From: Ryan Lackey <rdl@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 18:50:14 +0800
To: Wei Dai <weidai@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns
Message-ID: <tw767nxj3q7.fsf@the-great-machine.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



<daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU> (Wei Dai) writes:

> I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately.
> Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic
> properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the
> domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've
> already lost!
> 
> Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need
> crypto?

I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict
a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military.  With maybe
$20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make
life very difficult for any luckless squad that happens your way.  Multiply
that by 100 million armed citizens and you see that armed civilian
resistance *can* defeat an occupying army.

Certainly in times of "peace" information/infrastructure warfare is much
more cost effective for the guerilla -- but once they start sending armored
patrols around armed with 600 surplus M-16 rifles and having [un]official
rules of engagement which include sniper fire on the wives and children
of citizens not convicted of any crime, burning tens of people alive for
their religious beliefs, forcibly sodomizing suspects with wooden rods, and
passing laws which cripple the 1st by making it a crime to read, it's
perhaps worth looking at other methods of resistance. (wow, that approached
Hettingan length while having little in common with his style :)

Plus, I honestly believe certain people who lacked the foresight or desire
to use anonymity have increased the chances of illegal unconstitutional
government action against them.  It'll be a lot harder to quietly kill
someone and keep it out of the news if they're prepared to fight back
to the extent that I gather Tim May and others are prepared.  Even if
being armed does nothing more than let the world know they have declared
war against the constitution, it's worth it.

Me, I still plan to get out before high powered riflery becomes anything
other than a sport.  The Seychelles are looking remarkably tempting... 

(I still say steel core ammo is the way to go, especially in 5.56 NATO and
7.62 Soviet.  There exist plenty of vests which have rifle hardplate to
stop those rounds -- even 7.62 NATO rounds.  7.62 NATO AP/API, though,
is a bit tougher, buying you substantial time)    

Hacking on Eternity DDS,
Ryan
[Not actually a gun toting lunatic, nor does he play one on TV, but
 rather keeps them in a safe, and carries knives instead.  Yay Massachusetts.
 I hope this does not spark a discussion of how to stop a government
 assault force armed with only a knife (hint: the answer is not "in parallel")]

[*ObCrypto* (it's getting really hard to do this every time):
AOLserver (a nice web server formerly from GNN/navisoft) punted their
128bit SSL module distribution *EVEN TO US CITIZENS* due to commerce
department fuckedness.  Anyone know where I could get a copy?  It would
really suck to have to patch the 40bit one into a 128bit version, since they
do not distribute source.  Sigh.  But I've started to use it for insecure
stuff because it's cheaper than Stronghold (read: free) and does some cool
database stuff easier than apache.  And (cool db stuff + free) is more
important than (secure) or (secure and easily configured and supported)
for this.]

-- 
Ryan Lackey
rdl@mit.edu
http://mit.edu/rdl/