> Really clever.

This really isn`t the point, if you compromise, as you probably will, and 
we end up with a SAFE like "crypto in commision of a crime" provision we 
have gone up one step and down two. There can be no dealing with 
Washington nor any of the other cancers that have taken over the USA, 
removal is the only solution. 

> I'm probably in a much better position to criticize the failure
> of Tim May et al to stand up for crypto freedom than the other
> way around.

I don`t think so somehow, the cypherpunks, of whom Tim May was one of the 
founding memebers, have had effects in the past, not normally in 
legislative circles but in terms of getting the technology out there and 
available. The only solution is technical bypassing of the law, this 
along with other cypherpunkish ideas such as fully anonymous digital cash, 
chaumian mixes, uncensorable information sources, pseudonymity, DC-Nets 
etc.. will result in citizens being able to bypass state restrictions and 
disobey laws, in time it may even result in the downfall of the state. 

> >Being a rejectionist, I don't see the point of dealing with Congress. The
> >usual view is that "If you don't get involved, things will be even worse."
> >I'm not convinced of this. It's often better to not lend them any support,
> >not lend them any technical expertise, and devote all energies to
> >undermining and challenging their actions later.
> 
> And the existence proof of this proposition is . . .

You simply cannot reason with criminal poloticians, circumventing their 
restrictions and undermining the state is the way to go.

> >And helping them draft legislation only feeds the process.
> >
> >I think it was George Carlin who said, "If you think you're part of the
> >solution, you're part of the problem."
> 
> Good high school humor for a good high school philosophy.

Keep trying.

> I am underwhelmed.

I am unsuprised.

        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"

Thread