Subject: RE: [Raven] IP: China spies on its own people

From: "chefren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 20:43:41 +0100

On 28 Jan 00, at 13:40, Ed Stone wrote:

> You mean, if they are going to kill us, the least we can do is assist and 
> neaten up the process by kindly committing suicide?

A democratically approved tap =could= be compared to a 
democratically approved death penalty.

Yes.

What's the problem?

Do you want the IETF to provide standards that don't leave 
democracy a chance?

> Hooey. If something wrongheaded, dangerous, intrusive,
> destructive of civil liberties and stupid is going to be
> done, let it be done without the assistance of those to
> whom it is done. 

Ah, so we should make standards that make it difficult to 
produce electricity for electric chairs and also make it 
difficult to produce needles that can be used for lethal 
injections?

Sigh...

> What that accomplishes is depriving the government surveillance state of 
> cover and any shred of legitimacy. If you think "going along" so you can 
> make the policy better "from the inside" is a realistic strategy, read some 
> history.

The surveillance state is nearer than ever BECAUSE of the 
encryption lobby.

+++chefren

p.s. Economist September 4th 1999 page 48:

  .. According to Gallup polls only 10% of Americans say
  they hold a secular evolutionist view of the world,
  while 44% believe in strict biblical creationism. Four
  million also believe they have been abducted by aliens. ..

I don't know why but this kind of "news" makes me think 
serious discussions about encryption or tapping with 
Americans are pretty senseless...

_______________________________________________
raven mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raven

---

From: Ed Stone <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 17:26:10 -0500

>democratically approved death penalty.

You do the death penalty in Holland? You don't weaken democracy by refusing 
to do the death penalty, do you?

>Do you want the IETF to provide standards that don't leave

Wow!! IETF can refuse to give democracy a chance? What a power trip! Who 
needs nuclear weapons and beach landings? All you need to subvert democracy 
is a few votes of IETF folks!!

>difficult to produce needles that can be used for lethal

If one opposes such actions, but one assists in their implementation, that 
is sufficient, isn't it, for what one views as wrong to succeed. Ghandi 
said (paraphrased) "You must do what you can. It will not matter much. That 
is why you must do it."

I recommend that you take the line of thinking about electric chairs, and 
assisting their functionality, and look into the application of Weberian 
bureaucracy and obedience to authority to institutionalize crimes against 
humanity during the twentieth century. Find an old person living near you 
in Holland and ask them about what that means.

>The surveillance state is nearer than ever BECAUSE of the

You mean that the surveillance state would be benign except for the desire 
of some people for privacy and confidentiality?  Please read the newspeak 
section of Orwell's 1984.

But I do appreciate your continuing to make your case. It is very helpful 
for all to see the points and justifications you provide.

>Americans are pretty senseless...

 From this section, it seems that you sometimes do not look beyond 
unsupported assertion, and you sometimes do not hesitate to extend an 
unsupported generalization to a nationality. Someone might generalize 
(wrongly, of course) that pro-surveillance state sycophants are not clear, 
critical thinkers.  ;-)

--
--------------------------
Ed Stone
[email-masked]
--------------------------

---

From: "chefren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 18:39:27 +0100

On 28 Jan 00, at 17:26, Ed Stone wrote:

> needs nuclear weapons and beach landings? All you need to subvert
> democracy is a few votes of IETF folks!!

I don't know why you seem very enthusiastically about this.

If politicicians are starting to use strong encryption 
during their politics the end of democracy is not behind 
the horizon.

As far as =I= see it of course...

+++chefren

---

From: Ed Stone <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:08:55 -0500

>I don't know why you seem very enthusiastically about this.

It was just a ludicrous statement that demanded ridicule. Similar to 
assertions that sealed tap boxes will tie hands of miscreant governments.

But it has been said and I agree that the meeting and this list have come 
to the same conclusion. The answers provided to the questions "Should 
IETF..." are emphatically NO. I think it is done.
--
--------------------------
Ed Stone
[email-masked]
--------------------------