Re: May's Banal Rant

I don't understand this.  Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out
there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other
than the ACLU itself.  And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole
(although the ACLU is quite clued-up too).  It is true that EPIC is not
absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give
even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good.

Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list.  Instead,
canabalism.   Weird.  Very weird.

That does it.  When I get back to the US, I'm sending EPIC a donation.
-- 
Michael Froomkin                  until 6/11: michael@lawprof.demon.co.uk
Associate Professor of Law                        Various Points, England
froomkin@law.miami.edu <-- this will still find me, eventually
PO Box 248087 Coral Gables, FL 33124-8087 "Rain in parts, then dry" --BBC
http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin

> I don't understand this.  Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out
> there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other
> than the ACLU itself.  And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole
> (although the ACLU is quite clued-up too).  It is true that EPIC is not
> absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give
> even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good.

I agree EPIC has been one of the better groups, but I personally feel 
none of them can ever do any good: They all sell out in the name of 
compromise.

Also, they seem to have people within them that simply do not understand 
what they are talking about, for example, Marc yesterday commented that 
he would support a law to ban private companies asking for SSNs for 
anything other than tax purposes, this is a clear misunderstanding of the 
nature of private companies and private property.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

At 4:14 AM -0700 6/2/97, Michael Froomkin wrote:
>I don't understand this.  Of all the alphabet soup privacy groups out
>there, EPIC is the one I consider most pro-privacy and anonymity other
>than the ACLU itself.  And EPIC knows the tech better, on the whole
>(although the ACLU is quite clued-up too).  It is true that EPIC is not
>absolutist on SAFE -- and I'm not quite sure that they are right to give
>even the inch they gave to get a mile -- but they're awfully good.
>
>Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list.  Instead,
>canabalism.   Weird.  Very weird.
>
>That does it.  When I get back to the US, I'm sending EPIC a donation.

Cannibalism? You overstate the level of crititcism here.

Granted, my initial thread title, "Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy," was
provocative...deliberately so. Provocative titles get attention (yes, I
congratulate Rotenberg on choosing the current thread title!).

When a leading privacy spokesman makes soothing noises on CNN about the
need to control spam by looking into how spammers gather their information,
and when CDT, EPIC, etc., have still not withdrawn their support for SAFE
despite the "use a cipher, go to prison" language, they deserve our
criticism. (In fact, CDT's latest press release on the status of SAFE makes
not a single mention of the criminalization of crypto language.)

EPIC is not being singled out for especially harsh criticism, at least not
by me. I would reserve worse criticism for CDT. (Yes, I said that EFF is
fucked up. So sue me. Fact is, EFF is a shadow of its former self, and is
missing in action on this and most other leglislative debates. Yes, I was
once a dues-paying member of the EFF, back when they were active. At least
in legislative areas, that is. All of the alphabet soupers are doing nice
work on court cases, e.g., CDA, Bernstein, etc., but the focus of the
discussion here is on SAFE and the Internet regulation proposals, not on
their lawyers.)

Frankly, we've got the alphabet soup of privacy orgs in D.C. working on
various compromises, and almost no strong voices in opposition. Or at least
the strong voices in opposition are not being quoted. Certainly neither
Cato nor the Libertarian Party are being heard widely on the SAFE and
anti-spam issues.

(I attribute this at least partly to lack of presence in D.C., lack of a
machine to crank out press releases, lack of shmoozing with the reporters.
A reporter asked me in e-mail for a comment on SAFE; she wanted to know who
I was and what my affiliation was. I told her I had no affiliation, that I
was just a guy out in Calfornia. She may have been expecting "Policy
Director, Center for Cyberspatial Liberty Studies," or somesuch. She never
got back to me. I surmise journalists and others are hung up on
officious-sounding titles, which is why every lobbyist in D.C. is either a
Policy Director or a President of something.)

In my article/rant last night I outlined why these legislative juggernauts
are rolling across America. I regret that EPIC, EFF, CDT, etc., are not
doing more to oppose them.

For my part, I'll donate to Bell's defense fund long before I'll donate to
one of the alphabet soup.

--Tim May


There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

At 12:14 PM 6/2/97 BST, Michael Froomkin wrote:
>Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list.   Instead,
>canabalism.   Weird.  Very weird.

Michael,

You need to realize that Cypherpunks transitionally has been about the *elimination* of all governments. Cypherpunks' goal is called crypto-anarchy for a reason. In fact, for Cypherpunks cryptography is simply an exceptionally effective tool to achieve anarchy. The governments share the belief that wide spread use of crypto will possibly lead to anarchy, which is why they attempt to limit its use. The rest is smoke and mirrors and statements by people that fail to understand that the whole crypto issue is about anarchy and not about math.

Anarchy can not be achieved by negotiations or cooperation with any branch of government. Neither can crypto-anarchy be achieved by nuking DC.

I certainly can understand the reasons that would lead a person to start
thinking that "something is better than nothing" or "the bastards need to receive the punishment they so richly deserve". Neither view will help to further crypto-anarchy in any meaningful way.

Have fun,

--Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at       http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm

> Anarchy can not be achieved by negotiations or cooperation with any
> branch of government. 

Very succintly put, and straight to the point. Even minarchism could not 
be achieved by compromising or negotiating with the current system.


> Neither can crypto-anarchy be achieved by nuking
> DC.

This is not so certain, crypto-anarchy would of course be achieved if 
anarchy in general were achieved, this could occur if strong action were 
taken such as nuking DC. I believe more selective systems such as AP will 
eventually cause the downfall of government, and will do so in a much 
more ethical and discrimatory manner.

> thinking that "something is better than nothing" or "the bastards need to
> receive the punishment they so richly deserve". Neither view will help to
> further crypto-anarchy in any meaningful way.

I don`t believe they are at all comparable statements, the first is a cop 
out, the second simply carries the discussion to its logical conclusion, 
that agressors must be punished and agressive acts must be prevented.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

At 07:17 PM 6/3/97 +0000, Paul Bradley wrote:
>This is not so certain, crypto-anarchy would of course be achieved if 
>anarchy in general were achieved, this could occur if strong action were 
>taken such as nuking DC.

I sincerely doubt that nuking DC would lead to anarchy. A draconian police
state with travel permits and bomb sniffers in every bus perhaps, but
anarchy? Very unlikely.


--Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

  Put a stake through the heart of DES! Join the quest at
  http://www.frii.com/~rcv/deschall.htm

One other point about EPIC's role in the crypto debates -
we've done very little in the legislative realm other
than to argue for relaxation of crypto controls,
oppose DT, DT funding, and criminalization of crypto.
You want to find the folks cutting the deals, look
elsewhere.

Most of our work has been Freedom of Information Act
litigation, political organizing, and public education.
Among other things, we were the folks who got out most
of the documents about Clipper, DT, and even the DSS.

We've also organized political campaigns in the US
against Clipper, in Paris against TTP, and two
weeks ago in London against the DTI proposal.

See, another problem with the Libertarian view of the world is
you can't accept the idea that an organization in Washington,
DC does real government oversight or political advovacy. It
doesn't fit with your notecard-sized description of the world.

Free speech is wasted on closed minds.

Marc.

> One other point about EPIC's role in the crypto debates -
> we've done very little in the legislative realm other
> than to argue for relaxation of crypto controls,
> oppose DT, DT funding, and criminalization of crypto.
> You want to find the folks cutting the deals, look
> elsewhere.

Behind the scenes for example?

> against Clipper, in Paris against TTP, and two
> weeks ago in London against the DTI proposal.

No thanks, we don`t want your "help". Of course you are free to act as 
you like, but your co-operation with the criminal scum that rule us shows 
you as what you are.

> See, another problem with the Libertarian view of the world is
> you can't accept the idea that an organization in Washington,
> DC does real government oversight or political advovacy. It
> doesn't fit with your notecard-sized description of the world.

My view of the world is wider than your view up the ass of Washington 
poloticians when you are licking your way to a deal.

> Free speech is wasted on closed minds.

My time is wasted on you...

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

On Mon, Jun 02, 1997 at 11:04:50AM -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
>At 12:14 PM 6/2/97 BST, Michael Froomkin wrote:
> >Rotenburg should be a near-hero to most readers of this list.  Instead,
> >canabalism.   Weird.  Very weird.
>  Michael,
>  You need to realize that Cypherpunks transitionally has been about the

You must mean "traditionally", right?

>*elimination* of all governments. Cypherpunks' goal is called
>crypto-anarchy for a reason. In fact, for Cypherpunks cryptography is
>simply an exceptionally effective tool to achieve anarchy. The
>governments share the belief that wide spread use of crypto will possibly
>lead to anarchy, which is why they attempt to limit its use. The rest is
>smoke and mirrors and statements by people that fail to understand that
>the whole crypto issue is about anarchy and not about math.

I don't know about governments in general, but I don't think the US
government is seriously concerned that cryptography will lead to
"anarchy".  Their concerns about cryptography are much narrower, about
how cryptography can aid criminals, help people avoid taxes, etc. 
These government concerns don't sum to anything even close to anarchy,
either in the traditional literary sense or the obscure technical
sense preferred on this list.

>  Anarchy can not be achieved by negotiations or cooperation with any
>branch of government. Neither can crypto-anarchy be achieved by nuking
>DC.
>  I certainly can understand the reasons that
>would lead a person to start
> thinking that "something is better than nothing" or "the bastards need to
>receive the punishment they so richly deserve". Neither view will help to
>further crypto-anarchy in any meaningful way.

Crypto-anarchy is like communism -- great in theory, impossible in
practice.

>  Have fun,

You too :-)

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

> Crypto-anarchy is like communism -- great in theory, impossible in
> practice.

What "Communism" ?

Bolshevik-ism perpetrates heirarchies as a design principle.

This is obviously some new definition of the word "great" that I have 
been previously unaquainted with.

Peter Nicol
Global Media Magnet
nicol@iap.net.au
019 111 943

"Nonlinear models differ form linear ones in a number of ways.  
Rather than trying to figure out all the chains of causality, 
the modeler looks for nodes where feedback loops join and tries 
to capture as many of the important loops as possible in the 
system's "picture."  Rather than shaping the model to make a 
forecast about future events or to exercise some central 
control, the nonlinear modeller is content to perturb 
the model, trying out different variations in order to 
learn about the system's critical points and its homeostasis 
(resitance to change).  The modeler is not seeking to 
control the complex system by quantifying it and mastering 
its causality; she wants to increase her "intuitions" 
about how the system works so she can interact with 
it more harmoniously."