Re: This List--Public, Private, or Other? (fwd)

Hal writes:
> Because of these considerations, I think cyberspace is not really subject to
> the kinds of ownership and control that we associate with private property.
> Look at the Extropians list as an example.  They try to say that the list
> is private property and feel free to kick people off.  But sometimes people
> get disgusted with their autocratic practices and leave.  The list ends up
> losing value.  The more they tighten their iron fist of ownership the more
> individuals slip out of their grasp, to paraphrase noted cyberspace pundit
> Princess Leia.  (I say this not to disparage members of that list, which has
> a lot of talented people, but because to me it is a good example of the mis-
> application of the idea of private property.)
> 
    On the other hand, the list also tries to perform a useful function
 for many people which is to filter down the enormous amount of chatter
 conversation out there to make it easier to read. It's interesting
 to note that the people who left the list were not leaving because
 of our tight copyright rules but because they disliked the code-of-conduct
 rules with respect to politeness and the enforcement of them. 
 Code of conduct is a form of property control which won't disappear
 even in a "free" cyberspace. People will still form electronic
 country clubs excluding the non-elite or the non-polite from their
 ranks.
 
    The Extropian's list copyright rules are mainly e-cultural politeness.
 Just as it is considered bad netiquette to forward private
 e-mail to a public newsgroup, the Extropian's list administration
 considers it inappropriate to forward private exchanges to
 public lists without prior permission from the author. Such a rule
 would likely be in place on "women only space" e-lists or 
 abuse recovery lists. Although the cypherpunks membership list
 is public, I bet many cypherpunks would consider it inappropriate
 to sell or give away this list to direct electronic marketing 
 agencies. The extropians list has its copyright rule also to
 create a safe-zone. One where you can speak your mind without worrying
 about someone publishing your words in a "usenet cd-rom archive" where
 your boss could see it. Until pseudonymity is easier to use, restrictions
 will have to stay in place.
 
     I see electronic copyright as mainly just good manners.
 
> My model of the ultimate future of cyberspace emphasizes selectivity
> and filtering of a huge corpus of messages, articles, essays, debates,
> etc.  The hard part is going to be picking out what is interesting to
> you, and making your contributions in such a way that interested people
> see them.  I really don't think our current infrastructure of mailing
> lists and usenet does a very good job of this, and I hope that in the
> future better approaches will be possible.  It's not clear what role
> ownership will play in that system.

   I think mailing lists do a much better job of filtering than usenet
 where membership to a discussion group can not be moderated or 
 limited. (it doesn't work in practice. it usually kills the group or
 e-sociopaths just bypass the insecurity of the system) I like
 AOL's "auditorium" model.
 
    In the future, people will still want to pay others for locating
 information, filtering, and formating it in the oceans of
 information out there. Lexus/Nexus, IQuest, and some of the financial
 report natural-language filters out there are good examples.
 
    Information itself would probably be relatively free, but useless
 because *finding it* would be the hard part. Electronic Consultants
 would make their money by hooking you up with the right database
 or search software, or sell you their personal time over an electronic
 market.
 
 -Ray
 

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

Ray Cromwell writes:

>     On the other hand, the list also tries to perform a useful function
>  for many people which is to filter down the enormous amount of chatter
>  conversation out there to make it easier to read. It's interesting
>  to note that the people who left the list were not leaving because
>  of our tight copyright rules but because they disliked the code-of-conduct
>  rules with respect to politeness and the enforcement of them. 

I hope Ray was not counting me in with those who left the Extropian
list because they "disliked the code-of-conduct rules with respect to
politeness and the enforcement of them."

I left for a number of reasons, most of which I chose not to spell out
when I left. Of the several notable folks who left, for various
reasons I'm sure, Hal Finney left long before this issue arose, Perry
Metzger became dormant also before this issue arose, I left in January
for these aforementioned multiple reasons, and the only one I know of
who left over a conflict such as Ray describes was Vince Kirchner,
who left the list a few days after I did (I missed the big blow-up).

The Extropians are a fine bunch, and I enjoyed my 18 months on the
list. Ultimately, it was taking too much of my time for too little new
information in return, certain folks were treating the "Extropian
Principles 2.0" as a kind of catechism to be quoted to doubters, and
the personal invective was intensifying. I chose to leave and to use
the saved time to learn to play the electric guitar....seriously.

I had great fun with the concept of the "PPL" (privately-produced law)
justice system. At the encouragement of Harry Shapiro and other list
folks, I was the first to create an independent PPL, which I dubbed
"Mr. May's Greater Extropia." (You may see the reference to "Snow
Crash.") My PPL agreed to hear cases from other PPLs at the reasonable
rate of $100 an hour....$100 in real, U.S. currency. (This could not
argued against, as surely the Extropians could not argue for
wage-price controls!) This was received in good humor by Harry, at
least from his comments to me, and was not the source of my leaving.

It is true that Max More, the Extropian Maximalus, and I did exchange
some harsh words, mostly over Max's dislike of my pointing out some
disturbing parallels between Extropianism and certain religions. I
don't believe Max is a huckster, a la L. Ron Hubbard and
Dianetics/Scientology, but it is also the case that I found nothing
personally very interesting or satisfying in centering arguments
around ideas like "Dynamic Optimism" and "Unbounded Rationality" (I
never did learn the exact wording of the Five Principles, so bear with
me).

I remain on good terms with the many Extropian folks who I see at Bay
Area events and parties, and I even talked to Max at a party several
weeks ago. I wish them well, as our interests often coincide (and many
are on the Cypherpunks list), but I have some doubts that membership
will grow significantly--the type of bright, independent,
anarcho-capitalist folks drawn to discussions of the sort Extropians
like to engage in are seldom interested in dogma, even if the dogma is
Rational and Dynamically Optimistic. 

Whatever reasons I had for leaving the Extropians list are
complex...but I suspect you can all tell from my skeptical tone above
that my reasons had more to do with disenchantment with the general
tone of the group than it had to do with any kind of rejection of the
concept of codes-of-conduct (something I used to argue _for_, as Ray
and Harry can attest).

I just wanted to set the record straight. I know that Ray did not
single me out in his comments, but I think it's safe to say that my
departure was a high-profile event, due to my many postings to their
list, and so Ray's comments might be taken to apply to me. No false
modesty from me.

I support Ray's point about the value of mailing lists in creating the
kind of "private spaces" I've been talking about. A mailing list is
essentially just that, a "private space."

>    I think mailing lists do a much better job of filtering than usenet
>  where membership to a discussion group can not be moderated or 
>  limited. (it doesn't work in practice. it usually kills the group or
>  e-sociopaths just bypass the insecurity of the system) I like
>  AOL's "auditorium" model.


And I support Ray's point that we need both improved remailer features
_and_ some concept of digital postage. I hope Ray can pull this off.

--Tim May



-- 
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May         | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@netcom.com       | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409           | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA  | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."