Making the Agora Vanish | OSINT distributed haven (Intellagora)

[Tim May]

At 2:59 PM -0500 4/14/01, Aimee Farr wrote:
>
>I agree with you, I did not put forth my argument well, and I was lazy to
>snip out context from several offlist conversations. And, you are correct,
>it is difficult for me to make a compelling argument, due to the fact that I
>am a far cry from an expert in this area. These are challenging concepts.
>However, with respect, I did take on a mega-proposition for the application
>of your concepts.

Eschew grandiloquence.

>
>  > "A twist of legitimacy"? Some kind of appeal to authority/
>
>An appeal for a contract. I was trying to hypothesize a value proposition
>for a legitimate application of these technologies.

You'll need to translate this into straightforward English, please.


>What you proposed, via a
>"credit rating market," is an open source information mercantile system. I
>was looking for a better market, which attaches high value to information:
>intelligence.

What you were "looking for" is irrelevant to what I wrote about. You 
can try hiring me as your personal consultant, at my usual daily 
rate, and I will try to put something together that is closer to what 
you're "looking for."

In any case, the straightforward moving of credit ratings to a place 
where the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other such statist measures 
cannot reach is a much, much better example of the regulatory 
arbitrage issues of interest here than some nebulous "open source 
intelligence" project such as Robert Steele and OSS have been 
advocating. More power to him if he pulls off something interesting 
and important, but so far it is smoke and mirrors and vague claims.


>I wonder if these applications would find the most relevance
>in the intelligence sector, despite thoughts of subversive applications.

"I wonder, I wonder, I wonder..."

Do some background reading, think about the issues, and actually 
begin participating in a meaningful way in the debate and then maybe 
you won't appear to be such an airhead.

>If
>there is not a value proposition for an information marketplace between the
>government and the private sector, there could be a value proposition within
>the private sector intelligence channels, moving closer to your "credit
>rating market" proposition.

English, please. Or at least Ebonics.



>
>  > Read the hundreds of articles on these matters. Read "The Enterprise
>>  of Law: Justice without the State," by Bruce Benson. Read David
>>  Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom," and his other books. Read...
>>
>>  The point is, Aimee, _read the background material_.
>
>>  Then you can ask specific questions, instead of just throwing a dozen
>>  or two dozen points of confusion you have against the wall and asking
>>  me to make it all clear to you.
>
>Tim, I didn't expect you to make it all clear to me. (i.e., "Just lotsa
>questions." Indeed, I have some answers, but thank you for the book recs.) I
>was merely reflecting that anonymous cash is not a cure-all, and that it
>might not even necessary for a highly sensitive information marketplace.

I never claimed it was a cure-all. None of us has. It's part of an 
overall approach, outlook, worldview.

As for it being "necessary for a highly sensitive information 
marketplace," it depends. No doubt within the CIA it is not needed, 
though the equivalent of cash is still used (CPU hours allottable to 
various users, signatures to gain access to data, etc.)

As for outsiders, imagine buying "sensitive information" without 
untraceable cash...whoops, it's a sting, and the Saudi Royal Guard is 
on its way. Or Jeff Gordon is about to raid your house.

You seem not to have thought about these issues. You need to do some 
reading before you make a fool of yourself further.

>I
>was questioning the value proposition that you posed in the context of a
>more sophisticated model -- an admittedly fantastical one. Finally, I
>questioned if it was so fantastical, given Steele (et. al.) and thoughts of
>functioning OSINT communities.

I can't understand your writing. I'd normally say "So sue me," except 
lawyers like you typically try this.


>
>You are a prickly, philosophical, violence-inclined prick tease that won't
>put out for me. Clearly, I stand little chance of EVER getting into your
>intellectual pants. Give me some indication of how good your dick really is,
>because I'm thinking it isn't worth continued loss of blood on my end to
>even entertain thoughts of pursuing such a long-term, high-risk,
>book-reading, flesh-eating endeavor.


* P L O N K *, again, and this time, I expect for good.

People who can't write clearly and yet who use such language as you 
use above do not deserve to be taken seriously.

I thought I'd seen it all. At least now I can "Aimee" to the 
pantheon: Detweiler, Vulis, Cohen, Toto, and Aimee.

--Tim May
-- 
Timothy C. May         tcmay at got.net        Corralitos, California
Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon
Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go
Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns