NODE 00f4e053Re: possible solution to the anonymous harrassment problem
Rusty_H._Hodge@horizon.amgen.comMon, 18 Jan 93 19:32:58 PST
>for example, i can send postal mail with high confidence
>of anonymity, and can make anonymous phone calls (with care,
>e.g., by using phone booths and moving around).
What about that little old ladie that watches the PO Box and Phone Booth
from her window? What about the postman who sees you place the letter in
the mailbox?
>privacy and honesty are orthogonal.
I've often accidentially overheard things I wasn't suppost to. If people
were totally honest, we wouldn't need such good encryption...
NODE 0a57114bRe: possible solution to the anonymous harrassment problem
peter honeyman <honey@citi.umich.edu>Mon, 18 Jan 93 20:29:00 PST
> >for example, i can send postal mail with high confidence
> >of anonymity, and can make anonymous phone calls (with care,
> >e.g., by using phone booths and moving around).
>
> What about that little old ladie that watches the PO Box and Phone Booth
> from her window? What about the postman who sees you place the letter in
> the mailbox?
like i said, with care. just as i have to be careful that my sys admin
isn't snoopy. but that's not my point. if you do exercise care, you
can send anonymous mail, just like you can communicate anonymously with
other media (if you are careful). remailers institutionalize anonymity,
nothing more.
> >privacy and honesty are orthogonal.
>
> I've often accidentially overheard things I wasn't suppost to. If people
> were totally honest, we wouldn't need such good encryption...
if your point is that dishonesty makes privacy necessary, i agree.
but i do *not* agree that total honesty makes privacy unnecessary.
peter