At 1:41 AM 9/2/96, Arun Mehta wrote:
At 10:35 31/08/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
If discussions of Lee Kwan Yew's dynasty are considered illegal, then Singaporans will have to choose not to carry the various newsgroups into which *I* post such messages!
How long do you propose to carry on doing that? Soon, the others in the newsgroups will be asking you very impolitely to stop, just as you would if someone kept on and on posting such stuff to cypherpunks.
Actually, we already have several examples of how this worked, including some cases I was directly involved in. During the Teale-Homulka trial in Canada, many of us (me, too) posted numerous articles about it to the various *.canada newsgroups, such as soc.culture.canada. Canada had the choice of instructing all ISPs to halt the *.canada newsgroups. There were no real complaints that I recall about messages being "off-topic," as they clearly were very much on-topic. (Not that a few complaints have ever stopped me. While I don't spam newsgroups with auto-generated spam, I figure any article I take the time to actually write and that deals with the newsgroup involved, by my own standards, is fair game. My ISP can cancel my account if he feels I have spammed newsgroups in some way.) My proposal is not to post anti-Singapore screeds to comp.lang.java or the like, but to post them to various groups Singaporans and their neighbors might read. If Singapore wishes to disconnect itself from soc.culture.singapore, this is there choice. Then, the attack can spread to various other groups Singaporans might want to read.... (I call this a _good_ use of "info-terrorism.") ...
True, but Usenet only functions because it works most of the time. To the extent we subvert this consensus, we damage Usenet, make it less useful. It shouldn't happen that in trying to save or spread Usenet, we have to destroy it...
Posting the Homulka stuff did not kill the Usenet. Posting the autopsy photos of Nicole Brown Simpson did not kill the Usenet. Posting the innards of RSA Data Security algorithms did not kill the Usenet. If Canker and Sludgewell spam cannot kill the Usenet, if "Make Money Fast" noise cannot kill the Usenet, and if "Babes will fuck 4 U" posts cannot kill the Usenet, then surely some informative posts about the fascist Yew posted to various newsgroups of relevance to Singaporans and Asians will not kill the Usenet!
And _never_ has it involved determinations of "inappropriate" by _governments_!
There I'm with you -- I'm merely suggesting that you find a way to protest Singapore's actions in a manner that would be less objectionable to most Internet users, in Singapore and outside.
Why? What is "objectionable" about exposing the truth about Lee Kwan Yew, his feeble son, and their dynasty? What is "objectionable" about teaching them how to use Web proxies, remailers, and other tools of liberty? If the citizens find this stuff objectionable, they can simply not read the stuff! As with books, movies, and magazines. What could be more natural than this? But of course it is the _rulers_ of these Asian kingdoms and satrapies which want the distribution of certain thoughts controlled and denied to their serfs and citizen-units. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."