December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Governing an information society - 1/4
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jason W Solinsky <solman(a)MIT.EDU>: > > . What is to be done about non-conformists to the rules > > (without contradicting the rules?) > > They are fined. If this doesn't work their communication priveliges are > curtailed and if this doesn't work they are banished. As I have noted > before, in an information economy this is an extreme punishment. Yes, I can imagine heated debates on the moralities of such cyberspatial death penalties. I like to believe that the Internet model of society and indeed 'government' will eventually be adopted in the mainstream. What does one really need a 'government' for? A central source of power, Max Weber's monopoly of legitimate violence, is surely not the only method of ensuring a degree of fairness and order in society. Especially not in one based primarily on knowledge - or information. What do real world governments do? Broadly, two things. 'Social upliftment' - welfare and development programmes; and 'law enforcement' - ensuring that people stick to what they've agreed upon (idealized: in theory citizens have agreed to the social contract present in the constitution and laws). There is no specific evidence to show that the task of social upliftment is best performed by those with the weapons to enforce laws. Indeed, where welfare is _really_ needed (and I'm not talking about a Swede on unemployment benefits) much of it comes even today from independent organizations. Bangladesh, for instance, has what is almost a parallel government of several hundred local and international agencies that run numerous development projects, funded largely by private monies. Grameen Bank, a cooperative started on the premise that poor village women need small ($100) loans but invariably pay back, has a minute loan failure rate and makes a decent profit, unlike numerous government projects the world over. Development, the primary justification for taxation, is probably better accomplished by people outside the government, who are likely to be more efficient and dedicated. And if they manage with private donations now, they are sure to flourish when there is no compulsory taxation. Most cultures encourage generousity and most people would be willing to invest small parts of their income in organizations that do social work, where they could have far more control as investors than they do currently as taxpayers. Continued... Rishab ps. food for thought: there are seven countries on this planet that allow the death penalty for crimes committed by minors: Libya, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the United States of America. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "Clean the air! clean the sky! wash the wind! rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in take stone from stone and wash them..." Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

1 0

Cypherpunk U
by Nick West 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- What are some of the better colleges/universities to study Computer/Network security at? I know MIT is a good one. Any others that aren't quite so hard to get in to that still offer quality programs? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM9Eu9MF7aWKjtgVVAQGQUAP+O1255PqXzWGixEcku+kOwxhSpiibilg5 GMnV/6KZ1uWLefyWhyclx0S8yogHhbDyaWs3jpJ32MNQk/hbpliotD3r7oJHgmux pCbv71pwBzPU0z1q5qtaBnU3kEuCQtnVVvYobSJWkcrVAnBMxQVIl4Pd8ccHGdmy kKvoKx5Z3YM= =B3mA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Nick West http://members.tripod.com/~NWest/index.html

6 5

Governing an information society - 2/4
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Another thing that governments do that is not quite the same 'social upliftment' as welfare - build roads, bridges and so on - is already done in many countries by private, profitable ventures with little loss to society. Law enforcement: there are instances where you break your contract, that form the basis of most crimes from non-payment to larceny to even theft, which can be seen as a violation of a social contract to 'pay for what you take'; then there are things which even the most radical would consider plain wrong, such as murder or rape. This distinction is partially acknowledged in the difference between civil and criminal cases. The former, 'civil' cases are best sorted out by an independent and trusted judiciary; a 'government' doesn't, or shouldn't, interfere. In the latter, 'criminal' cases, there may be a need for some sort of 'authorised violence' such as a police force. This is the only part of government that might necessarily require a universally accepted power. The alternative is the utopian, where people are (or are conditioned to be?) too 'good' to become murderers; or the dystopian (as in cyberpunk fiction, or the Wild West for that matter) ruled by the law of the jungle - might is right. Note that this differs from the present situation where while it is true that the power of authority rests in its right to violence, this is in theory approved of by the people - a sort of 'right is might'. Continued... Rishab ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "Clean the air! clean the sky! wash the wind! rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in take stone from stone and wash them..." Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

1 0

No Subject
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 16 Jul 1997 frissell(a)panix.com wrote: > What ever happened to "de minimus non curat lex." The social damage from a > misrated website is too trivial to be believed. Punishing it is like > executing you for farting. In some cases that may not be a bad idea :). But getting back to the original point, if I'm going to be subject to jail for mislabeling my pages (and how do you tell, given that some systems use a numeric rating? count the nipples and add the size of any erections?) then that would seem to be a good reason to move my Web site out of America. Idependent rating systems are a good thing, and we've talked about them here many times in the past (e.g. 'repuation markets'). A mandatory requirement for web authors to rate their own pages is a hideous idea which will simply move more of the Web overseas, helping to destroy the US economy. WebMonger

5 5

Governing an information society - 4/4
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Real crime on cyberspace? The analogy to violence of action, such as murder, is violence of data, the fabric of cyberspace. This may have many forms: belief or opinions, knowledge, information and data crime. Violence of belief (thoughtcrime) - while some people feel that to discuss rape is to perform it, and discussing crimes is subject to a range of conspiracy and riot-control laws worldwide, this really can't be a crime in any free society. Then there is the knowledge crime - theft of intellectual property. This is in my view the single biggest issue in an information economy, but it can be addressed by a combination of encryption technologies, to prevent 'unauthorised' access, and the decentralized, non-governmental civil system discussed previously.Intellectual property can in any case not be treated quite as land and bonds are, and there are practical and moral issues involved in just what it is, which I may talk about in the future. Information crime - 'unauthorised' access of other information such as mail, unreleased memoirs etc, is basically an issue of privacy and can only be practically addressed through technology. Data crime - 'cracking', 'phreaking' etc usually reflect a total lack of responsibility on the part of _administrators_. "Officer, I left my wallet on the kerb 10 minutes ago, and now it's gone!" Better security and greater awareness will prevent most of it. If you do happen to catch a cracker, go through the same old _civil_ system. It is not really practical for a central Thought Police to actually find data criminals, without huge and non-specific violations of privacy. And data criminals don't need to be put in jail, they are probably the most affected by 'cyberdeath' - disconnection, digicash accounts cancelled, reputations muddied. I wouldn't want to do that to _anyone_ actually ;^) A thread I started months ago ('Cyberspace is by nature crime free' / 'Crime and punishment in cyberspace') led to similar Tim May-ist conclusion - let the police (and the minimalist government) attend to murders in brickspace, we cybercitizens will look after ourselves. Concluded. Rishab ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "Clean the air! clean the sky! wash the wind! rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in take stone from stone and wash them..." Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

2 1

Governing an information society - 3/4
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Violence of action requires the protection and violence of action in return. Violence of belief requires the freedom to believe differently. It definitely should not require violence or protection of _action_ in return. Having dispensed with the role of traditional government in the area of social development and civil law :-} what remains is the need for a police force to tackle murders. If I'm murdered (or raped or have my arm minced or whatever), it is physically damaging. I suppose I'd say the same of my house being bombed. I need protection from such things, and the sort of socially accepted protection that won't lead to riots or the law of the jungle. Barricading myself, carrying a Kalashnikov and learning aikido is not enough, not for a civilized society. So I concede the existence of the police. (There is another reason - it is usually practical for the police to trace murderers or arsonists). In cyberspace, there is a 'social upliftment' role. Though initially paid for by various governments, there are a number of organizations that manage to distribute costs efficiently and provide huge service and infrastructure for low rates. There may also be 'civil' suits in cyberspace. Due to digitally signed, undeniable contracts, these should be reduced to only those that involve a breach of contract, rather than a suspicion of invalidity. 'Civil' cases can be sorted out by a cyberjudiciary, and punishment efficiently enforced by a society without any central control. While there have probably been no civil cases on the Net in the traditional sense, there have been situations where the power of distributed control was apparent. For instance, when Richard Depew's ARMM went out and cancelled anon posts on USENET, there was universal outrage. His punishment required no central 'law enforcer' - it was just the threat of posts from his site being cancelled that did it. And this would not have been possible without general, widespread agreement with the 'verdict' - as anyone not enforcing it would risk similar punishment from the large majority. Continued... Rishab ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "Clean the air! clean the sky! wash the wind! rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in take stone from stone and wash them..." Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

2 1

Jim Bell Docket 2
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We've put the latest court docket for Jim Bell at: http://jya.com/jimbell-dock2.htm As noted earlier, it shows that the case has been assigned to a new judge and the last entry is dated July 9 for filing "felony information" by the US Attorney. No listing of the alleged plea bargain.

1 0

Another Denning's view
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From Pat Farrell, quoting Peter Denning: "..... Now the strength of the country depends not only on its government but on its corporations. . . . . A new policy aligned with the new clearing would be for the National Security Agency to make its expertise available to the private sector, enabling markets to flourish in a worldwide information medium." ................................................................. ..... What an amazing difference between Dennings. What a great idea for the NSA were to become allies and start working for us, instead of for 'them'. The perception of it (NSA) would change in everyone's eyes; even pencil-toting nerds could learn to like them. Blanc

3 2

Jim Bell on Seattle TV
by Mike Duvos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

KING-TV, channel 5, here in Seattle just had a blurb about James Dalton Bell. 8 years was mentioned, as were obstruction and the use of false social security numbers. I didn't hear the whole thing clearly as I was doing something else at the time. Sentencing to follow at a later date. They showed a picture of a very rotund individual while the story was rolling. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ enoch(a)zipcon.com $ via Finger $ {Free Cypherpunk Political Prisoner Jim Bell}

1 0

Re: Voluntary Governments? (Oh, Poleece!)
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Some hidden, subliminal messages which were missed in the reply to thoughts about the concept of governance (delete if you don't find this exciting): > . Who or what is to be governed? i.e.: Is it a 'what' which needs to be governed, or is it a 'who'? Is it 'crime' which needs to be governed, or any and all of the members of that association who generally require regulation? To simply enter into an association with strangers for the purpose of being governed is a strange thing to agree to do; it's like an admission of personal deficiency ("SomeBody Stop Me!"). But of course, most people think that it will be 'others' who wil be governed, rather than themselves. > . What is inimical/destructive and to be regulated/prevented, > or what is sacred which is to be upheld? i.e.: Can the members of the association distinguish accurately between the good, the bad, and the merely ugly? In the U.S. it is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness which are to be upheld, but who can say that these are truly appreciated & successfully defended? The values are listed in the precious original documents, but the education and the behavior of the citizens contradicts them. > . Who is to do all the work of preventing or upholding > (how do they qualify for the job)? i.e.: What are the victims going to be doing while their values are being encroached upon, or ignored? If the job of self-defense is given up to someone else, their ability to distinguish 'criminal' behavior from otherwise innocent/ignorant mistakes, must be established - and who will be the best judge of this, besides oneself? There is a danger in that an individual could become intellectually flabby, their ability to be of practical use in their own regard atrophying from inactivity. And then who would know who is qualified to reason on the matter? They could be fooled; they could be led down to the river to leap in. > . What is to be done about non-conformists to the rules > (without contradicting the rules?) i.e.: People who ask for rules (there oughta be a law) are the ones most inclided to break them. Rules often substitute for active intelligence, for the need to think about what one is doing and the evaluation of the outcome. But it really becomes absurd to speak of non-conformism in a voluntary system. If it's voluntary, anybody who doesn't want to follow the rules can simply leave, they don't have to hang around waiting for the administration of a 'punishment' of any kind (anybody who stays doesn't have any self-esteem). The most important question was overlooked: . What makes you such an authority on government? i.e.: What makes someone think that it is alright to put any one person as an authority over the mind of another? Authority should be earned through admiration. It is Reality which should govern one's decisions, not the overshadowing or overwhelming of one's mental functions by another; it is what should be recognized as 'the' authority by which to regulate one's behavior. Blanc

1 0