At 11:18 AM 9/8/96, James A. Donald wrote:
At 10:49 AM 9/5/96 -0700, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
I have seen it repeated here often that somehow anonymity is some kind of a "right" that one should have in all kinds of different & important transactions, not merely on "cyberspace debate societies". I see here frequently the implication that *private*entities* that want to enforce identity in their own transactions are somehow implementing a corrupt, orwellian system.
We hold that private entities have the right to attempt to impose corrupt orwellian systems provided they do not do it at gunpoint, but we doubt that they will succeed without guns.
An overstatement which diminishes the power of your arguments. Namely, many, many corporations have Orwellian surveillance systems and policies which would be unacceptable if imposed by a government. No guns are involved, only the considerations of employment, paychecks, and the like. Likewise, many private schools have such systems. Likewise, no guns are involved. And so on. (Naturally, I am not criticizing these voluntarily-entered-into arrangements, merely rebutting the point that people will generally not put up with Orwellian schemes unless threatened with guns.) --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, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."