A million monkeys operating under the pseudonym "Ray Arachelian <sunder@sundernet.com>" typed:
Meethinks (not speaking for Tim) that years under a fascist natzi-like regime bent on ripping out all out freedoms one by one and confiscating all things threatening to it would cause any awake person to lose any compassion for the scum that run our Freeh country.
BULL SHIT. This is a cop-out, used by emotionally stunted men to excuse themselves from their solemn responsibility to ethically justify their own actions and to deal fairly with their fellow humans. By reciting mantras to one another emphasizing their sense of having been mistreated and their sense of having _unquestionable_ moral superiority, people in this situation persuade each other to become more and more fanatical in their attitudes, less and less in touch with reality, and less and less compassionate towards the "others" who have been demonized in the process. Note that this process _always_ includes a group of other humans which are demonized in order to serve as a scapegoat and as a concrete focus for the participant's negative emotions. This process is objectively identical to the process experienced by _all_ hate groups, gangs and nationalists. You are standing in the auditorium, Louis Freeh's face is displayed on the screen, interposed with film of jackbooted thugs breaking down your door, and you are screaming wordlessly at him along with all of your brethren during the Two Minutes Hate. THAT should give you pause for thought, Ray. Listen to me: I might take up arms in the trenches next to you someday, if it comes to that. I might murder enemies or civilians in their sleep, if I were convinced that it was the only way to preserve the people and the ideals that I love. I might work to deploy ideas and technologies that threaten to induce social chaos, if I believed that those ideas and technologies were the only way to ensure the blessings of liberty and prosperity for my children. But I will _never_ take one of these actions while intoxicated by a cloud of hatred and self-righteousness. I will _never_ tell myself that I am part of a sacred jihad which absolves me of all guilt, and I will _never_ re-classify my enemies as sub-human in order to justify my treatment of them. So take a fucking BREAK man. Just get up from the computer and go for a fucking walk in the mountains and think about your fucking family and loved ones. Z
At 10:06 AM -0700 8/21/97, Zooko Journeyman wrote:
A million monkeys operating under the pseudonym "Ray Arachelian <sunder@sundernet.com>" typed:
Meethinks (not speaking for Tim) that years under a fascist natzi-like regime bent on ripping out all out freedoms one by one and confiscating all things threatening to it would cause any awake person to lose any compassion for the scum that run our Freeh country.
BULL SHIT.
This is a cop-out, used by emotionally stunted men to excuse themselves from their solemn responsibility to ethically justify their own actions and to deal fairly with their fellow humans.
By reciting mantras to one another emphasizing their sense of having been mistreated and their sense of having _unquestionable_ moral superiority, people in this situation persuade each other to become more and more fanatical in their attitudes, less and less in touch with reality, and less and less compassionate towards the "others" who have been demonized in the process.
I have written truly large numbers of posts explicating my philosophy. You may not agree with my point of view, but characterizing me--as I assume you were in your response to this thread about "Tim's heart"--as merely reciting mantras to others is false. It is you, B., who have generally been inactive on the list for quite some time, only occasionally dropping in to snipe. Referring to us as "emotionally stunted men",,,now there's a solid argument for whatever it is your position is.
Note that this process _always_ includes a group of other humans which are demonized in order to serve as a scapegoat and as a concrete focus for the participant's negative emotions.
You mean like "emotionally stunted men"? Or do you mean like the characterization of list members as "socio-economic cult" members?
But I will _never_ take one of these actions while intoxicated by a cloud of hatred and self-righteousness. I will _never_ tell myself that I am part of a sacred jihad which absolves me of all guilt, and I will _never_ re-classify my enemies as sub-human in order to justify my treatment of them.
So take a fucking BREAK man. Just get up from the computer and go for a fucking walk in the mountains and think about your fucking family and loved ones.
You sound like you're ranting to me. Lecturing others on their anger while writing "take a fucking BREAK man" and foaming about sacred jihads and emotionally stunted men.... Physician, heal thyself. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
At 01:09 PM 8/21/97 -0700, you wrote:
Or do you mean like the characterization of list members as "socio-economic cult" members?
Unfortunately, expressing one's views in public creates the possibility for one's own words to be misinterpreted by others, whether intentionally or by a simple misunderstanding. FYI, my reference to "socio-economic cults", originally in the Subject: line of my post, was not meant as a characterization of the members of the Cypherpunks list. I was using the phrase to refer to any of a number of -isms regarding the redistribution of property against the consent of the creators/owners of the property. For that reason (among others) I included the quote from Bastiat, but perhaps I did not make the point clear enough. Sorry for the confusion. -geoff
Thanks, Duncan. I couldn't have (or wouldn't have) said it better myself. A few words on "helping" others: At 12:52 PM -0700 8/25/97, Duncan Frissell wrote:
Tim has never said that he was interested in robbing, ruling, or killing others apropos of nothing -- something governments do every day. Tim has merely said that he reserves the right to use deadly force to defend himself and that he was not interested in helping other people just because they "need" his help. He didn't say he *wouldn't* help. He just said he does not believe he is *required* to care or *required* to help. That is a morally superior position compared to those who insist on helping others at the point of a gun.
And I think that most of what passes for "help" actually does more harm than good, at least in the longterm. For example, sending food aid to Third World countries sounds noble and good. But most studies show the real effect of such aid: it destroys the local infrastructure of food production and distribution. (Imagine being a poor Somali farmer bringing your grain to market, and seeing tons of U.S. grain being distributed freely...it wipes that farmer out, and his future years of production are gone, even after the U.S. food aid is also gone.) For example, the welfare system. Who can argue that it produces persons unable or unwilling to take the available jobs, mostly at or near minimum wage? When a welfare mother of two or more children can collect the total equivalent (direct payments, food coupons, tax exemptions, day care) of $15 an hour, it would be foolish for her to apply for a job at Burger King for $6.35 an hour, and then have to pay almost that amount to put her kids in some day care center. The longer she is out of the job market, the worse it gets. For example, saving people from their bad choices in life. When we force insurers to cover those who do stupid, formerly uninsurable things, or when we force the providers of legally and freely-chose substances (tobacco, hamburger, guns, breast implants, rock climbing equipment, etc.) to pay for the stupid actions of others, even if only imagined, costs rise and choices narrow. (Off the main subject, but I think it reprehensible that states are suing to collect _medical_ costs associated with tobacco. The costs are between the insurers and the customers, not third parties. The principle, if carried through, would make McDonald's liable for obesity and nutrition problems, heart disease, etc. And it would make Nintendo liable for education cost overruns, etc. Fact is, if Alice smokes three packs a day, and Mississsippi is stupid enough to give her free health care, or to charge premiums not reflecting her smoking, this is that state's problem, not R.J, Reynolds' problem! Same goes for breast implants. No evidence shows silicone is actually harmful, just a bunch of junk science show trials. Any woman who got her tits inflated for vanity reasons deserves whatever happens, in any case. So now Dow Corning will drop out of the implant business, and women truly in need of them for mastectomy sorts of reasons will find there is no supplier...except maybe in Mexico or Denmark, where "regulatory arbitrage" applies.) We have become what the Founders feared. (Somebody said this a few days ago. I think it's a great slogan, and I may add it to my .sig file.() --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
On Mon, Aug 25, 1997 at 02:20:33PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
And I think that most of what passes for "help" actually does more harm than good, at least in the longterm.
There is no doubt that sometimes "help" does more harm than good. There is also no doubt that sometimes help does more good than harm. Platitudes like these don't really give one much real guidance.
For example, sending food aid to Third World countries sounds noble and good. But most studies show the real effect of such aid: it destroys the local infrastructure of food production and distribution. (Imagine being a poor Somali farmer bringing your grain to market, and seeing tons of U.S. grain being distributed freely...it wipes that farmer out, and his future years of production are gone, even after the U.S. food aid is also gone.)
So the farmer can die of starvation later rather than earlier. The problem is not with help, per se -- it's with the specifics of how the help is implemented. What do you think the farmer would chose -- get some food now, and take his chances with his food production at a later time, or die of starvation immediately? A current case is North Korea. Of course if you give them food it will help perpetuate an evil government. On the other hand, if you don't give them food, lot's and lot's of people would die. Tim's answer is that you might as well let them die, rather than perpetuate the government that enslaves them. Others aren't quite as cold-blooded as Tim.
For example, the welfare system. Who can argue that it produces persons unable or unwilling to take the available jobs, mostly at or near minimum wage? When a welfare mother of two or more children can collect the total equivalent (direct payments, food coupons, tax exemptions, day care) of $15 an hour, it would be foolish for her to apply for a job at Burger King for $6.35 an hour, and then have to pay almost that amount to put her kids in some day care center. The longer she is out of the job market, the worse it gets.
The welfare system obviously has all kinds of problems. It's not easy giving help without creating dependency. That doesn't mean it can't be done.
For example, saving people from their bad choices in life. When we force insurers to cover those who do stupid, formerly uninsurable things, or when we force the providers of legally and freely-chose substances (tobacco, hamburger, guns, breast implants, rock climbing equipment, etc.) to pay for the stupid actions of others, even if only imagined, costs rise and choices narrow.
Yep. I don't see this as the same category of trying to help people, though. Rather, I think this example points out the end result of our adversarial legal system. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 07:06 PM 8/21/97 +0200, Zooko Journeyman wrote:
By reciting mantras to one another emphasizing their sense of having been mistreated and their sense of having _unquestionable_ moral superiority, people in this situation persuade each other to become more and more fanatical in their attitudes, less and less in touch with reality, and less and less compassionate towards the "others" who have been demonized in the process.
Save that the people who *actually* go out of their way to rob, rule, and kill other people are worse. They don't work themselves up into a frenzy. They just rule, and steal, and kill with a smile on their lips confident that they're doing it for the good of their victims. Tim has never said that he was interested in robbing, ruling, or killing others apropos of nothing -- something governments do every day. Tim has merely said that he reserves the right to use deadly force to defend himself and that he was not interested in helping other people just because they "need" his help. He didn't say he *wouldn't* help. He just said he does not believe he is *required* to care or *required* to help. That is a morally superior position compared to those who insist on helping others at the point of a gun. I should also point out that at Tim's potential billable hours, the amount of time he has dedicated to "helping" others on the Net over the last many years would add up to a hefty sum. The fact that he did it for his own reasons makes him no different from anyone else. Even Mother Teresa does things for her own reasons. All of our reasons are *our* reasons and are not subject to logical analysis by others who lack the ability to read our souls. Actions can be judged, words can be judged, motives are much trickier. I will only point out that a world of Tim Mays would have many fewer homicides in it than a world of Bill Clintons and much less oppression of others. Mostly everyone would leave each other alone. The fundamental of politeness. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNAHifIVO4r4sgSPhAQH8XgP/UoNMQaHlg7NLmoNbsvT6zk4UKQQy2Y00 dI/y4bEl03d7C9zjNT5KpBIXlf9zWUSSMSa+EclFgu685IH6/zZ4eLmlan1yZIww 0zeiJ1LyBDUz3x9qWlrSZw8gWZP18pTodNkRySp8XIlU1xJ/aDuElwBqXAwj19Ju Cxg/pcFow30= =5v+i -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Zooko Journeyman wrote:
This is a cop-out, used by emotionally stunted men to excuse themselves from their solemn responsibility to ethically justify their own actions and to deal fairly with their fellow humans.
The elected scum are far from being human. Apparently you haven't been paying attention to lovely incidents involving plungers. Is that demonizing them? Yes? Good!
By reciting mantras to one another emphasizing their sense of having been mistreated and their sense of having _unquestionable_ moral superiority, people in this situation persuade each other to become more and more fanatical in their attitudes, less and less in touch with reality, and less and less compassionate towards the "others" who have been demonized in the process.
What compassion did they show? Toilet plungers? Bullets in the head, flame throwers and tanks? Unquestionable? The very fact that I'm replying to you rather than sending out the toilet plunger brigade should give you a hint. What would the LEA's do were you to present the same arguement to them and cause enough noise that others took notice?
Note that this process _always_ includes a group of other humans which are demonized in order to serve as a scapegoat and as a concrete focus for the participant's negative emotions.
Right. Same thing they must have been feeding the FBI the morning of the Waco incident. I believe the key phrases were "gun toting child molesters." Nevermind that they fried to a crisp those same kids they supposedly were going to free from the clutches of the evil gun toting child molesters, and the supposed molesters.
This process is objectively identical to the process experienced by _all_ hate groups, gangs and nationalists.
Incorrect: this process is objectively identical to the process experienced by all HUMANS when faced with a horrid freedom destroying government. That it coincidentally is the same for the jackbooted thugs before they are told to attack. The difference is that no one is telling me to hate or feel rage. The actions of those who abuse freedom are my only inspiration.
You are standing in the auditorium, Louis Freeh's face is displayed on the screen, interposed with film of jackbooted thugs breaking down your door, and you are screaming wordlessly at him along with all of your brethren during the Two Minutes Hate.
Better that than standing in the auditorium and having Philip Zimmerman's face displayed on the screen, interposed with a film of keys and cyphers encrypting data and screaming wordlessly durring the Two Minutes of Hate. At least the former is based in honesty, not governmental orderes under the threat of thoughtcrime. It's not enough to fear Big Brother, you must love him.
THAT should give you pause for thought, Ray.
Still doesn't lessen the enemy's action, nor will it help the wrongs they commited any.
Listen to me: I might take up arms in the trenches next to you someday, if it comes to that. I might murder enemies or civilians in their sleep, if I were convinced that it was the only way to preserve the people and the ideals that I love.
Who said I'd be in the trenches or murder the enemy? Who said I would pick up a weapon and use it? Hating them is not the same as taking actions to quench that hate. That should give your panic pause for thought.
I might work to deploy ideas and technologies that threaten to induce social chaos, if I believed that those ideas and technologies were the only way to ensure the blessings of liberty and prosperity for my children.
Do what you think is necessary within your ideals.
But I will _never_ take one of these actions while intoxicated by a cloud of hatred and self-righteousness. I will _never_ tell myself that I am part of a sacred jihad which absolves me of all guilt, and I will _never_ re-classify my enemies as sub-human in order to justify my treatment of them.
Erm? What Jihad? Since where are we so organized and sacred? Hell, I don't even own a gun, I don't know where you get your knee jerk reaction from. You certainly don't see me renting a Rider Truck and buying fertilizer. So where do you get "sacred" and "jihad" from? Am I supposed to silence my hatred for the crimes against humanity that the scum in power have commited, or for their incessant attempts at destroying our freedoms because you can't deal with another's hatred? Because you imagine and fear that hatred will lead to action? Isn't that what CENSORSHIP is about after all?
So take a fucking BREAK man. Just get up from the computer and go for a fucking walk in the mountains and think about your fucking family and loved ones.
I wouldn't think, nor hate, this way if it weren't for thinking about my family and loved ones and their freedom. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
The elected scum are far from being human.
We can't let one group or other be considered less the human[1]. No one is less or more desurving of basic rights. The second you allow yourself to take that fundermentle step of saying that a group is less worthy then anouther group you tread down the path that leeds to desaster.
Apparently you haven't been paying attention to lovely incidents involving plungers.
The unfortunate inserdent with the plunger is an eclent example of what I'm saying. This the victom was reduced from a human to someone without thouse rights in the mind of the perpertator. [...]
What compassion did they show? Toilet plungers? Bullets in the head, flame throwers and tanks?
So we should resond in a simmler mannor? [...]
Note that this process _always_ includes a group of other humans which are demonized [...] Right. Same thing they must have been feeding the FBI the morning of the Waco incident.
Exactly. I can see a hellish future where the Cyperpunks have become the FBI. While we may be canting cyperpunk type ideology we would be doing FBI style actions. [...]
The difference is that no one is telling me to hate or feel rage. The actions of those who abuse freedom are my only inspiration.
Annd who will have freedom in your would? Your suggested means tell me more about your motives then your speech dose. [1] Unless like me thay have volenterly rejected that lable [2] [2] It however dosn't mean I regard myself less or more disuriving of basic 'human' rights. - -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. ex-net.scum and proud You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves? --Terry Pratchett -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM/yZXKQK0ynCmdStAQGLKAQAhhdAR1yEOPFu/btbwm0Vq9vwa8MM5rsm HFkPuL1q72z6A/o/iidy90tlgvesEQFOajKdAVMWWcXHaA4t4c/PzyV4YZ6j3hub OnhL6kY8pj901bgnBsA1oVbbi2H7HN7obynCWs3NxdC8BNZiaEKhj2CtEGbsS16T g/QMqix6C64= =Xocc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
At 05:39 AM 8/22/97 +1000, you wrote:
What compassion did they show? Toilet plungers? Bullets in the head, flame throwers and tanks?
So we should resond in a simmler mannor?
Should we just sit idly by and let police officers attack citizens? Or maybe we should do what our founders wanted, defend ourselves with miliary rifles. So if a pig wants to shove a crowbar up your ass, are you going to shoot him, or just say "I would never violate your rights like this!" /============================================================\ "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." -U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV \============================================================/
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Anonymous wrote:
Should we just sit idly by and let police officers attack citizens?
No you should video it. Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. Buy easter bilbies. Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay? ex-net.scum and proud I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yucky' a convincing argument
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"df" == dformosa <the> wrote the following on Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:32:01 +1000 (EST)
df> On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Anonymous wrote:
Should we just sit idly by and let police officers attack citizens?
df> No you should video it. Let me see if I understand you correctly. Your wife/gf/mother/brother is getting arsefucked by a cop with a toilet plunger and your preferred course of action while his/her rectum is perforated would be to video tape the event? Why? So we can all watch on Real TV. So the perps can launch another cover up internal investigation? You really wouldn't consider intervening to stop further damage? Of course this assumes you're actually able to be present and witness the 'interrogation', which you more than likely will not be, unless it's your turn next at playing scrub the toilet bowl. - -- .////. .// Charles Senescall apache@bear.apana.org.au o:::::::::///
::::::::::\\\ PGP mail preferred Brisbane AUSTRALIA '\\\\\' \\ Apache
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEUAwUBM/0zinawhvoxf0r9AQFfvgf45b+qbLsJYWM6t4KfLNpR3bt640Uk0+ix YHiFJ3uxxGiF2kuHUfR9E/f0f74X3+Tx6s02pn/Jb1zdVVZRuv5KJ/eVWaRmdn2F 5swv5ZwkLzcAQUaGWjjNnXWNDxmc2t3UF3dekOBcJCaxZ2kOclQh9ZsmZos4Vgks 09MVIjg5Ff13CfJokoCvSQ6kW9TuquBiY7t16VJLpm8Ygw1CAXWehTzpuV1boc9D NOEkTcnVDmaxvs8Dm57G74aE8TFY4/4dAPmj0qMGJjKtU+Q3GNLXjRSkKC2sU6wm /gdMMFMF7aSnU5OkNe56KMFR9H3kGLwWKJ5IT2XUbdDH60UNJrKi =jJ82 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
At 03:32 PM 8/22/97 +1000, you wrote:
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Anonymous wrote:
Should we just sit idly by and let police officers attack citizens?
No you should video it.
Well, actually, we have something like that in America on TV, it's called "COPS". /============================================================\ "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." -U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV \============================================================/
On Fri, Aug 22, 1997 at 02:55:18AM +0200, Anonymous wrote:
At 05:39 AM 8/22/97 +1000, you wrote:
What compassion did they show? Toilet plungers? Bullets in the head, flame throwers and tanks?
So we should resond in a simmler mannor?
Should we just sit idly by and let police officers attack citizens?
Of course not. There are possible responses other than the ones you suggest, however.
Or maybe we should do what our founders wanted, defend ourselves with miliary rifles. So if a pig wants to shove a crowbar up your ass, are you going to shoot him, or just say "I would never violate your rights like this!"
-- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
We can't let one group or other be considered less the human[1]. No one is less or more desurving of basic rights. The second you allow yourself to take that fundermentle step of saying that a group is less worthy then anouther group you tread down the path that leeds to desaster.
They already make themselves less than human by their actions, not by their identity.
The unfortunate inserdent with the plunger is an eclent example of what I'm saying. This the victom was reduced from a human to someone without thouse rights in the mind of the perpertator.
Untrue, the victim remained human, the cop was inhuman in his treatment. It doesn't matter what his thoughts were, his actions made him inhuman.
So we should resond in a simmler mannor?
An eye for an eye, a toilet plunger for another. That's the only true justice there can be.
Exactly. I can see a hellish future where the Cyperpunks have become the FBI. While we may be canting cyperpunk type ideology we would be doing FBI style actions.
Distinction: cypherpunks don't want to control or take away your privacy. Cypherpunks don't use toilet plungers. Cypherpunks write code. :) FBI should NOT exist.
Annd who will have freedom in your would? Your suggested means tell me more about your motives then your speech dose.
Everyone. Not in my world, but everyone's world. The only law that should exist is "do what you will as long as you harm none." By harm I only mean the following: physically (i.e. beat, kill, maim, etc.) and property (i.e. theft, damage.) Everything else is just excess bullshit. There are a billion and one ways to harm a person physically. You don't need a billion and one laws to state that it is wrong. One is sufficient.
[1] Unless like me thay have volenterly rejected that lable [2] [2] It however dosn't mean I regard myself less or more disuriving of basic 'human' rights.
Who does? Who deserves less than basic human rights? And yes, unlike the scum that run the FBI, I include total privacy as a basic human right. Just as important as the right to speak, think, or breathe air. I understand your fears, but hating the enemy and knowing the enemy isn't becoming it. Revolutions aren't about taking over, they're about freedom from the injustices done by the older regime. Sure, in time the political scum will rise to the top and another will be needed. We've seen that here already. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
We can't let one group or other be considered less the human[1]. No one is less or more desurving of basic rights.
[...]
They already make themselves less than human by their actions, not by their identity.
No even by there acts thay do not reduce there humanity. Humans do some realy rotten things but that is just the nature of a creature with free will. [...]
So we should resond in a simmler mannor?
An eye for an eye, a toilet plunger for another. That's the only true justice there can be.
Again I would not wish to live like that Nor do I beleave that it is true justice (what ever that may be.). Its a barbric form of psydojusice. [...]
Distinction: cypherpunks don't want to control or take away your privacy.
Of cause, nether do the goverment, in the beinging. But ideals fade and peaple become corrupted. At some point someone is going to say "To protect your privacy we have to violate your privacy."
Cypherpunks don't use toilet plungers. Cypherpunks write code. :)
But we are getting to the point where code can do more dammige and be more effective then any toilet plunger could be. (Though I dout it will unblock drains) [,..]
I understand your fears, but hating the enemy and knowing the enemy isn't becoming it.
Its just I fear the cure where worce then the desease.
Revolutions aren't about taking over,
Thay shouldn't be, but thay often are. History is littered with examples of the heroic revolutionary leader becomeing the next dictor, often before the presdential chair has gotten cold.
they're about freedom from the injustices done by the older regime.
Or stroking the egos and postion of the revolitionaries. Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. Buy easter bilbies. Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay? ex-net.scum and proud I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yucky' a convincing argument
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, ? the platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
No even by there acts thay do not reduce there humanity. Humans do some realy rotten things but that is just the nature of a creature with free will.
And somehow this justifies their actions while allowing them to be human, and doesn't justify our hatred of them and makes us inhuman? How's that again? The logic of this escapes me. Perhaps you're much brighter than I, and can see what I can't.
So we should resond in a simmler mannor?
An eye for an eye, a toilet plunger for another. That's the only true justice there can be.
Again I would not wish to live like that Nor do I beleave that it is true justice (what ever that may be.). Its a barbric form of psydojusice.
It's called having the punishment fit the crime precisely and exactly. It's your choice to live or not live like that. Nobody is forcing you to live in any way you dislike: except those that make the laws and enforce them with toilet plungers.
Distinction: cypherpunks don't want to control or take away your privacy.
Of cause, nether do the goverment, in the beinging. But ideals fade and peaple become corrupted. At some point someone is going to say "To protect your privacy we have to violate your privacy."
That would be Hoover. Correct: corruption. And why have we accepted and allowed such corruption of ideals from the start? The bastard should have been shot the day he started this shit.
But we are getting to the point where code can do more dammige and be more effective then any toilet plunger could be. (Though I dout it will unblock drains)
Erm, when the jack booted thugs come at you with automatics, I'd like to see you throw PGP disks, or source code at them to see if it can do more damage to them that their bullets to your body.
I understand your fears, but hating the enemy and knowing the enemy isn't becoming it.
Its just I fear the cure where worce then the desease.
The cure happened once before. Recall England and the lovely colonies that rebelled. Do you believe that cure was worse than the Kings taxes and troops?
Thay shouldn't be, but thay often are. History is littered with examples of the heroic revolutionary leader becomeing the next dictor, often before the presdential chair has gotten cold.
True, and agreed. Doesn't mean we should accept the current fascists in power and bend over when they ask nicely.
Or stroking the egos and postion of the revolitionaries.
Nor stroking the egos of Klinton and Freeh, nor their position. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, ? the platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
Humans do some realy rotten things but that is just the nature of a creature with free will.
And somehow this justifies their actions while allowing them to be human, and doesn't justify our hatred of them and makes us inhuman?
If we are willing to consider anyone of us to be less then human then we all become less human. No one has a right to consider anthoughter less then human. [...]
Again I would not wish to live like that Nor do I beleave that it is true justice (what ever that may be.). Its a barbric form of psydojusice.
It's called having the punishment fit the crime precisely and exactly.
I would prefur that the punishment would fit the criminal.
[...] At some point someone is going to say "To protect your privacy we have to violate your privacy."
That would be Hoover. Correct: corruption. And why have we accepted and allowed such corruption of ideals from the start?
It is greaduil, first you let the cops beconsidered less then human and then you let the idear spread to other groups. The only fair way to defend against such attacks is to attack idears like that when ever thay occour. [...]
Erm, when the jack booted thugs come at you with automatics, I'd like to see you throw PGP disks, or source code at them to see if it can do more damage to them that their bullets to your body.
Raids from jack booted thugs are nether the start nor the end. While code will not stop bullets, thay sometimes will have the ablity to stop the thugs being able to get you. [...]
Its just I fear the cure where worce then the desease.
The cure happened once before. Recall England and the lovely colonies that rebelled. Do you believe that cure was worse than the Kings taxes and troops?
Given I am a subject of HRM[1] I would not know. I am not happy about this eather but we are working at getting rid of her. - -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. ex-net.scum and proud You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves? --Terry Pratchett [1] I am an Australian. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM/4ZTaQK0ynCmdStAQEWAQQAqhBy5SkbJnYvtz7VCxlcnR9Mk/fDur4z nbnxeEyZtE5nNRuD+cXfwcomAdQUv8knZULHr6KoVahxr0B9FIwrAJi19O9Z3C83 9T9gw8F67/dArmMcrwvj91wPMwR1OmiUAulsl7WMPXklt8HwgKRL91y5NlZBbKbE pwb+EORA6gU= =EAOS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sat, 23 Aug 1997, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
If we are willing to consider anyone of us to be less then human then we all become less human. No one has a right to consider anthoughter less then human.
So what you are saying then is that when the scum inserts a toilet plunger up someone's butt you consider them less than human, therefore all of humanity becomes less than human including the plunging scum, therefore he himself is less than human... Which means you're agreeing with me, or you don't know shit about logic. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================
On Sat, 23 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 1997, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
If we are willing to consider anyone of us to be less then human then we all become less human.
[...]
So what you are saying then is that when the scum inserts a toilet plunger up someone's butt you consider them less than human, therefore all of humanity becomes less than human including the plunging scum, therefore he himself is less than human...
Ok I'll take this slowly 1) All of humanity is equaliy human 2) If someone is made less then human then we all become less human by that amount For esample if Alice, Bob and Paul all have say 10 units of humanity. Now Paul shoves a plunger up Bobs datehole, we could say that Paul should have 5 units of humanity. By rule one every body else is now also 5 units. As you can planly see assining humanitiy and inhumanity is a pointless esasize. Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. Buy easter bilbies. Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay? ex-net.scum and proud I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yucky' a convincing argument
On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, ? the platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
Ok I'll take this slowly
1) All of humanity is equaliy human
2) If someone is made less then human then we all become less human by that amount
For esample if Alice, Bob and Paul all have say 10 units of humanity. Now Paul shoves a plunger up Bobs datehole, we could say that Paul should have 5 units of humanity. By rule one every body else is now also 5 units.
Maybe I am too slow brained (ha!) Lemme get your model straight - and it is your model: Okay, so now everyone is down to 5 units. Now say that Joe takes a plunger to Bob as well and everyone is down yet another 5 points, therefore all humans, including both Alice and Bob are down to zero points making them all inhuman. At this point the perpetrator, uninvolved and the victim are all inhuman. In the above case, Alice is uninvolved, yet in your model she is now inhuman. Further, poor Bob is left with two punctures to his butthole and is deemed inhuman as well? Well, that's certainly equal treatment for victim, perpetrator and uninvolved. Given X humanity points to all humans and given over more than 4,000,000 years of existance, I'd say we'd all be in the negative humanity points by now. Solution to your model in trying to keep Humanity Points: Now if Bob pulled out a gun and humanely put both Paul and Joe out of Bob's misery, humanity's humanity points wouldn't be effected. Thus in your model, killing all the perpetrators (in a humane way of course, without malice) would solve the problem. Better yet, humanely nuke everyone off the planet, that way nobody can possibly commit any crimes, thus keeping humanity points constant. Sorry, I don't accept your model as it is clearly invalid. Are you begining to see how silly this is, or do I need to send the toilet plunger troops after you? :)
As you can planly see assining humanitiy and inhumanity is a pointless esasize.
So quit trying to push these silly assed morality models on us already. You came up with this shit, I've twice more than clearly shown you how silly it is. Give up already and quit bothering us with illogical bullshit. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, ? the platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
[...Realy lame aregument on my part snipped...] What was I on when I wrote that crap!? But I have a better example :D I take a blood sample from our plunger wealding cop, its the blood of a homospapian i.e. a human. The cop makes use of the plunger. I take a second sample from our plunger wealding cop, its the blood of a homospapain i.e. a human. The cop can't become inhuman by any action thay take. - -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. ex-net.scum and proud You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves? --Terry Pratchett -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNAKL9aQK0ynCmdStAQGNrAQA3tOnIsH1VBhvnNg5BKNJIsv/1a5pKlr+ FNZAV2KNvjfzT9gSVwhw6nJ30f91mtcQbvy09jwn3bDSUoIgY17u/lN7r6RT28FR pCB9fJ96XwGIRuqTI387EFN0dFjNrK+ICQ8NgwkY+4V4zTq6GFalwuAAObWnNX3i czNf/yFFS4A= =MUet -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, ? the platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
[...Realy lame aregument on my part snipped...]
What was I on when I wrote that crap!?
Good question... I'd like to know where you got it so I can smoke some too... must be some good mind altering shit....
But I have a better example :D
I take a blood sample from our plunger wealding cop, its the blood of a homospapian i.e. a human.
The cop makes use of the plunger.
I take a second sample from our plunger wealding cop, its the blood of a homospapain i.e. a human.
The cop can't become inhuman by any action thay take.
How's that again? Earlier you were saying that if any human considers another human inhuman, all huamns lose humanity points, I showed an example whereby all of humankind's inhumans action (by your model) would calls all humanity - including the cop - to lose their humanity points to the point of having negative humanity points therefore being human. Why are cops an exception to this? OTOH: By your new example: If you now take a blood sample from the plungee, is he human as well? If so, then both the cop and the plungee are human, therefore neither has lost humanity points, and if someone else came with a chainsaw and cut the cop's head off, and you now take all three persons' blood, they all are human. Whether or not the chainsaw dude did it with malice and thought the cop inhuman, all three blood samples will still show human. So what's your point now? =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================
On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
[...]
The cop can't become inhuman by any action thay take.
How's that again? Earlier you were saying that if any human considers another human inhuman, all huamns lose humanity points,
Earliar I was wrong. The idear of group loss of humanity was sort of badly thourt out. However I stand by my original point that it is a bad idear to consider peaple inhuman. Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. Buy easter bilbies. Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay? ex-net.scum and proud I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yucky' a convincing argument
On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, Ray Arachelian wrote:
How's that again? Earlier you were saying that if any human considers another human inhuman, all huamns lose humanity points, I showed an example whereby all of humankind's inhumans action (by your model) would calls all humanity - including the cop - to lose their humanity points to ^^^^^^^ cause
Ayeeee! I've been infected by the Platypus virus!!! Someone hand me FProt quick! :)
the point of having negative humanity points therefore being human. Why are cops an exception to this?
=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ==========================
participants (11)
-
? the platypus {aka David Formosa} -
? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
-
bennett_t1＠popmail.firn.edu -
Charles -
Duncan Frissell -
gturk＠concentric.net -
Kent Crispin -
nobody＠REPLAY.COM -
Ray Arachelian -
Tim May -
Zooko Journeyman