Popular opposition doesn't mean privacy is lost

[John E. Kreznar]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

While grudgingly accepting the larger message of your posting, I qualify
this with the following observation:

Eric Hughes, 1994 May 30:

> As soon as an issue [such as privacy] becomes a partisan issue, you've
> lost, because at least half the people are against it.

Eric Hughes, in the cypherpunks welcome message:

> Cypherpunks acknowledge that those who want privacy must create it for
> themselves and not expect governments, corporations, or other large,
> faceless organizations to grant them privacy out of beneficence.

Egregious among the ``large, faceless organizations'' is the tyranny
erected by the majority, ``at least half the people'', called democratic
political government.

My interpretation of the welcome message has always been that a
cypherpunk works to create his own privacy _in spite of_ interference by
``at least half the people'', acknowledging that these people are not to
be expected to grant that privacy on their own.

I do not concede that half the people being against privacy means that
I've lost.  I seek to apply what I learn through cypherpunks to create
my privacy even without their approval.

	John E. Kreznar		| Relations among people to be by
	jkreznar at ininx.com	| mutual consent, or not at all.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLepjFcDhz44ugybJAQHrWgQA2ix+775G0eIiQXsXgDjU71Cu+m1xOPnA
a5QkYS5J1GTSlVHuD1MKRS/mfa++Kf6U5h2wvpOeLqHVnE2aBta8llTKBPxMQjym
9/1yMNxdtdXbac9FeARKG5UGdLMglNudwrVWdrdfzham6xd0n0tLFVn6IE0OStg7
aGX0DHrdW9g=
=ATx7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----