Re: An Open Letter on Privacy and Anonymity
Eric Hughes wrote:
2001 September 12 An Open Letter on Privacy and Anonymity
It's a well written letter, unquestionably. But there's a problem. While the title of the letter refers to privacy and anonymity, these terms are hardly used in the body. Privacy is referred to only in the first paragraph were Eric introduces himself as a founder of the cypherpunks, a privacy organization. And anonymity is never mentioned at all! Any essay which purports to address a topic ought to mention it, don't you think? What if he had titled it, an open letter on pedophilia and child abuse? Would the arguments in the letter then automatically mean that we should support those activities? Mostly the letter contains calls for the preservation of liberty. Unfortunately, every politician in the United States, while voting for the most Draconian martial law curfews ever seen, would endorse each paragraph in Eric's message. Without some specifics tying these calls for liberty to concrete policy questions, the letter is not as strong as it should be.
We need not curtail our liberty in order to save it. The message is seductive that we may more effectively fight for liberty if we limit our freedoms for a time whose end has yet to be announced.
How broadly do we take this? What about the elimination of curbside baggage checkins at airports? Is this a curtailment of our liberty? Is it a sign that we have diminished ourselves? Or is it a reasonable precaution in the face of terrorist hijackings? The letter from Sean Hastings suffered from the same vagueness:
Do not let your natural reactions of fear or anger help ANYONE to further their short term political goals, or impose any "temporary" measures.
No "temporary" measures? They shouldn't have banned flights on Tuesday? Why not, exactly? Seemed like a wise precaution to most people. And no furthering of short-term political goals? The politicians have been wanting to dip into the social security "lockbox" for months. Now they can. Is this wrong? Isn't it just a matter of changing priorities which everyone will support? Why are we seeing such vague generalities from obviously talented writers? Let's see people go to the heart of the issue. If you want to argue for privacy and anonymity, make the case! The fact that no one will come out and make an argument for these technologies suggests that it is because they are afraid that any argument will be too weak to stand. Eric Hughes, take on this challenge. Write an essay, not in defense of liberty, but in defense of privacy and anonymity, as you promised in your title. And do it at a time when some of the best leads towards tracing these attackers are possible exactly because of a lack of privacy and anonymity. Tell us why the world would be a better place if it were impossible to trace these men. It's not an impossible argument. But it's not easy, either, like supporting freedom. Let's see it done, by someone as talented as you.
2001 September 13 A Call for a Chorus of Voices To All Who Would Defend Liberty and Freedom: Yesterday I wrote an open letter to all my fellow citizens. Today I write to all those who would defend liberty, on-line and everywhere else, from the looming threat of demagoguery that now hangs over us all. This morning I arose from my sleep with two realizations. First, that I would have changed the title of my letter had I thought about it. This has been pointed out by others. Second, that yesterday was the ninth anniversary of the first cypherpunks meeting; I had not realized this in the moment. When I began to write yesterday's letter, I had in mind to write a different letter than the one that thence I wrote. I had first intended a message to you my comrades, but in the moment I started typing I began to cry, because I had been struck as if by an external blow with the realization of whom I wanted to address. It was difficult for me to touch the well of my sincerity, because I have been and yet remain deeply cynical about my country, my government, and the particularly resilient propaganda of our media in the image of democracy. I had written only the title before I was overcome. For now the next phase of the work has commenced for which cypherpunks was preparation. The goal to affix into our society a bodiless ability to hide has greatly been achieved, yet the nascent robustness of these systems is as yet fragile. Our institutions do not yet breathe the ethos of individual liberty without supplemental air. The threat is not unique, however, and the task at hand is wider than our own concerns. As personal ability is bound up in technology, the technologies of which my friends and I have been so fond are but a section a larger movement, the movement to a democracy more about the "demos" than the "kratein", more about the people than the ruling. I shall not enumerate these trends into which cypherpunks so neatly fits. We are at a juncture in the road of our culture, whether to pursue the path of safety by limiting the individual and ignoring their desires or to pursue the path of safety by strengthening the individual and working out a new commons of desire. We cannot choose both; they are mutually hostile to each other in spirit and in practice. Our response to this week's terrorism will mark the proclivities of our future course. I have been challenged to write a narrow essay on privacy particularly. I regret to say that I cannot. My heart is elsewhere, and I have moved from privacy alone as a tool for my aspirations. I could not be as eloquent about privacy in isolation, because in truth I see no longer the isolation in which I was previously so comfortable. And thus I call for a chorus of voices to ring out and to proclaim the welter of specific consequences of walking down the path of individual liberty. My heart has been full in reading the spontaneous upwelling of sentiment from Perry Metzger, Sean Hastings, Matt Blaze, and Blanc Weber. Add to these your own voice, your own words, your own concerns. I seek the vision of a harmonious chorus without director, a single message rising in many throats, the motive wheel without a center. Speak about whatever you will, but speak true and speak from the heart. There are enough whose hearts are privacy and anonymity that I have nothing but faith that chorus shall contain enough of those voices. My heart is with you all, even though I shall not lead the charge. To touch one's own true voice may need the passage through ordeal, yet persevere, for everyone can find it. May peace arise from you all, and may the power of your souls become manifest in your deeds. Eric Hughes [Please feel free to post this at will.]
participants (2)
-
Eric Hughes -
Nomen Nescio