At 03:27 PM 7/20/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote:
Why not consider what the consequences will be? Do you seriously believe that this will make the government stop enforcing ITAR?
Yes: Widespread politically motivated disobedience forces the state to either demonize the disobedient, (as with drug users) or give up enforcement. This is a standard and effective method of forcing the repeal of laws, a method which has had a long record of success for several hundred years. The states cohesion derives from its legitimacy, and threats to legitimacy and cohesion are treated very seriously by government officials. Threatening the states legitimacy is arguably more effective in influencing government behavior than blowing up federal office buildings. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
James A. Donald wrote:
At 03:27 PM 7/20/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote:
Why not consider what the consequences will be? Do you seriously believe that this will make the government stop enforcing ITAR?
Yes:
Widespread politically motivated disobedience forces the state to either demonize the disobedient, (as with drug users) or give up enforcement. This is a standard and effective method of forcing the repeal of laws, a method which has had a long record of success for several hundred years.
A handful of cyperpunks hardly constitutes "widespread polititcally motivated disobedience". In any case, the demonization has already begun; they point their fingers at the four horsemen of the internet at every oportunity. What I object to is anonymous activists who perform acts at no risk to themselves which make it harder for those of us who are trying to bring strong crypto to everyone.
The states cohesion derives from its legitimacy, and threats to legitimacy and cohesion are treated very seriously by government officials.
Threatening the states legitimacy is arguably more effective in influencing government behavior than blowing up federal office buildings.
The first step is to create at least a strong minority. A handful of cypherpunks can be largely ignored. We have to get the general public using and educated about strong crypto before civil disobedience will mean anything. -- You should only break rules of style if you can | Tom Weinstein coherently explain what you gain by so doing. | tomw@netscape.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, Tom Weinstein wrote:
What I object to is anonymous activists who perform acts at no risk to themselves which make it harder for those of us who are trying to bring strong crypto to everyone.
Personally, I think it was a good idea for the American Colonists to shoot at the British from behind rocks and trees. As Tom pointed out in his post, there are relatively few Cypherpunks. We all do what we can, in whatever way best suits are temprament, talents and acceptible risk level. There is no single tao; there are many paths. For Netscape, dialog and negotiations may be the best way to promote privacy, for Zimmermann, it was guerilla programming, for others it might be high-tech monkey-wrenching. To each his own. As far as I can see, they are all trying to bring strong crypto to everyone. S a n d y P.S. I want to make it clear that I have the greatest respect for Tom and Netscape's contributions in support of strong crypto. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sandy Sandfort wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, Tom Weinstein wrote:
What I object to is anonymous activists who perform acts at no risk to themselves which make it harder for those of us who are trying to bring strong crypto to everyone.
Personally, I think it was a good idea for the American Colonists to shoot at the British from behind rocks and trees. As Tom pointed out in his post, there are relatively few Cypherpunks. We all do what we can, in whatever way best suits are temprament, talents and acceptible risk level. There is no single tao; there are many paths. For Netscape, dialog and negotiations may be the best way to promote privacy, for Zimmermann, it was guerilla programming, for others it might be high-tech monkey-wrenching. To each his own. As far as I can see, they are all trying to bring strong crypto to everyone.
I agree with you 100%. Note that while the American Colonists were shooting at the British, they didn't take their friends and pin them to trees as decoys. -- You should only break rules of style if you can | Tom Weinstein coherently explain what you gain by so doing. | tomw@netscape.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, Tom Weinstein wrote:
I agree with you 100%. Note that while the American Colonists were shooting at the British, they didn't take their friends and pin them to trees as decoys.
I think the analogy breaks down here. No one is using anyone else as a decoy. Those of us who are activists for strong crypto, do so of our own free will. Nobody is forcing us to stand up and draw fire. Anyway, I don't think our cypher-snipers are going to stop, just because we ask them to. So it's a moot issue. If you can't take the heat... S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At 7:54 PM -0700 7/21/96, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
Personally, I think it was a good idea for the American Colonists to shoot at the British from behind rocks and trees. As Tom pointed out in his post, there are relatively few Cypherpunks. We all do what we can, in whatever way best suits are temprament, talents and acceptible risk level. There is no single tao; there are many paths. For Netscape, dialog and negotiations may be the best way to promote privacy, for Zimmermann, it was guerilla programming, for others it might be high-tech monkey-wrenching. To each his own. As far as I can see, they are all trying to bring strong crypto to everyone.
If monkeywrenchers allege that they are trying to "help" us, they are lying. Netscape is bringing strong crypto to most US people. Monkeywrenchers are saying 'if everyone can't have it, nobody can' if they monkey-wrench Netscape's net downloading permission from the government. Since it's pretty unlikely their monkeywrenching will result in the repeal of ITAR, they are little different from the spoiled brats who, when told they can't keep another child's candy, throw it in the dirt and stamp on it so nobody can have it. I read Tim May's suggestions, and while he is sincere and trying to be helpful, I use strong language above because it's time we called things for what they are instead of politely pussyfooting around them. Monkeywrenchers are no friends of Cypherpunks. They are the enemy, as surely as is mandatory key escrow in the US. David
DS
I read Tim May's suggestions, and while he is sincere and trying to be helpful, I use strong language above because it's time we called things for what they are instead of politely pussyfooting around them. Monkeywrenchers are no friends of Cypherpunks. They are the enemy, as surely as is mandatory key escrow in the US.
wow, after only about a week DS has suddenly grasped the Tao of Cypherpunk and discovered the mysterious and elusive distinction of Those That Are and Those That Are Not. I'm really impressed. truly only a great master could accomplish such a feat in such a short time. as long as I have been around here, even I do not have such confidence, so I bow down to my superior <g> David suggests that Netscape will be royally screwed if the gov't cracks down on them because of "monkeywrenchers". but quite the opposite is possible. as TCM fondly points out, sometimes you win by losing and lose by winning (not necessarily in those words). by creating a very large, glaring, and visceral public spectacle of the government cracking down on crypto, the resulting outcry could be absolutely enormous and resonate throughout the entire population. it would be a vivid portrayal of what the government has been doing quietly and secretly for decades, and perhaps the public might finally understand what is going on. before on this list I have advocated that we try to bait the government into confiscating crypto at a border, or stopping a truck full of microsoft products with "military grade crypto" at the border or something-- filming the customs agents with guns raised and have a voiceover "what's in the truck? not submachine guns. not missles. but computer disks. and the government feels they are every bit as deadly". p.s. personally I think "monkeywrenching" does have its uses at times <g>
Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
by creating a very large, glaring, and visceral public spectacle of the government cracking down on crypto, the resulting outcry could be absolutely enormous and resonate throughout the entire population. it would be a vivid portrayal of what the government has been doing quietly and secretly for decades, and perhaps the public might finally understand what is going on.
I think that it would be more effective to get the US version of netscape into the hands of as many US citizens as possible. Taking away our permission to download in the near future after a few tens of thousands of downloads won't mean near as much as telling several million people running the US version that they can't upgrade to the next release and maintain their strong crypto capabilities. Once a few million voters have it, it will be very hard to take it away again. What i'm hoping for is the wide distribution of strong crypto in a user friendly package. Isn't that the heart of cypherpunk ideals? I certainly have sympathy for those who want to make a point by uploading our US software to hacktic and other foreign servers, but I think that my company will probably have to ask hacktic and others to remove these copies. I'm also curious why these anonymous crusaders did not act sooner? The US version has been available for sale in retail outlets for about a year now. Was it not worth $50 to make your point? --Jeff -- Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist Netscape Communication Corporation jsw@netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw Any opinions expressed above are mine.
At 11:23 AM -0700 7/22/96, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
by creating a very large, glaring, and visceral public spectacle of the government cracking down on crypto, the resulting outcry could be absolutely enormous and resonate throughout the entire population. it would be a vivid portrayal of what the government has been doing quietly and secretly for decades, and perhaps the public might finally understand what is going on.
You're living in a dream world, Vladimir. There's no more going to be a revolution about this than there was under Stalin, and for similar reasons--when the government says the security of the State is at risk, and the public sees explosions and deaths, they are going to go along. All this will accomplish is ruin it for most everyone else. It reveals the "monkeywrenchers" for the fascists they are. "Comrades, comes the revolution you'll all eat strawberries and cream." "But I don't like strawberries and cream." "Comrades, comes the revolution, you'll ALL eat strawberries and cream." David
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, Tom Weinstein wrote:
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 18:38:54 -0700 From: Tom Weinstein <tomw@netscape.com> To: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Netscape
James A. Donald wrote:
At 03:27 PM 7/20/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote:
Why not consider what the consequences will be? Do you seriously believe that this will make the government stop enforcing ITAR?
Yes:
Widespread politically motivated disobedience forces the state to either demonize the disobedient, (as with drug users) or give up enforcement. This is a standard and effective method of forcing the repeal of laws, a method which has had a long record of success for several hundred years.
A handful of cyperpunks hardly constitutes "widespread polititcally motivated disobedience". In any case, the demonization has already begun; they point their fingers at the four horsemen of the internet at every oportunity.
One might say the same thing about 10 or 20 people throwing shipments of tea off of boats in boston harbor.
What I object to is anonymous activists who perform acts at no risk to themselves which make it harder for those of us who are trying to bring strong crypto to everyone.
Why? Because they can do it without risk? The way I see it, if you can do something that should be done, and you can do it at no risk to yourself, then its all the better.
The states cohesion derives from its legitimacy, and threats to legitimacy and cohesion are treated very seriously by government officials.
Threatening the states legitimacy is arguably more effective in influencing government behavior than blowing up federal office buildings.
The first step is to create at least a strong minority. A handful of cypherpunks can be largely ignored. We have to get the general public using and educated about strong crypto before civil disobedience will mean anything.
Hrmm... I'll agree with that... We need to do something to get ourselves noticed (and no, I don't mean blowing up the NSA headquarters) --Deviant -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMfPPxTAJap8fyDMVAQF6Lwf9Fo3+79zO31nd+CQpLYh0Ptqa0s/T9Fkg T/sxZhB9qDK0E6qsvNq6MOn10YhBnHtJ2i7R5qyzgBlWLCsmcxT2SoYniRHV590s 6EXlvTyFMyCD1B5uFEdJrgOq9NTq18EEJ2+KxawPJ2OZKrN3XckCIfpZbl5m4GpW NoLaWtcKOKjGtdJj+em/xbRnczOEJh7BQ733sXQVsOryjjFdXu8EV4oZN8FU0Qat GNtw6VpzW2dLt2bcLEDXQSQdkIwXfs6+sXzjcGkB9SJoyAQMq20l1+h5YIHcfPiN alqHzN6YGOy4tILt1O/Xght67DLgRWhUmW3Apo5C2+IOfzqzHdAUMQ== =RATL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The Deviant wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, Tom Weinstein wrote:
A handful of cyperpunks hardly constitutes "widespread polititcally motivated disobedience". In any case, the demonization has already begun; they point their fingers at the four horsemen of the internet at every oportunity.
One might say the same thing about 10 or 20 people throwing shipments of tea off of boats in boston harbor.
Good point.
What I object to is anonymous activists who perform acts at no risk to themselves which make it harder for those of us who are trying to bring strong crypto to everyone.
Why? Because they can do it without risk? The way I see it, if you can do something that should be done, and you can do it at no risk to yourself, then its all the better.
Fine. Please do it with something you write yourself, not with our products.
The first step is to create at least a strong minority. A handful of cypherpunks can be largely ignored. We have to get the general public using and educated about strong crypto before civil disobedience will mean anything.
Hrmm... I'll agree with that... We need to do something to get ourselves noticed (and no, I don't mean blowing up the NSA headquarters)
Yes, and that's what we're trying to do. Get strong crypto in the hands of as many people as we can. I can hardly wait until we get S/MIME in. -- You should only break rules of style if you can | Tom Weinstein coherently explain what you gain by so doing. | tomw@netscape.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, James A. Donald wrote:
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 08:23:22 -0700 From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> To: Tom Weinstein <tomw@netscape.com>, cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Netscape
At 03:27 PM 7/20/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote:
Why not consider what the consequences will be? Do you seriously believe that this will make the government stop enforcing ITAR?
Yes:
Widespread politically motivated disobedience forces the state to either demonize the disobedient, (as with drug users) or give up enforcement. This is a standard and effective method of forcing the repeal of laws, a method which has had a long record of success for several hundred years.
The states cohesion derives from its legitimacy, and threats to legitimacy and cohesion are treated very seriously by government officials.
Threatening the states legitimacy is arguably more effective in influencing government behavior than blowing up federal office buildings.
Hrmm... I'm definatly on your side. _Civil_ Disobediance has been, and always will be, the most effective way. --Deviant -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMfPEwDAJap8fyDMVAQGA1Af7Bymmynm/ocJ+vFr4MQbIOVwfhLrxZw9K 3bG2WzmbdopMXSJ8rXW09ETMOYZOCoM73Kbv16M3MrhytgDIguFxxwqibQfSWzOy ZOWS8DJS4SL47Y8pE5jK1WAasK7QmWJXS4TsUX1ablIcNNK+LXMqxaWXN/0cLIKE IhZJ4jV+Sq4+G+4zACOqi0kiIPu+A3YYXlNHR0l6RTmSDFY97qzyGJwOCOPgApGe YekQz4uLuXDZ6JIq2k1Sgt6M71dQne8u/oBnV9qa1ONNx+q00yP0P4nLLhgKEfvZ gi3RSoRsFie7xBFrZdUGFP5XwQLtmd1gZc4rfEZ8GSxRxxO0Kq3iAw== =DfR4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (7)
-
David Sternlight -
James A. Donald -
Jeff Weinstein -
Sandy Sandfort -
The Deviant -
Tom Weinstein -
Vladimir Z. Nuri