I'm asking for more rights, not restrictions (was Re: Antispam Bills: Worse Than Spam?)

[Sunder]

While at the same time quoting from a book doesn't mean anything
either.  It shows that a) you can quote from a book, and b) you have no
ideas of your own.

If you have something valuable to say, say it.  Otherwise, let's not waste
time over who can read a book, who has read a specific book, or who can
quote from a book.

BTW: Incase you haven't been clued, arguing with Jim Choate is like
arguing with a broken clock.  It always returns 12:30, which twice a day
is the right time, but there's no real intelligence there.  Just an
automaton from a realm called Choate', where physics don't follow the same
laws as here, everyone uses Plan9, people earn money based on their needs,
not their ability, logic is based on whatever Choate says it is, and so
on.  

Most people, myself included have set bits emminating from that realm to
find their way to the bit bucket.


As for your points of view, my take is this: There ought to be a law to
stop people who say "there ought to be a law."  Making laws is the job of
congress.  Cypherpunks (supposedly) write code.  Want to push laws?  
Email, fax, mail, or otherwise spam (oh the irony!) your congresscritter,
not "us."  

("Us" is in quotes because cypherpunks have no official party line, "we"
don't speak for each other.  It's just a mailing list, and it's "members"
hold varying ideals, but a general trend of consensus is that more laws
are evil, and that freedom to use strong crypto is generally a good
thing.  This is only my view of what cypherpunks is about, YMMV.)


----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos---------------------------
 + ^ + :25Kliters anthrax, 38K liters botulinum toxin, 500 tons of   /|\
  \|/  :sarin, mustard and VX gas, mobile bio-weapons labs, nukular /\|/\
<--*-->:weapons.. Reasons for war on Iraq - GWB 2003-01-28 speech.  \/|\/
  /|\  :Found to date: 0.  Cost of war: $800,000,000,000 USD.        \|/
 + v + :           The look on Sadam's face - priceless!       
--------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------

On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 mindfuq at comcast.net wrote:

> * Jim Choate <ravage at einstein.ssz.com> [2003-08-02 23:06]:
> > 
> > > This is a cop out.
> > 
> > No, you asked for an explanation. The book is an excellent one. Just
> > another example of you wanting somebody else to do it for you.
> 
> Right, the book may be an explanation of law and democracy- no one is
> arguing that, but you're statement is a cop out, because you're not
> willing to back your statements with a supporting arguement.  "Go read
> a book" fails as a supporting argument because it lacks the connection
> you're trying to draw with your statement.