On Tue, 6 Jul 93 16:08:00 -0700, Timothy C. May <uunet!netcom.com!tcmay> wrote -
The discussion of free speech and political correctness is apparently not welcome by some on this list. I guess the usual religious debates about which mail reader is better are what we're supposed to talk about. Well, I'm a member of this list, too, and issues of censorship and free speech are more interesting to me--and to some others, I suspect--than the intricacies of "MH."
Hear, hear. Settle down, old chum. I suppose it takes a volitile issue or two to get me off of my keister, but now that I'm up, I'm more than willing to toss my (good?) name into the fracas. Idealisms are much akin to links in a chain; each crafted individually, yet forming a bond that link each idealism together into a society. (Discussions on how healthy this society really should be left for future discusion.) I walk a fine line between an affectionado for free speech and a staunch supporter of individual rights and privacy. Each aspect has its proponents and contentions, yet each aspect needs protection under _human_ law. Now, where does one infringe upon the other? I have always been fond of the adage that "your right to swing your fist ends when it hits my nose," and I hope you understand my sentiment. I have even played the role of the "net police" in at least one instance. (But then again, I did not react to rumor, innuendo or happenstance. This is another topic entirely. Those who subscribe to RISKS may be the wiser.) I applaud your exploit in the bitwise/erotica/net-police experiment. I personally think it was damned clever and proved a valuable point. In fact, I'd like to get your permission to reprint your original message in Legal Net News, por favor.
What is happening to free speech? What has happened to "Sir, I disagree with what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it."?
I was a military-man (once upon a time), and took that oath seriously. I tired of the "spinning-your-wheels" metality, so I naturally migrated into the private telecommunications sector. I would still defend it today, to death. Make no mistake, this country may have developed some serious problems over the course of the past 200 years, but some of us hold the intrinsic values embelished in the Constitution dear. What Tim has done is above and beyond petty in-fighting in this group. We are about change, challenge and chaos. We are old, we are new. We change, yet we are the same. What does it take? Ask us. We will tell you -- its about stirring up the pot. Paul Ferguson | "Confidence is the feeling you get Network Integrator | just before you fully understand Centreville, Virginia USA | the problem." fergp@sytex.com | - Murphy's 7th Law of Computing Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
Paul Ferguson writes:
I applaud your exploit in the bitwise/erotica/net-police experiment. I personally think it was damned clever and proved a valuable point. In fact, I'd like to get your permission to reprint your original message in Legal Net News, por favor.
By all means! Just be sure to provide enough context and to included the "explanation." Also, several other people made some excellent comments, and you might want to somehow include their points.
Ask us. We will tell you -- its about stirring up the pot.
Yeah, I think a lot of us got involved in this whole thing (now called Cypherpunks, but it started percolating years ago) precisely to stir things up. And to the credit of you folks, I think some progress has been made. The remailers, the awareness of Cypherpunks-type issues in the media ("Wired," "Whole Earth Review," "New York Times," "Newsweek"), and our role in the Clipper/Capstone/Skipjack/whatever matter, are all positive steps. It is true we haven't deployed digital cash, nor have we set up data havens in cyberspace, nor a bunch of other things, but these things are instrinsically hard to pull off. Someday they'll come. Finally:
Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
(I've been tempted recently to come up with a "crypto" version of this famous "And who shall guard the guardians?" line. Something, in Latin of course (for effect), about "And who shall eavesdrop on the eavesdroppers?" or somesuch. Perhaps the original is best as it is.) -Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.
It is true we haven't deployed digital cash, nor have we set up data havens in cyberspace, nor a bunch of other things, but these things are instrinsically hard to pull off. Someday they'll come.
Could someone please define a 'data haven'? I understand digitial cash, it is exactly what it sounds like. However, in the context I've heard data haven used in, then there is much more than simply keeping one's data encrypted on your local hard drive. Still learning and trying to understand all of these things. -- Pat Hykkonen, N5NPL Texas State Technical College at Waco Internet: {pat,postmaster,root}@tstc.edu Instructional Network Services Packet: N5NPL@WD5KAL.#CENTX.TX.USA.NA 3801 Campus Dr. Waco, Tx 76705 V:(817) 867-4830 F:(817) 799-2843
participants (3)
-
fergp＠sytex.com -
pat＠tstc.edu -
tcmay＠netcom.com