Re: [SCARE]: "If you only knew what we know..."

On 27 May 96 at 0:22, Subir Grewal wrote:

> Real world anonymity is difficult to buy, and actions such as murder
> (or what you'd like to call "self-defense") take place in the real
> world.

But that is the principle by which AP operates.  That *is* the whole 
point that seems to miss you: encryption technologies makes that 
perfectly feasible.  I agree that it is a novelty in the history of 
humankind...

> I'd expect a realization of AP to promote a great backlash from a
> variety of quarters.  Such methods, besides being unethical, are
> probably going to be used as fodder to infringe the liberties of
> others.

During the transition period, definitely.

>In other words, a witch-hunt will result, AP advocates
> marginalized (if they are discovered).  My original reservations, on
> the grounds of unjust means still stand, maybe we can return to this
> discussion sometime later.

Why, is it becoming too hot?  Are you tempted to send the cops at Jim 
Bell's place?


> "Religious" fanatics have great appeal, I don't think even AP will
> make them "go away", the odds are they'll become martyrs.  And we
> know where that takes us.

Against *whom* will they retaliate?  And more down to earth, I bet
that in the advent of AP becoming operationnal, their leaders will
go down even faster than our own.


> I wasn't talking about the legal system in an AP world, but the idea
> that AP is justice in some sense.

"In a competition between a pickpocket and a murderer, hte murderer 
always win"
		-Ayn Rand

> Incidentally, a purely civil law
> court is what I'd like as well, and competing courts and arbitration
> systems sound good to me.

Since you said yourself that the actual govt will *never* relinquish 
power, I find that statement a bit of a contradiction.


JFA
PLEASE NOTE: THIS POST DOES NOT MEAN THAT I ENDORSE MR. BELL'S
SYSTEM.  MY RATIONNAL CONCLUSIONS ABOUT IT'S INTERNAL MECHANICS
AND IT'S INTRINSIC LOGICS DOES NOT MEAN THAT I LIKE NOR ENDORSE
THE SYSTEM. I SIMPLY CONCLUDED THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PREVENT
THE SYSTEM FROM BEING IMPLEMENTED.  IMO, IT IS UNAVOIDABLE.

 DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee  
 Limoges porcelain, Silverware and mouth blown crystal glasses

 JFA Technologies, R&D consultants.
 Physists, technologists and engineers.

 PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon
 ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891

On Mon, 27 May 1996, Jean-Francois Avon wrote:

:Since you said yourself that the actual govt will *never* relinquish
:power, I find that statement a bit of a contradiction.

Asking someone to "relinquish" is not the only manner in which a change is
effected.  BTW, I have no problem with your proposals for voluntary
insurance, health etc. schemes.  In fact a minimalist state assumes all of
that.  You might want to read up on what classical liberalism is andd what
a minimalist state implies before you spout Rand.

hostmaster@trill-home.com * Symbiant test coaching * Blue-Ribbon * Lynx 2.5
A fool must now and then be right by chance.