The subject of Saturday's game

I just joined the list; I've read such archives as are locally
available, but I apologize if this subject has already come up.

Talking to a couple of people who had been to Saturday's meeting, I
was deeply disturbed by the choice of subject for the simulated
privacy game - trying to purchase illegal drugs. This is a subject on
which rational public discussion is essentially non-existent in this
country. Let me first state that I do favor the legalization of drugs,
and I am a committed libertarian (as I suspect are many of the people
in this group).

However, I think it is unwise to tie cryptography in with this issue.
Communications privacy is *too important* to take the risk that it
will get caught up in the current hysteria of the New Prohibition.
There have already been enough government attacks on cryptography that
we do not want to give them any more ammunition.

I think that if we are committed to getting cryptographic technology
in wide use, and spreading true privacy and information security
throughout the world, then we need to take careful account of the
political and social factors, as well as the technical. In order to be
successful, this needs to be not just a development project, but also
a marketing campaign.  When an MIS manager at some large corporation
is deciding whether to upgrade her network to privacy-enhanced mail,
we want her to associate it with security and liberty, not the street
corner punks who are trying to sell her kids crack.

In this vein, let me suggest some subjects for future simulations:

	- organizing the Boston Tea Party in the face of British spies
	and informers

	- purchasing condoms or Lady Chatterley's Lover back when they
	were banned (these bans seem so absurd now, that trying to get
	around them seems sensible and ordinary, and may start people
	thinking about the absurdity of current interdictions)

	- Yeltsin/Gorbachev vs the coup leaders

Furthermore, given the erosiion of constitutional protections in the
Drug War, I think the participants in Saturday's game were taking a
non-trivial risk to their persons and property. If the risk were
necessary to help spread cryptographic privacy, I think none would
begrudge it; however, I think it was not only unnecessary, but
counterproductive. 'Nuff said.

To life and liberty,
	--ravi

Excellent message.  I agree with your points about drugs.  I also like
the organization topics you suggest for the game.  

	 In this vein, let me suggest some subjects for future simulations:

		 - organizing the Boston Tea Party in the face of British spies
		 and informers

		 - purchasing condoms or Lady Chatterley's Lover back when they
		 were banned (these bans seem so absurd now, that trying to get
		 around them seems sensible and ordinary, and may start people
		 thinking about the absurdity of current interdictions)

		 - Yeltsin/Gorbachev vs the coup leaders

On the victory conditions.  Right now, the game is declared over as
soon as any party accomplishes their objective.  This creates the
incentive to prevent other people from accomplishing their objective,
even if it would help me accomplish mine.  

The use of topics like the above gives clearer victory conditions:
One side or the other wins, even though that side only loosely
includes any particular participant in the game (an informer wins if
either his nominal side wins without his duplicity being revealed, or
if the opposition wins).

A plausible generic form of victory condition is for one 'side' to
succesfully transact some secure exchange, or for the other 'side' to
successfully break such a secure transaction.  I don't know how to
allow decoys with this model of victory.  Hmmm...

	 To life and liberty,

Da.

dean

Re: drugs and simulation games.

At the meeting last Saturday, we played the second incarnation of the
remailing simulation game.  In a nutshell, the game is intended to
teach people about how to protect their privacy by using encryption to
prevent against monitoring and by using remailing to protect their
identities.  Since the game is also in part an economic simulation, I
tried to pick game objects which someone had some interest in keeping
quiet.  I picked drugs, of unspecified name, as a prominent game item.
This, by wide acclamation, is a mistake.  Since the primary reason to
pick this was a paucity of imagination, I now ask for help from the
list.

We want to develop a list of game items, physical objects, which will
be the goods of transaction.  I would like to pick objects that have
been illegal in the past, but which are not anymore.  They should not
be primarily information, such as copies of _Ulysses_.  They should
not now be restricted.  Nor should they be weapons, such as crossbows
or samurai swords.  They should, however, be objects that are known to
have generated some emotional reactions in the past.

There are two suggestions that meet these criteria: contraceptives and
printing presses (or xerox machines).  I would like to find more.
Please make your suggestions.

Another possibility is to use items which have been the subject of
state-enforced monopolies in the past, such as pepper or nutmeg.

Be creative.  We'd like to get a good list of twenty or so items.

Eric

That was a really good point.  Keep separate issues separate so as not to
alienate people.

e