please do not fill my mailbox with argument in the form `criminal behavior [y] exists or is widespread, therefore similar practice [x] is ok' please do not say `forgeries are hard to prevent, therefore no one should even attempt it' please do not say `the only systems for identity tracking amount to government oppression' please do not talk about some depraved person with multiple personality disorder as a way of describing Utopia. most of all, do not pollute the Constitution with your lies:
The freedom to communicate in any way whatsoever, including "pseudospoofing", is a Constitutional guarantee and part of the foundation of this society.
the Constitution specifically prohibits `high treason'. Or are we now against the Constitution? It's hard to keep track lately. [Pseudospoofing]
This is a fundemental paradigm shift that you have not made yet. It is one that few have. If anything, it is shared conceptual memes such as this subject of identity in a world without substance that is the true cypherpunk cause.
oh, what depravity and moral blackness. Evil promoted as `a fundamental paradigm shift', a `conceptual meme'. Helleluja. many cypherpunks have so utterly deluded themselves, they believe they have invented a new kind of society that is completely free of accountability, while they leech the fruits of one where that accountability was hard-won by many sacrifices of our forefathers. I urge you to live in your `society'. You will get the chance, I assure you! `actions have consequences, even in cypherspace.' * * * Let me ask a question of the `cypherpunks' opposed to identity tracking in any form. A major aspect of catching vicious criminals is being able to link up their multiple crimes. It is absolutely essential for crimefighting. I could point to some examples using credit scams or drug dealing or whatever, but the hard core Cypherpunks would probably just grin with evil pleasure. So-- An excellent case is Ted Bundy. Ted Bundy would be the Cypherpunk Poster Boy for Pseudospoofing. `Medusa' is correct in saying our new societies allow and encourage this kind of anonymity. He slipped and danced between cities and murdered young women in the most grisly and heinous fashions. He lied at *every* stage of the way, perhaps even at the end when he blamed his utter depravity on exposure to pornography. Part of the difficulty in catching him in the end was his total mastery of the techniques that have a striking similarity to what the Cypherpunks promote -- hidden credit, deception, disguise, impersonation, etc. He was a man who was so treacherous, he would truly not `stop at anything'. I'm sure he weaved such a majestic and convoluted `web of lies,' PRZ & the Cypherpunks would be proud. In the end, one of the final critical incriminating pieces of evidence used in court to convict him, and prevent further murders, was the bite marks he had savagely embedded in the buttocks of one of his victims, which matched his own jaw. It took something like 4 police to hold him down to make the cast, he squirmed and writhed with such force and desperation. Cypherpunks, look at yourselves in the mirror. See what you are becoming and promoting. Look at the logical extent of your ideas. Could *any* society truly function without any identity or accountability whatsoever? The cypherpunk `agenda' has become so closely indistinguishable with raw criminality and evil it horrifies me. Oh, how it nauseates me. Perhaps many of you will fill my mailbox with new letters defending Ted Bundy and asserting that the only problem was that he didn't `spawn' a new set of teeth. Perhaps you look forward to the day you can spawn some of your own Ted Bundys, and be so clever you'd *never* be caught. Perhaps you already have the young lady victims in mind. The ones that betrayed you by thinking you were too strange too date, huh? Perhaps the only problem was that these young ladies are just too damn *trusting*? `that which cannot be enforced should not be prohibited'. Like murder? * * * Another question for all the bastard apologists and moral relativists. Are you fundamentally opposed to me having the choice of screening phantom identities in my personal mailbox? Many of your arguments suggest that not only do you wish to make sure you can be anonymous, but you wish to ensure that other people must support and sponsor your anonymity. As for screening, very soon these capabilities will probably exist, based on birth certificate databases etc. that are accessable over the internet. Oh, my kingdom for this capability. But you will infect and poison these databases with your forgeries and lies, won't you? That is the fundamental cypherpunk agenda: wherever accountability or identity is in place, do everything possible to *evade* and *sabotage* it. Not only should there be *passive* anonymity, but there should also be *active* deception. You not only want to swing your fist, you want to batter my face -- with a phantom bludgeon. I'll never know what hit me! Oh, what utter joy! To not only be evil, but to get away with it! You hate Democracy and `egalitarianism' not because they are unfair, but because they are the closest thing to honesty and fairness we humans have ever discovered, and in them *you* would *lose*, because the `perverted majority' of society is *not* in favor of being murdered and raped without consequence. And you will tear and wreck those fragile developing efforts and schemes for identification and accountability, no matter how basic or feeble, with the most insidious treachery. You will subscribe to the mailing lists where the development is going on, you will infiltrate the development groups, you will assault the honest, polite, and courteous ladies and gentlemen with poisonous and acidic email and posts, you will twist your knife into the baby in the crib, and you will stick dynamite sticks up the nostrils of anyone who says, `well, gosh, guys, just hold on a minute here!' ... Oh, how you are thriving on the Internet. Either the parasite or the host will die soon, of at least that I am sure. I pray to God that Cyberspace survives. P.S. Ask all your revered fiction authors like Gibson and Sterling et.al. what they would think of your grotesque perversions. Be sure to explain it in *your* terms of `true and pure anonymity.' `a fundamental paradigm shift? sure, sounds great! right out of one of my own stories.'