Sue D. Nym

I think that the evidence is pretty strong that Sue isn't Larry.
She's another person completely, with a different posting style, a
moderate feminist and extreme leftist political stance, a willingness
(possibly, probably IMHO) to forward unsubstantiated libels (Ollie
North smuggling drugs?  How likely is that?), a great deal of
sensitivity to the feelings of others, and a beautiful capacity to find
symbolism.  I could be wrong about any or all of these, but they are
my impression on reading her posts, both here and from the new-age
religion group.

I suggest that the cypherpunks list has been dominated by a few people
to a great extent.  They're highly intelligent people, their ideas are
worth listening to, but they don't take well to being challenged.  I
think that if we are to maintain a rational view of reality, we must
listen to the views of people from outside.  The tone has been rather
paranoid IMHO much of the time.

My opinion is that the repressive government shit that several
prominent and articulate cypherpunks fear so greatly is unlikely, for
the simple reason that the government is in the process of communist
collapse.  If it takes on health-care as well as all of the things it
has taken on so far, it will die from the inside much faster.  I
predict within two or three decades, unless it becomes a police state.

Needless to say, I don't want to be living here when that happens.
But I know that the government that rises in its place will be
different from any government the world has ever seen before, simply
because the circumstances it will arise in will be so unique.

We must be open to the opinions of others.  We don't need to accept
them without reservation;  I'd like to do my best to make sure that
what happens here after the Feds die is positive, and assures privacy.
I want to avoid the police-state mentality, though, which permeates
the thinking of many cypherpunks.

Kragen

> I think that the evidence is pretty strong that Sue isn't Larry.

This isn't something that needs to be argued.  If "Sue" is Larry
and reveals this through his or her actions, so be it.  If he/she isn't,
or doesn't, that's great.  (I do have to wonder, though, who else
would remail messages with Detweiler's "Organization: CRAM" header.)

> I suggest that the cypherpunks list has been dominated by a few people
> to a great extent.

Actually, we're all T.C.May.

> I want to avoid the police-state mentality, though, which permeates
> the thinking of many cypherpunks.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by this?  I doubt many people on
the list think that a full-blown _1984_ is just around the corner.
Some of us are, however, not enamored of Clipper, Digital Telephony,
ITAR, a National I.D. Card, or the like.  I trust this does not
constitute a full-blown "police-state mentality".

> But I know that the government that rises in its place will be
> different from any government the world has ever seen before, simply
> because the circumstances it will arise in will be so unique.

Hmm.  I hope millenarianism works better now than it did the first
time around.

   Eli   ebrandt@hmc.edu

Eli Brandt:
> > I suggest that the cypherpunks list has been dominated by a few people
> > to a great extent.
> 
> Actually, we're all T.C.May.

(Ignoring Det-bait :) No, but I think we *agree* with T. C. May more
than can be explained by the kind of people who subscribe to the list.
I think we see the logic in his postings, and since he is usually
considerably better at argument than anyone on the list who disagrees
with him, we tend to believe him.

> > I want to avoid the police-state mentality, though, which permeates
> > the thinking of many cypherpunks.
> 
> Could you elaborate on what you mean by this?  I doubt many people on
> the list think that a full-blown _1984_ is just around the corner.
> Some of us are, however, not enamored of Clipper, Digital Telephony,
> ITAR, a National I.D. Card, or the like.  I trust this does not
> constitute a full-blown "police-state mentality".

What I mean by this is that there are too many people who think that
the above things will *matter*.  Clipper is flopping and will continue
to flop.  DT, in whatever form, will never be useful; the government
simply does not have the resources to closely watch the phone network.
If a singularity-producing AI is born, well, all bets may be off...
but then again, the AI might want a little privacy too.  ITAR is
dying, and we already have a National ID Card.  We have had one for
more than half a century.

But the government which supports these things is being pulled
gradually into the embrace of communism.  Inexorably, communism sucks
at the hearts of the American voters.  The decline of America's
current government is already irreversible.  Our duty, as human beings
at the scene of the crime, is to make its death as pleasant as
possible, and its rebirth as innocuous as possible.

> Hmm.  I hope millenarianism works better now than it did the first
> time around.

:) It's not millenarianism, Eli.  It's just confidence that in this
age, when information is exchanged in ways it never has been before,
the old forms of government and economy won't work anymore.

Kragen

> the above things will *matter*.  Clipper is flopping and will continue
> to flop.  DT, in whatever form, will never be useful; the government
> simply does not have the resources to closely watch the phone network.
> If a singularity-producing AI is born, well, all bets may be off...
> but then again, the AI might want a little privacy too.  ITAR is
> dying, and we already have a National ID Card.  We have had one for
> more than half a century.
>
On the issue of AI, the Dept. of Treasury has a AI project as White
Sands which is intended to watch real-time the monetary transactions
of the citizen-units real-time (quite a task if you ask me). It would
not be a stretch of the imagination to see such technology hooked into
a network of intelligent switches for real-time communications monitoring.
In most cases all the AI would need access to is the identity of the 
parties, not necessarily the entire contents of the communication.

As to the national ID card you refer to, is this the Social Security Card?
If so it is not, nor was it ever meant to be, a national ID card. The only
agencies which *require* access to it are the IRS and the SSA.

> But the government which supports these things is being pulled
> gradually into the embrace of communism.  Inexorably, communism sucks
> at the hearts of the American voters.  The decline of America's
> current government is already irreversible.  Our duty, as human beings
> at the scene of the crime, is to make its death as pleasant as
> possible, and its rebirth as innocuous as possible.
>
Seems to me we are looking at Socialism and not Communism as the trend of 
the day. Communism implies that we all work together in a 'commune' where all
is owned by all. Socialism however is the belief that the people can handle
small amounts of private ownership and responsibility but ultimately the 
power resides in the authorities. The situation really reminds me of the 
post-WWI conditions in Italy when Mussollini took over and instituted facism
as the order of the day. The only good thing one can say about that is that
the trains run on time.

> :) It's not millenarianism, Eli.  It's just confidence that in this
> age, when information is exchanged in ways it never has been before,
> the old forms of government and economy won't work anymore.
>
I do not believe this for a minute. Governments and economies are mitigated 
by psychology not technology. Technology is the means, not the goal. The      
information is what is important, not how it is transfered. While it is true
that the existing systems are having a hard time keeping up with the technology
this is due to beurocratic inertia to do it as it has been done in the past
more than any particular aspect of technology which prevents its use by any
particular party. If your thesis is correct then we have nothing to worry 
about and our 'meeting' here is a waste of our time, we should be out pushing
technology even harder and not worrying about government and its policies 
in any way. I get the impressio that you feel the world is driven by technology
and I hold that people always have and always will drive the world and how
it turns out. Technology is a means to an end, not an end unto itself.

Take care all.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Kragen Sittler writes:

> Clipper is flopping and will continue
> to flop.  DT, in whatever form, will never be useful; the government
> simply does not have the resources to closely watch the phone network.

The fact that DT allows real-time monitoring of conversations is secondary;
the interesting effect is that it creates (to steal from .. Burroughs?)
"the policeman inside", who *does* watch us at every moment. Surveillance
can cause the subject to become his/her own watcher, an autonomous unit of
self-suppression. This is the real danger of Clipper and DT.
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.5

iQCVAgUBLiwniH3YhjZY3fMNAQFZrgP8CDQDfwteIUkPGEbvUNvBbDQ+N11IFHrC
UbOrLnTDGGYRuyrfrE66k7uKC/E3Pnr8ByfeioQSl98XVtNxBqGYrvRs/MoqZtoC
V6K6LiDcmZ6TAsTXXsnuNvjdSBJVONH0yPIhiQrsLPK9XvlwyTmVmHtat4htu/Sf
nMnHeYUVz3k=
=fxC5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----