Re: Net Regulation

To: cypherpunks@toad.com
B >Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com> wrote:
B >:And don't tell me that we still have to live in the physical world. 
B >:If 90% of the GWP (including *almost all* the money) consists of 
B >:non-physical goods and services on the nets, government control over
B >:the remaining 10% is not statistically significant.
B >
B >All too often, people look at one thing and imagine that the
B >numbers somehow outweigh reality. It ain't like that, folks.
B >Reality is complexly, intimately, and inseparately interconnected.
B >No matter what you do with the bits, physical reality cannot be
B >discounted.

You also can't disount the physical realities confronting the state.  It 
is enormously difficult to control workers who can live anywhere on earth 
and work anywhere else.  The US government may think that it can control 
Americans but it can't control the rest of the world's population most of 
whom live in countries that don't even claim to try and tax income earned 
by their expats.  Everyone on the nets is an expat.

I believe that the percentage of GWP controlled by the world's states 
peaked at some point since WWII and has started a decline.  With the 
growth of informal markets, tax evasion, non-national economic activity 
(offshore), and the privitization of the economies of the SU and China.  
If this trend continues, the relative power of states will decline as 
their control of economic activity declines. 

B >"No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife in the back will always
B >cramp his style."

But who is more vulnerable to the knife.  Millions of "Permanent Tourists" 
living and working in cyberspace or a large nation state incapable of 
moving, hiding, or getting an honest job when markets turn against it.

B >So, please, stop with the simplistic answers!
B >
B >(What *did* happen at Panix, eh? I rest my case.)

Panix was down but my three other connections to the nets were up.  Panix 
had a security intrusion.

Duncan Frissell



--- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

In article <199310241403.AA06468@panix.com>,
Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com> wrote:
: B >Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com> wrote:
: B >:And don't tell me that we still have to live in the physical world.
: B >:If 90% of the GWP (including *almost all* the money) consists of
: B >:non-physical goods and services on the nets, government control over
: B >:the remaining 10% is not statistically significant.
: B >
: B >All too often, people look at one thing and imagine that the
: B >numbers somehow outweigh reality. It ain't like that, folks.
: B >Reality is complexly, intimately, and inseparately interconnected.
: B >No matter what you do with the bits, physical reality cannot be
: B >discounted.
:
: You also can't disount the physical realities confronting the state.

Oh, I don't disagree with your main thesis which, if I understand
it aright, amounts to that the state is pretty much obsolete and
is only taking its time realizing this. :-) I'm just trying to
point out that it is simply dangerous to imagine that bandying
about numbers that purport to show its insignificance will
actually make it so. Or, to put it another way, I mostly agree
with your statements and wish you wouldn't weaken them with
worthless supporting claims.

:                                                                       It
: is enormously difficult to control workers who can live anywhere on earth
: and work anywhere else.

Really? I'll tell you what: I'll give you 100% control over all
communications starting tomorrow and I'll take 100% control over
all food and water at the same time. I win. You *die*.

Simplistic and impossible, true, but the point remains. There is
always a physical reality and no matter who "insignificant" it
is, it can still kill you.

: B >"No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife in the back will always
: B >cramp his style."
:
: But who is more vulnerable to the knife.  Millions of "Permanent Tourists"
: living and working in cyberspace or a large nation state incapable of
: moving, hiding, or getting an honest job when markets turn against it.

The permanent tourists, of course. The state is, when all is
boiled down, an instrument of force and it functions most
"effectively" when it limits itself to that. I guarantee you that
if the US wanted to crack down on this stuff that it would be
gone. This year, a third of the prison population is from
drug-related "crimes"; if they got a bee in their bonnets, you
and I and a whole lot of other people could take their places.
(Not, mind you, that I think this'll happen. But it *could*.)

Yes, that could be prevented, but it won't be prevented by what
the cypherpunks are doing. Sooner or later, the bodies would have
to meet the bullets. That's the way of the world, alas.

: B >So, please, stop with the simplistic answers!
: B >
: B >(What *did* happen at Panix, eh? I rest my case.)
:
: Panix was down but my three other connections to the nets were up.  Panix
: had a security intrusion.

You missed the point. The net is embedded in the rest of reality
and that reality, in this case, *people*, had significant
deleterious effects on many others' ability to use the net. This
isn't going to change any time soon. Maybe in a couple of decades,
less if people stop pretending the real world is an irrelevancy.

T. William Wells says:
> :                                                                       It
> : is enormously difficult to control workers who can live anywhere on earth
> : and work anywhere else.
> 
> Really? I'll tell you what: I'll give you 100% control over all
> communications starting tomorrow and I'll take 100% control over
> all food and water at the same time. I win. You *die*.

How will you take control? If Napoleon and Hitler couldn't manage it,
I doubt any of the mediocre dictators we have around these days could.

You can't forget that that the state can't violate the laws of physics
or economics. They can't extract more resources out of a country than
that country has, and they can't be everywhere at once.

Admittedly, if someone could put a *loyal* armed soldier over
everyone's shoulder on earth they could control everyone. How, though,
could they manage to do this?

> Simplistic and impossible, true, but the point remains. There is
> always a physical reality and no matter who "insignificant" it
> is, it can still kill you.

I think you are the one who is ignoring this. The state is just as
subject to the problems of physical reality as anyone else.

Perry

In article <9310250152.AA09786@snark.lehman.com>,
Perry E. Metzger <lehman.com!pmetzger> wrote:
: [irrelevancy]

I watched you arguing with Detweiler and thought that you were an
idiot. However, I figured that Detweiler was sufficient
provocation to bring out the idiot in just about anyone so I
ignored that.

But here you have proven that you really don't understand.

This I don't intend to ignore. Welcome to my killfile. When you
figure out why, you may be worthy of being removed from it.

T. William Wells says:
> In article <9310250152.AA09786@snark.lehman.com>,
> Perry E. Metzger <lehman.com!pmetzger> wrote:
> : [irrelevancy]
> 
> I watched you arguing with Detweiler and thought that you were an
> idiot. However, I figured that Detweiler was sufficient
> provocation to bring out the idiot in just about anyone so I
> ignored that.
> 
> But here you have proven that you really don't understand.
> 
> This I don't intend to ignore. Welcome to my killfile. When you
> figure out why, you may be worthy of being removed from it.

On the contrary -- I am honored to be in your kill file, given the
apparent criteria. I hope never to leave it.

Perry

In his final message, Mr. Wells accuses me of wanting to control, rule,
and abuse despite the fact that I've been on the list since it's
beginning and have participated in a grand total of 2 flames. He says our
actions should be based on a fundamental respect for others. He's already
abused my character far more than I did to Detweiler. While weeding out
my mailbox, I ran across the following:

T. William Wells writes:
> 
> In article <9310250152.AA09786@snark.lehman.com>,
> Perry E. Metzger <lehman.com!pmetzger> wrote:
> : [irrelevancy]
> 
> I watched you arguing with Detweiler and thought that you were an
> idiot. However, I figured that Detweiler was sufficient
> provocation to bring out the idiot in just about anyone so I
> ignored that.
> 
> But here you have proven that you really don't understand.
> 
> This I don't intend to ignore. Welcome to my killfile. When you
> figure out why, you may be worthy of being removed from it.

  Not the words of an "understanding" and "sensitive" person.

  Everyone else seems to be getting in their last word. That's mine.
I've temporarily unsubscribed the list for an unspecified period. I can't
keep up with this war, my classes, and my work on the Extropians list
software.

 
-- Ray Cromwell        |    Engineering is the implementation of science;    --
-- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu  |       politics is the implementation of faith.      --
--                   Founding Member of the Dark Side                        --