At 09:19 PM 11/19/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
C-A-C-L's would let people die from thirst before interfering in a 'free market'. Others would say screw the market and give that man a drink.
No, a libertarian would say "screw anyone who'd initiate force against me to make me to do this" and then make his own decision.
2. redundant ('capitalist' and libertarian)
Not congruent.
Capitalism is a natural result of free people.
3. nonsensical --cryptography is a neutral technology with debatable social consequences
Technology is 'neutral' only within in a 'pure' context. The instant 'psychology' gets injected, as in 'how do I use this?', all bets are off. Technologies have consequences. The failure of most is in not realizing the only hope is to discover and distribute as fast as possible. Anything else leads to failure of the system.
So Jim suppose we just invented metals. You go debate its social consequences, I've got some forging to do.
4. one poster's label; and anyone can post here
More an observation of shared motive of a particular segment of the other posts (who self-apply these labels mind you).
More an explanation of signal to noise ratio for future historians.