From: IN%"llurch@networking.stanford.edu" "Rich Graves" 24-MAY-1996 04:18:17.16
I recognize that criminalizing the free flow of information is like trying to stick your finger in a dike, but every little bit has an effect. In this case, I'd call it a positive effect.
That's funny, most people would call the German action to censor pro-nazi information a criminalization of the free flow of information with a positive effect.
I was certainly disappointed to hear a couple of cypherpunks the other day discussing for-profit offshore data havens full of personal information that is illegal to collect in the US as a business opportunity *they* were interested in pursuing. I just can't see myself doing that, for anybody. Gubmint or private, doesn't matter.
Why, pray tell, _should_ someone be able to conceal that they declared bankrupcy - e.g., ran out on their debtors that they had freely contracted to repay - more than 7 years ago? Should prison terms to theft be limited to 7 years? Moreover, there are significant negative economic impacts for criminalizing the possession of such information. The above is one instance; another, which is even more of interest to me due to my profession, is that of genetic information and insurance. Genetic screening for insurance purposes decreases the risk to an insurance company. It is therefore possible to issue insurance with less of a pool backing it up (for claims in insurance, for bad debt in the case of credit). This increases the number of businesses who can get into a given market, which will decrease prices for insurance since the current insurance business is quite ogliopolistic. Thus, for the average individual the availablility of such information is beneficial. I would personally be interested in setting up some such business in the future, specifically one with a genetic screening lab. While I would not wish to devote my entire time to it, I would be quite willing to help with setup and updating it - if paid a fee, of course. -Allen