Yes, we have been thinking about this sort of thing (protecting against sabotage/abuse/etc). Unfortunately, we haven't come up with any brilliant ideas. I'm attaching a post of only a few days ago that addresses the future of the cpunks remailers. I think it answers a lot of your points.
It is interesting, thank you. I really drool over anything by the Big Macs.
You still didn't answer my point about other modes. Is the postman responsible when a threatening letter arrives in your mailbox? No. Is AT&T responsible when a bomb threat is 'anonymously' phoned in? No. If the phone company did not exist, perhaps terrorists would have to drop threats in person. Does this mean that the phone company should be outlawed, because it allows abuse that would otherwise not exist?
I will answer your questions. YES. The postmaster and the mail office and AT&T are RESPONSIBLE for PROVIDING ALL INFORMATION THAT EXISTS when some illegal communication has been detected. That is, if someone has been sending violent death threats, these communications services are RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION. Sometimes no such information exists because of the *inherent infrastructure*. E.g. with mail, it is possible to send an anonymous letter. E.g. with phones, it is possible to make anonymous telephone calls. Instances of my claims are common. The post office may be contacted by law enforcement officials attempting to track the origination of mail. The telephone company may be subpoenaed to provide information on calls.
No, because the functionality of the phone system is such that its plusses are greater than the abuses it makes possible. Such is the case with the remailer system.
You completely neglect the subject of *design*. Whoever *designs* these systems *chooses* whether traceability is inherent to the design. And a sense of morality and ethics is central to this decision. A communication system is not simply something that Exists and must be Tolerated. A system is something that is *designed* to meet *criteria*. And sometimes the criteria is, how do we prevent *illegal* uses? Mr. Remailer Operator, YOU CHOOSE. are there ILLEGAL USES OF THE REMAILERS, like HARASSMENT, BOXXIAN DEATH THREATS, LIBEL? or are there NONE? Tell me what world I live in. It is so confusing for me when you take contradictory positions. Cypherpunks, a year ago, and for many months, you essentially said to me: there is nothing illegal in ASCII text alone. But you have screeched and shrieked at me and my postmaster and anyone who will listen to you that anything *I* write is a violent death threat, harassment, a libelous post that is ILLEGAL and that I should be CENSORED. one person told my postmaster that it was ok for me to post as long as what I said was TRUE. What if I say, cyberanarchists are slime? Is that true? Is that Satire? Are the Cypherpunks the new Truth Police. Oh, what ridiculously funny hypocrites you all are. imagine that a certain string of letters is illegal! That it should cause the author to be *censored*! *even* if he used a remailer! What a shocking concept! I am deliberately evading the question of whether libel, death threats, etc. *exist*, that is, *illegal* postings. Our legal system certainly seems to think so-- death threats are illegal in the postal mail. Surprise! How many of you knew that? And recall that there are *limits* on free speech-- you cannot advocate violence, or attempt to instigate a riot legally, for example. Could someone be so kind as to post the law? I think cyberspace will change some of these boundaries in a significant way. But as long as You, Cypherpunks, say that Libel and Death Threats and Illegal ASCII Text Exists and should be Banned, I think I will believe you, because you do have some experiences in the area, and you seem to have started to grasp the consequences of your decisions, and even the idea that your *decisions* have *consequences*.