From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rms2g@virginia.edu)
Date: Tue Oct 29 2002 - 07:44:14 MST
Eugen wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, spike66 wrote:
>
>> Gene, demand freedom, not anonymity. spike
>
> I demand the freedom to remain anonymous. Or to use strong
> authentication, whenever appropriate.
### How do you enforce your demand? Against a government which is not
transparent, in a world full of technologies asymmetrically strengthening
large organizations?
You mentioned using democratic means to prohibit government surveillance,
but are you really sure that such means would be sufficient? If you demand
unilateral transparency of the government, you will have a weak government,
poorly able to resist attacks by internal and external forces, soon to be
succeeded by a stronger version, with no intention to listen to your vote.
If you allow government opacity, you will be unable to enforce your demand
to be left anonymous.
How do you solve the conundrum?
Also, I hope your demand for anonymity would not involve the use of
organized violence (state law) to prevent private entities from non-invasive
gathering of information about you. After all, if a neighborhood watch sees
you and recognizes you, your anonymity is breached, yet I am sure you would
not demand that the neighborhood watch volunteers would need to be
blindfolded whenever you pass by their street. Analogously, should the
neighborhood watch, or their hired security firm, or the mutual information
exchange system formed by such firms, use not only eyes but also cameras,
body language analyzers, smell sensors, etc., the resulting personal
information about you would remain their private property, to be used as
they see fit.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:51 MST