Wei writes:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:45:34PM -0700, hal@finney.org wrote:
> > I'm not sure that David's transparency would necessarily fix the IP
> > problem, anyway. In a truly transparent world, shouldn't I be able to
> > look over David's shoulder as he types up his latest novel? Shouldn't I
> > have access to it in the files on his computer? And if I buy the book,
> > shouldn't my friends be able to read it at the same time that I do,
> > via my wearable webcam?
>
> I don't think that kind of total transparency is likely. People won't
> voluntarily allow cameras into their homes that they can't turn off, or
> allow everyone to access their hard drives across the Internet. I can't
> really imagine that the technology necessary to achieve total
> transparency without consent will arrive soon enough to make a difference
> to the IP issue.
You're probably right about the relative time frames. These IP issues
have come to the fore more abruptly than most people anticipated a few
years ago.
My understanding of Brin's ideas was that transparency would in fact
invade the home. He did suggest that there might be specific areas where
people would still have privacy, but he wanted to be able to make sure
they were not commiting information crimes. This was also the motivation
to crack down on crypto.
> David Brin himself claims that he is interested in transparency as
> protection against abuse by the powerful. I don't think it's the right
> solution to that problem, but it seems like a more plausible motivation.
It was my interpretation, based on some email correspondence and reading
an early draft of his book. He mentioned concern about his own livelihood
in the draft; I don't recall whether it made it into the final version.
Crypto doesn't seem to be a tool for the powerful, but he spends a lot
of time arguing against it. And as you say, there is a poor fit between
the ostensible problem and the proposed solution, which suggests to me
an ulterior motive.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:37:51 MDT