At 10:16 AM 4/17/2001 +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote:

Agreed, to a degree. But it isn't very difficult to outlaw crypto, and to effectively control its use for online anonymity - to get a workable anonymity infrastructure, you need common protocols, participants to create the mixnets and a certain amount of publicity to make your effort matter. It is extremely difficult to run such a usable setup without being detected by a determined TLA. Unlike with IP, porn, prostitution and drug trade, control of online activities can largely be automated.

You're still thinking like a nice middle-class person with a normal job. People who are serious about participating in black markets use human and technological cutouts to do their business, as well as good old-fashioned graft and corruption. In some criminal cultures, prison time is a badge of honor. In many criminal cultures, it's low-level disposable people who commit the actual crimes - it's the John Gottis and the Pablo Escobars and the Dick Nixons back sleeping in their beds who profit from it. If it was easy to stop crime by passing laws, we'd have done it already. Consider Jim Bell in light of your objections above - do you consider him "controlled"? If so, then the control you speak of is hardly sufficient to prevent forbidden activity. If not, then what makes you think that other, more clueful people can be controlled? -- Greg Broiles gbroiles@well.com "Organized crime is the price we pay for organization." -- Raymond Chandler