Re: SS Obergruppenfuhrer Zimmermann (NOT!)
At 05:11 PM 1/23/96 -0500, Alan Horowitz wrote:
The reporter's slander against Zimmerman was not accidental, or the result of ignorance. Calling someone a Naxi sympathizer is not something that one should do without a smoking gun.
This act of aggression against cypherpunks, attempts to box us into a corner. Our enemies want to keep us on the defensive.
Phil is not a cypherpunk. On the whole, the cypherpunks have gotten very favorable press for a group who's actions may render government policies irrelevant and possibly the governments themselves. DCF
On Tue, 23 Jan 1996, Duncan Frissell wrote:
This act of aggression against cypherpunks, attempts to box us into a corner. Our enemies want to keep us on the defensive.
Phil is not a cypherpunk.
On the whole, the cypherpunks have gotten very favorable press for a group who's actions may render government policies irrelevant and possibly the governments themselves.
Would you call cypherpunks (as a group and as a philosophy) to be influential? Do you think governments listen to us much? Are they forced to listen to us? Any stuff to support this? Please give me your comments. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Patiwat Panurach Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. eMAIL: pati@ipied.tu.ac.th Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. m/18 junior Fac of Economics -Johann W.Von Goethe -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In message <2.2.32.19960124014532.0095ac74@panix.com>, Duncan Frissell wrote:
At 05:11 PM 1/23/96 -0500, Alan Horowitz wrote:
The reporter's slander against Zimmerman was not accidental, or the result of ignorance. Calling someone a Naxi sympathizer is not something that one should do without a smoking gun.
This act of aggression against cypherpunks, attempts to box us into a corner. Our enemies want to keep us on the defensive.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity" (or journalists) Of course with paranoia being almost compulsory around here, it's probably a government plot to discredit all people who want privacy. To be frank I doubt the NSA or anyone else is going to bother, they can get what they want *anyway*
Phil is not a cypherpunk.
He probably should be. I mean, it would mean he only got *one* copy of mail rather than all those concerned people cc:ing him a copy.
On the whole, the cypherpunks have gotten very favorable press for a group who's actions may render government policies irrelevant and possibly the governments themselves.
Mind you, its not as though the government's policies have *ever* been relevant. Of course, having a less open government in my own country, no-one has bothered to define what the goverment is going to do re: trying to enforce low encryption standards or (hah!) censoring the net in general. In fact, at least the US *has* a centralish government. Here, where we have only a handful of quite autonomous states, any one of which could decide to implement some ridiculous scheme to "crack down on kiddie porn" which would have the unfortunate effect of removing individual's rights to privacy. Which brings me to another point. At least you people *have* a free speech bit in your constitution. While it's generally considered a right here, legally that's not really good enough. -- Packrat (BSc/BE;COSO;Wombat Admin) Nihil illegitemi carborvndvm.
participants (3)
-
Bruce Murphy -
Duncan Frissell -
Patiwat Panurach (akira rising)